WATCH THIS TRAILER FOR WES ANDERSON’S MOONRISE KINGDOM

Looks absolutely ridiculous.

I cannot fucking wait.

The shot of Bill Murray shirtless carrying booze and an axe (now immortalized as my avatar) automatically makes this the best thing anyone will see all week.

"That's a loaded question."

Why do they even put 'A Film by Wes Anderson' in his trailers? They are so obviously his it's absurd.

Having said that, can't wait. Love me some Anderson. Love love love.

Hey now, Doc... it could've been Brad Silberling film!

It's the only way to be sure!

I'm very happy now and it's all because of this article.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc Happenin 

Why do they even put 'A Film by Wes Anderson' in his trailers? They are so obviously his it's absurd.

My wife, who is rather ignorant in the ways of pop culture (I have taken her on as my padawan) knew it was a Wes Anderson film by halfway through the trailer. The fact that she picked up on it, let alone so quickly, really says something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.T. 

Looks absolutely ridiculous.

 

I cannot fucking wait.

Couldn't have said it better myself.  This trailer also serves to remind me that my sorry ass STILL doesn't own any Anderson films outside of Fantastic Mr. Fox.  I'll definitely be tossing Rushmore, Darjeeling, and Bottle Rocket into my next Amazon order.  Anyone know when Criterion might get around to giving Tenenbaums and Aquatic HD upgrades?

Hopefully soon. I think their release of Rushmore's upgrade means Tenenbaums has got to be coming soon, or at least next, but who knows when. That said, the Rushmore BluRay is fantastic, and the transfer is gorgeous. 

Few filmmakers have an aesthetic that's so immediately and irrevocably identifiable as Anderson. I'll be honest, I had reservations about him going back to live-action after Fantastic Mr. Fox proved to suit his proclivities as a director so perfectly, but this looks wonderful and had me hooked immediately. It's on my list of "most anticipated of 2012" anyways, but the trailer really seals the deal.

Edward Norton looks weirdly appropriate in a scout leader uniform.

Gosh, I wish I could like this guy's movies. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Singer 

Edward Norton looks weirdly appropriate in a scout leader uniform.

That is spot on.  And yet I can't help but wish that was Owen Wilson.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Singer 

Edward Norton looks weirdly appropriate in a scout leader uniform.

I was reminded of Death To Smoochy, which isn't a bad thing.
 

This looks good, but I continue wish Wes Anderson would try something outside his comfort zone.  I'm bored with every Wes Anderson movie having the same texture and feel.  Does that make me a bad person?  Should I just accept Wes for what he is: a unique and often brilliant, but rote voice?

Sometimes, an auteur has an aesthetic that translates, permeates, and sometimes dominates all aspects of their work. Wanting Anderson to change his look just to try "something else" would be futile if it wasn't what he wanted; similarly, it'd be like wanting Goddard or Fellini to change the way they made movies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

Gosh, I wish I could like this guy's movies. 

I think everyone else will keep doing just fine.

This looks great, but frankly, the thing that most excites me is Norton's involvement, as I really kind of love the guy and have been a tad depressed over how he's been out in the wilderness for the past several years. Outside of that, this a typically phenomenal cast from Anderson, and as I very much respect Roman Coppola as a creative spirit with a limited output, I'm interested to see what he brings to the table.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

I think everyone else will keep doing just fine.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.
 

Greg Clark is such a pompous cunt it's hilarious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Mee-yow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

Sometimes, an auteur has an aesthetic that translates, permeates, and sometimes dominates all aspects of their work. Wanting Anderson to change his look just to try "something else" would be futile if it wasn't what he wanted; similarly, it'd be like wanting Goddard or Fellini to change the way they made movies.

It's implicit in wanting Wes to try something different, that I want him to want it.  It's not that I don't think he's great, or that there isn't a place for his work, I'm just slightly disappointed with his dependency on the same well of style and ideas.  Rushmore felt different, fresh, and exciting, Royal Tenenbaums felt like the perfection of of everything that made Rushmore great.  Perhaps at the heart of my disappointment is that each new permutation of the Wes-verse is inherently less fresh and exciting.

I'll still be catching this in theaters.

Anyway here's my own pompous post that I was originally going to make before I got distracted.

This basically looks like every Anderson movie ever, which for me signals the following:

Gorgeous, uniquely Wes-ish cinematography; great actors doing pretty solid performances; characters mainly built out of self-consciously quirky affectations; trite cathartic moments where the emotional heavy lifting is done by songs that already evoke the desired emotion; dialogue delivered with an arch dryness that makes it feel more witty and intelligent than it really is; half-baked themes that probably include daddy issues or some such shit.

He may be an auteur, but he's basically remaking the same mediocre movie again and again in different zany settings!

I like his aesthetic! Watching them I was always convinced I'd like his movies until I realized I didn't. I think that's mainly because I don't think he's much of a writer at all, or at least needs to find co-writers who aren't his mates. His movies don't all have the same story but frankly I think they all tend to be vague and unfocused. To me he always seems more confident coming up with these oddball settings and characters than in knowing what to do with them. That's one reason I'm keen to finally catch up with Mr Fox, which has a good story ready made for him.

Funny you should mention PTA because I'm of the unpopular opinion that both Wes and PT Anderson make 'imitation masterpieces' - movies that are, on the surface, as exceptionally well crafted as anything that has ever been made, so much so that it's tempting to think they're as brilliant as they appear to be. But then when you try to dig a bit deeper into them, they turn out to be surprisingly hollow. (Obviously Paul W.S is the one really delivering the goods).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

Funny you should mention PTA because I'm of the unpopular opinion that both Wes and PT Anderson make 'imitation masterpieces' - movies that are, on the surface, as exceptionally well crafted as anything that has ever been made, so much so that it's tempting to think they're as brilliant as they appear to be. But then when you try to dig a bit deeper into them, they turn out to be surprisingly hollow. (Obviously Paul W.S is the one really delivering the goods).

At least Paul Thomas Anderson "imitates" different filmmakers.

The only thing Wes seems to be imitating is the 1970s-era children's storybook aesthetic. And that's alright with me. PTA obviously was homaging Kubrick with There Will Be Blood, but to say that once you dig past the homage there's nothing there is a pretty tragic misunderstanding of that film. Do you similarly dismiss all of Tarantino's films for being similarly influenced?

To me, it feels like the complaint would be similar to harping that Altman films have to many long, sustained takes where everyone talks over each other and the story always seems to get tossed to the side, and he should really think about knocking that off and making a movie like John Carpenter for once. Cause he's getting predictable.

Kudos for not rising to my profane little shot there.

'Imitation' was probably a misleading way of wording it cos I don't think Wes is ripping anyone off as such, 'facade' is more what I'm getting at. I think he's a brilliant craftsman and good at creating the impression of depth and wit and sophistication, but for the most part I don't think they have the meat at the heart of it to back it up.

The PTA thing is a different thread altogether really. I like him but his 'big three' seem like exercises in imitating Scorsese, Altman and Kubrick (so with him its imitation in more ways than one). His writing isn't bad but again tend to be mainly appealing on a surface level, and I think he has an issue with his reach exceeding his grasp.

With TWBB (which I'd say is very good at worst) my issue with its depth is that it's extremely broadly drawn and essentially has no subtext. With the two main characters PTA seems to want to take on no less than capitalism and religion themselves, but if you're going to tackle two subjects that huge in the same movie you'd better have something interesting to say about them, and I don't think he really does. As an allegory it's a bit simple and trite. As a character study it's mainly interesting thanks to Day-Lewis, but Plainview as a character is practically defined by being one dimensional and single minded, there's not a whole lot to investigate there. And just as a story it's decent but not a grand achievement in plotting or anything. So again, basically what I'm saying is the movie's strengths are in its brilliant craftsmanship rather than its intellectual depth.

This looks pretty cool, I'll definitely be seeing it. I'd be seeing it anyways because I like all of Anderson's movies a lot, save for Darjeeling which is a tab bit too bullshitty (quick aside: Darjeeling and Brothers Bloom are two movies that were decent except for Adrien Brody's lead role. I just don't see what people like about the guy most of the time).

The big thing for me though is a lot of this movie was filmed on Aquidneck Island in RI, where I've spent the majority of my life. Newport is the most famous, with the touristy downtown, waterfront, and historical buildings. Then the towns on the other part of the island, Middletown and Portsmouth, would supply the fields and suburban neighborhoods with plentiful trees. Trinity Church, which I hear plays a big role in the movie, is where most of my family funerals have been. it's going to be surreal seeing Bill Murray and Bruce Willis hanging out in there.

So, not that anybody except me and my fellow New Englanders gives a shit, but it's going to be wonderful seeing these places in what looks to be a good movie. The last major filming I can remember here was Amistad back in '96, and I never bothered to see that, because I heard it was extremely boring. My mom got to shake Spieldberg's hand in downtown Newport though, so there's that.

And I could've sworn it was MoonLIGHT Kingdom when they were filming it. Maybe with Batman and all they decided "rise" was this year hot shit buzz word?

Love the time capsule BOY'S LIFE aesthetic mixed with Wes' old tricks and Ed Norton and Willis joining the troop. On my MUST-SEE list for sure.