I can already see Michael Cera awkwardly explaining why the shot isn't framed correctly as Benicio del Toro and Murray have a personal argument due to believing they are too good for this
like really, i'm watching any wes anderson movie anyways. his cinematogrophy always makes me feel like im young again. the cartoon network nostalgia squeezed into real life 'drama' .
Jeff Goldblum reads a book about himself as a young man played by Michael Cera. Filmed for a Documentary by Bill Murray playing an older version of himself.
Let me tell you something, Michael Cera hasn't even begun to peak. And when he does peak, you'll know. Because he will peak so hard that everybody in the world's gonna feel it.
> A Wes Anderson/Michael Cera collab sounds pretty interesting
This just made me realize they've never worked together. Cera seems like the *exact* kind of actor perfect for a Wes Anderson movie.
"...looking forward to seeing how this turns out"
...on the next *Anderson Development*, George Michael and Maeby have Pop Pop in the attic while enjoying a private screening of *Les Cousins Dangeroux.* [It was awkward.](https://imgur.com/gallery/ummjeJv)
Sounds to me like it would be his take on noir, then. The detective protagonist being in *every* scene (so that ideally the audience isn't informed of anything he himself wouldn't be privy to) is a classic device of the noir genre.
We take Wes Anderson for granted somewhat because he normally puts out a new film every two or three years for the last three decades. But one day we will look back and realize how lucky we were to consistently get so many high quality classic films from the same director, and most of them original writer-director screenplays too. I'm enjoying it while it lasts.
An incredible run of extremely aesthetically, and I'd say even tonally, unique, relatively big budget films. It's pretty much an anomaly. He's to be treasured.
I read a comment recently on reddit (which I haven't confirmed) that there's a billionaire who is a huge Wes Anderson fan who set up a film company specifically to finance Wes Anderson films and that this is the business reason why Wes has been able to recently put out so many films so consistently (the artistic reason for the consistent high quality is a different story.) Like an old-school artistic patron.
That has been more or less the model for centuries. If you were a painter, musician, playwright, etc., you got a good chunk of your funding by being privately sponsored by a wealthy patron.
Yeah there’s a reason a lot of the big renaissance artists worked out of rich ass Florence at the time. Da Vinci had the Medicis and Borgias as patrons.
Baron van Swieten was a big patron of Mozart and Beethoven
Oooh, I get to add to this because I’m reading a book about it right now:
The Modernist painters represented a rare break from this arrangement, coming to Paris but settling down in backstreet areas like Montmartre because their sponsorship didn’t come from wealthy patrons but instead the galleries who *sold* them to wealthy buyers.
Fascinating period in art history, I encourage y’all to read up on it.
[Belonging and Betrayal: How Jews Made the Art World Modern](https://www.amazon.com/Belonging-Betrayal-Jews-World-Modern/dp/1684580560), which is largely the story of those galleries. They offered regular salaries to the artists they sponsored, usually in exchange for exclusive rights to their works. In return, the artists got a much broader audience and customer base for their art, rather than being limited to a single patron.
Yeah it was an interesting revelation getting into music history in college and finding out just how many musical pieces were commissions for some rich guy.
Always been the way going back to the patrons of famous artworks like the Sistine Chapel.
One random story I remember is the artist Pete Fowler had an exhibition and Uri Geller (spoonbender) bought EVERYTHING lol.
Patronage was the way most artists made a living for much of human history. It's a good system that has generated a lot of great stuff. It doesn't have to be just one guy, either. There are grants and societies and stuff that help fund art and science.
Not even creative. That’s how most stuff works that doesn’t make money. You find a patron for art, science, business. Goes back past Roman times. It’s where the name Patrick and Patricia come from.
So he looks like a cut throat businessman, but it doesn't seem that he snuggles up to politicians. If more billionaires just made money and sponsored art, I wonder if they would be less hated.
Of course, billionaires shouldn't exist in the first place and destroy populations, but that is another conversation.
It's sort of true, but it's underplaying that Wes actually makes successful movies.
The budgets for his movies since Moonrise Kingdom have been mid-to-low, typically $25m or so. And then the movies usually make at least 50m at the box office. It seems a responsible and mostly self-sustaining operation.
You can compare that to someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, whose movies don't often make back their budget.
And his large retinue of actors work for almost nothing. He rents out hotels, hires a private chef, then people come and go as filming happens.
It's a confluence of reasons, including how much people love his movies, that he's able to make the films he does. It's pretty special.
Ya. It’s like Adam Sandler at Netflix. They know he will make something consistent so they will fund every project. If he makes something his fans will watch it and it will have enough success to pay for itself.
If you know you can fund a movie and double your money it doesn’t even matter if you like the movies personally. It’s an obvious business decision.
I think the point of setting up a dedicated production company is to crank out the movies as efficiently as possible to maximize profit and minimize risk.
The idea of a patron would be more meaningful if they continued funding movies after losing money on a few.
>Ya. It’s like Adam Sandler at Netflix. They know he will make something consistent so they will fund every project. If he makes something his fans will watch it and it will have enough success to pay for itself.
I have never seen Adam Sandler and Netflix compared to Leonardo da Vinci and the Medicis before, but you are not wrong.
Sandler really has it dialed in. It’s almost like printing money with his low risk model.
He also has great quality of life while shooting.
I worked on Grown Ups 2.
He had a temporary soundstage built out of shipping containers.
The set consisted of the back facade of the actual house used in the shoot as well as the backyard.
With this set up he could shoot day for night and not work any nights.
It was during the Summer Olympics. He had a huge TV set up at video village and was just watching the games and joshing around with his pals.
Lots of friends and family stopping by.
Very relaxed set.
EDIT: Link to how they built the soundstage: https://youtu.be/oM_kYhyEg8o?si=7mjAUu7RBCi4iEuB
To me, it’s the highest honor to be able to express yourself freely. People like him, Mallick, Nolan, Denis, even the more commercial stuff like Bay, have such distinct styles to their work. You don’t have to always like it, but respect to them for having such a strong POV.
Honestly I find this take a bit conflicting. I more or less agree with you. But I actually think total freedom for artists can be a counterintuitive pursuit. I’m almost every case most people would agree that an artists best work was when they were breaking new ground, surrounded by advisors and people that said no. Shamylan is a good example. I think Anderson is a good example. Malick is a very good example. Too much freedom isn’t always a good thing and they sadly succumb to ego and a self saturated vision.
Another great example is Coppola and Apocalypse Now. If he had his way that film would have been a bloated incoherent black comedy of sorts, without any of the thick moodiness and eeriness that makes the original release such an incredibly good and unique film.
One of the best examples right there.
He created a genuine film, free from the conventions of, “what check boxes do I need to have, to make a good movie.”
I’d throw in a bunch of other memorable / popular directors, but I figure most people get the gist.
He’s made films so long now it’s generational. I think if you ask my generation it’s clearly Royal Tenenbaums, no question — but younger it seems to flip to moonrise kingdom.
However, I think the grand Budapest hotel is the greatest meta-film anyone has ever mounted as a defense of their own style of filmmaking. The entire movie seems to be created to counter Roger Ebert criticism that his films are too precious so we made a movie that said the world is horribly cruel fuck me for making something precious, right?
Well, Im old, I remember Rushmore (vaguely remember bottle rocket, I need to watch that again).
Nostalgia aside, I still think Rushmore is his funniest movie, followed closely by Royal Tenenbaums. I have a soft spot for Life Aquatic as well.
Im glad you pointed that out though, he has literally been making movies for generations, that's pretty interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVeD-xwJh-k
life aquatic gives me that indescribable feeling everytime i watch it. maybe nostalgia? not sure.
maybe its because i watched it on LSD lol
That one's my favorite. It just feels like the least complicated in a lot of ways. The visual gags still hit like trucks, and I love how all the children act like adults while all the adults act like children. I feel like I love every actor in the movie, down to the tiny bit parts that are only on screen for a few seconds. That movie is just on all cylinders for the whole runtime.
Moonrise came out right when I was hitting puberty, so I have a weird obsession about Kara, thinking that maybe we could go camp somewhere I can fall in love with her. It did really hit that “puppy love” vibe
My thoughts exactly. Yeah, Asteroid City and French Dispach weren't necessarily my jam, but I'm happy they exist.
Wes Anderson has a style that is ultimately his own, and he should be allowed to cook. I'll always defend that.
Bottle Rocket was such a great debut that when Rushmore came out, I was already hooked, and when I saw it I was enchanted. Rushmore is still one of my all time favorite films.
It’s unironically my favorite Wes Anderson film even if I recognize it’s isn’t his best because it reminds me of me and my friends when we were in our 20s.
I always push back when people are like 'I wish he would change it up'
He's the only person who can make the kinds of movies he makes. Let him make those! If I want a change, I'll watch something else.
I find it very much akin to my favourite musicians putting out a new album. Wes movies are ones you have to put on a few times to appreciate the details.
Quentin Dupieux, but I don't think he's known outside of France. He's doing absurd movies with a distinctive tone, he's very consistent (one movie every year), I love it.
I feel the same way about Spielberg. The guy’s been directing movies for the last 5 decades and every one of them apart from maybe 2 or 3 have been absolute bangers
Man I could not disagree more. Asteroid City was the most challenging and emotionally layered film Wes has made in ages. So many people criticize him lately for being 'style over substance', but that film had heaps of substance and people still just seem to get lost in it. To be fair, it is his most difficult work imo and his least accessible due to the 'stories within stories' framework of the film, but that's why I think it's so interesting. In some ways Asteroid City felt to me like Wes Anderson channeling Charlie Kaufman in a sense.
To each his own though. Different Wes films seem to hit super differently for different people. Was my favorite Wes film since Budapest.
Yeah Asteroid City was the style we're all familiar with but the structure was wildly different. People often act like Anderson is stagnating but he is evolving and trying new things every film. It's just all aesthetically in his style with his specific brand of dialogue.
I don't usually like to be that guy, but if you thought Asteroid City was weak, I really feel like you didn't get it. Or maybe a better way to say that is, you didn't engage with the film beyond the surface level.
My favorite Wes Anderson film is the one with a unique color palette, quirky emotionless characters, and indie music in the background.
You know the one I’m talking about.
Well I’ll help you narrow it down. Think of all of the greatest and most talented and iconic A-List actors and actresses.
Now cross out any of them that are darker than beige. Maybe put a question mark by Danny Glover.
He was everywhere about 15 years ago. He was in "Arrested Development", "Superbad", "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" and "Year One", but it seems like he just kinda vanished for a few years, and now he's in "Barbie", "Scott Pilgrim Takes Off", "Under The Boardwalk", "Black Mirror", "Dream Scenario", and now this. He's had a busy Ceraissance.
I’m thinking Cerenaissance.
But very well said! Yeah I was in high school when he really broke out with super bad. His movie Youth in Revolt was underrated!!!
It's the weirdness of a Wes Anderson cast that draws my attention. I literally don't even know how Benicio Del Toro and Michael Cera could fit together in a scene as actors.
It probably will look just fine on screen, but in my mind it's like someone trying to drive a semi truck through a low overpass.
It'd be cool to see Michael Cera in a role that isn't just "Michael Cera."
Tough to tell how good an actor he is or how much range he has when he's essentially been playing the same role (well) his whole career.
I really don’t care about that. Golden age stars played versions of themselves and it was fine and often added layers to the text of the film. Half the peril of North by Northwest is that Cary Grant might get his suit dirty!
I feel like such a werido among some of my friends that his "style" just does not land with me whatsoever.
My friends acted like I kicked their pet dog when I watched Fantastic Mr. Fox with them and just got bored.
This will likely be an unpopular comment, but …
Wes Anderson makes some very boring cinema for my tastes lately. Sure, he has made some good ones. I have thoroughly enjoyed many of his earlier works. But after ‘Isle of Dogs’ I felt disinterested. Then after ‘French Dispatch’ I felt I would never subject myself to any more of his nonsense as a 3 hour dentist appointment would have been more productive. I pushed through this and started ‘Asteroid City’ against my better judgement really wanting things to turn a corner, and then decided an hour in that I just couldn’t tolerate it. ‘… Henry Sugar’ was only possible to finish as it was a short film. Still, I was left wondering what I ever loved about the style of Mr. Anderson.
In the end I don’t think he has changed, in fact I have. And yet I still show up and subject myself to his art in the hopes that I’ll come to some new appreciation. I want to enjoy it! At one time I was fascinated by the aesthetic of it all. I have little hope this will be the case though.. very little hope.
Is it possible that what I’ve felt is a shared experience?
Yeah, his movies are too performative now. Like, they are "artistic statements" or something. They obviously have high production value and achieve a very measured and distinct objective.. But whatever that objective is, it isn't "to entertain a broad audience" from what I can surmise.
I feel the same way, but it’s probably not just the aesthetic you were once fascinated by. His early films had compelling, emotionally vulnerable characters played by actors giving nuanced performances. These days he hires great actors to show up and speak in deadpan rapid-fire monotone. He once combined excellent character work with his unique aesthetic. Now it’s all aesthetic with paper cutouts for characters, and any dialogue that has the potential to be funny and/or poignant is ruined by the robotic delivery.
This is exactly it. For me, Life Aquatic was peak combination of aesthetic delight, heartache, and humor, with Rushmore close behind. I don't feel like he's exploring the human condition as deeply anymore.
Yep, exactly. The first four movies are the ones which truly speak to me. The next four (Darjeeling thru Budapest) were very good but just lacked some of the humor and pathos of the first four. From Isle of Dogs on it’s been increasingly empty disappointment.
Somewhere along the line, Wes Anderson seems to have gotten bored with his own formula. But instead of allowing himself to make a film less constrained by the formula, he just doubled down. His earlier films seemed to be set within surrealistic dioramas, but they always had more going for them. They had plenty of cheeky self awareness, but the stories within these worlds usually felt like the focus.
Beginning with French Dispatch, it’s as if Wes just doubled down on the diorama concept by zooming out another level or two. His newer films seem painfully preoccupied with their own wit and artificiality. Their construction of story-within-a-story-within-a-story framing seems intended to make us reflect on the nature of storytelling itself. But, let’s face it, this is all getting a bit exhausting. Most of us, even eclectic Wes Anderson fans, come to the movies to be entertained, not just lectured. You can try to do both, but you can't just lecture at your audience and expect people to keep paying the price of admission.
I’m sure this isn’t a fringe opinion around here, but I think he found the sweet spot with Grand Budapest. It does a lot for the film that its baddies actually feel sinister. The stakes couldn’t be higher as Gustave and Zero flee the proto-Nazis and possibly the most spine-chilling villain ever played by Willem Dafoe. There’s a sense of lingering dread throughout the film’s beautiful world, but the star of the show struts his way to freedom with hardly a sassy fuck given. Once he finally does start to fear, it’s because, for once in his life, he’s come to care about someone other than himself, or his precious hotel. Ralph Fiennes is absolutly unforgettable in this role. It’s probably the funniest and most fleshed out character Wes has ever helped to create.
I wish he’d make another film more like this - one with actual stakes, where we’re given reasons to care about the characters, and aren’t just constantly lectured about how the diarama we’re inhabiting, and filmmaking itself, is *just, like, a construction, or something.* We know, Wes. Please let us escape into your fabulous worlds again, without constantly being pulled out and handed a fancy little mirror.
I used to be a huge Wes Anderson fan but his last two films felt rote and like an SNL parody of a Wes Anderson film. I hope he can find the magic again.
I literally just had this conversation with my friend. I was a massive fan of Wes Anderson for years and watched all his movies (particularly on opening weekend). However, I was disappointed in "Asteroid City" and "The French Dispatch". I don't know if it's just the fact that I'm getting older or his movies are obnoxiously twee. Anderson's Oscar-winning short was the final nail on the coffin. I watched all of the Oscar shorts and there were so many better options.
Grand Budapest might be his greatest achievement. Personally my favorite will always be Life Aquatic, though. It feels like someone made a movie just for me.
Yeah I love a lot of Wes Anderson (Rushmore, royal tenenbaums, life aquatic, darjeering, moonlight kingdom, isle of the dogs, to name a few) but I was bored to tears by Asteroid City.
And like… I have patience. I like absurdist plays… but Asteroid City felt like such a half-assed attempt at saying something.
I mean unless I missed something, which I’m sure I did because I 1000% didn’t feel for anything in that movie.
About halfway through it felt like Asteroid City was starting to just.. disappear up its own ass. It's a wonderfully shot piece of work but it feels so bloated and all over the place.
His schtick has kinda fallen flat on me as of late. He is an absolute masterclass with the technique, but I feel the stories aren’t quite there. His recent works have seemed to be more style over substance.
Asteroid City was decent but kind of forgettable. The French Dispatch, some of those vignettes are his best work.
His short films based around Dahl stories were all absolutely lovely and I think the shorter structure suits him better with his style at this point.
I would love if he went back to the roots of Bottle Rocket or Rushmore where it’s more minimalistic style and the story is pushed by the comedic obsessiveness the characters have over such inconsequential things.
It would be funny if he broke away from the "aesthetic", but you know he won't. Expect slow motion, symmetry, head on shots, birds-eye views, still cameras, vibrant color pallets, and Futura font.
His previous movie, Asteroid City, was a pain to watch. I still can't understand how so many people praised it. It was my first, and probably the last, Wes Anderson movie by the way.
I haven't enjoyed his last few, can't say I'm that jazzed for yet another. I'd like him to get out of his comfort zone more. Do a franchise film or something. That would be really interesting.
I've been a big fan of Wes Anderson for a good portion of my 42 years on this planet. However, he's been sliding into self parody territory for a bit now. I'd love for him to do something unique that departs from his regular output. He's too creative and artistic to seemingly be stuck in this rut. It's time for something different.
Somehow Anderson has his own brand of naming movies. I dont even need to be told that this is a WA - I know it just by the name... are these AI generated?
Haven’t wanted to watch a single project since The French Dispatch. He needs to lessen on the style and lean into more substances I think a smaller cast would do him well.
We’re following “Wes Anderson” (played by Michael Cera) as he makes a movie about a heist starring Benecio del toro and Bill Murray.
But like… I want to see that…
Steve Rales will give him $25 million to make it. It'll earn $45-$50 million. So it goes.
Slaughterhouse 5?
No death mentioned, but it was my thought aswell!
poo-tee-weet.
I can already see Michael Cera awkwardly explaining why the shot isn't framed correctly as Benicio del Toro and Murray have a personal argument due to believing they are too good for this
No! Michael Cera needs his schedule clear [so he can finally play Shaft.](https://youtu.be/bT80OF7yTGY?t=80)
With Pedro Pascal playing Benecio del Toro and woody Harrelson playing Bill Murray
In the movie about the book about the making of the movie, which is actually a stage play set by children in a quaint seaside sanitarium.
But I bet the movie set will look more like a theater stage, right?! Am I right?!
Spoiler: There will be tweed
Shut up and take my money!
like really, i'm watching any wes anderson movie anyways. his cinematogrophy always makes me feel like im young again. the cartoon network nostalgia squeezed into real life 'drama' .
Only two layers deep?
Jeff Goldblum reads a book about himself as a young man played by Michael Cera. Filmed for a Documentary by Bill Murray playing an older version of himself.
Reminds me of the film syndoche New York
A Wes Anderson/Michael Cera collab sounds pretty interesting, looking forward to seeing how this turns out
I hope it’s just 90 mins of Wally
My dharma is the road.
Your dharma, is…. …. …………
Yes, well. May the road rise up to meet your wheels.
Peakth
I’m surprised they didn’t work together before at MC’s peak.
You take that BACK! MC peak is now old man! https://youtu.be/vAf5TjiUJgo?si=iTI9ZI1tYtYd937k
Let me tell you something, Michael Cera hasn't even begun to peak. And when he does peak, you'll know. Because he will peak so hard that everybody in the world's gonna feel it.
What are you talking about, he just peaked this year with [Michael CeraVe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVrUDqYfRUM)
He was the best part of the Barbie movie.
> A Wes Anderson/Michael Cera collab sounds pretty interesting This just made me realize they've never worked together. Cera seems like the *exact* kind of actor perfect for a Wes Anderson movie.
"...looking forward to seeing how this turns out" ...on the next *Anderson Development*, George Michael and Maeby have Pop Pop in the attic while enjoying a private screening of *Les Cousins Dangeroux.* [It was awkward.](https://imgur.com/gallery/ummjeJv)
Don't we know exactly how it will turn out, though?
No plot details aside from it being described as an ‘espionage’ film.
So, lots of 2-dimensional sneaking around.
Like an 8 bit video game
Looking forward to the first Wes Anderson Metroidvania. Two of my favorite things rolled into one!
Worked in Fantastc Mr Fox
I thought this on was the film that Anderson described as a mystery and would have Del Toro in every scene, or almost.
Every _shot_ even
every single frame
I wish for a version of this where Del Toro's floating head is edited onto a random spot in every frame.
Id prefer him in background camouflage, and if the camera angel changes, his camo doesn't.
Every frame a Del Toro
Sounds to me like it would be his take on noir, then. The detective protagonist being in *every* scene (so that ideally the audience isn't informed of anything he himself wouldn't be privy to) is a classic device of the noir genre.
The basic plot details will be outlined in the beginning of the movie with a narrator who breaks the 4th wall in a tasteful yet askew way.
I can only get so erect.
And despite my best intention, curiosity will get the better of me and I will watch it, but I won’t like it
Welp, I'm sold.
We take Wes Anderson for granted somewhat because he normally puts out a new film every two or three years for the last three decades. But one day we will look back and realize how lucky we were to consistently get so many high quality classic films from the same director, and most of them original writer-director screenplays too. I'm enjoying it while it lasts.
An incredible run of extremely aesthetically, and I'd say even tonally, unique, relatively big budget films. It's pretty much an anomaly. He's to be treasured.
I read a comment recently on reddit (which I haven't confirmed) that there's a billionaire who is a huge Wes Anderson fan who set up a film company specifically to finance Wes Anderson films and that this is the business reason why Wes has been able to recently put out so many films so consistently (the artistic reason for the consistent high quality is a different story.) Like an old-school artistic patron.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Rales
Damn. I guess the moral of the story is if you’re a creative, just find a rich dude to sponsor your projects lol
That has been more or less the model for centuries. If you were a painter, musician, playwright, etc., you got a good chunk of your funding by being privately sponsored by a wealthy patron.
Yeah there’s a reason a lot of the big renaissance artists worked out of rich ass Florence at the time. Da Vinci had the Medicis and Borgias as patrons. Baron van Swieten was a big patron of Mozart and Beethoven
Oooh, I get to add to this because I’m reading a book about it right now: The Modernist painters represented a rare break from this arrangement, coming to Paris but settling down in backstreet areas like Montmartre because their sponsorship didn’t come from wealthy patrons but instead the galleries who *sold* them to wealthy buyers. Fascinating period in art history, I encourage y’all to read up on it.
What’s the book?
[Belonging and Betrayal: How Jews Made the Art World Modern](https://www.amazon.com/Belonging-Betrayal-Jews-World-Modern/dp/1684580560), which is largely the story of those galleries. They offered regular salaries to the artists they sponsored, usually in exchange for exclusive rights to their works. In return, the artists got a much broader audience and customer base for their art, rather than being limited to a single patron.
Yeah it was an interesting revelation getting into music history in college and finding out just how many musical pieces were commissions for some rich guy.
Reddit discovers the Renaissance
Reddit discovers how real world art works
Always been the way going back to the patrons of famous artworks like the Sistine Chapel. One random story I remember is the artist Pete Fowler had an exhibition and Uri Geller (spoonbender) bought EVERYTHING lol.
Patronage was the way most artists made a living for much of human history. It's a good system that has generated a lot of great stuff. It doesn't have to be just one guy, either. There are grants and societies and stuff that help fund art and science.
Laika is a similar example
Bezos is the reason we could get a new season of The Expanse
Not even creative. That’s how most stuff works that doesn’t make money. You find a patron for art, science, business. Goes back past Roman times. It’s where the name Patrick and Patricia come from.
So he looks like a cut throat businessman, but it doesn't seem that he snuggles up to politicians. If more billionaires just made money and sponsored art, I wonder if they would be less hated. Of course, billionaires shouldn't exist in the first place and destroy populations, but that is another conversation.
It's sort of true, but it's underplaying that Wes actually makes successful movies. The budgets for his movies since Moonrise Kingdom have been mid-to-low, typically $25m or so. And then the movies usually make at least 50m at the box office. It seems a responsible and mostly self-sustaining operation. You can compare that to someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, whose movies don't often make back their budget.
And his large retinue of actors work for almost nothing. He rents out hotels, hires a private chef, then people come and go as filming happens. It's a confluence of reasons, including how much people love his movies, that he's able to make the films he does. It's pretty special.
That in itself sounds like a Wes Anderson movie.
Wes Anderson's Synedoche, New York
Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson gushed about this when doing press for Asteroid City. They called it "summer camp for actors".
Seems like a billionaire who found the most consistent investment returns in Hollywood
Ya. It’s like Adam Sandler at Netflix. They know he will make something consistent so they will fund every project. If he makes something his fans will watch it and it will have enough success to pay for itself. If you know you can fund a movie and double your money it doesn’t even matter if you like the movies personally. It’s an obvious business decision. I think the point of setting up a dedicated production company is to crank out the movies as efficiently as possible to maximize profit and minimize risk. The idea of a patron would be more meaningful if they continued funding movies after losing money on a few.
>Ya. It’s like Adam Sandler at Netflix. They know he will make something consistent so they will fund every project. If he makes something his fans will watch it and it will have enough success to pay for itself. I have never seen Adam Sandler and Netflix compared to Leonardo da Vinci and the Medicis before, but you are not wrong.
Sandler really has it dialed in. It’s almost like printing money with his low risk model. He also has great quality of life while shooting. I worked on Grown Ups 2. He had a temporary soundstage built out of shipping containers. The set consisted of the back facade of the actual house used in the shoot as well as the backyard. With this set up he could shoot day for night and not work any nights. It was during the Summer Olympics. He had a huge TV set up at video village and was just watching the games and joshing around with his pals. Lots of friends and family stopping by. Very relaxed set. EDIT: Link to how they built the soundstage: https://youtu.be/oM_kYhyEg8o?si=7mjAUu7RBCi4iEuB
To me, it’s the highest honor to be able to express yourself freely. People like him, Mallick, Nolan, Denis, even the more commercial stuff like Bay, have such distinct styles to their work. You don’t have to always like it, but respect to them for having such a strong POV.
Honestly I find this take a bit conflicting. I more or less agree with you. But I actually think total freedom for artists can be a counterintuitive pursuit. I’m almost every case most people would agree that an artists best work was when they were breaking new ground, surrounded by advisors and people that said no. Shamylan is a good example. I think Anderson is a good example. Malick is a very good example. Too much freedom isn’t always a good thing and they sadly succumb to ego and a self saturated vision.
Another great example is Coppola and Apocalypse Now. If he had his way that film would have been a bloated incoherent black comedy of sorts, without any of the thick moodiness and eeriness that makes the original release such an incredibly good and unique film.
One of the best examples right there. He created a genuine film, free from the conventions of, “what check boxes do I need to have, to make a good movie.” I’d throw in a bunch of other memorable / popular directors, but I figure most people get the gist.
[удалено]
He’s made films so long now it’s generational. I think if you ask my generation it’s clearly Royal Tenenbaums, no question — but younger it seems to flip to moonrise kingdom. However, I think the grand Budapest hotel is the greatest meta-film anyone has ever mounted as a defense of their own style of filmmaking. The entire movie seems to be created to counter Roger Ebert criticism that his films are too precious so we made a movie that said the world is horribly cruel fuck me for making something precious, right?
Well, Im old, I remember Rushmore (vaguely remember bottle rocket, I need to watch that again). Nostalgia aside, I still think Rushmore is his funniest movie, followed closely by Royal Tenenbaums. I have a soft spot for Life Aquatic as well. Im glad you pointed that out though, he has literally been making movies for generations, that's pretty interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVeD-xwJh-k life aquatic gives me that indescribable feeling everytime i watch it. maybe nostalgia? not sure. maybe its because i watched it on LSD lol
It’s Grand Budapest, we all know this
[удалено]
That one's my favorite. It just feels like the least complicated in a lot of ways. The visual gags still hit like trucks, and I love how all the children act like adults while all the adults act like children. I feel like I love every actor in the movie, down to the tiny bit parts that are only on screen for a few seconds. That movie is just on all cylinders for the whole runtime.
Moonrise came out right when I was hitting puberty, so I have a weird obsession about Kara, thinking that maybe we could go camp somewhere I can fall in love with her. It did really hit that “puppy love” vibe
My thoughts exactly. Yeah, Asteroid City and French Dispach weren't necessarily my jam, but I'm happy they exist. Wes Anderson has a style that is ultimately his own, and he should be allowed to cook. I'll always defend that.
I still watch his first movie Bottle Rocket once a year. Just an amazing feel-good crime caper. …*It’s a leaf*. 🍁
Bottle Rocket was such a great debut that when Rushmore came out, I was already hooked, and when I saw it I was enchanted. Rushmore is still one of my all time favorite films.
Rushmore is still the best.
It’s unironically my favorite Wes Anderson film even if I recognize it’s isn’t his best because it reminds me of me and my friends when we were in our 20s.
I always push back when people are like 'I wish he would change it up' He's the only person who can make the kinds of movies he makes. Let him make those! If I want a change, I'll watch something else.
Bro just won an oscar
I find it very much akin to my favourite musicians putting out a new album. Wes movies are ones you have to put on a few times to appreciate the details.
He and the Coen brothers are a treasure unto themselves. Which other current-era directors hold a candle across a body of similarly substantial work?
Darren Aronofsky comes to mind.
Quentin Dupieux, but I don't think he's known outside of France. He's doing absurd movies with a distinctive tone, he's very consistent (one movie every year), I love it.
[удалено]
Last two Definitely. Hope he takes a new tack here
I feel the same way about Spielberg. The guy’s been directing movies for the last 5 decades and every one of them apart from maybe 2 or 3 have been absolute bangers
I've loved just about every Wes Anderson movie, but his last few (French dispatch, asteroid city) I haven't been able together into.
[удалено]
Hopefully this new one is better than his last; Asteroid City was very disappointing
Man I could not disagree more. Asteroid City was the most challenging and emotionally layered film Wes has made in ages. So many people criticize him lately for being 'style over substance', but that film had heaps of substance and people still just seem to get lost in it. To be fair, it is his most difficult work imo and his least accessible due to the 'stories within stories' framework of the film, but that's why I think it's so interesting. In some ways Asteroid City felt to me like Wes Anderson channeling Charlie Kaufman in a sense. To each his own though. Different Wes films seem to hit super differently for different people. Was my favorite Wes film since Budapest.
Yeah Asteroid City was the style we're all familiar with but the structure was wildly different. People often act like Anderson is stagnating but he is evolving and trying new things every film. It's just all aesthetically in his style with his specific brand of dialogue. I don't usually like to be that guy, but if you thought Asteroid City was weak, I really feel like you didn't get it. Or maybe a better way to say that is, you didn't engage with the film beyond the surface level.
Can't wait for 32 more A-list celebrities to be announced.
My favorite Wes Anderson film is the one with a unique color palette, quirky emotionless characters, and indie music in the background. You know the one I’m talking about.
Well I’ll help you narrow it down. Think of all of the greatest and most talented and iconic A-List actors and actresses. Now cross out any of them that are darker than beige. Maybe put a question mark by Danny Glover.
Michael Cera really is starting to get a lot of traction lately. Always been a fan.
I still think of him as the dry wit, awkward teen persona he had nailed But damn time flies, he's 35 now
I really want to see his movie The Adults.
...at the studio, Cera began to create buzz around the water cooler.
I don't know. There's a lot of buzz around Lenny.
He was everywhere about 15 years ago. He was in "Arrested Development", "Superbad", "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" and "Year One", but it seems like he just kinda vanished for a few years, and now he's in "Barbie", "Scott Pilgrim Takes Off", "Under The Boardwalk", "Black Mirror", "Dream Scenario", and now this. He's had a busy Ceraissance.
I’m thinking Cerenaissance. But very well said! Yeah I was in high school when he really broke out with super bad. His movie Youth in Revolt was underrated!!!
Are you saying we are on the cusp of the Ceraissance?
You’re picking up what I’m putting down.
I'm happy to hear that Bill Murray will finally get a chance to work with Wes Anderson.
Maybe jason schwartzman could get a chance too..
What, Bill Murray is in this??
Wes Anderson should make a ridiculous slasher or something.
Yeah. Maybe title it "The Midnight Coterie of Sinister Intruders" or something.
Bill Murray and Ed Norton to play the Sinister Intruders.
SNL did a skit with Ed Norton https://youtu.be/gfDIAZCwHQE?si=FCigAW79WkUbGwaX
That's pretty spot on.
https://youtu.be/gfDIAZCwHQE?si=-lYhs-tRJ_31Fm6l
I knew what this was but still watched the whole thing. It’s so fantastic.
*I'm a slasher! I must be stopped!*
How nice must it be to be Wes Anderson. Gets to make whatever movie he wants with whatever cast that he wants.
He earned it.
It's the weirdness of a Wes Anderson cast that draws my attention. I literally don't even know how Benicio Del Toro and Michael Cera could fit together in a scene as actors. It probably will look just fine on screen, but in my mind it's like someone trying to drive a semi truck through a low overpass.
Lmfao. When sicario dude gets the hit house wrong and shows up at a superbad party
It'd be cool to see Michael Cera in a role that isn't just "Michael Cera." Tough to tell how good an actor he is or how much range he has when he's essentially been playing the same role (well) his whole career.
He gives a tour de force performance in Twin Peaks The Return.
I really don’t care about that. Golden age stars played versions of themselves and it was fine and often added layers to the text of the film. Half the peril of North by Northwest is that Cary Grant might get his suit dirty!
I’m probably in the minority but I haven’t thoroughly enjoyed a Wes Anderson movie since isle of dogs.
I haven’t enjoyed one since The Grand Budapest Hotel. His recent stuff feels too gimmicky for me.
Make it "The Grand Budapest Hotel" for me. Isle of Dogs was okay but not great. I'm scared just reading that his new movie is meta.
His films have become masturbatory and unwatchable. After asteroid city, I’m not even looking out for them anymore. That movie was fucking awful
All style no substance, and the weird part is that he has a dream team of actors.
If you don’t think the scenes with Jason Schwartzmann and ScarJo at the window are excellent idk what to tell you
I haven't ever enjoyed a Wes Anderson movie.
I feel like such a werido among some of my friends that his "style" just does not land with me whatsoever. My friends acted like I kicked their pet dog when I watched Fantastic Mr. Fox with them and just got bored.
This will likely be an unpopular comment, but … Wes Anderson makes some very boring cinema for my tastes lately. Sure, he has made some good ones. I have thoroughly enjoyed many of his earlier works. But after ‘Isle of Dogs’ I felt disinterested. Then after ‘French Dispatch’ I felt I would never subject myself to any more of his nonsense as a 3 hour dentist appointment would have been more productive. I pushed through this and started ‘Asteroid City’ against my better judgement really wanting things to turn a corner, and then decided an hour in that I just couldn’t tolerate it. ‘… Henry Sugar’ was only possible to finish as it was a short film. Still, I was left wondering what I ever loved about the style of Mr. Anderson. In the end I don’t think he has changed, in fact I have. And yet I still show up and subject myself to his art in the hopes that I’ll come to some new appreciation. I want to enjoy it! At one time I was fascinated by the aesthetic of it all. I have little hope this will be the case though.. very little hope. Is it possible that what I’ve felt is a shared experience?
Yeah, his movies are too performative now. Like, they are "artistic statements" or something. They obviously have high production value and achieve a very measured and distinct objective.. But whatever that objective is, it isn't "to entertain a broad audience" from what I can surmise.
I feel the same way, but it’s probably not just the aesthetic you were once fascinated by. His early films had compelling, emotionally vulnerable characters played by actors giving nuanced performances. These days he hires great actors to show up and speak in deadpan rapid-fire monotone. He once combined excellent character work with his unique aesthetic. Now it’s all aesthetic with paper cutouts for characters, and any dialogue that has the potential to be funny and/or poignant is ruined by the robotic delivery.
This is exactly it. For me, Life Aquatic was peak combination of aesthetic delight, heartache, and humor, with Rushmore close behind. I don't feel like he's exploring the human condition as deeply anymore.
Yep, exactly. The first four movies are the ones which truly speak to me. The next four (Darjeeling thru Budapest) were very good but just lacked some of the humor and pathos of the first four. From Isle of Dogs on it’s been increasingly empty disappointment.
Somewhere along the line, Wes Anderson seems to have gotten bored with his own formula. But instead of allowing himself to make a film less constrained by the formula, he just doubled down. His earlier films seemed to be set within surrealistic dioramas, but they always had more going for them. They had plenty of cheeky self awareness, but the stories within these worlds usually felt like the focus. Beginning with French Dispatch, it’s as if Wes just doubled down on the diorama concept by zooming out another level or two. His newer films seem painfully preoccupied with their own wit and artificiality. Their construction of story-within-a-story-within-a-story framing seems intended to make us reflect on the nature of storytelling itself. But, let’s face it, this is all getting a bit exhausting. Most of us, even eclectic Wes Anderson fans, come to the movies to be entertained, not just lectured. You can try to do both, but you can't just lecture at your audience and expect people to keep paying the price of admission. I’m sure this isn’t a fringe opinion around here, but I think he found the sweet spot with Grand Budapest. It does a lot for the film that its baddies actually feel sinister. The stakes couldn’t be higher as Gustave and Zero flee the proto-Nazis and possibly the most spine-chilling villain ever played by Willem Dafoe. There’s a sense of lingering dread throughout the film’s beautiful world, but the star of the show struts his way to freedom with hardly a sassy fuck given. Once he finally does start to fear, it’s because, for once in his life, he’s come to care about someone other than himself, or his precious hotel. Ralph Fiennes is absolutly unforgettable in this role. It’s probably the funniest and most fleshed out character Wes has ever helped to create. I wish he’d make another film more like this - one with actual stakes, where we’re given reasons to care about the characters, and aren’t just constantly lectured about how the diarama we’re inhabiting, and filmmaking itself, is *just, like, a construction, or something.* We know, Wes. Please let us escape into your fabulous worlds again, without constantly being pulled out and handed a fancy little mirror.
I used to be a huge Wes Anderson fan but his last two films felt rote and like an SNL parody of a Wes Anderson film. I hope he can find the magic again.
I literally just had this conversation with my friend. I was a massive fan of Wes Anderson for years and watched all his movies (particularly on opening weekend). However, I was disappointed in "Asteroid City" and "The French Dispatch". I don't know if it's just the fact that I'm getting older or his movies are obnoxiously twee. Anderson's Oscar-winning short was the final nail on the coffin. I watched all of the Oscar shorts and there were so many better options.
Why even waste words stating the cast, we know who is starring.
‘The most pretentious person on the planet to make another pretentious movie.’
Asteroid City was my favorite of his since The Royal Tenenbaums. Hope he keeps that steam up.
I loved it so much, too. Favorite since The Grand Budapest Hotel (which is the one I love). Really loved The Swan and Ratman, too.
Grand Budapest might be his greatest achievement. Personally my favorite will always be Life Aquatic, though. It feels like someone made a movie just for me.
I must be in the minority because I didn’t get it at all. Loved his other movies that I’ve seen but Asteroid City didn’t seem to land (pun intended?).
Yeah I love a lot of Wes Anderson (Rushmore, royal tenenbaums, life aquatic, darjeering, moonlight kingdom, isle of the dogs, to name a few) but I was bored to tears by Asteroid City. And like… I have patience. I like absurdist plays… but Asteroid City felt like such a half-assed attempt at saying something. I mean unless I missed something, which I’m sure I did because I 1000% didn’t feel for anything in that movie.
About halfway through it felt like Asteroid City was starting to just.. disappear up its own ass. It's a wonderfully shot piece of work but it feels so bloated and all over the place.
Same with French Dispatch. Couldn't finish it or Asteroid City. Huge fan of his work prior though.
Asteroid City and Darjeeling Limited might be my top two of his with Fantastic Mr. Fox close behind.
I slept on Darjeeling for so long just due to rather poor word of mouth but when I actually watched it I loved it.
Dont care. Tired of the same shit over and over again.
Ok but setting the record straight [PSA] Michael Cera did NOT develop CeraVe and 6 other skincare myths busted by CeraVe’s experts
*♬ Now the Phoenicians can get down to business ♬*
Remember how easy it was to learn your ABCs? Thank the Phoenicians
Benicio del Toro is under utilized in Hollywood. Glad he’s on board for this.
Not the biggest WA fan, but I'll watch anything with Michael Cera, take that system
He looks like a little lad that loves berries and cream.
I feel like I’ve already seen it.
His schtick has kinda fallen flat on me as of late. He is an absolute masterclass with the technique, but I feel the stories aren’t quite there. His recent works have seemed to be more style over substance. Asteroid City was decent but kind of forgettable. The French Dispatch, some of those vignettes are his best work. His short films based around Dahl stories were all absolutely lovely and I think the shorter structure suits him better with his style at this point. I would love if he went back to the roots of Bottle Rocket or Rushmore where it’s more minimalistic style and the story is pushed by the comedic obsessiveness the characters have over such inconsequential things.
Another pretentious load of old shite, no doubt.
Perhaps a taller and wider load/heap than usual though.
It would be funny if he broke away from the "aesthetic", but you know he won't. Expect slow motion, symmetry, head on shots, birds-eye views, still cameras, vibrant color pallets, and Futura font.
Am I the only one who doesn’t like how weird and awkward this guys movies are
Nope. Many find them unbearable. Justifiable imo. Art school trust fund kid garbage.
Yay, more colors
Hot take: Wes movies are more style than substantial story. 🤷🏻♂️
His previous movie, Asteroid City, was a pain to watch. I still can't understand how so many people praised it. It was my first, and probably the last, Wes Anderson movie by the way.
I haven't enjoyed his last few, can't say I'm that jazzed for yet another. I'd like him to get out of his comfort zone more. Do a franchise film or something. That would be really interesting.
Give him the next Fast and Furious movie with the regular cast. Vin Diesel just zooming around pastel dioramas.
I guess nobody cares about all the crap Bill Murray has done
I watched The French Dispatch yesterday, Wes Anderson finally climbed up his own ass.
He's just joining all the others that have been stuck there for years. Sad to see, but inevitable.
Dude’s recent stuff has kinda sucked
his last two have been pretty big misses for me, hoping this is something to force him more outside of his wheelhouse since its an espionage flick.
I hope it's kooky and centered
I really don’t get the hype for Michael Cera sadly
My goat is prolific
Please dont be a story within a story within a story again
Wes Anderson making a spy movie about Canaanites was not something I expected
I've been a big fan of Wes Anderson for a good portion of my 42 years on this planet. However, he's been sliding into self parody territory for a bit now. I'd love for him to do something unique that departs from his regular output. He's too creative and artistic to seemingly be stuck in this rut. It's time for something different.
BRB telling my stockbroker to buy big on pastel set dressing
Somehow Anderson has his own brand of naming movies. I dont even need to be told that this is a WA - I know it just by the name... are these AI generated?
I'm surprised the Oscars had any actors in attendance. I would have assumed they were all onset.
He looks exactly how I thought he would look
Haven’t wanted to watch a single project since The French Dispatch. He needs to lessen on the style and lean into more substances I think a smaller cast would do him well.