Xixax Film Forum

Wes Anderson's next film reportedly starts filming in the fall with Bill Murray, Owen Wilson and Nicole Kidman.  I'll bet it'll be pretty friggin' excellent.

Clue us in on some more details, see if you can beat Macguffin.

Jan 31, 2003:Rumor has it that Anderson has been secretly working on a "huge" project involving an oceanographer, set mainly in France and Mexico. The tentative title for the film is, "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou," with Bill Murray playing the lead.

Sources also point towards the inclusion of Jason Schwartzman (who made his acting debut in "Rushmore"), Gwyneth Paltrow, and of course, Owen Wilson. Mothersbaugh, the music director in all of Anderson's films, has said that there is a possibility that the whole movie could take place on a boat.

For the first time in his career, Anderson is not writing with the help of Wilson, but instead with Noah Baumbach (whose next script, "The Squid and the Whale," is being produced by Anderson).

Article (http://www.vanderbilthustler.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/01/31/3e39d5a03dc8e)


More here:
http://wesanderson.org/untitled/

Game goes to Macguffin.


Whats this Kidman news I hear? Where did that come from?

that's ok. i hear that jerry bruckheimer wants her and tom cruise for a days of thunder prequel.

Quote from: mrsimonray
Lord let this be untrue, Kidman is thrusting herself too stongly into too many different projects. She's becoming boring and her acting is going downhill. I'll bet she's after a Coen Bros or PTA movie next.

I dont have a prob with her being in a PTA movie, especially if there is nudity. But she does need to calm down on all the movies. At first I thought it was cool, but it got a little old seeing her name attached to every movie.

Really? I don't think so at all. Firstly, she isn't becomming boring, and secondly, her acting is at its peak; she has never been better. And you have to remember also that all of these films are not going to come out at the same time, and most importantly, that because she is the name of everybody's lips right now, you going to hear that she is attached to every movie where in actual fact she is attached to less than half of them.

You took what I said to literally. I dont want Kidman to stop making movies, I just think its cooler when you have to wait a little while to see her. Id like to see her be a little more selective, but I dont run her career, so whatever.

Quote from: The Silver Bullether acting is at its peak; she has never been better.

I actually think Kidman's best performance was in "To Die For." That movie just plain rocked.

agreed.

i traded in some old cd's for the RT soundtrack. after reading WA's comments about Mark Mothersbaugh (the scorer of all his films) I hope they have an extra on the next DVD showing Mothersbaugh through the writing, scoring and recording process. Seems like that would be cool and definitely interesting.

Does anyone remember who Emma Thompson is?

Kidman or no Kidman I already can't wait for this fucking movie. I'm so glad to see Schwartzman back...and Owen Wilson too, he can finally be funny again after all those fucking lame action movies.

Looks like Bill Murray is becoming Wes' Phil Hoffman...that's awesome....I love the guy. He really works great with Wes, their both geniuses.

Quote from: ebeaman69Kidman or no Kidman I already can't wait for this fucking movie. I'm so glad to see Schwartzman back...and Owen Wilson too, he can finally be funny again after all those fucking lame action movies.

u don't hav to swear just cos u can.

Quote from: Pu don't hav to swear just cos u can.

fuck you ya fuckin' fuck!

Quote from: P

Quote from: ebeaman69Kidman or no Kidman I already can't wait for this fucking movie. I'm so glad to see Schwartzman back...and Owen Wilson too, he can finally be funny again after all those fucking lame action movies.

u don't hav to swear just cos u can.

Sorry mom...I just get excited. I don't do it to be cool. See, this is the only place that I hear about this exclusive stuff...it's where I hear about everything, it's where I heard about PDL for the first time...so the reactions of mine (such as this one) that you read is my first and most honest reaction. I don't think about it and edit it a million times.

owen wilson confirmed wes is shooting in rome with nicole kidman

Quote from: sphinxowen wilson confirmed wes is shooting in rome with nicole kidman

Right now? Awesome. I just hope she can be funny, Kidman that is. Or is this even a comedy? I sure hope it's got some of that Wes Anderson humor in it.

I hope they put "from the creator of The Royal Tenenbaums" in the trailer. I love when they do that stuff. It always gives me chills.

And what a cool title too

QuoteI just hope she can be funny, Kidman that is.

See To Die For.

Lets just hope Kidman proves herself as an overall good actor in the film. This is sort of an irrelevent topic but Kidman did NOT deserve the Best Actress Oscar for the Hours. Anybody who saw it would've chosen Streep for Best Actress on any day of the week: More screen time.. more development of the character.. MUCH more emotion.. Kidman was not deserving.. she got it because everyone said it was "her time".. where the fuck was everybody when Julianne Moore was pulling off dynamic performances in "Short Cuts", "Safe", "Boogie Nights", "Magnolia", "Cookie's Fortune", etc.. and Kidman made "To Die For", "Moulin Rouge!" and "The Others"... Uh huh. Who has the stronger acting resume when looking at a PURE actress? I think the only great performance out of Kidman was Kubrick's complex "Eyes Wide Shut"

Well, I saw The Hours and I thought Kidman was better than Streep overall. I would have been happy with any of the nominess in that category this year, though. All top notch.

Oh yeah.. I don't want to make it seem like I'm ultimately knocking Kidman as an actress.. but I just think she's been overly hyped. As if Kidman overshadows everybody when that most definitely is not the case with all the strong performances. I think more people should've seen "Far From Heaven" but.. such is the life of an indie.

Quote from: CinephileOh yeah.. I don't want to make it seem like I'm ultimately knocking Kidman as an actress.. but I just think she's been overly hyped. As if Kidman overshadows everybody when that most definitely is not the case with all the strong performances. I think more people should've seen "Far From Heaven" but.. such is the life of an indie.

I saw it, I think Julianne Moore deserves and Oscar, but not for that.

I don't want to seem like "the more screen time, the more deserving for an oscar" because thats not true. I was moved a lot more by Moore's excellent performance than Kidman's performance. This year was just an unfortunate one for the Best Actress category.

Quote from: Duck Sauce

Quote from: CinephileI think more people should've seen "Far From Heaven" but.. such is the life of an indie.

I saw it, I think Julianne Moore deserves and Oscar, but not for that.

wh...wha...whaat?????!!!!!!

I never understood the hype to Julianne Moore's performance in Far From Heaven either. The role of wholesome cliched 1950s mother coming to terms with a horrible situation in a repressed fashion is a typical role already. Moore has very little to do with the role but act the character that has been shown a billion times over. The real discovery of great acting in Far From Heaven is with Dennis Quaid and his complete breakdown that is present on screen.

~rougerum

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThe role of wholesome cliched 1950s mother coming to terms with a horrible situation in a repressed fashion is a typical role already.

Any examples?

Off the top of my head, there is Joan Allen in Pleasantville and Laura Linney in The Truman Show but this argument seems misplaced because I am certain everyone who has been watching tv and movies for the past 10 years knows that common motif of how the typical cliche 1950s house wife acted as represented on tv and has been re-used over and over again through tv and movies in different areas. This is all based off old tv shows, from Leave it to Beaver and other such shows that for the time period, was trying to suggest the example of what every family should be like. There it became the cliche and in the two examples I named, was re used to address that.

~rougerum

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetOff the top of my head, there is Joan Allen in Pleasantville and Laura Linney in The Truman Show

The Joan Allen example is a good one, but doesn't that represent a broader eye-opening in Pleasantville? And it was less discovering something horrible than it was discovering something wonderful. Laura Linney in the Truman Show doesn't really fit, though... that's more like.. an actress trying to fake the typical 50s cliche housewife, or at leasted one adapted for the 90's.. and that's more about Truman anyway (but I guess the whole thing is similar to Pleasantville). Obviously there is a cliche of the 50s American housewife, but I'm not seeing the cliche of playing off that cliche.

{splutter}

If you didn't see more than '50s cliche housewife' (whatever that is) you need to retune your senses. What was masterful in Far From Heaven was the way the performances echoed fifties performance styles, and Julianne Moore (and Quaid, who I thought was brilliant) captured this so subtly it was intense. She constantly reminded me of Marilyn Monroe (not the housewife type at all) without at all slipping into camp, a performance that was totally in tune with the whole movie. To play repression is not a case of simply looking stereotypical or 'doing nothing', and the contrast with The Hours shows how well she can differentiate two apparently (to the deadened eye of people like Gold Trumpet) done roles. I don't see how you can even begin to compare Pleasantville or The Truman Show to Far From Heaven, the play off was wholly different and so, as JB points out, were the characters.

Blah, Nicole Kidman can't hold a candle to JM, and I'm sick to think she's gonna taint the new Anderson.

How not? Here and there, within little places all over tv, whenever it is suggested that a time and feeling go back to the more wholesome world of America pre 1970s or whatever, there is always shown a house wife who plays to these examples. I always felt it was something that was present and if someone was to play that image, they would do it a certain way. A kind of acting that is based off over exaggerated facial movements to suggest the happy and nice. Though I give Julianne Moore a little credit for adding what seems to be realism, her acting for the movie exists only in the recreating of these facial movements. From smiling like all is well and everything is dandy to showing strict discipline placed upon a kid who does wrong and then showing devastation but also being confined to a world that asks her to keep some level of emotion up. I honestly think she was just running the gauntlet of all these little stereotypes to how the household wife was exaggerated to be like. Nothing she can do, because it is all the role offered her. But the acting in Pulp Fiction was the same way, in actors playing up to the roles of what their genre said to them that was transformed into a cliche of ways. Pulp Fiction does a lot better though in bringing a realism to it that is apparent now, Far From Heaven is just a Sirk film made now.

~rougerum

Your Julianne Moore comments stem from over-analyzation and bad taste. As for Far from Heaven being a Sirk film made now, pfft. Far From Heaven does address issues relevant today, and it does so bodly, unlike the Sirk movies that would only vaguely hint at such taboos. I'm not sure I'm understanding the Pulp Fiction comparison.

Budgie,
you offered the words that the performances brought an echo to fifty performance styles. In that sense, how do you think this is achieved? Far From Heaven is a direct imitation of the style and story of a filmmaker from the 1950s who made melodramas of banal material and an over stlyization that made people second guess the material on how honest it really was about what it was showing, if it did just show it as bad romance fiction or the stylization put it into a context that was showing the super ficiality of the genre and the times. Though Far From Heaven deals with issues common place only now instead of the previous day, it is still very much Sirk in conforming to a 1950s movies of his, with the only difference being that the issues are updated. The thing is, Far From Heaven is a movie based off other movies and a style that is playing parody straight. Everyone in the movie is following these rules, besides Dennis Quaid, who has some emotional scenes that seem to go outside of it. If you were reminded of Marilyn Monroe, then thats fine. I wasn't at all because even when Marilyn tried to play a role straight and serious, she had a voice and way with her that suggested she was as confused as any blonde is portrayed to be now (note: I am a complete natural blonde myself). I just can't see how this is not camp when it is basically an imitation of movies that really were in many respects.

and cbr, go fetch your answer in that paragraph.

~rougerum

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet(note: I am a complete natural blonde myself)

Your argument is no longer credible.

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet(note: I am a complete natural blonde myself)

Your argument is no longer credible.

{slap, slap}

But on that point, JB's 'joke' works because you are (I believe) a blond man, not a blonde woman. Actually, I'm not sure... do you encounter prejudice for it, GT? Just thinking how blond actors might be thought of as bimboys. But anyway, it isn't at all to the same degree I'm certain.


GT,
First off I will say that I find it very difficult to pin down how Far From Heaven works its magic (on me). I found it extremely intelligent and the interplay between two periods (now and the fifties) extremely original in that it did not feel to me like a period film. Somehow too it managed to make issues and actions that we have come to take for granted as no longer that affecting or relevant seem completely shocking and serious. For instance, when Quaid hits Julianne, an action that has been almost naturalised in contemporary media, it really took me aback. It doesn't 'update' the issues, it just makes you look again at them and I think you realise, with some horror, that the issues are still the same.

I have to say I don't quite understand what you mean about Sirk's movies making people "second guess the material on how honest it really was about what it was showing", but presuming that you are talking about the audiences in the fifties (as opposed to later, when Sirk got re-evaluated for a male-oriented audience) I think you are misjudging how people related to the stories as 'honest' and the style as emphasis of the melodrama. In the context of fifties design and Hollywood movies of the period style wouldn't have been that apparent. For the female audiences of Sirk's films, the stories would not have been 'banal, bad romance', and the design would not have been exotic (seen within the familiar Hollywood ideal) they would have been fantasised and moving imitations of their lives (duh). That's why the critics dismissed the films in the fifties as 'just' soap and melodrama. You seem to be seeing them from the point of view of later critics who decided that if they separated out the style from the story ('good' from 'bad'/'entertainment' from 'art') they could celebrate Sirk as an auteur. But that's just what they wanted to see.

Where I think FFH is so brilliant is that it does appear to imitate Sirk, but yet totally avoids being camp and makes the so called 'banal, bad romance' shocking, whereas in my experience Sirk causes a lot of giggling when seen today. I think the performances, as I said, contribute to that. I would not dismiss the possibility that this is to do with recognising the actors, knowing they are of the present, and yet being forced to accept them in this world that we can only see styled as 'the fifties'. So you almost become aware of Julianne Moore, the actor, caught in this other time, where because her performance, like the style of the film, reminds you of Sirk's actors', the two periods just melt together. I don't know that I can be absolutely precise about how the acting reminds me of fifties acting without seeing the movie again and directly comparing it with a Sirk, but Quaid's performance, for instance, reminded me of the manly classic guy shot through with the angsty style (Dean, Clift, Brando) that was also current. Kirk Douglas in Written On The Wind.

What I found was that, apart from when Moore goes to see Haysbert in his home and he tells her he's leaving, I wasn't moved in a conventional sense of feeling weepy, but that the film's intelligence moved me (to shock). I think it somehow made you see familiar things in a different way. I haven't talked to my gay male friends yet, but I would guess that they were emotionally moved. I think the film may be showing a gay man's way of seeing, and the way Quaid's gay relationship (though it's also a white man's relationship) becomes the most successful and 'normal' at the end is really something.

Sorry, that's really rambling, I know, and I don't know whether I answered your questions, but as I said, I think it's an incredibly complex movie that I will need to see another few times to get my head around.

Its most definitely a masterful piece of work by Haynes, as he should've been awarded the Best Original Writing Oscar for it. If anybody sees the movie, loves it, but has not even heard of Sirk, then it thankfully opens up a whole new door for filmgoers who haven't seen those classics.. and I bet Haynes would be happy if he accomplished that. I know he has.

Hey, if you all wanna see a chilling portrait of a repressed woman, see "Safe" by Todd Haynes. Julianne Moore fucking blows me out of the water.

Budgie,
From what I read on your feelings of affection toward the movie, I think you are addressing what I liked the most about the movie, the fact it deals with subjects that are not observed with our own thinking, which is sympathetic towards issues like interracial relations and gays, which still are not fully accepted, but it looks to them as they would have been looked at through the more strict view point in the 1950s. I think we as the viewers, when seeing a drama stylized in such a Hollywood way, start to identify with the story through what we know and find the views even more shocking as we witness them through a mind set not our own. On that level of usage of another man's style of filmmaking, the movie has power. But as this dicussion moved from one on Julianne Moore to the general standing of the movie, there are drawbacks to this.

In the movie taking a style completely and making it like it was one of that style made now, it does succeed in bringing new ideas into a new perspective, but as a work, the lack of indepedence of the person doing this really must be noted. This movie really reminds me of The Talented Mr. Ripley the most, where I saw a movie that filmmaking and story wise, acted really as imitation of another filmmaker, Alfred Hitchcock, with the exception, like this movie, it brought forth themes of today not present really in movies then. I liked The Talented Mr. Ripley only to a point. I've admired the craftmanship of Hitchock films and though Ripley worked well as a Hitchcock film effectively for today, but it wasn't by Hitchcock, so standing as a film by another man, I really couldn't appreciate the movie to any great degree. I can't see much creativity in seeing how well one can recreate another man's movie to a subject very similiar to all his rest. It became a 3 star movie for me. And thing is, that movie still really deals with just a genre movie while Far From Heaven has more importance in dealings with ideas that are more expressive for their own importance to our society. With that in mind, I admire Far From Heaven more. Then take into account the feeling for the film, that Roger Ebert described in another Julianne Moore movie, The End of the Affair, to have dragged way too long at the end. That's what I remember from his show review, I've never seen the movie. I though Far From Heaven dragged beyond comfort, especially with the relationship between Moore and the gardener finally ending. I respected the movie for what it was trying to aim for and saw it as more important than Talented Mr Ripley, but unlike Ripley, I was restless as the movie went on and themes started to reappear when they were already understood. Just the same themes and such. My overall thoughts on the film was admiration but not enough for recommendation since the film, in its ground work, didn't have much to really become.

And on the blonde prejudice, I have gotten some. Nothing bad though, but my prejudice came from everyone's first impression of me for just being a kucklehead. In one of my college courses, I am known as the kid who argues with the professor to just annoy her, fitting the goof off role. Today, for the first time, I was able to speak at length about a subject I knew more about than the professor and everyone looked at me and said, "Wow, you're actually kind of smart."

~rougerum

GT~

It seems to me that again, as with Van Sant, our divergence comes from differing attitudes towards films as somehow being untouchable and original works of art. I don't have any problem with filmmakers upfronting film as being like any other life experience and using a fictional text as a basis for a new movie. I actually think it raises the status of film/art by not treating it as something separate from other life experiences, especially when it results in an excellent and new perspective on those experiences. This is part of Haynes' agenda inside and outside of the film - the synthesis of pictures and life, and his ref to Sirk is really to depict what his interpretation of Sirk's movies is. This is where it is a particularly gay film, I think, because gay men have to integrate appearance into their everyday reality. He's also commenting on the way we all have to do that to some extent, and one way we all do it is through the way we watch movies: you don't ever see them in a vacuum, as your comments about Ripley and Hitchcock point out. It's impossible and artificial to try to isolate the film as you try to do. And you can't talk meaningfully about Haynes' film being lesser than Sirk's because Sirk got there first or something: at the end of the day they are still two totally different films and to someone who doesn't know Sirk your assertions are nothing.

As for your role as classroom goof... yes, I always understood you as that type. The reason I like our exchanges is because I am too in a way, although 'annoying the professor' isn't my main motive for challenge because that would just be kinda limited. Besides, having taught in the past, I doubt very much whether your professor is annoyed. I used to live for the day when any student, however blond, would actually challenge me to shake up my thoughts. On the rare occasions it did happen, I experienced real satisfaction.

Jesus fucking Christ P, you mean I don't have to fucking swear every fucking time I open my fucking mouth?
Cmon pal, saying fuck is therapeutic. You should try it alot lol

Budgie,
I am also starting to see this go into our debate of Van Sant, I was thinking of going back and replying to what you last said on the other thread a while back before leaving, but it seems new life in the general discussion we have been having can start here again. In responce to your first comments, I will say I do not believe at all films are untouchable and original works of art. Actually, I am in complete favor with remakes that I hope are not just remakes, but reimaginations. My argument does not concern itself with the films that adapt previous films into their own identity, but take that identity and add things to it that seem of the inessential of making it into an entire film. The idea of remaking Pyscho shot by shot, imitation of the style and story of Sirk films completely in Far From Heaven. My point deals with these films aren't really conveying new images out of old ones, but make their points through a way that can be understood just as perfectly as in a movie as on paper in retrospect to understanding one's work from a previous time and relating it to today's life. I am in belief a lot of what you got out of Hayne's film in the context of within Sirk and reasons why can really still be perfectly understood through proper writing of it.

It may be the school of thought I came from, being that whenever a movie or any work is remade into a new, the best thing for the new work is to share qualities with the old but make it into something that is its own. I admire Haynes for what he was trying to do, but I don't think the complete imitation of another filmmaker was really essential to doing it. Movies have made identity of themselves through showing parts of it in homage to another, like a jazz musician may do in a jam session where he plays with his heart first, instead of working out what exactly he will do. Movies can operate perfectly on that level, because it never reduces itself to being an imitation only of one percise movie or filmmaker that can be understood through a writing just as easily. A film can show many different thoughts and ideas, ones that you pointed out with what Haynes was trying to do as you in relation to the audience. It can be done when a filmmaker takes from different styles and flavors it with their own. I've always had a deeper respect for movies because it had that freedom to freely move from one to another. It is imitation and all in many ways, but it isn't reducing the imitation to only one where it feels more and more like a trick, a trick that can be understood through its one clear imitation.

My main motive for challenging professors wouldn't be just to annoy them if I was a better speaking in relaying my thoughts. What happens to me is I am more realizing of all the stress around me and end up coming up blank in what to say. So I shoot for annoyance, which is easy and good for getting a reaction. Sometimes I challenge due to ideas, but I don't have enough confidence in myself as a public speaker to do so as much as I wish I could. I absolutely love when I challenge because I live for discussion, to either be proven wrong or succeed, but to see how much available thought is out there for me to learn. There are smart people on this board, but I would say you are the only person I can rely on for a discussion of whatever is said. Others, if they do, seem to pick and choose their arguments. My posts are always long because I always feel a right to explain myself, even if no one may agree. That's what I like best about this board and what can be done on it.

~rougerum

GT ~

How do you differentiate between a 'remake' and a 'reimagination'? Where is it 'jazz' and where 'imitation'? Isn't it all a matter of you wanting to see repetition that works within and confirms your existing knowledge, as opposed to being open to a new perspective, of being shown that actually your knowledge isn't the sum total of interpreting a movie?

The real problem here is that you judge a film's value and meaning by comparing it to another film's already established values and meaning, whereas I am interested in meaning being a result of the watching of the film. When you look at it like that, remaking or reimagining takes place every time we see the same film. It also obviously means that no one can take control of meaning or value and say one film is saying this or that, which is why critics and others are so keen to stake their claims on movies. By closely and visibly referencing other films as Haynes and Van Sant have done, they are staking a claim for their own readings of the films - eg. Sirk's movies are gay favourites because they speak to feelings of repression, so Haynes is reappropriating Sirk from the straight film historians who read Sirk as a mainstream auteur, at the same time as he's making connections with other repressed groups (women and blacks). If he hadn't referenced Sirk and publicised the fact for the people who are film buffs and who have seen Sirk as belonging to the straight, white, male canon, then the film couldn't exist. It had to be close. If that's just a 'trick' then I think you are underestimating the political power of movies and Haynes' intentions, perhaps because it 's more convenient to keep Sirk and Haynes in separate boxes?

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThere are smart people on this board, but I would say you are the only person I can rely on for a discussion of whatever is said. Others, if they do, seem to pick and choose their arguments.

Aww, that's unfair to JB for a start. And just because people don't fill in all the gaps it doesn't mean there isn't a good discussion in there. We all pick and choose. Come on everyone, feel free to argue! Don't be frightened! :yabbse-smiley:

dangit.
i keep thinking there is new news on the actual topic.
=(

Budgie,
OK, I will agree with you Budgie on the validy in imitation of Sirk for Far From Heaven within the contexts of it representing the history of gays in our society. You just stated the connection in your recent post, but explained yourself better on the previous one. When I read the previous one, I was conflicted but figured I had to post anyways. Now, though, having thought about it more, I will agree with you that remaking of a particular style in this way is appropiate and am humbled to finally understand this. This means I am satisfied with the film as being a very good one, but I do still think there is a better movie to be made out of the subject sometime down the road because I think an imitation of Sirk was the only and best way to looking at the subject, but you did what you had to do in convincing me it is a very good film.

I want to get back to the Pyscho discussion though, because I do still believe I am right in it. I just want your opinion again, with what you know of my arguments, to why it is a good film, so we can continue it. I think the imitation of the work in Pyscho, though, is a much more revelant one for written study or dabbling with the original itself instead of remaking an entire new one due to the distraction that it is of watching new actors remaking an entire film shot by shot, when things could have been done to answer your questions without making the film or bringing ideas up on paper.

And as much as you want to believe that I think I know all I can know, I really don't at all and have said before that I know very little. I think my cockiness just makes me seem that way. Even though that may be snobbish to say and all, it is much more truthful than what a lot of other people here are willing to admit about themselves.

~rougerum

I just want to leap in here and say that the Psycho remake should be burned to a crisp and ultimately cease to exist. Each and every copy of the film should be destroyed. The only things added were different actors (obviously), colour, and Norman Bates masturbating. Pitiful, useless, and absolute garbage. Its a shame to think people aged and lost time in their lives over the making and viewing of the film.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I want to get back to the Pyscho discussion though, because I do still believe I am right in it. I just want your opinion again, with what you know of my arguments, to why it is a good film, so we can continue it. I think the imitation of the work in Pyscho, though, is a much more revelant one for written study or dabbling with the original itself instead of remaking an entire new one due to the distraction that it is of watching new actors remaking an entire film shot by shot, when things could have been done to answer your questions without making the film or bringing ideas up on paper.

GT, I appreciate you still have questions here but I don't know whether I really have any more answers than those I've given between here and the other thread. The only thing I have to say is that I don't think I'm trying to convince you that FFH or Psycho are 'good', or that they are better than other films. I am only talking in terms of why they give me pleasure, not trying to establish, as I think you are, a standard and hierarchy of value. The way I see Van Sant's project, as I said before, is that he is questioning, as I do, that whole idea that filmmaking/watching is a competition, with one movie judged and labelled forever as better than another.

Now, as I also said before, you think that could be written down, and I say yes, it could, but not everyone reads books and certainly not everyone writes. Van Sant is a filmmaker, he makes films. Does that necessarily restrict his subject matter or references? Can't he make movies about watching movies and what they mean? Why should that properly belong in the realm of written criticism? Surely that is to assume that movies are never critical? I don't see the difference in the functions of films and film criticism or in overlap between the two. What makes Psycho remade pleasurable for me (and therefore a good movie for me) is that it is that intelligent and questions these divisions. The fact that people will miss the point and still try to read Van Sant's project in a way that segregates movies from other forms of discussion and therefore be disappointed is just part of his point. It's ironic.  

QuoteAnd as much as you want to believe that I think I know all I can know, I really don't at all and have said before that I know very little. I think my cockiness just makes me seem that way. Even though that may be snobbish to say and all, it is much more truthful than what a lot of other people here are willing to admit about themselves.

I don't think that about you at all. I like cockiness. I don't think you are a snob, either.

I know I'm jumping in again but I think any shot-by-shot colour remake of a classic B&W film with the exception of more blood in scenes that don't need more blood and masturbation where its not needed, is insulting. Utterly insulting. It personally didn't give me pleasure to watch a talented director degrade a classic such as Hitchcock's "Psycho". IMO, naturally, but I fully believe I speak for the vast majority here.

Budgie,
Yes, Gus Van Sant is a filmmaker, and is asking questions with Psycho, but also (imo) found out that the question he was asking was wrong. The movie is a near shot by shot recreation of the new one that articulates in bad fashion what the director could have been told, and that is when you go for a recreated movie in such a way that is very limited in difference from the original, you get the reaction from the people who are fans iof the original (and there are lots of people, not just critics) that the film is a cheap imitation that can never go to anything near suspence or horror because the meticulous planning and thought goes for the students of trivia in how much is recreated. The distraction in this excercise is enormous and intruding on the impact of the film. Instead of the film being an act of asking a question, it becomes an annoyance of someone hopelessly trying to recreate a classic movie that is seeming to add up to an inferior movie in every way. This movie knows the notes the original played, but not the music. I think before you mentioned something about how the addition of music does in the new film in bringing a new experience. Well, if you really wanted to find that out, wouldn't you assign the music to the original instead of the hackneyed remake that is a distraction anyways? Why not colorize the original and bring up the tone of blood in large ways from the original? See, questions can be asked but the way Van Sant's Psycho goes about in doing no real good questions can be asked anyways because the true experience of watching Pyscho with all the effect is not even there.

~rougerum

I think the only level on which one can appreciate the remake of Psycho is on this level of "an interesting experiment" and always, always in relation to the original. It becomes more like a conceptual art piece referencing a cornerstone of popular culture, or a visual essay on a theme. In no way can one judge it as a thriller in its own right, a story about some girl called Marion who steals some money then goes to a motel and - OH MY GOD - she gets murdered in the shower... It's just not possible. In this respect, one could call the film pointless (it doesn't entertain on the level on which movies are expected to entertain: story, and surprise), but on another level it could be considered an extremely valuable filmic experiment.

However, I personally still think it sucks balls. This is for the simple reason that - as far as I'm concerned - it didn't make any interesting comments on the themes of the original or on the idea of watching, as it could have done. This is just my opinion, but I got a hell of a lot more interested watching the art piece 24 Hour Psycho (the film - the original, of course - slowed down so it projects once in 24 hours, for anyone who doesn't know) than by watching Van Sant's remake.

I think the idea of the remake wasn't necessarily a bad idea (as many believe it to be), but the method of execution was. Still interesting in a way, sure, but only by default.

So.
Yeah, anyway: Wes Anderson...

Quote from: children with angels
Yeah, anyway: Wes Anderson...

Who?

I think Psycho was an experiment.Like the end result or not, like the intention or not. It was an experiment to see that if you make a relative carbon copy of the original, does the original hold the same power as we have all given it. Assuming, the re-make hits all the same beats as the original, of course.

I won't try and answer those questions, because I'm lazy, I liked in a way the intention and the result of Van Sant's Psycho. I think it deserves at least a cult following, but I don't want to see it happen to anymore films in the future. It's a paradox with me.

Oh, and The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is a great title.

Quote from: DerekOh, and The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is a great title.

I know, right?

Yeah, because in your mind you're thinking, "hey, this sounds like Aquaman" and then: Steve Zissou. All of a sudden your life flashes before your eyes and your mind goes blank. "Steve Zissou isn't Aquaman".. and then you're thinking to yourself, "fuck, I gotta see that Aqua Steve movie!!"

.. Yeah.

I especially like how it's Life Aquatic instead of Aquatic Life

Yeah and it sounds like a weekend TV special on The Discovery Channel.

Totally, totally. See, it's that kind of thinking that makes Wes great.

Yeah.. I'd go into deep depression if that was a cheap working title and the end film title was "The Aquatic Life of Steve Zissou"

GT, I can see I'm not gonna convince you that there are other ways of watching movies than for entertainment or answers or in order to form a judgment based on aesthetic values that are treated as separate from other aspects of culture. Let's just say I'm happy to be distracted by the dialogue and the questions raised by, say, constantly being reminded of the original by, say, the soundtrack, but having my responses and ideas about both movies unsettled and challenged because of that reminder. I like that, like watching two movies at once, the repetitions and likenesses seeming the same but actually never. You're watching the relationship between the two, not the movie as something caught in a vacuum - it is the essence of watching, of what happens between the audience and the film. Being aware of yourself watching as well as submitting to escapism. Frankly that turns me on, and as I said, it's political.

It's in the way we're trained to watch movies, though, that we all expect to get sucked in and come to crave that. I guess if you can't let go of that and open up to the fact that Van Sant is pointing out how trained we are, and find a different kind of pleasure (one that makes you watch yourself, in effect) then you will miss the beauty of it. Maybe it's just because of my background and interests that I enjoy it.  

Quote from: children with angelsit didn't make any interesting comments on the themes of the original or on the idea of watching, as it could have done.

See above, but also I think it asks the questions and leaves it up to you to make the comments, as all good art does (in my opinion).

Quote from: children with angelsI got a hell of a lot more interested watching the art piece 24 Hour Psycho (the film - the original, of course - slowed down so it projects once in 24 hours, for anyone who doesn't know) than by watching Van Sant's remake.

I love that piece. But on this theme, did you see Douglas Gordon's back to back projections of The Story of Bernadette (?) and The Exorcist?

Sorry, Wes.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned elsewhere (maybe even the beginning of this thread. i don't know, i'm lazy.) but i'm sure i heard somewhere that gus van sant was planning on doing another remake of psycho. maybe with diferent camera angles, even.

but, you know, i was never too fussed about it. hitchcock's dead, van sant probably made some money (and i think he was counting it in jay and silent bob strikes back) and anyone who claims to have been horrified by his 'butchering' of a classic, well, nobody got het up about the remake of mutiny on the bounty with marlon brando, you know?

ok, so it wasn't great, but it was better than freddy got fingered.

Quote from: HimI'm not sure if this has been mentioned elsewhere (maybe even the beginning of this thread. i don't know, i'm lazy.) but i'm sure i heard somewhere that gus van sant was planning on doing another remake of psycho. maybe with diferent camera angles, even.

I'm not lazy:
http://xixax.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=402

Quote from: Duck Sauce

Quote from: Cinephile.

I saw it, I think Julianne Moore deserves and Oscar, but not for that.

I agree. I like Jualianne's performance, but I wouldn't give it an oscar.

Quote from: NewtronDoes anyone remember who Emma Thompson is?

yeah

but she read Duck Sauce's advice, and is now waiting 3 years between films

i can't believe i had the patience to flip through five pages of debate about Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore and the Psycho remake...... just hoping there was actually any dicussion about Wes' new one.  i must be having a good day!

New Details Emerge Concerning Wes Anderson's New Film

As pre-production on Anderson's new film The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou continues in America and Italy, more details about the film are coming out. The film, which will star Bill Murray and Owen Wilson, follows the relationship of a famous oceanographer and his estranged son, while they and the father's motley crew embark on a series of wild adventures.

The Life Aquatic will mark the first time in Anderson's career that he has not collaborated with Owen Wilson on the screenplay. Anderson's writing partner this time is writer/director Noah Baumbach, whose film The Squid and The Whale Anderson has signed on as producer.

In the Anderson tradition, Zissou's crew will include a number of quirky characters. Pele, a Brazilian man in his late 20s or early 30s, will bear a resemblance to the famed soccer player Pele. His character likes to play guitar and is a fantastic singer. Twentysomething Anne-Marie Sakowitz is young, tough, sharp, thin, boyish, smart, determined. Possibly is of European or Israeli background, Anne-Marie often walks around the ship topless, although she is not voluptuous. Wolodarsky, in his thirties, is both a physicist and a composer, with an offbeat, mad scientist quality. He is definately an eccentric, interesting presence on the ship. Bobby Ogata, in his mid twenties, hails from Japan. Bobby is athletic and a bit of an innocent. The currently unnamed teenaged Intern will be smart, charming, aggressive and earnest.

Shooting is scheduled to being at Rome's famed Cinecitta Studios, home to many of Federico Fellini's movies, this August. Disney will distribute the film in the fall of 2004.

hmmmmmmm........I believe I'm in

one of the few cinematic experiences I'm looking forward to

Wolodarsky must be named after Wally Wolodarsky, who Wes mentioned in the RT commentary as being the original choice for Bill Murray's young case study, unitl he got a job directing a movie himself. The title of the movie was not mentioned, but it was...Sorority Boys.

which was fucking hilarious, don't diss on sorority boys.

This may have already been discussed, so redirect if you must.

How are you guys pronouncing "Zissou?"

Quote from: DendyHow are you guys pronouncing "Zissou?"

xixax.

hehe  

he bee funny

Quotehe bee funny

that be not

Quotehe bee funny

that be not

still, no

-- I'll stop

Quote from: bonanzatazwhich was fucking hilarious, don't diss on sorority boys.

rrriiiigggghhhttttt

does anybody know who will play Zissou's crew members?

and by the way, Wally Wolodarsky was involved with the Simpsons early on. He is also in Rushmore, as the ref in the wrestling match







//www.thestate22.com

jeff goldblum? stop-motion animation?........this just keeps getting better


http://wesanderson.org/articles/2003/variety.html

Quote from: bigideasjeff goldblum? stop-motion animation?........this just keeps getting better


http://wesanderson.org/articles/2003/variety.html

It's going to be animated? Or the guy that's doing the set design just happens to be an animator? I don't get any of that. What the hell is stop motion animation anyway?

Glad to hear about Goldblum and Bud Cort and Angelica Huston though, this is going to be cool as hell unless it's animation.

Quote from: ebeamanIt's going to be animated?

Quote from: ebeamanWhat the hell is stop motion animation anyway?

Question one:The undersea world of "Aquatic" is being created in collaboration with director and stop-motion animator Henry Selick Question two:("The Nightmare Before Christmas," "James and the Giant Peach").

Alright...so the undersea world is going to be animated? That fucking sucks. It's going to take forever to do and it's not going to be that cool...my anticipation just got taken down a pretty big notch dammit.

Au contraire...that fucking rocks. This movie is suddenly more exciting than ever. Ebeaman, I think you underestimate the possibilities of animation...especially stop motion animation. Truly wondrous things are in store with this film, I think.

i thought it meant it would be more like the California Raisins stuff, but i guess that is "claymation?"

either that or kinda like parts of Beetlejuice where the sculptures come alive?

i dont think so. "Claymation" (a la california raisins) is Will Vinton Studios who have also done the shows THE PJs and GARY AND MIKE, in addition to their CLAYMATION CHRISTMAS SPECIAL from the 80s.  Henry Selick is more like, well, Henry Selick.  I imagine it will be just like Nightmare before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach.  Hopefully less like Monkeybone.  you should watch some special features on the great Nightmare dvd to see how its all done. very interesting.

Quote from: GhostboyAu contraire...that fucking rocks. This movie is suddenly more exciting than ever. Ebeaman, I think you underestimate the possibilities of animation...especially stop motion animation. Truly wondrous things are in store with this film, I think.

I guess I really do need to see it before I judge it. I'm glad the whole film isn't being done like that though, that I really do think would suck. But just the undersea world? I can deal with that I guess, that sounds kinda fun...it might be ok...jesus, it might be fucking amazing, who can ever tell? It's Wes we're talking about. It's just that I usually look to only Pixar for good animation movies, I wanted Wes to stick to live action stuff...I don't know though, I really need to see it I guess, once the trailer comes out I'll have a better idea of what I think of it. James and the Giant Peach is a cool movie.

i have a soft spot for stop motion animation

i used to do it as a kiddie with a shitty old camera, pressing the record button twice as fast as i could, usually if i was lucky i could animate in fives or sixes, and then i was introduced to the animation lunchbox which allows you to animate off a video camera in ones and twos, advance single frames, etc...sadly this was out of my price range at the time.  since then i've grown away from animation but i still do it now and then

I'm much more excited for this project by Wes than any of his others. Like I said before, since he is moving so much into where style and other things are taking more part, he needs to move his stories along with that too. Royal Tennebaums seemed like it was way too busy in cuteness for its story, which was very normal. Anderson needs to get like Fellini where he writes stories that are dictated by his visions and style and feel, not trying to implant them into an average story. Its just way too off setting. With this project, hopefully he is doing that because working at Fellini's studio, and doing the things he is doing, he has way more freedom by way of imagination to really explore and given how successful RT was and how cheap, he is likely getting some room financially with this one. I'm hopeful.

~rougerum

I would've loved it if Anderson players Jason Schwazman or Ben Stiller were in this but I'm happy as hell that Murray is the lead. Can't wait for this flick.....

OH SHIT, this is going to be cool.  Finally, the movie season just brightened a bit!  :-D

I'm so thrilled about this movie !  I really like the cast, and (obviously) the direction will be top-notch. And now stop-motion animation for the undersea scnes ? This will be sweet ! Eye candy is never wrong

Quote from: ebeaman
I really do think would suck. But just the undersea world? I can deal with that I guess, that sounds kinda fun...it might be ok...jesus, it might be fucking amazing

Come to think of it, no comment.

can you imagine???? murray and wilson together as leads in a stop motion seaworld?????......they've yet to really share any screen time........rushmore, wilson was the dead husband in photographs.....and TRT, murray played a smaller role...........2004 can't come soon enough!!!

From today's EW (page 19, "The Deal Report"):

"Wes Anderson update! The Royal Tenenbaums ringmaster is assembling a cast for The Life Aquatic, about a crew of deep-sea explorers. Tenenbaumers Owen Wilson, Bill Murray, and Anjelica Huston are back, while Jeff Goldblum, Peter Stormare (Fargo) and Bud Cort Harold and Maude) are new additions..."


Bud Cort. Excellent.

I notice, too, they seem to have shortened the title. Don't know if that reflects the new reality or was just truncated for space or convenience.

DAMN! Where is Owen Wilson as Olivia's dead hubby in Rushmore? I've seen that movie and actively perused the set decoration about 5 times, and I've never seen them pictures spoken of!
I thought Owen was originally supposed to play Luke Wilson's character in Rushmore because he says "what happened to your nose?" and Max responds "I got punched. What's your excuse?" (yknow cuz uh Owen has the screwed up nose)
That's really neat though, that Olivia may have had an attraction to Peter who is "brothers" w/ her late husband. hohohah.

AS FOR "AQUATIC LIFE etc.": Who's interested in seeing this stop-motion that is planned? You know Anderson wants the old shaky "Rudolph" type of stuff because it looks so cool, and I think it's smart not to go straight to CG.

what the fuck happened all over bud cort's face?

Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestionAS FOR "AQUATIC LIFE etc

LIFE AQUATIC!

lamas: Bud Cort was in a really bad car accident years ago.

Quote from: supermarket trollleylamas: Bud Cort was in a really bad car accident years ago.

were you in the car with him?  you seem touchy about the subject.

Quote from: themodernage02were you in the car with him?  you seem touchy about the subject.

Who do you think caused the accident?

In 1979, Cort was involved in a terrible car accident on the Hollywood Freeway on his way back from a Frank Sinatra concert. He broke an arm and a leg and sustained a concussion and a fractured skull. His face was severely lacerated, his lower lip cut and hanging by a thread. In 1984, he told People magazine, "When I got up the nerve to look at myself in a mirror for the first time, I screamed. I looked like a monster, with my forehead, face and lip all sewn up. I wanted to die." Cort underwent three operations for plastic surgery and remains unsatisfied with the result. "I try not to look in mirrors," he said.

At the time, Cort had a part lined up in a Robby Benson movie, "Die Laughing." He expected to be fired but instead, producer Jon Peters said, "Well, you're playing the villain anyway. Think about how good it will be for the character." Later, Leonard Maltin wrote, "Cort is disgustingly oily as a fascist villain."

Cort spent all of his savings on medical bills and went on to lose a $10 million suit he had brought against the driver of the other car. He found himself broke and without work. While he receives annual residual checks from Paramount for "Harold and Maude," (the last one was for $28.77 ), he doesn't get any profit from video distribution. "I get no participation from video sales -- I'd be a millionaire if I did," Cort has said. "I made next to nothing from that movie."

In the past 20 years, Cort has made 30 forgettable films, including playing the role of Norman Bates' creepy proxy in the TV flick "The Bates Motel." After the accident, he'd stopped being choosy and uninterested in weirdo roles. His disfigurement motivated him to go into radio, where he did a bit of voice work, including a successfully syndicated reading of "The Catcher in the Rye."

In 1991, he made his debut as a director with "Ted & Venus" a low-budget romance about a crazed poet on Venice Beach that he also wrote and starred in. While the film's producer called the movie the "spiritual sequel" of "Harold and Maude," the critics were not moved. The L.A. Times wrote, "Bud Cort was as appealing in the milestone comedy ('Harold and Maude') as he is repellent in this film." Variety's Todd McCarthy called it "a highly unpleasant yarn about a lovelorn sickie who endlessly torments a beautiful young woman." The film -- with cameos by Woody Harrelson, Gena Rowlands, Andrea Martin, Timothy Leary, Carol Kane and Martin Mull, went straight to video.

In the coming year, Cort will appear in four or five films, some of which already have pretty good street cred. He has a role in the highly controversial, much anticipated "Dogma," Kevin Smith's religious satire starring Ben Affleck and Matt Damon, with Alanis Morissette as God. And he will portray the strait-laced dad of Natasha Lyonne's high school cheerleader in "But I'm a Cheerleader." In the film, the girl is sent by her parents to rehab camp when it's suspected that she's a lesbian. He will also appear in Dwight Yoakam's western "South of Heaven, West of Hell," starring Vince Vaughn, Billy Bob Thornton and Paul Rubens. Further, Cort will be seen in Ed Harris' bio-pic about Jackson Pollack and the Bono-scripted "Million Dollar Hotel," about a murder at a skid-row hotel.

Cort may ultimately crack his typecast. Indeed, a new generation of kids is growing up that has never heard of "Harold and Maude." But for many a poetic soul, "Harold and Maude" is bound to stay around forever. As Colin Higgins once explained, "We're all Harold, and we all want to be Maude. We're all repressed and trying to be free, to be ourselves, to be vitally interested in living, to be everything we want."

Quote from: supermarket trollleyI'm not sure I understand the last two posts. I thought I was just answering that guy's question...

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.destinationhollywood.com%2Fcelebrities%2Fsamuelljackson%2Fimages%2Fsamuelljackson_pulpfiction_03.jpg&hash=7c843f98273b333e57c274c465f1000dfd0a335f)

"English motherfucker!  DO you speak it?!?"

My God. Life Aquatic. I'm so ashamed. Time for an appropriate emoticon.
:oops:
I subconciously followed the norm. Apologies.

antidumbfrogquestion where upstate do you live....film music and beer...you sound like my kinda guy

I alternate between rochester and fredonia/ beerdonia (the crappiest trying to be lame that it's not even funny dumb nickname for a college party town anywhere). It's right next to Dunkirk though, and I'm the only person who gets a kick out of saying Drunkirk.
So, if you've heard anything bad about my breed of nomad, it's false. We's all good.

btw...film, music, beer...you know it's all worth it's salt 8)

Quote from: mdantidumbfrogquestion where upstate do you live....film music and beer...you sound like my kinda guy

You drink illegally? I could swear you said you were under 21.

Quote from: ebeaman

Quote from: mdantidumbfrogquestion where upstate do you live....film music and beer...you sound like my kinda guy

You drink illegally? I could swear you said you were under 21.

Hahaha, oh ebeaman ::kiss forehead and combs hair with fingers::

...so innocent...

Quote from: tremolosloth

Quote from: ebeaman

Quote from: mdantidumbfrogquestion where upstate do you live....film music and beer...you sound like my kinda guy

You drink illegally? I could swear you said you were under 21.

Hahaha, oh ebeaman ::kiss forehead and combs hair with fingers::

...so innocent...

Sloth, you're fucking priceless.

I wish Trem was a girl

Just to voice my opinion oono "Life Aquatic," It's gonna kick ass.

Oh, I was just saying cause I had talked to md before a couple times and he just didn't seem like the type to drink illegally. He won best film a couple times at a local film festival. I just thought only football players and people like that did it illegally. I guess I thought wrong.

Lol, seriously, I never knew I was so naive before coming here. Lately though, I've been starting to think somebody should write an ebeaman-version of "What's This?" from Nightmare Before Christmas...don't really do it though...I'll get better.

What's this? What's this?
There's color everywhere
What's this?
There's white stuff in my hair
What's this?
I can't believe my eyes
I must be dreaming
Wake up, Ebes, this isn't fair
What's this?

What's this? What's this?
There's something very wrong
What's this?
There's people smoking bongs

What's this?
The streets are lined with
Lots of people drinking
Everybody seems so happy
Have I possibly quit thinking?
What is this?
What's this?

There are children smoking cigarettes here
Instead of sewing sweaters
They're busy doing drugs
And no one's writing grammaw letters

There's smoke in every window
Oh, I can't believe my eyes
And in my nose I smell the weed
That's coming from inside

Oh, look
What's this?
They're touching their own wangs
Why that looks so unique, inspired
They're gathering around to hear a story
Of how Jim scored with Meg that liar
What's this?
What's this?

In here I've got a little wood, how queer
And who would ever think
And why?


That's all I've got... who wants to finish?

Holy shit!

Quote from: RegularKarateThat's all I've got... who wants to finish?

IS THE PORNO CONVENTION IN TOWN TONIGHT?
IS THIS THE PORNO CONVENTION?
WHAT IS THIS?

God damnit, P, I couldn't even remember that sig, so how did you?

RK, that was great

Quote from: tremoloslothGod damnit, P, I couldn't even remember that sig, so how did you?

He probably picked it up from the new Ween album, they say it there, Trem.

Quote from: tremolosloth
RK, that was great

You're great, Trem
will you be my girlfriend?

Very good RK, lol.

One thing though, I didn't get any of the first verse.

Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestionDAMN! Where is Owen Wilson as Olivia's dead hubby in Rushmore? I've seen that movie and actively perused the set decoration about 5 times, and I've never seen them pictures spoken of!

i only knew because of the commentary. the pictures in appleby's room were taken by owen's mom when he was  kid......i believe there's a black and white framed photo that is hung beside the door......if i remember correctly

More people added to the Life Aquatic, courtesy of AICN...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/film/brief_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1967751

Dammit I'm really excited by this film, it's always great to follow a film (although from the sidelines) right the way through the production proccess.

willem dafoe! Playing Bill Murray's brother! Fuck yeah!

Nice script review at AICN:

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=16089

QuoteThe premiere is a disaster, and his rival Alistair Hennessey (please let this be Jeff Goldblum... please let this be Jeff Goldblum...) relishes the opportunity to rub Zissou's nose in it.

YES!

QuoteIn the midst of this darkest hour, Zissou meets a young man named Ned Plimpton

Great name. I can just hear Owen Wilson introducing himself as this character.[/quote]

Cinema em Cena reports that Brazilian actor and singer Seu Jorge ("City of God") has joined the Wes Anderson comedy playing a soccer-shirt wearing member of Bill Murray's crew, one who has a habit of singing Portugese versions of David Bowie songs.

Sounds great

Maybe he'll unruin Space Oddity (sandler...)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calsmodels.com%2Fimages%2FXIXAX%2Flifeaquaticpic.jpg&hash=4262a1da8eef89abd1747efba8b5c7657450f97d)

...albino dolphins?......

::R.I.P.  Flipper.....screeeeeeeeeeechhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.!!::

<-----does the happy "I know more about a movie before it's even out and am not keeping myself surprised but I don't care" dance

I heard this morning on ESPN that the film has gone over schedule. Bill Murray was supposed to play in the Pro-Am as he does every year. He has to miss it due to filming. They even mentioned his vanity shot in LOST IN TRANSLATION with Mt. Fuji in the background. Funny.

A smattering of on-set photos on pp 238 of the new Vanity Fair (March 2004). Wes Anderson is unrecognizable as the spiky-haired nerd of the Rushmore DVD supplements; he has long hair, very Euro-chic.  :shock:

wow, after a week, someone finally  wrote something here!
Scan scan scan scan scan....

I haven't read the AICN script reviews because I don't want any spoilers, but anyone make anything out of this thread?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0362270/board/nest/5830142

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaI haven't read the AICN script reviews because I don't want any spoilers, but anyone make anything out of this thread?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0362270/board/nest/5830142

i think its worthless of that tub of lard posts unproduced scripts on the internet -- im sure the filmmakers arent endorsing such acts -- this fat ass who cliams to be such a film lover is a tasteless waste of skin. does anyone know if there are legal issues with posting unproduced material without the concent of the proprioters?

Quote from: cowboykurtis

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaI haven't read the AICN script reviews because I don't want any spoilers, but anyone make anything out of this thread?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0362270/board/nest/5830142

i think its worthless of that tub of lard posts unproduced scripts on the internet -- im sure the filmmakers arent endorsing such acts -- this fat ass who cliams to be such a film lover is a tasteless waste of skin. does anyone know if there are legal issues with posting unproduced material without the concent of the proprioters?

They posted the review of the script and not the actual script, right?

just a review

hes still a fat peice of shit

Quote from: cowboykurtishes still a fat peice of shit

.he was good in Angus.......

i just saw the vanity fair photos. they look so good, i can't wait for this film.

and btw, for anybody else who saw them, did cate blanchet have what looked like 'tan in a can' on? And doesn't wes look a little like spike jonze now?

Article from Gotham magazine:

Part One (http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/thewilsons/goth12031.jpg)
Part Two (http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/thewilsons/goth12032.jpg)

Wes looks very different! I liked him better with the spikes....

Great article thanks!

Quote from: cronopioWes looks very different! I liked him better with the spikes....

he now resembles micheal bay's scrawny little brother

Vanity Fair photos here. (http://img15.photobucket.com/albums/v46/itsanowenthing/sc.jpg)

mention of TLA in interview at Dark Horizons for Starsky and Hutch.

Question: How much time did you have to spend in the water for the new Anderson picture, "The Life Aquatic"? Were you in submersibles at all or did you actually have to get in the water?

Owen Wilson: It was one of those things like every movie that's always kind of a big crisis; 'Oh, you need to go over to Italy and you gotta go and do all this diving. You're going to have to go get certified, but you can't be certified in America, it won't work there...' And then you go over there and you hardly do any diving.

Ben Stiller: So the Italians are really tough on the certification?

Owen Wilson: Yeah (laughs)

Question: Why is that film being shrouded in such secrecy?

Owen Wilson: I wasn't aware that it was. Really? I didn't know that. I play a guy named Ned Plimpton... (Ben leans over and whispers in his ear) Oh, ok... You know what? I'm not going to be able to talk about it, someone has advised me that if I answer that question, in a court of law, they can prove that I had knowledge. No, it's kind of inspired by Jacques Cousteau and Bill Murray plays a Cousteau character. It's not that secret. [I play] Ned Plimpton. I fly for Air Kentucky and I may or may not be Bill's son.

is the script online?

Kate's LIT pose is mildly amusing. But I'm still convinved this film will never be finished. It'll just go on and on...

In which glorious month of the year is this movie getting a release date?

december 25, 2004. at the moment

Quote from: meatwaddecember 25, 2004. at the moment

Crap, that's too fucking late.

Quote from: Withnail

Quote from: meatwaddecember 25, 2004. at the moment

Crap, that's too fucking late.

IMDB claims it to have a December 1st release date as of today (march 18th) when I checked it. They've been reliable in the past so.....here's to hoping for the sooner one.

probably dec 1 limited. dec 25 wide.

either way, i'm seeing it before you...

December... It's gonna be 2005 befoer it hits the UK then  :cry: And this is the movie I'm most looking forward to at the moment...  Sure there's KB2 and the ladykillers... Sob

Apparently, Roman Coppola was one of the second unit directors on this film, even though he's not listed as such on the InternetMDataB.

www.wesanderson.org changed the main page. That is all.

but the site is still down. that is all.

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanG-good God, people.

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=204

Some new stills:

http://www.cinemaeye.com/more/539_0_10_0_C/

those we the photos from vanity fair, which were posted one page back in this thread

I can honestly say that I'm more excited about this film than any other that's being released this calendar year...

me too, that, garden state and we dont live here anymore

Quote from: meatwadthose we the photos from vanity fair, which were posted one page back in this thread

Oh, i am sorry

Quote from: A Matter Of Chance

Quote from: meatwadthose we the photos from vanity fair, which were posted one page back in this thread

Oh, i am sorry

you damn well should be ..thats phucked up man......!!!



.....i kid  w/you.....

Quote from: El Duderinome too, that, garden state and we dont live here anymore

well the last two were at Sundance, therefore they wont be that good.  see also: The New Rules.

Reviews of the film are up at Aint It Cool. Beware of spoilers I guess...

Holly Jesus fucking christ... I was anticipating this with anxiety and these rave reviews don't make it any easier for me to wait until I see it. Sounds really really fantastic.

Haven't been this excited whilst reading a review since that Punch Drunk Love review from Cannes. Bill Murray going ape shit at some pirates!? Jeff Goldblum as a villain!? I'm so damn excited about this.

Did we already do a Wes Anderson festival here? I cant remember.

Quote from: ®edlumBill Murray going ape shit at some pirates!?

I laughed really hard when I read it in the review.  :lol:

Quote from: ®edlumBill Murray going ape shit at some pirates!? Jeff Goldblum as a villain!?

are those spoilers

Quote from: Pubrick

Quote from: ®edlumBill Murray going ape shit at some pirates!? Jeff Goldblum as a villain!?

are those spoilers

Kill him now, let God sort it out.

wow, could i be ANY MORE EXCITED about this movie?  the answer is no.

in 2001 when I first went to a film school, all these family and friends kept on asking me "Pete, you goto a film school, what's the best film of the year?"  I always told them, The Royal Tenenbaums--even though that film didn't come out until december 14th, and they'd been asking me as early as april.
Now, same thing, 'cause I have faith in Wes Anderson.

Unfortunately, the best film of 2001 was Apocalypse Now Redux. :)

you lose.

Lose what? I liked Tenenbaums. But Redux was a 6000 lb. gorilla. It's still the best movie of the last 25 years.

if this is a statement of personal preference, would you like a list of everything you're disregarding? but if you feel this is true empirically, you are incorrect.

it's just mutinyco.

Yes, it's just Mutinyco. But yes, it's also a fact. In fact, an international poll by none other than Sight & Sound came to the same conclusion. I'm on no ledge.

But this is silly. This is Mr. Wes' forum. No need to take this thread on a detour.

i dont think a new edit of a previously released film can count as a best film of the year, but i'm not Sight and Sound.  

yeah pete, i have to agree.  nobody does it for me like WES or PT.

http://www.ateaseweb.com/news/archive/001038.php

"Everything in its Right Place" might be included in the film's soundtrack. My favorite director, my favorite band - I am pleased.

ugh,. Vanilla Sky already claimed/ruined it.

next........

Quote from: mutinycoLose what? I liked Tenenbaums. But Redux was a 6000 lb. gorilla. It's still the best movie of the last 25 years.

words of the wise. havent seen redux -- revisited the original cut a few weeks ago. breathtakingly astounding movie. now, i have been reluctant to watch redux, in the event that it was the result of coppola being bored and old and off his rocker -- his hands arent as steady with the scalpel as they used to be, if you know what I'm saying. are you suggesting that redux is superior to coppolas first pass?

Quote from: Pubrickugh,. Vanilla Sky already claimed/ruined it.

next........

Who cares if it was used in Vanilla Sky? Nobody will remember that film in 20 years anyways. I think it's safe to say we won't be saying that about The Life Aquatic. It's a great song and I think this will be a great movie. That's all that matters.

Quote from: cowboykurtisare you suggesting that redux is superior to coppolas first pass?

I would've kept the same opinion of the original as the best of the last several decades. But yeah, although I think there are some uneven elements in the Redux, there's just nothing else even remotely like it.

you still don't get it, dude.  That's like a girl says to a guy "you're the best guy who's ever lived" and you go "uh-hmm, excuse me, I believe that will be Gahndi."  And apocalypse now ain't even gahndi, not even with that extra hour of cinema.  was the best film of 2003 Aliens?

party foul.

Quote from: peteyou still don't get it, dude.  That's like a girl says to a guy "you're the best guy who's ever lived" and you go "uh-hmm, excuse me, I believe that will be Gahndi."  And apocalypse now ain't even gahndi, not even with that extra hour of cinema.  was the best film of 2003 Aliens?

party foul.

Can somebody please translate that into English?

Quote from: mutinyco

Quote from: peteyou still don't get it, dude.  That's like a girl says to a guy "you're the best guy who's ever lived" and you go "uh-hmm, excuse me, I believe that will be Gahndi."  And apocalypse now ain't even gahndi, not even with that extra hour of cinema.  was the best film of 2003 Aliens?

party foul.

Can somebody please translate that into English?

I think he's disagreeing with you.

Quite obviously.

judging from mixed reviews on AintItCoolNews,

this is like Margots play.

but thank the Gods of cinema for the Wes Anderson we love

For this will exceed more than a two week run

aintitcoolnews can eat a dick.

they've never been right about anything.

Quote from: Pubrickaintitcoolnews can eat a dick.

they've never been right about anything.

youve gotta point....

'Punisher' as movie of the year....

constant updates on Godzilla movies....

I hear ya

Gotta agree about AICN. The site sucks out loud. Anyone who defers their tastes in movies to that fat retard might as well become a scientologist.

About The Redux---Best of 2001? You've gotta be kidding. That revisitation completely destroyed everything that made the original one of the best movies of all time. It completely destroyed its dynamic, diluted its meaning, and turned Col. Kurtz into nothing more than an overweight bully version of Dennis Hopper's character. The redux is an utter abomination! Ive been trying to forget it ever since I first saw it so not to contaminate my impression of one of the greatest masterpieces of the twentieth century.

The Redux is to Apocalypse what The Godfather part 3 is to the Godfather 1 and 2.

...And if you really want to be technical about it, the best film released in 2001 was... 2001.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv53%2FJeever79%2F185719__life-aquatic_l.jpg&hash=37c3f463619c92f6f3c5b136591966f78b6821d5)

There's and even better pic in the new EW.

I am so excited for this movie.

Quote from: A Matter Of Chancepetter

:?:

Quote from: mogwai

Quote from: A Matter Of Chancepetter

:?:

Sorry... I meant better.

All changed now.

Mark your calendars.  According to the new Premiere, The Life Aquatic will be released (the rumored date of) December 25th.  (Although this could change....)

Quote from: themodernage02Mark your calendars.  According to the new Premiere, The Life Aquatic will be released (the rumored date of) December 25th.  (Although this could change....)

WAAH!

From Entertainment Weekly:

Anderson, director of the geek-chic comedies Bottle Rocket, Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums, has never had an easy time boiling his movies down to a quick, simple pitch: "What I do is sort of the opposite of that," he deadpans. "Unboiling." When it comes to his latest film, he's more adrift than ever. Basically, it's the story of a Jacques Cousteau-esque oceanographer/filmmaker named Steve Zissou (Murray, in his tragi-comedy wheelhouse), who is struggling to finish his latest underwater-exploration documentary. Along for the ride are Wilson, playing a pilot for Air Kentucky; Blanchett, as a reporter working on a profile of Zissou; Huston, as Zissou's dissatisfied wife; Goldblum, as his pompous rival; and Dafoe, as his loyal German crewmate, Klaus. So, yeah -- it's that kind of movie.

Shot mainly in Italy with a large international cast, Aquatic is by far Anderson's most complicated project to date. Among the many logistical challenges, he had to retrofit a World War II warship into Zissou's research vessel, the Belafonte, and, with the help of animator Heny Selick (Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas), create an entire world of not-quite-real sea creatures, like the jaguar shark and the sugar crab. And, of course, he had to shoot on the ocean, which for a guy whose films have all been fairly small-scale, landlocked affairs was "completely chaotic and wild."

Dafoe says the adventure of making the film ultimately helped to feed the story. "The first day, we had rough seas and I'd say about 99 percent of the people got really ill," he says. "But it's a bonding experience, you know, to be puking with your costars over the side of a boat."

Quote from: themodernage02Mark your calendars.  According to the new Premiere, The Life Aquatic will be released (the rumored date of) December 25th.  (Although this could change....)

Dec. 10

Quote from: MacGuffinFrom Entertainment Weekly:

Quote from: themodernage02Mark your calendars.  According to the new Premiere, The Life Aquatic will be released (the rumored date of) December 25th.  (Although this could change....)

Dec. 10

damn, that was fast!  :-D

Bet it will be a limited release, expanding on or after Christmas.

Bet I'll see it, like, three times the week it opens.



Because I'm a loser.

Quote from: UncleJoeyBet I'll see it, like, three times the week it opens.



Because I'm a loser.

we don't use that word here.

Bet I'll see it, like, three times the week it opens.


Because I'm a winner.

For the twelve people who check this forum, pete presents:

Trailer here. (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=trailer&id=1808562850&intl=us)

I could've sworn it was thirteen.

(Thanks, pete -- and Mac.)

great trailer.  can't wait.

I just orgasmed.

Thanks, xixax.

i've felt for about a year now that every song off of the "ziggy stardust and the spiders from mars" album could cut together really nicely in a trailer. i guess wes felt like proving me right...

Yeah, I'm also really excited, although I doubt many Xixaxers aren't.

Can Anderson do any wrong?  Jesus.  That guy's a genius.  Give him the right material and he soars.  I can't wait for this.

looks like a live action version of finding nemo. which is good.

Oh my lord. When Willem Dafoe says "Thanks... Thanks a lot - for not picking me.." I died laughing.

Ive been eagerly anticipating this one for a long time. I was a little disappointed by the unfunniness of the trailer. I was also hoping Murray would really be hamming it up, way over-the-top, but he seemed pretty standard Murray. Eh, I'm still eager to see this though. Ive got faith in Anderson and Co.

cool, another boston kid.  yay boston kid, boo not laughing at the trailer.
man, only your 34th post and we've already developed a love/hate relationship.

Quote from: bonanzatazi've felt for about a year now that every song off of the "ziggy stardust and the spiders from mars" album could cut together really nicely in a trailer. i guess wes felt like proving me right...

what were the songs in the trailer?

Quote from: CinephileOh my lord. When Willem Dafoe says "Thanks... Thanks a lot - for not picking me.." I died laughing.

:rofl:

This will be amazing.   :multi:

I also felt a little disappointed by that trailer, I have to admit it. I really am hoping for this to be one of the best films of the year, but this trailer kind of scared the shit out of me  :?

Quote from: pete

Quote from: bonanzatazi've felt for about a year now that every song off of the "ziggy stardust and the spiders from mars" album could cut together really nicely in a trailer. i guess wes felt like proving me right...

what were the songs in the trailer?

apart from the catchy disco tune playing in bull murray's diving helmet?

The trailer did feel slight, and perhaps TOO cheeky.

But yes, the Willem Dafoe "thanks for not picking me" thing was hilarious.  I definitely laughed at that part.  I think that may have been the only thing I laughed out loud at, though.

Quote from: pete

Quote from: bonanzatazi've felt for about a year now that every song off of the "ziggy stardust and the spiders from mars" album could cut together really nicely in a trailer. i guess wes felt like proving me right...

what were the songs in the trailer?

"Queen Bitch"....but that was on Hunky Dory, not Ziggy Stardust

"Swamp leeches! Everyone check for Swamp leeches!

....

I'm the only one that got hit?
What's the deal?!"

That's my favorite. :wink:

I guess my buddies at the trusty yankee racers board answered my question:

not sure what the horrible techno music playing in steve's helmet is, but the rest of the music in the trailer is as follows:
from the shot where they all dive into the water to the scene where bill and owen are talking on the deck at night: "gut feeling" by devo.
from "a film by wes anderson" to bill murray's delightful delivery of the word "revenge": "ceremony" by new order.
from "this christmas" to the punch: "queen bitch" by bowie.
over the cast credits we get to hear bowie's "starman" played by seu jorge (and it's really, really good. maybe better than the original).
from the word "action" to the end, it's bowie's version of "starman".

A Wes Anderson film co-written by Noah Baumbach featuring Bowie songs.  Throw in Kate Winslet and a bunch of zombies and you have the perfect film for me.  Cate Blanchett and sharks will have to do, I suppose.

large, quick time trailer here (http://www.laxexclusive.com/the_life_aquatic_with_steve.mov).

And so with one little trickle, the influx of Life Aquatic avatars and sigs begins.

Quote from: peteIover the cast credits we get to hear bowie's "starman" played by seu jorge (and it's really, really good. maybe better than the original).

is this just for the movie?  is it online somewhere?  I want it bad, pete :oops:

I join the numbers of whoever wasn't overwhelmed by the trailer but thinks that the movie may just be too out there to sum up properly in a 2 1/2 minute advertisement. I lack no faith in Mr. Anderson.

I can't wait for the soundtrack. Anderson talked in EW about how he got Seu Jorge to cover quite a few Bowie tunes. It'll be beautiful.

A little underwhelmed...yes. But this trailer just made my day.... :oops:

My favourite bit: "That's beautiful...I wonder what they're saying"

Quote from: Sleuth

Quote from: peteIover the cast credits we get to hear bowie's "starman" played by seu jorge (and it's really, really good. maybe better than the original).

is this just for the movie?  is it online somewhere?  I want it bad, pete :oops:

yeah, make that a 2nd bad wanting.. of it. link us up, linkers.

xixax field trip on opening day.

Quote from: SHAFTRxixax field trip on opening day.

Only if there's a Xixax bus

I was a bit disappointed by Royal Tennenbaums, and despite the genious of Rushmore, I almost feel like Bottle Rocket remains Wes's best film.  But I have to say, I think this trailer looks pretty good.  It seems like Wes has expanded and loosened up a bit (Tennenbaums seemed so stiff and contrived, as if the actors were afraid to move for fear of ruining the shots of obsessively detailed sets).  

This looks like it has some good slapstick, some explosions (those are always good), some animation, and a good idea at its core.  

I am looking forward to it.

Quote from: A Matter Of ChanceOnly if there's a Xixax bus

The Ratnermobile.

Quote from: adolfwolfliI was a bit disappointed by Royal Tennenbaums.

Disappointed?  What else did you want to see in it?

Quote from: Cinephile

Quote from: A Matter Of ChanceOnly if there's a Xixax bus

The Ratnermobile.

I am there

Love it. Gotta love it.

the 56k quicktime had an annoying high pitched sound throughout.

i'm really looking forward to this.

i have a question: Why would they not open this film wide? With Bill Murray and Owen Wilson (plus the rest) as big as they are it would easily debut at number 1 (unless there is some big time serious competition on the release date.......oh Christmas.....hmm).

i've always wondered just how much film prints cost to make for an average length film? is this what detours studios from releasing films like this wide, or the fear that the public won't get it? is it a cost issue or a backlash issue?

Quote from: bigideasi have a question: Why would they not open this film wide? With Bill Murray and Owen Wilson (plus the rest) as big as they are it would easily debut at number 1 (unless there is some big time serious competition on the release date.......oh Christmas.....hmm).

i've always wondered just how much film prints cost to make for an average length film? is this what detours studios from releasing films like this wide, or the fear that the public won't get it? is it a cost issue or a backlash issue?

It's called 'platforming.' The studios will release it at Christmas time to qualify for Academy rules, but also to gradually try to build a word of mouth. It's better to roll out and let the film have 'legs' rather than just go all out on 3000 screens and try to claim a number one spot. Plus, January and February don't see many new releases and Academy films can use the press of acclaim from critics and Golden Globes, etc. to get the word out. It's really more a marketing strategy than cost effective because the film will usually get a wide release anyway.

but this is no smalltime indie film, actually Wes Anderson's never directed an "indie" film, but anyways, if The Royal Tenenbaums didn't get a "platform" release, there's no reason that this one should.  I think this is in that category with School of Rock (granted School of Rock is PG, therefore has a much easier time at the box office) in which the producers know that it's a studio film aimed at a more marginal audience.  I don't think it'll do bad at all though.  I hope not.  I hope there's no "A Beautiful Mind" this year to overshadow it.

Quote from: petebut this is no smalltime indie film, actually Wes Anderson's never directed an "indie" film

'Platforming' isn't restricted to 'indie' films. Major studios sometimes do it with their releases too; "Chicago" and "Beautiful Mind," for example.

Quote from: peteif The Royal Tenenbaums didn't get a "platform" release, there's no reason that this one should.

Actually, it did.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265666/business

Week 1 - 5 screens
Week 2 - 40 screens
Week 3 - 291 screens
Week 4 - 751 screens
Week 5 - 905 screens
Week 6 - 997 screens

where could i find the figures for Matchstick Men and PDL?
they opened this(MM) pretty wide as far as i remember and it opened at 1 or 2, i think. after seeing that happen i wondered why Punch-Drunk Love or many other films aren't opened that way. now i know that PDL probably could never satisfy a mainstream audience for the most part, but Matchstick Men wasn't exactly paint by the numbers either. i'm pretty sure MM made at least double what PDL did. anyway, i think Life Aquatic could do better than MM did, especially with Bill Murray/Owen Wilson and the rest of the cast.

*disclaimer * don't think i regard Matchstick Men as some great triumph or anything. i was just surprised how it opened.
*disclaimer 2 * i'm not even putting in to perspective the fact that TLA will get great reviews as some of the reviews from the screenings seemed to talk badly about how it ends.......and endings/reviews/word of mouth are important (think The Village as a recent example)

ok, i just saw how Mac looked it up on imdb.com

i guess the fact that Matchstick Men was PG-13 helped some. now that i remember, i'm pretty sure it was a real weak week that it was up there because it opened with $17 mil. still, that's more than the total for PDL.

i'm sure many of you know more about this that I, so i welcome explanations.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fmichael_gambon3.jpg&hash=b51aa459e054a2f5578c568107cca1fc4d8788ef)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fbill_murray%2Forangecap.jpg&hash=d01ee8738c46d15522398ef1c84d469a1a71c796)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fwillem_dafoe2.jpg&hash=ac12b8c8685214e735cf8ae8bfcbfe509f36a003)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fbill_murray%2Forca.jpg&hash=0d3eef32a83982e2bdc590170e9bd559b40bd123)

Wes Anderson:  I want to have like a million of his babies.

Link to a much much better quality encode of the trailer here:
http://www.davestrailerpage.co.uk/

Willem Dafoe can do no wrong.

Where is Bud Cort?  I though he was supposed to play the rival, but the information says that Jeff Goldblum is Steve's Rival.

He's in the trailer, and also in one of the photos Mac posted on the last page. He looks a lot like Bud Cort used to look, except old and with a moustache.

Quote from: russiasushaWhere is Bud Cort?  I though he was supposed to play the rival, but the information says that Jeff Goldblum is Steve's Rival.

Quote from: GhostboyHe's in the trailer, and also in one of the photos Mac posted on the last page. He looks a lot like Bud Cort used to look, except old and with a moustache.

To the immediate left of Murray.

Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fmichael_gambon3.jpg&hash=b51aa459e054a2f5578c568107cca1fc4d8788ef)

Hey, I think that black guy to the imediate left of Cate is the guy who played Mané Galinha in City of God.... how cool!

Quote from: rustinglassHey, I think that black guy to the imediate left of Cate is the guy who played Mané Galinha in City of God.... how cool!

Quote from: On Page 8, MacGuffinCinema em Cena reports that Brazilian actor and singer Seu Jorge ("City of God") has joined the Wes Anderson comedy playing a soccer-shirt wearing member of Bill Murray's crew, one who has a habit of singing Portugese versions of David Bowie songs.

I suck.

i LOVE this.  

of course when i go away for the week, the life aquatic trailer hits.  it seems once again to strike the perfect balance between being funny and touching.  this doesnt look like something the masses will be lining up to see, but who gives a shit, i'm sure it will do okay.  there is nobody more exciting to me working today than PT or WES anderson.  i am excited HUGELY.  :shock:

hmm, i wonder if owen wilson's character hooks up with cate blanchett.. and if it's a major plot point.

*looks up*

oh shit.

did you watch the trailer?

trailer looks really wide, whats the aspect ratio the film was shot in?  Is it the same his earlier films and what pta shoots. thanks

Quote from: Pedro the Alpacadid you watch the trailer?

no, i just looked up.

I liked the trailer, it was typical Wes Anderson it seemed, nothing slightly out of the ordinary than what youd expect. Seems a little more heartfelt of a film though.

Quote from: mdtrailer looks really wide, whats the aspect ratio the film was shot in?  Is it the same his earlier films and what pta shoots. thanks

I think bottle rocket was 1.85, while rushmore and royal tenenbaums were both 2:35 anamorphic aka super35?  I'm a little shaky on these film formats, but I know the aspect ratio is 2:35.  I think when you shoot super 35 you have to downconvert it to a viewable format or something, maybe matt35mm can explain it.

stefen: looks like a typical wes anderson film is a GOOD thing right?  you better say yes, or I'll fuck you in the face.

Quotestefen: looks like a typical wes anderson film is a GOOD thing right? you better say yes, or I'll fuck you in the face.

I may lie, just to get what I may/not want.

Royal Tenenbaums was 2.40:1, Life Aquatic is probably the same.

Quirky stories from America's most exciting gang of filmmakers

BY JOE NEUMAIER

New York Daily News

Filmmakers have always thrived on a sense of community. Joined by sensibility or the cultural ferment of a particular time, they get grouped under unofficial banners like the British Kitchen Sink school, the French New Wave, the American Movie Brats or the Chinese Fifth Generation. The latest in-crowd of American writers and directors should be called the New Geek Wave.

"Geeky" best describes the often brilliant, invariably quirky and decidedly un-macho films made by David O. Russell, Wes Anderson, Paul Thomas Anderson, Alexander Payne, Sofia Coppola, Spike Jonze, screenwriter Charlie Kaufman and actor-writer-producer Owen Wilson.

Three of them have films opening this fall: Russell's "I (Heart) Huckabees," Payne's "Sideways" and Wes Anderson's "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou." Coppola's "Lost in Translation" was the buzz movie of last fall, and the smartest film of this past spring was "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," a second collaboration between French-born Michel Gondry and Kaufman (whose "Being John Malkovich" and "Adaptation" scripts were directed by Jonze).

These are filmmakers who don't spend much time in Hollywood and are known for being offbeat.

"I guess we're between the indie world and mainstream films - but that's always been my area, the middle ground," says Russell, who worked as a political organizer and documentarian for nonprofit groups before directing "Spanking the Monkey" (1994), "Flirting With Disaster" (1996) and "Three Kings" (1999). He describes "I (Heart) Huckabees," starring Jason Schwartzman, Dustin Hoffman, Lily Tomlin, Naomi Watts and Jude Law, as "an existential love story.

"I'm neither fish nor fowl in terms of accessibility," Russell adds. "But that style echoes the movies of the '70s, which taught me about cinema. Those films were mainstream but came from a very introspective place."

"This new group is very much the spiritual descendents of the '70s mavericks," says Robert Evans, who as a studio chief and producer shepherded many of that era's most important films.

"They have an intellectual outlook similar to that of Peter Bogdanovich, Hal Ashby and Mike Nichols. Like that bunch, they're fresh, they emphasize story, and they love movies," Evans adds.

Wes Anderson, a former philosophy student from Texas whose first three films had a singular style, helped bring Bill Murray back into vogue with "Rushmore" and "The Royal Tenenbaums." Murray stars in "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou" as an oceanographer dealing with his dysfunctional family and colleagues; Owen Wilson co-stars.

"These (friends) are the only directors I know, but they're also making my favorite movies," Anderson says of the group. "We're all about the same age. When I met them five years ago, everyone was just getting to know each other."

But they know Hollywood may never "get" them.

"I don't know if I'm interested in being 'gotten,'" says Anderson. "But as for individualism, if someone's set on having a specific 'voice' in their work, it's a recipe for disaster. When it's organic, it may be less annoying."

cool little article. i wish it had quotes from all involved.  the middle ground is probably my favorite place for movies/music etc.  not something totally weirdforweirdssake or something totally mainstream, but something just a little left of center that would be mainstream if people were cooler.

Quote from: pete

Quote from: bonanzatazi've felt for about a year now that every song off of the "ziggy stardust and the spiders from mars" album could cut together really nicely in a trailer. i guess wes felt like proving me right...

what were the songs in the trailer?

there are two bowie songs in the trailer. one is "queen bitch" which is off of hunky dory, the other is "starman" from ziggy stardust. both great albums. if you don't have them already, get them.


btw, i'll be a boston kid tomorrow. yippee!

taz, I actually answered my own question in one of the subsequent posts when I found the answers on the yankee racers board, thanks anyways.  I'm actually in the 'burbs for a few weeks, I'm in between apartments right now, but I'll be in Boston this weekend if you wanna see some free movies.

regarding that "grey area" of mainstream and indie, I don't think these people are indie at all.  They're just more Hollywood in the old sense of the word, the pre-Star Wars Hollywood filmmakers.  They tend to actively draw attentions to their influences (usually European or American film movements from the 50s-70s) to distinguish themselves from the mainstream Hollywood, but they spend very little effort to break out of the traditional narrative mode of character arcs or the three/four/five act structures.  I think David Gordon Green is the only American indie/ semi-indie director with a true fresh voice today.  The rest are just building on existing good things, however old they may be.

Quote from: petetaz, I actually answered my own question in one of the subsequent posts when I found the answers on the yankee racers board, thanks anyways.  I'm actually in the 'burbs for a few weeks, I'm in between apartments right now, but I'll be in Boston this weekend if you wanna see some free movies.

taz, pete is totally asking you out. I knew there was a reason for the Richard Gere With A Gerbil Smile avatar.

dude, still talking about my avatar?

Quote from: MacGuffintaz, pete is totally asking you out. I knew there was a reason for the Richard Gere With A Gerbil Smile avatar.

Now I understand the accusing eyes of MacGuffin's avatar.

our four avatars should totally do it together.

The movie looks interesting although it's another WA film that's strange for the sake of humor or just for being strange.

I don't think WA's films are strange for the sake of being funny/ strange at all.  I think there's always a very strong underlying theme of sadness that ties all his characteres/ quirks/ movies together.  He doesn't beat you over the head with the sadness, which perhaps makes it even sadder.  Max's mother's death, Chas's wife's death, and Dignan's not getting accepted...etc., these quirks have causes.

Tell me this poster doesn't make you smile.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.movieweb.com%2Fgalleries%2F1191%2Fposters%2Fposter1.jpg&hash=d4c250e34f938591e2c9a866a4c595ca3d04eb4e)

that poster doesnt make me smile

wow, that's cool. can anyone tell what it says in the description part of the rating box?

edit

i found it on the site:
(for language, some drug use, violence and partial nudity)

Quote from: bigideaswow, that's cool. can anyone tell what it says in the description part of the rating box?

edit

i found it on the site:
(for language, some drug use, violence and partial nudity)

haha, you want to know the naughty parts.

no, not really, i usually look at that anyway. if i'm looking for naughty i don't imagine i'd be looking for any Wes Anderson films.

Wow. That poster is instant classic.

Quote from: bigideaswow, that's cool. can anyone tell what it says in the description part of the rating box?

edit

i found it on the site:
(for language, some drug use, violence and partial nudity)

anjelica huston.!!!.::crosses fingers::


or .... :|   jeff goldblum would suffice..

thats an ugly poster -- such a shame

I like the poster. I'd like to own one, in fact.

www.wesanderson.org is coming back soon.

if you go there now, it says "lucky for you we're on our way back" or something like that.

I just hope they don't open it to close the next month or something like that, as usual...

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=204

UK Release: Feb 28th

You know what's really annoying? I'm going to New York for a week before Christmas. I was all hyped-up, looking forward to seeing Aquatic there... then they go and change the release date to the 24th. The date I arrive back here. Life kinda sucks sometimes.

Quote from: SleeplessYou know what's really annoying? I'm going to New York for a week before Christmas. I was all hyped-up, looking forward to seeing Aquatic there... then they go and change the release date to the 24th. The date I arrive back here. Life kinda sucks sometimes.

Yeah, and if you lived in Portugal you probably would have to wait until March to see it, so don't say that  :evil:

Quote from: ElPandaRoyal

Quote from: SleeplessYou know what's really annoying? I'm going to New York for a week before Christmas. I was all hyped-up, looking forward to seeing Aquatic there... then they go and change the release date to the 24th. The date I arrive back here. Life kinda sucks sometimes.

Yeah, and if you lived in Portugal you probably would have to wait until March to see it, so don't say that  :evil:

Sorry Panda.

But that's what you get for living in Portugal.  :twisted:

yeah,  youse people don't know how lucky youse people is.
i'll probably see it in december 2005.

Quote from: cronopioyeah,  youse people don't know how lucky youse people is.
i'll probably see it in december 2005.

Don't say that you date delayer!  :evil:

http://www.newmarketpress.com/title.asp?id=743

Quote from: MacGuffinhttp://www.newmarketpress.com/title.asp?id=743

Woah. I shall pre-order.

new trailer (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=mf_frame&id=1808562850&mspid=1808604656&mfurl=http://mediaframe.yahoo.com/launch?lid=wmv-56-p.1294927-133956,wmv-100-p.1294928-133956,wmv-300-p.1294929-133956,wmv-700-p.1294930-133956&p=movies&f=1808562850)

It's a nice trailer but I'm so used to the other one and the wonderful music from the other one that the new one isn't as good to me.

However -- I LOVE those 2 shots, 1 of Jeff Godlblum and the other of Anjelica Huston. The set design on this film looks amazing!

Good enough, "Rebel, Rebel" is one of my favorite Bowie's. The other one was better, yeah.

did anyone see the article about wes and life qquatic in the new PAPER mag -- wes anderson looks like he had plastic surgery -- really looks bizarre -- pretty boring article all around -- worth flippin through

Jaguar Shark: http://bvbp-qt.vitalstream.com/LifeAquatic/LifeAquatic_Clip_JaguarShark_1500.mov

website seems to have some new stuff on it.

http://lifeaquatic.movies.go.com/main.html

also confirms Dec 10th NY/LA and 25th wide.  which means i'm driving 5 hours up to new york that weekend.  it was so much easier when i lived in philadelphia.

were they seriously selling some limited edition zissou adidas kicks?

From the current Entertainment Weekly:

Global Storming
Postcards from the egde of moviemaking on location.

The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou

Location Italy: Smitten with Rome's Cinecitta Studios during a press tour for The Royal Tenenbaums, director Wes Anderson purposely shaped this script, about a Jacques Cousteau-style oceanographer (played by Bill Murray), to film on the boot-shaped peninsula.

Island Hopping: In addition to Rome and Naples, "we also shot on the Mediterranean island of Ponza and on an uninhabited island next door," says producer Barry Mendel. "We scouted the coast a few times by motorboat, which was a cool way to [cast] locales."

A Novel Idea: Thanks to a mutual friend, author Gore Vidal allowed Anderson to film at his previously off-limits moutaintop estate in Ravello. Says Mendel, "It was a great honor."

Say Cheese: "There's a great scene [on one of the islands] where you can see the team running through this Vietnamesque landscape," adds Mendel. "You think you're in Apocalypse Now or something, but it's actually Sabaudia, the region where they make that fantastic mozzarella di buffalo."

how long has the Life Aquaitc website had that much stuff on it?
last time i checked it was just a page with a picture.
i think i'm going to stop watching the clips because they're ruining the movie for me. jeff goldblum and the dog won't be as funny now.
i went into The Royal Tenenbaums without prior knowledge and it was one of the most enjoyable theatre experiences in my life.

i always thought the movie worked better with picture, but i'll have to try it someday.

once you go without prior knowledge, you never go back.

man, ya'll guys are really random.
whatever do you mean?












:wink:

Can't you see?

Quote from: POZERonce you go blind, you never go back.

atleast if it's the result of too much masturbation.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.twitchfilm.com%2Fpics%2FLifeAquatic_Shelter.jpg&hash=51338be464f0b8d0c4fa7284db504dfed22e4faf)

Quote from: ranemaka13(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.twitchfilm.com%2Fpics%2FLifeAquatic_Shelter.jpg&hash=51338be464f0b8d0c4fa7284db504dfed22e4faf)

first he looks like sofia coppola, and now this..

he should just ask jonze out already.

It's a little bit Malkovich and a little bit P-DL DVD...

I have tickets to see this next Thursday 11-18.

Followed by a Q & A with the director.

Quote from: Slick ShoesFollowed by a Q & A with the director.

Take a pair of scissors and run up and cut that hair back it's non-girly look.

Will do.

Anything else?

Quote from: Slick ShoesAnything else?

Find out about a Criterion Bottle Rocket.

yeah, what state are you in again?  and how soon can i fly there.

ask if he can get Criterion to do a documentary on Mark Mothersbaugh.

Quote from: Slick ShoesI have tickets to see this next Thursday 11-18.

Followed by a Q & A with the director.

so do i.

Regarding that poster- I bet a lot of you losers will go out shopping* to try to find that red hat.


Regarding the losers that get to see an advance screening of Life Aquatic followed by a q&a- may you die tragically...before the show.






*excuse me, I meant online shopping.

Quote from: BethieRegarding that poster- I bet a lot of you losers will go out shopping* to try to find that red hat.

I've already a red cap and a speedo.

Quote from: ranemaka13

Quote from: BethieRegarding that poster- I bet a lot of you losers will go out shopping* to try to find that red hat.

I've already a red cap and a speedo.

And I've found that aquatic life and put it on my face.

Quote from: BethieRegarding that poster- I bet a lot of you losers will go out shopping* to try to find that red hat.

Quote from: ranemaka13I've already a red cap and a speedo.

Quote from: CinephileAnd I've found that aquatic life and put it on my face.

and I couldn't let Cine win, so I did the same and got the word "DECEMBER" tatooed in red on my neck.

Quote from: RegularKarate

Quote from: BethieRegarding that poster- I bet a lot of you losers will go out shopping* to try to find that red hat.

Quote from: ranemaka13I've already a red cap and a speedo.

Quote from: CinephileAnd I've found that aquatic life and put it on my face.

and I couldn't let Cine win, so I did the same and got the word "DECEMBER" tatooed in red on my neck.

Yeah, well I did all that plus trained my mind to only think of the words: Bill MURRAY THE LIFE AQUATIC with STEVE ZISSOU. And now I let my thought bubble show.

i'm the one who took Wes Anderson's old face + glasses. and i rub my eyes a shitload every day to retain my "crazy eye." and i banged my head on a table a bunch of times so it wouldn't grow hair anymore and then i cut off my hair and glued it to my "official Zissou beard-regions." and then i fucked a fish mr. show rip off-style. and i have a remote-controlled gun trained to my head for the exact moment Wes dies (Wes controls the trigger from a long piece of thread attached to his heart. it's kind of hard to tell you how it works without being right in front of you.)

for anyone else who wants to be inflamed with jealousy, TLA was screened tonight in NYC with Wes there for a Q&A.  so there are people who have no seen the film.  and they're not us, and if they are... i hate you.

The Directors Series Presents: Life Aquatic  
Date and Time:
11/10/2004
6:00pm

Location:
Theater 006
721 Broadway, Lower Concourse

The Directors Series presents a special screening of Life Aquatic directed by Wes Anderson, who will be interviewed afterwards by former New York Times film critic, Elvis Mitchell.  Space is limited for this screening and a special email will inform you about ticket distribution. Presented by the Kanbar Institute of Film & Television.

When Mutinyco posts here, I'm going down there and slitting his throat.

i was just thinking that!

Yeah but let me do it... you need to spend time with your girlfriend..

you sound like you've been talking to her.

I've been doing more than talking to her, moddy..

And I've been in the closet with a video camera.

Quote from: Weak2ndActAnd I've been in the closet.

Freudian slip! Freudian slip!

Quote from: Ghostboy

Quote from: Weak2ndActAnd I've been in the closet.

Freudian slip! Freudian slip!

Take that shit to the library. Or else get in line for mods girlie.

GB's already had her, man.. Who hasn't?

come november 18th, i'll have done things to "moddy"s girlfriend tenfold whatever it is cinephile does (bring more than one tape, 2ndact) and have seen The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, a screening followed by a q&a with Wes Anderson.  I'm more than confident that Bill Murray show up unannounced, just like he did for the Lost in Translation screening w/ Sofia Coppola.

i win.

samsong, 3-Iron was great.

Quote from: Cinephilesamsong, 3-Iron was great.

i think a reminder that bush is still my president would've been better...




asshole.

Oh but that was just a given about Bush being your president for another 4 years.

But I thought I'd remind you that 3-Iron was one of the best movies I've seen all year.. even better than Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter.. And Spring.

i'll score a hole in one with modernage's girlfriend with a 3 iron while we watch an advance screening of the life aquatic.

MOVIEFONE FIRST LOOK:
http://movies.channel.aol.com/franchise/firstlook.adp

Quote from: themodernage02MOVIEFONE FIRST LOOK:
http://movies.channel.aol.com/franchise/firstlook.adp

Ensue orgasming.

This film is going to be so wonderful. But from that little clippy thing it seems it's going to be a tad quieter than the trailer leads one to think.

No?

I don't know.

Just read the Owen Wilson interview in GIANT magazine. He says "I saw the movie recently, and it's very odd; to me it seems like the oddest thing that Wes had directed. It links Tenenbaums with, like, Die Hard."

Sounds awesome to me.

Oh yeah because Die Hard is awesome.

Quote from: UltrahipJust read the Owen Wilson interview in GIANT magazine. He says "I saw the movie recently, and it's very odd; to me it seems like the oddest thing that Wes had directed. It links Tenenbaums with, like, Die Hard."

he was on mescaline at the time.

or is that the other one..

Well no, Die Hard isn't awesome. However, as far as action movies go, it's pretty first rate in it's own awful, funny way. What other movie has lines like "Yippe Kayay Master Falcon!" when dubbed for TV? Wes Anderson is awesome, and so Life Aquatic appears to be. Cinephile, why go out of your way to be a jerk?

And yes, Wilson was on mescaline at the time, so perhaps we shouldn't believe everything he said, but I do anyway. I think mescaline allows him to see the inner truths.

Quote from: UltrahipWhat other movie has lines like "Yippe Kayay Master Falcon!" when dubbed for TV?

"Melon-Farmer!" also ranked as one of the best TV dubs for Die Hard!
(all pales before the Mallrats TV dub)

Fuck turning this into a Die Hard thread, though

Dafoe's Hair Rocks. Makes him look a bit like a Gremlin.

Quote from: UltrahipWell no, Die Hard isn't awesome.

no, die hard IS awesome.  perhaps you arent as hip as we had all thought...

but...but I visit youthquakemagazine.com on a daily basis!

I'm still seeing this tomorrow, but the Q&A with the director has been cancelled.

Oh, and Die Hard is awesome.

Quote from: UltrahipCinephile, why go out of your way to be a jerk?

jerk    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (jûrk)

Slang. A foolish, rude, or contemptible person.

You = disliked by me.

Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestion

Quote from: UltrahipWhat other movie has lines like "Yippe Kayay Master Falcon!" when dubbed for TV?

"Melon-Farmer!" also ranked as one of the best TV dubs for Die Hard!
(all pales before the Mallrats TV dub)

it was once "Cowboy John" on TBS.

TV spot here. (http://bvbp-qt.vitalstream.com/LifeAquatic/LifeAquatic_TV_Revenge_1500.mov)

And Die Hard is not only awesome, but one of the best films of it's action genre.

Hey why don't we um, take a cue from the guy who said not to turn this into a Die Hard thread? That film is not the issue at hand.

And Hedwig I still like you even if you don't like me. Heffa Nice Day.

Quote from: UltrahipAnd Hedwig I still like you even if you don't like me.

Are you callin me fat?

No.

But if I did, you couldn't do anything about it, could you?

Quote from: UltrahipNo.

But if I did, you couldn't do anything about it, could you?

I could respond cleverly on an internet message board, now that I could do.

Now, no more of this. Back to discussion of "The Life Aquatic"

I wish it was called the Aquatic Life

I wish it was called Weekend at Zissou's: Beyond the Sea.

i wish it was called Die Hard

I wish I was called Die Hard

I'm just so tired of all this wishing. I think I'm going to go die hard.

That's fine. But I'm gonna Die Harder.

this joke just went

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flibrary.thinkquest.org%2FJ001569%2Fgraph.gif&hash=cf77bf49f87df6ac0b056ecfe166490daaa05cb2)

Yeahp, it's been awhile since I've been watching these trailers, and I'm definitely seeing this for one reason.
Willem Dafoe.
I've always been familiar with him since ShitFest--er, Speed 2, and really liked him in Boondock Saints.
But every time I watch a trailer his parts stick in my head.

oh, and

[insert line about Die Hard, possibly/poorly linking it to Speed 2]

Yes!  I was waiting for someone to say they wanted to see Life Aquatic because of Boondock Saints!

Beautiful!


Who cares about the movie anymore... let's lock this up.

remember that movie Lock Up with Sly Stallone...?

Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestion[insert line about Die Hard, possibly/poorly linking it to Speed 2]

Isn't it obvious? Speed 2 is Die Hard on a boat, just like Speed was Die Hard on a bus.

Quote from: POZERremember that movie Lock Up with Sly Stallone...?

Yes. It was no Die Hard.

hmmm...

Sadly, I have to say that The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou is Wes Anderson's worst film.  Fortunately it's still one of the year's best (don't know if that's because the film's that good or this year is that lame), and if I can come up with a more cliche lead-in than that, I should win a prize. Gonna process it for a while before writing more but I will say that this is Wes's biggest departure in terms of style, content... everything, and I'm still trying to decide whether that's good or bad.  It felt a little forced and half-baked compared to the effortlessness of his other films.   Still a very funny movie that's strangely poignant by its end.  Full review to come.

About the screening, though... Wes didn't show, nor did Anjelica Houston or Jeff Goldblum who were scheduled to come in his stead.  Along with that comes a very nice encounter with the kind of people I hate the most.  I got in line to buy some tickets for a Mark Ruffalo-in-person (screening You Can Count On Me and We Don't Live Here Anymore w/ a Q&A in between films) and a guy behind me asked me what I was in line for.  I told him, then asked if he was trying to get tickets to tonight's screening and he said that he already had tickets, but was depressed because Wes Anderson wasn't going to be there.  So was I but he was geniunely (and unreasonably) angry.

me: well, at least you get to see the film, right?
guy: i can see this at the amc when it comes out, i came to see wes.
me: yea, that sucks but we get to see the film, yea?
guy: no, you see, wes anderson's my favorite director. you don't understand, it's like meeting the president for some people, get it?

Maybe I'm overreacting but I hate assholes who like to try and exude their film buff status, who think it's fashionable to make themselves out to be a more devout than anyone else (which I think a few of you might think of me... for the record, I don't treat people like shit for not wanting to "meet" a director at a Q&A as much as I do.  I'd like to think I'm pretty nice).  Poseurs fucking suck.

There was a mixed reaction to the film among those in attendance last night. Not everybody clapped at the end when the credits started to roll.

It is, however, one of the year's best. I don't know where it fits among his other films just yet. I'll have to see it a couple more times before I decide.

Wes Anderson trademarks abound. Once again, it is all about the details.  Willem Dafoe was simply amazing. Bud Cort was really good too.

Wes pursues a certain stylistic flourish we first saw him use in The Royal Tenenbaums. Here it is used to great effect in one of the best, most touching scenes in the film.

I wanted to add a few things because I've been thinking about it all day trying to pinpoint exactly how I feel about this film overall. Also, in my previous post, my enthusiam didn't quite come across, and I really want to express how much I loved this fucking movie. I think the main difference between The Life Aquatic and his previous three films is that this one is more plot-oriented. Accordingly, we don't get to spend a whole lot of time getting to know some of the other characters. As the title implies, though, the movie is really about Steve Zissou, who is brilliantly played by Bill Murray. There are so many great moments in this movie that I don't want to wreck, but I will say that there is something comparable in terms of impact and emotion to that scene in TRT where Chas tells Royal that it's been a rough year. I think it could be one of the best scenes Wes has ever directed. Certainly it's one of my favorites. This film, like Rushmore and TRT, is swarming with ideas - in the form of props, costume, music, setting, character, etc. Some of these things fall flat. They just don't seem to gel with the rest of the film. I believe this is what samsong might have been referring to when he said it felt "forced" and "half-baked." No matter. For me these were relatively minor quibbles in an otherwise beautiful movie.

http://p210.ezboard.com/fyankeeracers33503frm16.showMessage?topicID=218.topic

according to Amazon.com, the soundtrack is coming December 14.

here's the track listing:

Track List:

1. Rebel Rebel - Seu Jorge
2. Starman - Seu Jorge
3. Rock N' Roll Suicide - Seu Jorge
4. Five Years - Seu Jorge
5. Queen Bitch - David Bowie
6. Life On Mars - David Bowie
7. Inner Space Music - Sven Libaek
8. Loquasto - Mark Mothersbaugh
9. Ping Island - Mark Mothersbaugh
10. Ping Demo - Mark Mothersbaugh
11. Ned Theme - Mark Mothersbaugh
12. Pirate Attack - Mark Mothersbaugh
13. Let Me Tell You About My Boat - Mark Mothersbaugh
14. Search And Destroy - Iggy & The Stooges
15. Way I Feel Inside, The - The Zombies
16. Here's To You - Joan Baez
17. La Nina De Puerta Oscura - Paco De Lucia
18. Gut Feeling - Devo
19. 30 Century Man - Scott Walker

that's interesting that he's using that Zombies song. it's pretty much acapella with just a little a little bit of organ and very short

hmmm.... not enough songs.  

these reviews make me jealous and nervous.

yeah, but it's WES ANDERSON you fuck.  Dude.  I wish robocop was real so he could come to your house to blow your fucking balls into shreds.  

ps. who're you calling an asshole, asshole?  

Quote from: samsong
Maybe I'm overreacting but I hate assholes who like to try and exude their film buff status, who think it's fashionable to make themselves out to be a more devout than anyone else (which I think a few of you might think of me... for the record, I don't treat people like shit for not wanting to "meet" a director at a Q&A as much as I do.  I'd like to think I'm pretty nice).  Poseurs fucking suck.

Ohh.. an Asian bitch fight!

Wheres Bruce Lee and his awesome painting of Elvis?

Quote from: CinseyOhh.. an Asian bitch fight!

hey dude, don't you have some fat chick's mowmow to chow in the backseat of a car somewhere?

(ps. don't say "your mom's" 'cause I called it already.)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg58.exs.cx%2Fimg58%2F9006%2Felvis-eyes.jpg&hash=a84479322f045cf0ad03f222759f5a335ef0b4da)

Quote from: bigideas1. Rebel Rebel - Seu Jorge
2. Starman - Seu Jorge
3. Rock N' Roll Suicide - Seu Jorge
4. Five Years - Seu Jorge

If anyone wants to get me these songs right now, that'd be great.

Ahaha! Man that's gotta be the best Owned picture yet.

Quote from: pete
ps. who're you calling an asshole, asshole?  

pete, tha- that hurt... right here  ::points to heart::








:roll:

Yeah, you roll your eyes, fuckface.

Cause you know you don't have a heart..

There's an Asian Pete/modage?

Quote from: CinseyYeah, you roll your eyes, fuckface.

Cause you know you don't have a heart..

SILENCE!

Quote from: Gamblor not so gone.There's an Asian Pete/modage?

WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN?!
if it means what i means what i think it does... then let me just say that i am deeply hurt.  honestly, that's uncalled for.

what?

Mod, you should proabably leave. You don't wanna hear any of this.

Quote from: Gamblor not so gone.There's an Asian Pete/modage?

what does that mean?

hahahahahah

Quote from: BethieRegarding that poster- I bet a lot of you losers will go out shopping* to try to find that red hat.
...
*excuse me, I meant online shopping.

lolz. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0362270/board/nest/11335209)

Quote from: some guy at the imdb boardI knew that Wes Anderson fan-boys would hop on the jock of this movie and start wearing those hats. Let me be the first to tell you, you will look like a douche-bag if you wear that hat. Its such a childish thing to see something in a movie and immediately go, "dude, wes anderson movies rule, im getting an orange hat so i can be part of zissou's crew! yah!"

HAHAHA

I wonder if my pink beanie will be affected at all.  I hope not.

Quote from: Stefen

Quote from: some guy at the imdb boardI knew that Wes Anderson fan-boys would hop on the jock of this movie and start wearing those hats. Let me be the first to tell you, you will look like a douche-bag if you wear that hat. Its such a childish thing to see something in a movie and immediately go, "dude, wes anderson movies rule, im getting an orange hat so i can be part of zissou's crew! yah!"

HAHAHA

I looked up that guy's previous posts. He's a heavy Republican..

figures

And aren't the Team Zissou hats red, not orange?  Come on!   :roll:

If he's right, I have to go exchange mine.

heavy like fat?

Wes Anderson movies rule dudes! I'm gonna totally go score me one of those red hats so I can be a part of Zissou's crew YAY!

*flinch*

Quote from: analogzombieWes Anderson movies rule dudes! I'm gonna totally go score me one of those red hats so I can be a part of Zissou's crew YAY!

That red cap would go swell with my blue blazer.

http://cgi.go.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14890&item=6133804948

also:

NYC PREMIERE @ MOMA MUSEUM DECEMBER 8TH

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. 2004. USA. Directed by Wes Anderson. Screenplay by Anderson, Noah Baumbach. With Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, Anjelica Huston. From the Oscar-nominated writer-director of Rushmore—who cited Jaws as one of three films he would save from a burning building— comes this eccentric comedy about an oceanographer who sets forth on the high seas in search of the elusive "jaguar shark" that ate his partner. 120 min.

Wednesday, December 8, 8:00 (T2) and 8:30 (T1)

A limited number of advance tickets are available, no more than one week in advance of a film, to Museum members for a 50¢ service fee and to the general public for the film ticket price plus an additional $1.50 service fee. Film admission tickets can be purchased in person only.

so who in NYC, wants to grab me a pair of tickets to this so i can come up there and see this?

I'll see what I can do.

I'm sure it's too late already but I'll see what I can do...

I want to go.  :(

tough, i dont want you anywhere near my girlfriend buddy.  not after what happened last time...

how many people cant wait for this sumbitch?

me! me!

any idea the kind of release it's getting?

if it gets an I Heart Huckabee's release, then i better get ready to drive a while.

I got all excited, and then I called my friend in NYC, and she was just like, chill out, bitch, can't you wait?  and then I was like "you're right, I CAN wait."
so now I'm waiting.

Quote from: bigideasany idea the kind of release it's getting?

I think it goes something like:

LA & NY - Dec 10

EVERYWHERE ELSE - Dec 25

I know what I'm getting myself for Christmas....

New photos:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fbelafonte1.jpg&hash=6dd1357c2f483febf8f77f330c936304dfe62714)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fbill_murray%2Faquatic1.jpg&hash=df4fc650b539cff0eb2091ebeeecb7a3cef895e2)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fwes_anderson%2Faquatic1.jpg&hash=caa140cd85198960f13bc79db2806b8571039f7e)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fowen_wilson32.jpg&hash=399a117259c815389a421b21b3932e7e933d07d6)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fwes_anderson%2Faquatic3.jpg&hash=1385886f12738a370af25859e198b341d7e1ce3d)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fwes_anderson%2Faquatic2.jpg&hash=7c60a2398a86ec6a1a64d9191141daf92dd588b2)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2Fbill_murray%2Faquatic3.jpg&hash=58fcea4b635a28b09772d2341e43fee962e7227d)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fbill_murray14.jpg&hash=c83de0345ef0d0e12ce6c849282e160a003a64aa)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fbill_murray13.jpg&hash=6d5fedabc874b3811449fe7e01b6b746093ffbb5)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fbill_murray16.jpg&hash=55ab8f099fd059c59f9296ed9d57f6a533a45015)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ftouchstone_pictures%2Fthe_life_aquatic_with_steve_zissou%2F_group_photos%2Fanjelica_huston15.jpg&hash=2e725cb5df57b539c3988f8e8e56708dabc924cb)

Neato. I actually think he looks pretty cool with long hair.

I can't wait to find out what the dvd features are going to be.

Let's face it.  Wes is just not an attractive guy.

Oh, and I'm sure one of the DVD features will be something about him wanting to grow his hair out and lose the glasses so he can look like Spike Jonze and pick up that Coppola chick.  I hear she's divorced.

Quote from: PwaybloeLet's face it.  Wes is just not an attractive guy.

OMG, he's SO cute!  What-EVER!

you guys should start like a tiger-beat magazine for film directors, you could all giggle and blush like school girls over the hottest young auters. run with that children.

It doesn't work. Very unfocused. $50-million of production design with no script.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.onomatopoeia.biz%2Felephantbeat.gif&hash=5b31642a677970f6348439302908b639322f7fdc)
I'd buy it.

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  Get da fuck outta here! You know that mag would be littered with the faces of Ratner, Harlin, Bay, McG, and Polanski! No way PTA gets the cover!

Quote from: PwaybloeOh, and I'm sure one of the DVD features will be something about him wanting to grow his hair out and lose the glasses so he can look like Spike Jonze and pick up that Coppola chick.

the joke you're ripping off was saying he was looking like Sofia so he could go out with Jonze.

I won some tickets through a magazine contest so I guess I'll be seeing this again on the 6th.

Well, you'd be foolish to pay to see it...

Why would Xixaxers be foolish to pay to see the next Wes Anderson film?

Quote from: Slick ShoesI won some tickets through a magazine contest so I guess I'll be seeing this again on the 6th.

me too. but mines on the 8th in nyc, so that bumps up my trip a few days.  :-D

Ah fuck you all.

I'll be back when I actually see the movie.

:yabbse-leavesthread:

"in theatres everywhere December 25th"

they said 'in theatres everywhere' for I Heart Huckabees, too, and it never came close. Napoleon Dynamite actually did make it.

Quote from: cinephiléWhy would Xixaxers be foolish to pay to see the next Wes Anderson film?

Because it isn't any good. Like I said, it's $50-million of production design and no script. Seriously, it's a disappointment. It looks like Wes, with a big budget on sets in Cinecitta, got lost and carried away -- and that epic long production should've been a warning to everybody.

Yeah, but you thought The Terminal was really great and even unconventional. I think that's an appropriate gauge...

I'm pissed I missed the screening of this. Now I have to wait all the way until Christmas to make my top ten list, just in case this might deserve a spot (I'm not necessarily counting on it, but I'm not counting it out either).

Unconventional, yes. Great, no. If it's a question of taste, I did write an 11,000 word esssay on a film you've called your favorite of all time...

Quote from: mutinyco

Quote from: cinephiléWhy would Xixaxers be foolish to pay to see the next Wes Anderson film?

Because it isn't any good. Like I said, it's $50-million of production design and no script. Seriously, it's a disappointment. It looks like Wes, with a big budget on sets in Cinecitta, got lost and carried away -- and that epic long production should've been a warning to everybody.

It's not that I don't agree with you to a certain extent. But come now. A flawed Wes Anderson film is still better than most of the other stuff that gets released.

Quote from: themodernage02

Quote from: Slick ShoesI won some tickets through a magazine contest so I guess I'll be seeing this again on the 6th.

me too. but mines on the 8th in nyc, so that bumps up my trip a few days.  :-D

well, it looks like i actually have an extra pass for 2 to this, so if any other wes anderson freaks are going to be in the NYC area on wednesday and wants to come meet me for the show, ummm... let me know.  since its first come first serve i want to get there by 6 (atleast) for the 7:30 show, because i DO NOT want to drive 5 hours up for this and not get in.  so, actually if anyone wants to get there a little earlier than that and hold a spot and then can go elsewhere when i hold the spot or something like that, that would be cool.  if anyone is interested let me know.

Hahaha.. seriously dude.. where is your girlfriend..

she's coming.  just like she did for Royal Tenenbaums and PDL (twice).

Quote from: themodernage02she's coming.  just like she did for Royal Tenenbaums and PDL (twice).

I heard she came three times for Cine.

Ugh.  Last night while standing in line at the movies, I heard numerous people saw Aquatic was just garbage... I have a feeling I'm either gonna really like this or start instigating riots.

Quote from: Weak2ndActUgh.  Last night while standing in line at the movies, I heard numerous people saw Aquatic was just garbage... I have a feeling I'm either gonna really like this or start instigating riots.

Honestly, I know a LOT of people who hated Tenenbaums too.  Flat out, "I almost walked out of the theatre, it was so bad" hated it.  And I remember people walking out at the end of Rushmore with a "what the hell did I just see" look on their faces.  I think it's that Wes Anderson movies rub some people completely the wrong way.

No, I liked both of those films. This just isn't good. It's in the realm of Hudson Hawk.

Ok, My Personal History Of Taste in Wes Anderson Films
(like you care, but here goes)  [Note: I haven't Seen Life Aquatic. Ie, I don't know what the fuck I'mtalking about]

* Caught Bottle Rocket on HBO when I was 14. My first thought was "This IS An Independent Film". Favorite line= "No, I just have short hair!"  I loved it, the end with Dignan walking away really hit me.  Didn't see it between the ages of 14 'til 19 and still cited it as my favorite film alongside Boogie Nights because it made me CARE.

* Saw Rushmore in the theatres when I was 16 hearing it was 'The most original comedy of the year' during a quest for originality.  I did NOT Get the Humor, or even the psychology of what the characters were going through! What was the point!?
A Year later, even after I knew it was by 'The Bottle Rocket Guys', and saw it with more people and they found all the humor in Jason Schwartzman that was way too dry for me to understand before.  Loved the Movie. Still Do, and still couldn't watch it everyday, but it's still great!

* Super-excited for the Follow-Up to Rushmore, I went to The Royal Tenenbaums with my family.  They called it 'quirky' as most would.  I actually thought it was great with alot of the cuts like 'This is my adopted Daughter, Margot Tenenbaum'.  My friend hammered it into my head that 'this was the best movie I've seen in years!' and watched it 192837897 times when we borrowed the DVD.  that kind of made it lose it's flavor. It's one of those Subtle hits you just want to enjoy for yourself, you know? Before anyone defines it for you.  In retrospect, I got sick of the movie because it was too Stiff.  Even the 'moving' parts.  I eventually understood where Wes Anderson was coming from with the film, and how he developed it more like a book for screen than a movie.  I'm over the stiffness. Although the movie had not enough Meat and too much Bread, yknow?

*SO! This 'Life Aquatic' movie looks absolutely great.  I rewatch parts in trailers because they work for me on the Super-fictional Wes Anderson level that only he can achieve, and I definitely can't wait to analyze things about it with my egghead friends.  I no longer expect 'Bottle Rocket 2'.  But this movie looks like a Masterpiece.
Better actually SEE it before I start praising it and calling it Hudson Hawk though. (damn, what a bashing THAT is!)

I read all that and you didn't actually see the movie yet.  Now that was a letdown.  If you're going to post something that involving, why not actually have a reason for it?

I am absolutely the most bored person on this planet earth, and thank you for your support! Though I remind you, I put all those little bullets there so you could skip ahead to what you wanted to read about.

I will be seeing this film tomorrow.  I will give some kind of report tomorrow night.

Quote from: russiasushaI will be seeing this film tomorrow.

how?

some cell phone company is showing it for free at the University of Colorado, which I am a student of.

Quote from: russiasushasome cell phone company is showing it for free at the University of Colorado, which I am a student of.

I hope they turn their phones off.

This movie is awsome.  If you like wes anderson movies, you will like this one.

Best report ever.

Well, I just saw this thing for the second time last night. Wes Anderson movies tend to get better upon subsequent viewings. This one is no exception. However, I can now say with confidence that this is probably his most uneven film. Perhaps Owen contributed more to the scripts than was previously thought. Anyway, the person I saw it with is a pretty discriminating viewer. He thought it was good, but could have been great. Jessica Biel was sitting two rows ahead of me.

Did you tell her that you liked her body and wanted to clean fish with it?

Quote from: russiasushaThis movie is awsome.  If you like wes anderson movies, you will like this one.

Funny. I like Wes Anderson movies. But this is still an overindulgent mess without a script.

And...although I may be mistaken, I find it a bit odd that a film opening in just a couple of days doesn't have advance reviews (or raves) at either Rotten Tomatoes or MetaCritic...

After thinking about The Life Aquatic all day, it does have its problems (quite a bit in fact) which makes the movie just "good" (I take back my awsome).  It could have been great.

I still stand by my comment that if you like Wes' movies , you will like this movie.

How bout hella good? Would you give it a hella good?

SPOILER FREE

Few films in my life have I been looking more forward to than The Life Aquatic.  Perhaps Magnolia and Punch-Drunk Love following my discovery of Boogie Nights in the theatres, the first Star Wars prequel following a lifetime of watching the originals, and The Royal Tenenbaums after the discovery of Rushmore on video.  As my obsession with movies has grown deeper over the past several years, so has that obsession with my favorite two directors working today: the Andersons.  TLA is a film I have built myself into an absolute fury over.  

My specific history with TLA goes back to 3 years ago when I met Jason Schwartzman only a month or so after the opening of Royal Tenenbaums in January of 2002.  I asked him the obvious question if he had seen it and he said he had, and he loved it.  I told him I also had seen it, and also loved it, and had even driven 9 hours from Virginia to New York (in some serious traffic) to see it opening week, only to arrive there, run 30 blocks with our bags to make the show time and have EVERY SHOWING ALL DAY/NIGHT be sold out.  But having worked in a movie theatre in high school and being the obsessive that I am, I was determined to find a way in and we did.  We bought tickets to something else, and decided to wait till the next showing an hour or so later so that we could the first ones in (as opposed to not having a seat at all in the current showtime).  It was a simple enough plan that I was pretty sure would work, or at least be worth the effort after all the trouble we went through to get there, except a friend who I was with, started freaking out a little that we would be caught and ejected.  Soon his delirium started to spread and infect my girlfriend and me.  So, there we sat, there trying to play it cool, our hearts in our stomachs waiting for an hour or so, as employees walked by and we tried to nod and play it cool assuming they the whole time they knew what we were up to!  They of course, didn't, and after all the waiting we went in and the film started and we had a great, if not somewhat delirious time.  We were, after all very VERY tired.  After hearing my story he said something to the effect of 'wow, I'll have to tell Wes that."  Shock and awe across my 20-year-old face.  He continued, "yeah I'm meeting with Wes tomorrow night to talk about his new movie."  I asked for any details, and all he would let slip is that it would be "crazy."  That was the first inkling of news about the Life Aquatic that had been heard anywhere that I was aware of.  And I thought that was newsworthy, so I even sent in my tidbit of news to Wes Anderson Blog, which was the only active fan site I could find at the time covering that sort of thing.  

i just met and talked to jason schwartzman while he was here in philadelphia with his band PHANTOM PLANET filming a music video and he said that he is having dinner with wes tomorrow nite and going to be talking about the wes' next movie which they will be doing TOGETHER! i asked him if there was ANYTHING he could tell me about it, but he just said it would be "crazy".

After that first tidbit I followed all the ensuing news about Schwartzman no longer being involved, other cast speculation/cancellation, potential titles and anything else that could fill the wait till it arrived.  Finally that day was soon to arrive as the past several months have been a flurry of the first pictures/trailers/ EVERYTHING.  (Nothing like waiting till the last minute!)  Although I have watched the trailer a dozen times, I've did not watch the clips posted online in the interest of trying to preserve as much of the movies surprise as possible.  So I planned, again, (since the last several Anderson pictures we have driven to NYC for, to catch in their limited release) to try to do the same thing for this one, and tie in a little Christmas shopping too as long as we were there. (Actually to all sane relatives, etc. it was the opposite, but for me it was really only the film I was excited for.)  So about a month ago, hearing the pretty certain news that it would open in NY/LA on December 10th and not until TWO WEEKS LATER everywhere else, (damn you extra long exclusive engagements!), we would definitely be planning a trip up there that weekend.  So we tried to book a hotel so we could go up Saturday and have two days to hang out and shop and come home on Sunday.  All hotels had either been booked, AND I MEAN EVERYTHING, or were UPWARDS of $300.  So we tried to gather up a few other participants to take the trip with us and help divide up the costs but nobody wanted in for that much dough.  So the trip was shortened to a daytrip on Saturday the 11th, that we expected to be taking alone.  It was almost that simple.  

Over the past month, just about every day I have been checking out the Yankee Racers message board, (although never posting, as I'm loyal to my xixax and only have time for one), and doing a Google search on "life aquatic advance screening", or "life aquatic free screening", etc.  At first my searches yielded little but extremely jealousy inducing news that NYU students as well as LA residents would be getting not only a screening a month in advance but a Q&A with Wes as well!  (Steam comes out of ears now).  However, with persistent looking I also stumbled upon my very own DC film society, which is basically what I always knew I wanted but thought you had to donate like thousands of dollars to join.  You don't, actually its more like 40$ for a whole year of free movie passes to every advance screening in the area.  Never had I been so happy as this discovery.  (Haha, a few weeks later I have now officially MISSED screenings for Closer, Oceans 12 and Spanglish and soon I will be missing A Very Long Engagement!  Damn you busy schedule!)  So anyways, I also found out about a few contests to win tickets to advance screenings of TLA in New York so I entered a few of them with mine and my girlfriends name figuring there was little chance I would win, or even be able to attend on whatever short notice on whatever day of the week.  

As it turned out, one of these contests, I won. Apparently a magazine called Giant, which I had never heard of, was handing out passes to see TLA on the Wednesday before its release in NYC.  This works out well because Wednesdays are the day my girlfriend has off from work, and my job is flexible enough that missing it wouldn't be a problem as long as I could make up the hours on other days.  So it was decided, we would now be going on Wednesday.  This meant that now, we would have to see the film at the 7:30 time, and not much earlier in the day as we had planned, which would mean we wouldn't be able to head home on our 4-5 hour trip until around 10pm.  It didn't seem like too big a deal.  

As you know, I put out the word here on xixax that I had won two sets of passes (one under my name and one under my girlfriends), and anyone who wanted to go could just let me know to meet me at the theatre.  This would be good for two reasons: firstly, a pass wouldn't be wasted, secondly: someone who REALLY wanted to see the film early would be able to, and thirdly: if that person was willing to get there a little before I did and hold a spot in line (if there was one), I wouldn't have to spend all day worrying that I needed to get there by 4pm or else I wouldn't get in!  This was what I was dreading, because you never know.  Perhaps this would be some sort of divine punishment for something I wasn't aware of.  God's way of getting back at me for spending so much time on this board instead of with my girlfriend! (for cinephile).  Luckily for me, meatwad responded that he would be willing to go, and get there early to hold a spot.  And all was right with the world.  

Every one of the movies to be released in the interim between an Anderson movie for me is just filler, just killing time, waiting for the movie that will surely be my new favorite film of that year to be released.  Just loving what I can until the real colossus arrives to put all other films to shame.  A year without an Anderson film is a dark one for me as 2000 and 2003 were.  Because no other director, no other film is able to 'hit the spot' in a way so perfectly as theirs do.  So far this has been without fail.  They are a sure thing.  They are to be counted on.  They are 'money in the bank.'  And so, begins my review...

This is not an easy film.  What is it about the 4th film that a director decides to break out of his comfort zone?  For PT, Punch-Drunk Love was a film that nobody could've expected.  It was SO different, and yet when you saw it, it made perfect sense.  "Ah, so THIS is what a PTA Adam Sandler romantic comedy looks like".  For Quentin Tarantino, Kill Bill was the same thing.  SO different from anything he had done before, but completely his.  If those directors first three films you can see a natural progression and a shared likeness between the films, the forth ones go out of their way to say "lets do something different. No, lets do something REALLY different."  Some fans of those directors loved the results, and for some it became their favorite.  Some people thought they had gotten a little too indulgent, gotten further away from those trademarks they had fallen in love with from their earlier films and given them something so different, so unfamiliar, that they didn't want to accept it.  TLA is no different.  For anyone who read Owen Wilson's quote ""I saw the movie recently, and it's very odd; to me it seems like the oddest thing that Wes had directed. It links Tenenbaums with, like, Die Hard."" and just couldn't imagine what he was talking about, when you see this film it will all make sense.  The preview doesnt even begin to hint at how different this film is from his previous efforts.  

This is a difficult film.  It will not play well with general audiences AT ALL.  Whereas his previous films have been pretty accessible to Regular Joe who may stumble into the theatre and actually end up enjoying this 'quirky' little film, this film will probably make Joe get up midway through and demand his money back.  It is bizarre.  I found it, contrary to an earlier review here, to be his LEAST plot oriented film as the middle hour and a half just sort of floats by from scene to scene without much aim or any plot to speak of.  There is very little to grab onto in the way of story, and most of what there is has already been laid out in previews and synopsis.  Oceanographer Steve Zissou goes hunting for a mythical shark that ate his best friend and tries to connect to Ned Plimpton who is probably his son.  That's really the bones of this movie.  Other than that, it's just glimpses of character development and whatever oddness happens along the way.  .  I found myself barely able to stop smiling during the films beginning, to wondering when it would end.  Or how?  Maybe it had something to do with being exhausted, or maybe because during the last hour I REALLY had to pee.  The opening is familiar and comforting but very quickly the film becomes a very different beast.  Brace yourselves, you will be SHOCKED.

Whoever said that this is really Wes Anderson's movie about making movies was right on the money.  It was so apparent during the beginning of the film with the autograph hounds, disappointing premiere and little touches of things that seemed to be so thinly veiled, it would be hard for anyone to actually believe this was a movie about oceanography.  In a way though, much more than Wes doing Die Hard, this film is Wes doing Fellini.  It's his 8 ½, but it's completely HIS 8 ½.  Complete with all his Anderson flourishes as well as reaching far out into unfamiliar territory (like Die Hard.)  For me it really did have the feel of an arty 60's Italian film, of course shot through the Anderson lens.  This will make some of you rapturous with joy.  It's a bold step, and a huge risk and if you are open to it, you will love this film for its direction.  

This is a very loose film.  VERY loose.  Like I mentioned earlier, for mostly the length of the entire film (barring the introduction and the ending), the film wanders from moment to moment with a strange rhythm not seen before.  While watching Royal Tenenbaums, you can feel how tight the film is.  Every scene, every camera movement, every song cue, every stage direction has been meticulously storyboarded and planned out in advance.  And in my opinion, it completely works for that film.  But that's a different film.  TLA has some sequences that must've taken the same sort of planning to achieve, the zooms and amazing boat 'tour' shots, both seen (at least partly) in the preview.  But most of the film has the feeling that it was done on the fly.  Cameras are occasionally shaky (!), the scenes don't always cut together well, there are brief interludes of songs and the film has the meandering feeling that it was being made up as they went along.  Like the ending to 8 ½, Wes almost went searching for the meaning of this movie while he was making it.  The ideas were in place as well as the finale (which is beautiful and moving), but how to get there was a mystery bigger than where the hell to find that fish.  Which becomes fairly obvious was never the point of the film; but its macguffin.  

The movie is also hilarious, but that's to be expected.  So many moments that I wont dare spoil for people who haven't seen it yet.

There will be fiercely different opinions on this one.  When Bill Murray referred to it as "That death ship known as The Life Aquatic" you begin to imagine the troubles that might've went into making it.  Some people will say that Wes got in over his head, that his budget was too big, his ambitions greater than what could be achieved, and perhaps they all (along with the plot) got lost at sea.  Whether this works to the films advantage or not is going to depend on you, the viewer.  But when somebody who named Gerry one of last years best complains that THIS films weakness is it didn't have a script, you have to wonder about what criteria this is being judged on?  Because it's all subjective and it really just depends on what you're looking for.  Maybe mutinyco didn't want Wes to 'do Fellini', or maybe he just didn't like the results when he did.  It's a step that would probably be celebrated for a director like Gus Van Sant but will be questioned and scrutinized under Wes Anderson because this isn't what he was 'supposed to be doing'.  All I'm saying is "who knows?"  Sometimes it all depends on what you're looking for.  

Although other films can be referenced, this is really a film not like anything I've ever seen before.  The film is uneven, but there are moments of beauty here.  Fantastic moments that everyone will be talking about.  "Search and Destroy" is probably my favorite along with "The Way I Feel Inside" and "Staralfur" and finally "Queen Bitch".  (In the interest of not spoiling ANYTHING, the songs indicate the scenes in the film I'm referring to.)    Another point of criticism has been Owen Wilson's come and go Foghorn Leghorn accent, but it didn't bother me.  Is anything in this film even accidentally resembling reality?  Not really.  It is a film of excesses, and indulgences.  Those of you who long for the days of Bottle Rocket, when things were simple, will find yourself wondering where that director went.  Because this is not that director.  This is the film of a director who is out on a limb.  This is the film of a director who is working outside of his comfort zone and trying to do something new.  On a superficial level, it's his first film without Luke Wilson acting, a Rolling Stones song, and without Owens co-writing.  (Critics of this film may say that Owen might've been the glue that kept their movies together, but maybe without him Wes is free to truly go 'out there' and explore.)  But really it's just a completely different sort of Wes Anderson movie.  The same way that Punch-Drunk Love was a completely different sort of PT Anderson movie.  Where either goes from here is yet to be decided, but this was without question an interesting step along the way.  

So, I loved it but what do I know?  I was delirious and for the last hour, REALLY had to pee.  Actually, I need to see it again before I form my opinion.

Now that's a review.  Dwarfed pretty much everything I've ever written.

Highlights:

QuoteIt links Tenenbaums with, like, Die Hard.

Okay, so maybe GT will like this one.

QuoteWes doing Fellini. It's his 8 ½, but it's completely HIS 8 ½.

Interesting.  I didn't dig 8 ½ as much as most of you here, but this is exciting.  Limbs are exciting.  Great directors going out on them can be exciting too.

I really liked your analogies to PTA and QT, though I feel Kibble was a misstep that's going to continue in the wrong direction until someone deflates his massive ego.  Sorry ... bygones.  Not the issue.

QuoteI REALLY had to pee.

QuoteREALLY had to pee

Something about reading this review made me really have to pee.  Excuse me.

...




...

Okay, I'm back.

QuoteActually, I need to see it again before I form my opinion.

Given the context, that's the funniest thing I've read in a while.

Anybody who drives 9 hours to see a movie doesn't have a girlfriend.

I LOVED this movie. This is one of the few instances in which Themodernage and I are in complete and utter agreement (at least until he [re]forms his opinion).  It's fucking amazing, but not in any shape way or form in the way that his previous films might have been amazing. This isn't his best movie in some ways, but in so many others it's light years ahead of anything else he's done. I was really unenchanted by the trailer, and was afraid he'd just be repeating himself...but that ain't the case. Must gather thoughts. Full review sometime in the future.

review meatwad

Quote from: Sleuthreview meatwad

i pretty much agree with modage about this being much different then his other films, much more loose, etc. I was really surprised actully, because when you watch the trailer, you kind of get a royal tenenbaums feel (with the dolly shots and what not) and it is not that at all. There are some odd editing choices, but that did not take me out of the film. I loved the music in this film, all the Bowie songs are great. There is one song, i don't think it's on the soundtrack, but really surprised me and put a huge smile on my face. If you have seen the movie, you prob know what i mean.

I went in expecting something, got something totally different, and still loved this movie.

It's hanging a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 60% on MetaCritic. I stand by my opinion.

damn, mod-age....that was a good read...... :-D .......

i am glad you liked it.......there is nothing worse then to have your favorite director 's new film turn into a dud.........so a i am glad it livee up to your expectations.....

i think mutinyco is just kidding .he really likes it.........

This bond goes deep
Bill Murray and Wes Anderson once again move against the mainstream comedic tide, this time finding synchronicity in the existential absurdities of "The Life Aquatic." Source: Los Angeles Times

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calendarlive.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2004-12%2F15324472.jpg&hash=87f52382341ab90b5e21ef3231a86d0c63b9d18a)

Muses are most often thought of as comely, lithe and young. Throughout history, they've usually been depicted as female guides to inner wisdom that spark the imaginations of great men. But for director Wes Anderson, whose loopy reimagining of the filmmaking experience, "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," opens this week, the muse has recently taken the form of a middle-age man with faintly pockmarked skin, tufts of graying hair and sad, teardrop eyes — the comedian Bill Murray.

In fact, he's standing at the exact spot where the two first met eight or so years ago.

"That's the couch!" says Anderson, pointing to the divan in the bar at the Four Seasons Hotel, a lush expanse now covered with hipsters on the make.

"That's the couch!" deadpans Murray, who's in tow on this expedition.

The two have just spent an afternoon junketeering with the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. It's the beginning of the pre-Oscar Christmas rush, where filmmakers and stars spin through special insider screenings in all the places where Hollywood tastemakers might congregate. Murray, who keeps a 1-800 number — which he never answers — for dealing with the business, isn't a common sight on the publicity circuit.

Yet here he is — affable and genially uninhibited, in a blue blazer, blue sweater and gray pants. He stops to smell a riotously gigantic bouquet of lilies and to rush over to check out the signature on a painting of monkeys to see if it belongs to a friend (it does). When it's time to sit down, he is almost courtly, pulling out the chair for a reporter and helping with her coat.

Although he's the same height as the 6-foot-1 Murray, Anderson seems half that size. He's thin like a stretched out rubber band, with a long nose, long hair and a close-fitting olive corduroy suit, Hush Puppies and a white, roll-necked sweater, which in another era would have been finished off with a cravat. At 35 he seems like a precocious kid wearing his dad's suit.

Drinks with the pair and one of the film's producers, Barry Mendel, has an amiable, off-kilter quality, a semi-ironic jaunt through an interview process that Anderson in fact lampoons with relish in "The Life Aquatic." As in a Wes Anderson film, the surreal quality is softened by warmth, born here by the real affection between wunderkind director and his world-weary yet jaunty star.

Anderson, after all, enticed Murray to spend six months in Italy, for less than his customary fee, to play Zissou, a narcissistic and broke oceanographer (Jacques Cousteau on a very bad day) who drags his band of misfits, his mistrustful brainy wife (Anjelica Huston), a pregnant journalist (Cate Blanchett) and a Southern pilot who might be his long-lost son (Owen Wilson) on a quixotic search for the mythical jaguar shark that ate his best friend.

If there was any doubt that Murray would be game for "The Life Aquatic's" exercise in existential silliness, it was dispelled at that meeting on the couch, all those years ago, says Anderson.

The skinny director trills the lyric, "You know I'm back!" adding, "It's an Animals song he sang walking in circles a few minutes after we met." A waiter comes to take an order, and Anderson asks for flat water, as does Mendel.

"Who am I hanging with?" says Murray with mock outrage. "Let's get a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon for putting you through your misery." Murray combs through the list, and then takes up the Animals' song with twee panache, like a demented lounge singer. "You know I'm back. I'm back like Al Capone. I'm back like Sonny Liston."

Before the song interlude, Anderson spent months just trying to get Murray's attention, mostly by plying him with copies of "Bottle Rocket," his well-received but little-seen first effort.

"I had the largest collection of 'Bottle Rocket' tapes on the Eastern Seaboard," says Murray. "I still haven't seen it."

Finally, the "Rushmore" script showed up and he read it, and decided the guy could direct. He tracked Anderson down by telephone and they spent 45 minutes discussing Akira Kurosawa's film "Red Beard," whose shape reminded him of "Rushmore."

Murray gives an excited recap of the story of a country doctor (Toshirô Mifune) who happens to be a martial arts expert; he's most taken with the story's emotional reveals, which "go off like cherry blossoms" before the actual "feel good" ending, which he says "is completely obvious, but you're so overwhelmed by what just happened, it's almost like being told the truth."

The truth appears to be important to Murray, as does loyalty. There's also the concept of shame — of all the comics he came of age with, he's the only one who still commands the big screen. It's the unspoken current.

Ask Murray about his recent career reblossoming — with his adoption by two of the leading young filmmakers of this generation, Anderson and Sofia Coppola — and he deadpans, with flirtatious faux naiveté. "I'm an adult now. I'm not an ingénue anymore. I'm sort of like, who's the girl in 'The Last Picture Show?' "

"Cybill Shepherd?" offers Anderson.

Cybill Shepherd, Murray agrees.

"I'm not an ingénue anymore. I'm a leading lady. But it's interesting, I'm yet unseen as a leading lady." Pressed, he answers more seriously. "I know why they've asked me. It's because I haven't really embarrassed myself. I don't think I've ruined myself, and I don't think Wes has, either. I'm not overused. If you can do funny things, you can do serious things too. I can do whatever's required."

Movie is Murray-centric

Murray lent "Rushmore" an air of sad despair, along with his stardom, enabling the tale of 15-year-old precocious prep-schooler Max Fischer (Jason Schwartzman), in love with a schoolteacher, to be made. "I guess they blew the big money on my salary because a lot of the actors are from his grade school or his high school or whatever neighbors. You're always looking over your shoulder going 'Is there anyone in the union?' " he jokes, noting Anderson's penchant for stocking his films with nonactor friends in bit parts. Murray's comic performance as the lonely industrialist Herman Blume, who befriends Max and falls in love with the same teacher, earned him a raft of critics' awards and boosted Anderson's career.

Cousteau is a motif in that film as well. The book that first leads Max to his beloved teacher is about Cousteau, and he is inspired to get an aquarium built in her honor. It was on the set that Anderson told Murray, "I've got an oceanographer movie that we're going to do after this," says Anderson who with everyone else is drinking a superb $145 bottle of wine that Murray ordered.

"I didn't take it seriously because it just seemed so casual," says Murray. "I just decided he was trying to keep me calm during the shooting."

He insists that the reason he needed to be soothed was costar Seymour Cassel's penchant for intense conspiratorial conversations on eccentric subjects. "You want to laugh at him and it's not a good choice," says Murray.

Cassel returns for "The Life Aquatic" to appear in flashbacks as Murray's deceased friend. "By the time they got to making this movie together, they had rebonded, " Anderson says with a laugh.

"It's revisionist history," demurs Murray. "It turns out we were happily married for all those years, Liz."

Writers and critics are going to have a field day trying to come up with the appropriately insouciant adjective to describe "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou." Loopy. Zany. Wacky. Offbeat. It features one character who sings David Bowie songs throughout the movie — in Portuguese.

Anderson, who has worked with the precision of a short-story writer, has been unleashed structurally as well as financially with "The Life Aquatic."

He's made a picaresque opera, a Don Quixote-esque saga that costs in the neighborhood of $50 million, more than twice the price of his last film, "The Royal Tenenbaums," which earned $52 million at the domestic box office. For the Walt Disney Co., which financed the film, this is certainly a nervy move.

In the movie, Anderson again evinces his distinctive blend of solipsistic, pain-fueled humor, although the balance has tipped toward the comedic, with moments of wonder. In particular are the underwater sequences featuring such imagined sea creatures as the rattail envelope fish and 2-inch crayon pony fish, designed by Anderson, co-writer Noah Baumbach and stop-animation wizard Henry Selick (who directed "Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas").

Anderson wrote the film with Baumbach ("Kicking and Screaming") instead of longtime partner Owen Wilson who, he explains, was off being a movie star.

Their first motivation was to write a part for Murray. "We picture [him] with a beard, and every now and then there might be something stolen from some moment of real life," says Anderson, who refers to a snippet when Zissou tells an overly ambitious autograph-seeker to scram.

"My inspiration is '8 1/2 ' and 'Day for Night,' movies about filmmakers," adds Anderson. "In the movie, as much as he is an oceanographer, he's a maestro."

For a final-cut director involved in the details of his films down to the typeface on the poster, Anderson isn't too keen on explaining the mysterious meaning of it all. Like a primitive native who fears a photograph will somehow steal his soul, Anderson is suspicious. "There's stuff that's thematic that's in there, and I don't want to explain it to myself even." But he touches on the highlights: improvising families out of workmates, the father-son/mentor relationship.

Whether it's out of politeness or accessibility, Murray winds up explicating for Anderson. He's seldom played a father before, although in real life he has six sons, and he certainly knows the tricky terrain that the hapless and selfish Zissou is trying to traverse in exploring when to be a friend and when to be a father. "That's true. That's a moment you have," Murray says. As in "Rushmore" and "The Royal Tenenbaums," the film is redolent with the romance of failure.

"Failure is more interesting than success," says Anderson. He stops himself. He is after all an extremely successful film director now. "I don't even want to say that. I'm more interested in failure. I don't know why."

Murray steps in for him. "You learn much more from failure than success. It's much more instructive."

"I think more about it," admits Anderson. "I kind of like the ending of 'The Bad News Bears.' They lose the game, but the kids are drinking beers on the baseball field anyway."

Anderson prefers to discuss the grind of making a movie. He tells of rehearsing the film during a motorboat ride, scouting locations off the coast of Italy. They stopped at a tiny island, Ponza, where they had to swim to shore to have lunch. Later, when they were preparing to go home, Anderson spotted Murray climbing onto the dock, bag in tow.

"I go, 'Wait a second. What are you doing?' He goes, 'I'm going to stay on the island.' He had 7:15 dive training the next morning. 'How are you going to get back?' He says, 'I'll see you tomorrow.' "

How did Murray while away the hours? He met a guy who owned a great restaurant. "I marched around most of the night, carried a drink with me. When it ran out, I bought another. Went down some dark stairways. You're not afraid of the dark in a place like that," he says. "When you go to a place that primitive, you hear the sounds of life underneath the windows."

Gathering what falls away

A few minutes later, the director, who's been monitoring the clock on his cellphone, leaves. The mood at the table somehow feels more intimate as the topic shifts, the way these conversations go, to the man who just left the room. Has success changed Anderson? "Everyone changes a little bit when they have success and celebrity," says Murray, sounding like a grizzled eyewitness to that perpetual battle between ego and gratification.

"He lives a funny lifestyle [apparently he is itinerant at the moment]. He's a gleaner. Gleaners were the people that were so poor that they would come to the fields after the fields were picked and they got to pick up what was left behind. This comes to mean someone who by watching takes what falls from the life of the culture and puts it into something. He knows a lot of famous people. He sees that there's a value in what they have lived."

"It's like Bogdanovich," adds Mendel, referring to the director of "The Last Picture Show," who as a young man interviewed the great directors including Hitchcock and Ford, and has been publishing the research and his insights for decades. "Similarly Wes has gone down that road. All the generation of people, who are 20, 30, 40 years older than him, he's been fascinated by from the start. Now if he calls them, they might just call him back. He's taken total advantage of that, and over time that's had a lot of influence on him. That's part of the genesis of a [film] like this one."

Has Murray's recent artistic success changed him? The actor seems genuinely pleased to be a part of Anderson's oeuvre, just as he was to be part of Coppola's success last year with "Lost in Translation." Though he didn't win the best actor Oscar, "I didn't care," he says.

"It was a relief not to win. I might have enjoyed winning. It might have been nice to have someone say, 'You're the greatest, baby.' But I was OK. I made a real conscientious choice that I was not going to lose myself over this. I would have been very disappointed if I had."

He admits he likes playing the room at awards ceremonies, and his speech would have been "different." After the Oscars, he appeared on "The Late Show With David Letterman," in his tux, rolling in a gutter. "I think it's going to be a regular thing," he joked. "Every 25 years I'm going to get nominated.

"Honestly, I think I was in the best film of the year," he says, over the last sips of wine. " 'The Lord of the Rings' — I may never see it, 'The Lord of the Rings 3.' I missed [parts] one and two. I may never get around to it. I loved my movie.

"That was the prize."

Quote from: GhostboyI LOVED this movie. This is one of the few instances in which Themodernage and I are in complete and utter agreement (at least until he [re]forms his opinion).  It's fucking amazing, but not in any shape way or form in the way that his previous films might have been amazing. This isn't his best movie in some ways, but in so many others it's light years ahead of anything else he's done. I was really unenchanted by the trailer, and was afraid he'd just be repeating himself...but that ain't the case. Must gather thoughts. Full review sometime in the future.

are there top secret screenings in D-Town?

He goes to press screenings. Like me.

Quote from: mutinycoHe goes to press screenings. Like me.

well,
poo poo
on you two.

me want to see now.
arrrggggggghhh

Ebert and Roeper gave it two thumbs down.  what a burn.  Macguffin, do something useful and post the review.

Ebert didn't like Rushmore either.  I love the guy, but he doesn't get Anderson, that's for sure.

Quote from: mutinycoHe goes to press screenings. Like me.

Out of interest, how do you get into press screenings. Are you press?

December 10, 2004
MOVIE REVIEW | 'THE LIFE AQUATIC WITH STEVE ZISSOU'


A Seagoing Showcase of Human Collectibles
By A. O. SCOTT





here may be filmmakers more idiosyncratic than Wes Anderson - Jean-Luc Godard is still alive and shooting, after all - but there is no one who can match Mr. Anderson's devotion to his own idiosyncrasy. In his last movie, "The Royal Tenenbaums" (2001), the director and his writing partner, Owen Wilson, confected a parallel-universe Manhattan of moody tennis players, neurasthenic playwrights and rambling mansions, burying a touching story of child prodigies and prodigal parents in tchotchkes and bric-a-brac. At the time, some of us who had admired Mr. Anderson's first two films, "Bottle Rocket" and "Rushmore," complained that his delicate combination of whimsy and emotional purity was sliding into preciousness.


"The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," based on a script by Mr. Anderson and Noah Baumbach, goes even further, conjuring an imaginary world that encompasses wild ocean-faring technologies and fanciful species of computer-animated fish. Rather than tacking toward the shore of realism, Mr. Anderson blithely heads for the open sea of self-indulgent make-believe. As someone who was more annoyed than charmed by "Tenenbaums," I should have been completely exasperated with "The Life Aquatic," with its wispy story and wonder-cabinet production design, but to my surprise I found it mostly delightful.


Some of this has to do with Bill Murray, who occupies nearly every frame of the picture, usually sighing and frowning right in the middle of the screen. Mr. Anderson favors static, head-on compositions stuffed with beguiling details, and Mr. Murray holds still for him, allowing the audience's eyes to peruse his carefully arranged surroundings.


The actor's quiet, downcast presence modulates the antic busyness that encircles him, and his performance is a triumph of comic minimalism. Like Gene Hackman's Royal Tenenbaum, Mr. Murray's Steve Zissou is a flawed, solipsistic patriarch, though his defining emotion is not intemperate anger but a vague, wistful tristesse. His doughy face fringed by a grizzled Ernest Hemingway beard and topped by a red watch cap, Mr. Murray turns tiny gestures and sly, off-beat line readings into a deadpan tour-de-force, at once utterly ridiculous and curiously touching.


Zissou is a famous ocean explorer whose undersea adventures have less to do with scientific research than with pop-culture branding. He makes movies, administers a vast fan club, and keeps his eye out for merchandising opportunities. When we first meet him, at the premiere of his latest "Life Aquatic" documentary, he is beset with troubles. His trusty sidekick (Seymour Cassel) has been eaten by a mysterious shark (on which Zissou vows Ahab-like revenge) and Eleanor, his wife and business partner (Anjelica Huston), seems to be gravitating back into the orbit of her ex-husband, Alastair Hennessey (Jeff Goldblum), Zissou's slick, reptilian arch-rival. Meanwhile, a nosy reporter (Cate Blanchett) talks her way onto Zissou's boat, joined by Ned Plimpton (Mr. Wilson), a guileless, pipe-smoking young man from Kentucky who may or may not be the captain's long-lost illegitimate son.


Having established a rather hectic set of narrative premises (and I have provided only a partial list), Mr. Anderson proceeds to treat them casually, dropping in swatches of action and feeling when they suit his atmospheric purposes. He is less a storyteller than an observer and an arranger of odd human specimens. "The Life Aquatic" is best compared to a lavishly illustrated, haphazardly plotted picture book - albeit one with frequent profanity and an occasional glimpse of a woman's breasts - the kind dreamy children don't so much read start to finish as browse and linger over, finding fuel for their own reveries.


There is, to be sure, a certain willful, show-off capriciousness in this approach to filmmaking, but there is also a great deal of generosity. Mr. Anderson and Mr. Baumbach have built a magpie's nest of borrowed and reconditioned cultural flotsam - from Jacques Cousteau to Tintin and beyond - but the purpose of their pastiche is less to show how cool they are than to revel in, and share, a childish delight in collecting and displaying strange and enchanting odds and ends. If you allow yourself to surrender to "The Life Aquatic," you may find that its slow, meandering pace and willful digressions are inseparable from its pleasures.


Not that it's all fun and games. The bright colors and crazy gizmos are washed over with a strange, free-floating pathos that occasionally attaches itself to the characters, but that seems in the end to be more an aspect of the film's ambience than of its dramatic situations. Zissou's world-weary melancholy, the utter seriousness with which he goes about being absurd, contains an element of inconsolable nostalgia. He is a child's fantasy of adulthood brought to life, and at the same time an embodiment of the longing for a return to childhood that colors so much of grown-up life.


In my ideal cinémathèque, "The Life Aquatic" would play on a permanent double bill with "The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie." Mr. Anderson and Stephen Hillenburg, Mr. Squarepants's creator, share not only a taste for nautical nonsense, but also a willingness to carry the banner of unfettered imaginative silliness into battle against the tyranny of maturity.


They also both understand the sublimity that well-chosen pop music can impart even to throwaway moments. The seaborne contrivances of "The Life Aquatic" may make you a little queasy, but the soundtrack is impossible to argue with. It consists mainly of early David Bowie songs - "Queen Bitch," "Space Oddity," "Five Years" and the like - sung samba style, in lilting Brazilian Portuguese, by Seu Jorge. Like much else in the movie, these songs seem to come from another world: one which is small, crowded and, on its own skewed terms, oddly perfect.[/b]

I'm still looking forward to it no matter what E&R say. Of course they didn't like Dogville either and I still think that's the best film all year.

mod nailed it 100%.  I don't have to write a review; he already did it for me.  

And I completely understand why mutinyco said it was an overindulgent piece of shit.  I disagree with him but I understand.  

I've found that with some films, I need a second viewing in order to solidify my thoughts on them.  Punch Drunk Love was one of those films for me.  Coming out of Life Aquatic last night, I felt EXACTLY how I felt coming out of PDL, which I liked when I first saw it but loved when I saw it the second time on DVD.  Now that I know what to expect, I can watch Life Aquatic the next time and judge it on its own merit and not solely in relation to Wes' previous films.

But as it stands right now, I loved Bottle Rocket, Rushmore would go in my top 100 favorites of all time, and Tenenbaums would go in my top 50 easily... Life Aquatic doesn't meet those standards but a lesser Wes Anderson film is still worthwhile.

Quote from: A Matter Of ChanceMr. Anderson and Stephen Hillenburg, Mr. Squarepants's creator, share not only a taste for nautical nonsense, but also a willingness to carry the banner of unfettered imaginative silliness into battle against the tyranny of maturity.

:) Great.

Quote from: A. O. ScottMr. Murray turns tiny gestures and sly, off-beat line readings into a deadpan tour-de-force

For the love of God, why must A. O. Scott say tour-de-force in every review? Seriously, I purposefully looked for that phrase in this review, of all reviews, and found it.

in honor if wes andersons new movie ..i decided to share a "shark-themed" joke for you..


here goes.........

HoW Do Yo KnOw If A ShArK aCcIdEnTlY sUcKeD yOuR pEnIs?.........................



your penis looks like a flute

Quote from: wantautopia?Ebert didn't like Rushmore either.  I love the guy, but he doesn't get Anderson, that's for sure.

Ebert wrote about Rushmore:

The movie turns into a strategic duel between Max and Blume, and that could be funny, too, except that it gets a little mean when Max spills the beans to Blume's wife, and feels too contrived. When plotting replaces stage-setting and character development, the air goes out of the movie.

I agree with him that the film becomes plot-oriented at this point but I love the film anyways.  I am disappointed in the reviews of Life Aquatic posted here but I will see it nonetheless.  I'm sure there will be a lot to admire about it, even if it doesn't completely succeed.

Quote from: mutinycoIt's hanging a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 60% on MetaCritic. I stand by my opinion.

well, if you and tony medley from the tolucan times say it sucks, that's enough for me. congrats on being 'right'.

Quote from: RaviEbert wrote about Rushmore:

The movie turns into a strategic duel between Max and Blume, and that could be funny, too, except that it gets a little mean...

I agree with him...

I agreed with Ebert, too, about Rushmore getting a little mean-spirited there (and dangerous -- the bike stealing, and then Max's cutting of Blume's brakes), and it was one of the only things that really detracted from the movie for me.  Seems as if Ebert can get hung up on one thing to dislike about a movie and not see the whole picture.

Quote from: wantautopia?

Quote from: RaviEbert wrote about Rushmore:

The movie turns into a strategic duel between Max and Blume, and that could be funny, too, except that it gets a little mean...

I agree with him...

I agreed with Ebert, too, about Rushmore getting a little mean-spirited there (and dangerous -- the bike stealing, and then Max's cutting of Blume's brakes), and it was one of the only things that really detracted from the movie for me.  Seems as if Ebert can get hung up on one thing to dislike about a movie and not see the whole picture.

Perhaps we are more forgiving than Ebert of Rushmore because we were dorky teenage boys when we saw it?

Maybe.  Although actually, I don't think I saw it until I was like ... 22.  Okay, so dorky young adults who easily succumb to bittersweet nostalgia.

so you're all aware i saw this movie today

Quote from: cowboykurtisso you're all aware i saw this movie today

That bad, huh?

Quote from: wantautopia?

Quote from: cowboykurtisso you're all aware i saw this movie today

That bad, huh?

wonderful to be exact

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.allmusic.com%2F13%2Famg%2Fcov200%2Fdrg500%2Fg578%2Fg57811v6fj8.jpg&hash=49bd2898d1f3efa4ca7965969ba5b4248ba7479b)
REMINDER: SNTK out tomorrow.

interview with maxim MINOR SPOILERS...

Underwater Times: The Life Aquatic director Wes Anderson comes up for air to talk stuffed Speedos and Bill Murray.

Interview by Paul Ulane

Not many directors have been as consistent, or as consistently strange, as Wes Anderson over the first four films of his career. Whether he gets you to relate to the rebel schoolboy (Rushmore), the rebel twentysomething (Bottle Rocket), or the rebel billionaire (The Royal Tenenbaums), Anderson has a unique style that's less funny "ha-ha" and more funny "ha-huh?" Now, in The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou, he sets sail with Bill Murray, Owen Wilson, and Cate Blanchett on a high-seas journey, pitting man against shark...and ex-wife...and a couple of pirates, too. Here's what the director had to say about action, adventure, and Jerry Bruckheimer.

Do Bill Murray and Owen Wilson have naked pictures of you—they keep making it into your movies.
[laughs] Those are two of my favorite actors. Owen and I grew up together. The first movies that I did, we wrote together. I directed them and Owen acted in them. Then, you know, Bill's one of my favorites. So I'm just lucky enough to get to work with my top choices.

Speaking of Bill, what's he got to do to win an Oscar?
I don't know. But whatever it is, he probably won't do it.

Do you think he has any chance with Aquatic?
He'd probably have a better chance if it was directed by Ron Howard.

There are a couple of pulse-pounding shootout sequences in Aquatic—got any plans to team up with Jerry Bruckheimer or Joel Schumacher for a big-budget action flick?
I don't think so. For one thing, when your hero during a shootout is wearing a striped Speedo and bathrobe, that tends to scare away the people who want to make hundreds of millions.

Did you catch any of the actors stuffing their crotches before the Speedo scenes?
No, no—they would never do that. These people are too honest. These are method actors.

Do you ever catch yourself laughing at your own movies?
Not much, because by the time it's a movie, I've seen it too many times. I laugh if I hear somebody else laugh and I'm thinking, Thank God.

The names for your characters are always strange. Do those just pop into your head or do you spend time creating them?
Well, "Zissou" comes from this French photographer Jacques Henri Lartigue. He's one of my favorite photographers, and there are many pictures of his adventurer and inventor brother, Maurice, who was nicknamed Zissou. So they're all from different references and ideas.

We're sorry we asked. Ever walk around in matching outfits when you were younger, or is that just your characters?
Well, with Zissou, that's a uniform for his operation, so I think that's his idea. But for the one in Tenenbaums, um...that was just supposed to be funny.

Do you have a favorite character you've created?
That's a tough one. I think the two best realized characters were what Jason Schwartzman did in Rushmore—I feel like he really brought that character to life—and Owen in Bottle Rocket.

Are there any current directors out right now whose work you enjoy?
I liked Mike Nichols' new movie, Closer, quite a lot. And I ♥ Huckabees. I felt like David O. Russell was pushing the envelope in every scene and made a movie that would deliberately alienate a big part of the audience. But it connects with the other part of the audience in a way that if it didn't alienate the other half, it would never have connected with the first.

Would you ever direct anything you didn't write?
Yeah, if somebody handed me the right thing and I got around to reading it...My girlfriend is standing across the room shaking her head saying, "No, you wouldn't."

We'll just leave the first part of that answer in and make you look good.
[laughs] No, you can include that.

You have a pretty dedicated fan base. Is there any particular line that fans come up to you and quote a lot?
Yes. They always say to me, "Why are you wearing that tape on your nose?" And I say to them, "Exactly."

Quote from: themodernage02(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.allmusic.com%2F13%2Famg%2Fcov200%2Fdrg500%2Fg578%2Fg57811v6fj8.jpg&hash=49bd2898d1f3efa4ca7965969ba5b4248ba7479b)

Would you ever direct anything you didn't write?
Yeah, if somebody handed me the right thing and I got around to reading it...My girlfriend is standing across the room shaking her head saying, "No, you wouldn't."
"[/size]

wes doesn't wear the pants

A good interview by Ken Tucker in New York magazine:


Wes Anderson's The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou looks, at first, as though it's the inevitable final entry in what you might call Anderson's Great-Search-for-a-Father-Figure Trilogy. It's of a piece with previous Anderson movies like Rushmore (1998) and The Royal Tenenbaums (2001), in that it features a selfish bastard (Bill Murray in the first; Gene Hackman in the second) who, in crumbling middle age, decides it's important to impart some of his wisdom, or at least his hard-won cynical savvy, to a young man who views him as a father figure, if not an actual father. What's with the dad thing, Wes?

"I finally realized it's just the opposite of what I really grew up with, and for me there's something exotic about it," says the 35-year-old Houston-born filmmaker, who wrote Aquatic with his friend Noah Baumbach. "I'm drawn to those father-figure characters that are larger-than-life people, and I've sought out mentors who are like that, so I relate to them. But they're not my father."

In Life Aquatic, Murray stars as the bearded, red-beret'd Steve Zissou—half- oceanographer, half–hack filmmaker; a schlock Jacques Cousteau—facing the waning popularity of the undersea documentaries that once made him rich and famous. He's surrounded himself with a band of now-not-so-merry men, a doughty crew that includes a hotheaded, melancholy Teutonic fellow played by Willem Dafoe and—until his demise in the teeth of a watery beast Zissou dubs the "jaguar shark"—a fellow named Esteban du Plantier, played by Anderson favorite (and before that, John Cassavetes stock player) Seymour Cassel. Preparing a voyage to avenge Esteban's death and film one more exploration that will cap his career with glory and money—"the last adventure I've got in me," he says with mock hubris—Zissou encounters surprises: Owen Wilson as Ned Plimpton, his long-lost son; Cate Blanchett as a grouchily pregnant journalist intent on determining whether Zissou is a fraud or a hero; a run-in with his arch-nemesis, a more commercial oceanographer played by Jeff Goldblum; and a large number of hostile "Filipino pirates."

I tell Anderson this is probably a stupid question, but it was hard for me to pin down when this movie was supposed to take place—its mixture of old-fashioned seafaring equipment, of oddly shaped guns and tools, left me perplexed.

"Not a stupid question, and almost impossible to answer," he replies. "From the first movie I did [1994's Bottle Rocket], I almost unconsciously decided to not specify where [my movies] were taking place, and to fill them with details that were not of any particular time period. With this movie, I think the props and gadgets are coming from the seventies, the sixties, and even the fifties. It's just by chance, because I'm drawn to old analog gear, which sets any movie into a Blue Velvet–type unknown period. I like that feeling of displacement."

The Life Aquatic reportedly cost about as much as The Royal Tenenbaums grossed at the box office—more than $50 million—and the director has told the New York Times that the burden of this budget meant the film "needs to be broader." Did he mean reaching a broader audience than his usual adoring cult following, or reaching for much broader humor?

"A little of both, I guess. You don't want things to get too broad, but a lot of times, I couldn't do the sort of controlling I like to have on this project . . . I mean, just dealing with being on the water—I couldn't control things the way I usually want to, and I think some of that spills over into what you shoot."

What Anderson has shot is at once his most ambitious, emotionally varied, and wobbly movie to date. At times, this most "outdoorsy" of his major releases feels a little hemmed in by his stylized approach: the beautifully composed shots of people staring straight into the camera, and the long, risibly uncomfortable silences at which Anderson excels (sometimes it seems he'd be happiest directing a Buster Keaton silent film, all deadpan rigor). You get the feeling Anderson may be struggling to break free of the "controlling" instinct he refers to, and the struggle itself becomes interesting, if kinda distracting. Anderson says he ultimately found Aquatic's technical challenges "much more freeing" than he'd expected. As for Murray, the actor has his own agenda: He's intent on further perfecting the clean-slate stare he deployed so effectively in Lost in Translation, and therefore doesn't communicate the full frustration, anguish, and ambivalence that Steve Zissou is experiencing at this point in his life. But he's also game for a startling amount of goofy slapstick—you don't hand Bill Murray a gun and a deck full of rifle-toting pirates and not get a swarmingly silly spectacle.

"I think you can walk the edge between the corny thing and the thing that moves you: That's what you hope for."

"Hey, that's pretty good—that gets at a lot of things!" says Anderson. He laughs, and we jokingly agree that I'll write that he said that stuff. "Yeah," he says softly, his Texas twang suddenly becoming more pronounced. "I'm really tired."

"That's what I mean about the water—that scene was a nightmare to shoot," says Anderson. "You'd get all these pirates on one ship, and then get the main actors in place, and a boat positioned behind them so the viewer could get some perspective on the scale we were working with, and the boats are heaving back and forth, and by the time you get everything all set up, the sun is gone."

So it was a rough shoot, as Murray has suggested in some comments. "Oh, Bill likes to play up how tough things are, how much he had to work. It wasn't like Lawrence of Arabia or anything. That's Bill's idea of making an interview funny."

And so, it would seem, are lines from Murray that, if not improvised, are brilliantly attuned to his dead-eyed, shrugged-off manner. "This gizmo's outta juice," he mutters, tossing a spent weapon aside. He also suggests to Wilson's Ned that, rather than call him Dad, he refer to him as "Steve-sy." And defending a young crew member, Murray snaps, "Don't point that gun at him—he's an unpaid intern!" Any of this ad-libbed? "No!" says Anderson proudly. "I mean, Bill improvises in the way he'll say a line, but everything you just cited was in the script."

The climax of the movie, it's not revealing too much to say, involves a scene in which Zissou, after his final film premieres, hoists a little boy onto his shoulders and marches down a row of stone steps. It's the sort of quiet, atypical moment—for Murray and for Anderson—that could have been corny, don't you think? "To have the hero putting an adorable boy on his shoulders? Sure! That has very little to do with directing, if that comes off. It has everything to do with Bill and the little boy. There's some kind of weird metaphor that we were striving for, that we didn't want to shy away from. I think you can walk the edge between the corny thing and the thing that moves you: That's what you hope for."

And what is the weird metaphor?

"I feel like there's something about the sea; there are these characters who die, and there's this whole mission that Bill and his gang are on. It's some kind of family they're trying to become. And there's some ocean metaphor, this thing that they're all missing that they want to connect with."

Almost like the ocean is the amniotic fluid that Cate Blanchett's baby's in, that they're all floating in, looking for comfort?

Quote from: cowboykurtiswes doesn't wear the pants

have you SEEN the guy?

Quote from: cinephilé

Quote from: cowboykurtiswes doesn't wear the pants

have you SEEN the guy?

have you seen his pants?  he's been looking for quite some time now.

Quote from: cinephilé

Quote from: cowboykurtiswes doesn't wear the pants

have you SEEN the guy?

He hasn't seen the guy but I have and he never wears pants when I'm around.


badumching!

Sometimes we have to forget that we're card-carrying members of the Wes Anderson Fan Club and realize that we just saw a bad movie. Then dump Wes like an old girlfriend and move onto better things.

turn in your card and your taste, asshole.  you're out.

It was a shitty club anyways!

Who are you, and where the hell do you think you're going with Vincent Gallo's head?

Jeez Meatball, you weren't this harsh on the film last night....We saw it together. But ya, I agree with mod on this one and meatball and I agree on one thing: Willem Dafoe is awseome in this...by the way, meatball, you owe me 18 bucks.

hm....the name Meatball reminds me of a Bill Murray from back in the day

Quote from: lamasEbert and Roeper gave it two thumbs down.  what a burn.  Macguffin, do something useful and post the review.

http://tvplex.go.com/buenavista/ebertandroeper/today.html

Quote from: wantautopia?

QuoteIt links Tenenbaums with, like, Die Hard.

Okay, so maybe GT will like this one.

Hah, sorta doubtful, but I'll admit that even though I've never fully come to actually liking any of Wes' films, I am really excited to see this one. I'll give him that and I've ignored this forum enough to not be annoyed by his fan worship so I'm going in pretty open minded.

If you've ignored this forum, how do you know there's fan worship?

...

What?

Quote from: wantautopia?If you've ignored this forum, how do you know there's fan worship?

...

What?

Ah but my comment says I ignored this forum "enough" to not be annoyed and so for clarification, I've ignored this thread enough recently to not be annoyed. I remember battling Redlum when Royal Tennebaums hit and ever since then, I've hardly stopped by. Stopping by here twice tonight actually is a new record for me.

Congratulations!  :yabbse-thumbup:

(You know we love you.  Well, not that way.  Well, maybe a little.  Wait, no.  Please stop looking at me like that.)

Quote from: wantautopia?Congratulations!  :yabbse-thumbup:

(You know we love you.  Well, not that way.  Well, maybe a little.  Wait, no.  Please stop looking at me like that.)

Third time...please, don't wear me out so soon. And please, don't fucking reply. Curiosity will kill me

GT ... may he rest in peace.  He was a bit of a cunt -- what we could make out of him anyway.  But we loved him for it.  ::salutes.

Quote from: wantautopia?GT ... may he rest in peace.  He was a bit of a cunt -- what we could make out of him anyway.  But we loved him for it.  ::salutes.

oohhh....may mutinyco rip apart everything you ever do for the rest of your life.

I feel something got lost in the translation.  :?

But hey, if I ever get to the point where mutinyco (or even you) is/are writing about my work, well, I'll know I've arrived.  I look forward to it.

Quote from: wantautopia?I feel something got lost in the translation.  :?

But hey, if I ever get to the point where mutinyco (or even you) is/are writing about my work, well, I'll know I've arrived.  I look forward to it.

Hostility only for you bringing me right back to this thread a fourth time tonight. I mean, fuck, the audacity!!!!!??? and now....now this makes 5. you know, they'll say we're in love....yes, silence of the lambs rip off

Quote from: SiliasRubyyou owe me 18 bucks.

I owe you a contract signed by you which specifies "it's my treat", which is what you said. Why'd you go back on your word? Not only that but you're making me owe you for gas, though I didn't beg you to drive down here and then around town for a few hours so that I could owe you even more.

Quote from: Meatball

Quote from: SiliasRubyyou owe me 18 bucks.

I owe you a contract signed by you which specifies "it's my treat", which is what you said. Why'd you go back on your word? Not only that but you're making me owe you for gas, though I didn't beg you to drive down here and then around town for a few hours so that I could owe you even more.

Take this bitchy relationship crap to PM's.  It's fuckin' creepy.

After Tenenbaums, 'Life Aquatic' Tackles Stormy Seas

Floating on the success of offbeat domestic comedy "The Royal Tenenbaums" director Wes Anderson set out to make an epic about adventure on the high seas. But some critics are already predicting a shipwreck.

Despite a cast of big names such as Bill Murray, Angelica Huston, Willem Dafoe and Cate Blanchett , Anderson is the first to admit that the title of his new film "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" doesn't really make it as a blockbuster.

"It's probably safe to say it's kind of a terrible title in and of itself," Anderson said. "Any time somebody asked me what the movie was called ... I was reluctant to say because people are not sure what to make of it."

"It doesn't serve the purpose of grabbing people when they know nothing about the movie, but if you already know it then I like it for that," he said.

It's not just the title that risks losing its audience -- the film's quirky and ironic humor, minute detail and convoluted plotline may be hard going for those who are not already fans of the director who made his name with cult favorite "Bottle Rocket" and critical hit "Rushmore."

Newsday critic Jan Stuart said it "launches with enormous promise, then sinks into a quagmire of misfired humor and misbegotten characters."

On limited release in New York and Los Angeles earlier this month the film made a respectable debut, averaging $57,000 per theater its first weekend. Yet with a budget of over $25 million, it has a lot of work to do after its Dec. 25 nationwide release.

SEMI-FANTASY WORLD

The film creates a semi-fantasy world in which world-renowned but washed-up oceanographer and documentary maker Steve Zissou sets out to take revenge on a mysterious shark that ate his friend and former colleague.

Bill Murray, who received an Oscar nomination for 2003's "Lost in Translation," plays the charismatic, if a little unbalanced, adventurer who leads Team Zissou, a cast of odd-ball characters wearing uniforms of powder blue speedos and red bobble hats.

The fish in Anderson's world are animated and wildly colorful, while a soundtrack of David Bowie songs rendered in Portuguese adds to the surrealism of the film.

Anderson says he was careful to avoid letting the quirky and artificial details of his fantasy world take over, a criticism that was directed at "The Royal Tenenbaums."

"Smart people who hated it often pointed to that, but I've been self conscious about that," Anderson said. "At the end of the day I just kept going by my own instincts."

But instinct can lead to self-indulgence: USA Today's critic said the film "gets bogged down in extended-family dysfunction that's not as funny as Anderson's The Royal Tenenbaums but has the same tendency toward the precious."

TEAM ANDERSON

Still only 35, Anderson's three previous films won him a reputation as a writer and director that allowed him to attract movie stars and other established actors most young film-makers can only dream of.

For "The Life Aquatic..." he took them to Italy for six months of filming, including weeks in the Mediterranean in the winter -- an ordeal that Murray, who is in practically every scene, described as tortuous, miserable and brutally cold.

Dafoe, who answered a last minute call to play the ship's engineer, said it was an unusual film to work on.

"The economics of it is people wanted to work with Wes so they didn't ask for their normal salaries," he said. The film crew discussed the movie at a media briefing.

Anderson's longtime friend and collaborator Owen Wilson did not co-write the script this time, though he stars as an airline pilot who may or may not be Zissou's illegitimate son.

Sharing the writing credits this time is screenwriter Noah Baumbach, who said he spent the better part of a year working with Anderson in the back of an Italian restaurant in New York, creating the script between rigatoni and Campari. "A lot of the fish are named after items on the menu," Baumbach said.

Anderson compares the writing process to hearing voices in his head, and paints a picture of the two scruffy young men sitting muttering to themselves as diners come and go.

"In a restaurant it's very strange because we'll come out of our trance and see people looking at us," he said.

Huston, who also starred in "Tenenbaums" and whose character is described as the brains behind Team Zissou, said the humor of the film was subtle, perhaps too subtle for some.

"If you don't listen closely a lot can go by ... It takes some concentration. It's not a movie for dumb people."

anyone buy the soundtrack?

I did. Seu Jorge can really wail.

Quote from: bigideasanyone buy the soundtrack?

yes, at first listen its not my favorite.  but still pretty good.  although missing the pivotal sigur ros song.  and the seu jorge recordings are sort of low-fi, but i guess that makes them cool.

does Wes have his little note in the liners like usual?
i don't know how full the cd is, as far as time, but i think the Sigur Ros song is 9 minutes. if the cd is already full, then that would mean cutting several other songs. maybe that's it. i'm not sure what song is used in TLA, but the Vanilla Sky soundtrack did have at least one Sigur Ros song on the actual cd soundtrack (3 in the film).

out of curiosity -- for those who saw zissou; how was the quality of the film print? mine was very washed out and desaturated -- i think it's a result of what I think is a very flawed post technique, digital intermediate. D.I. looks great on dvd and digitally projected but on print it looks muddy and flat. did anyone see a print that had the usual vibrant color pallette that his previous films established. the shitty print really detracted from the film -- curious to see how this looks on dvd. this whole D.I. process is a real problem, that will most likely only be solved once the exhibitors switch to digital projection -- which is far from ideal, but unfortunately the most commmon outcome. i feel if one is going to a projectedd film print, avoid D.I. at all costs -- however one must take into consideration their final dvd image which will benefit form teh D.I process -- its a long winded subject -- any opinions?

It looked great when I saw it. I didn't notice anything wrong really.

It looked fine to me, too. Do you know for certain that he did a DI? I wouldn't have guessed, just from the look of the film.

Myself, I love the look of DI films, and definitely plan to utilize it on all my own celluloid-originated projects. Lord Of The Rings, O Brother, and from what I can tell from the trailers, The Aviator all look amazing, among  many others.

Quote from: GhostboyIt looked fine to me, too. Do you know for certain that he did a DI? I wouldn't have guessed, just from the look of the film.

Myself, I love the look of DI films, and definitely plan to utilize it on all my own celluloid-originated projects. Lord Of The Rings, O Brother, and from what I can tell from the trailers, The Aviator all look amazing, among  many others.

yea, wes did DI over at EFILM. i think the look of DI is great on digital formats -- i think much of the information is lost on the film out -- i've yet to see a film that looks good, or as good as it should, on print that orignated from DI. the blacks are muddied and the color saturation is sub - par -- im curious to know if very long engagement was DI -- thats one film of recent memory that looked absolutely goreous on print.

i dont think one can argue that Di films look superior in theaters than they do on dvd -- i think this is a shame -- since when did home exhibition take the priority to the theatrical image quality -- nowadays theatrical release is just a big advertising scheme for the dvd release so i think much of the care for prints is neglected -- you dont have films running for as long as they used to in theaters. dvd is definatley where the revenue is, and the quality and process of the post production directly reflects where the movie will breath its longest life.

im still not sold on DI. as long as the exhibtiors are outfitted with films projectors theres will be a missing peice in the puzzle.

mine looked fine too.

Quote from: bigideasdoes Wes have his little note in the liners like usual?
i don't know how full the cd is, as far as time, but i think the Sigur Ros song is 9 minutes. if the cd is already full, then that would mean cutting several other songs. maybe that's it. i'm not sure what song is used in TLA, but the Vanilla Sky soundtrack did have at least one Sigur Ros song on the actual cd soundtrack (3 in the film).

wes has linear notes.  the cd is only 60 minutes so it wasnt a matter of length, it was probably a rights thing like the stones from previous sntks.

Yeah...gotta go with Ghosty on this. I think DI looks amazing on screen. O Brother looked like it was 3-D...

What is the Sigur Ros song that's not on the soundtrack?

VANILLA SKY ALL OVER AGAIN

You mean Untitled 4 off ( ) ?

silly fuck

Quote from: UltrahipWhat is the Sigur Ros song that's not on the soundtrack?

Staralfur, I believe. It's off Agaetis Byrjun

Thank you sir.

Quote from: UltrahipYou mean Untitled 4 off ( ) ?

Real quick, which part of the movie was this song in?

It's a spoiler

Was it actually that song? I thought it was Staralfur, like that guy said...but I don't know I haven't seen this yet.

Quote from: UltrahipI thought it was Staralfur

It is.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mtv.com%2Fshared%2Fmedia%2Fnews%2Fimages%2Fa%2FAnderson_Wes%2Fsq-wes-lifeaquatic-bv.jpg&hash=be03c97b7ba289d24052f8d31a0a593e25db4fd4)
Rewind: Director Wes Anderson Gets Deep Again With 'Aquatic'
'Rushmore' creator one of Hollywood's few true visionaries.
Source: MTV News

Hollywood loves to use hyperbole. "Brilliant," "greatest" and "of all time" are bandied about as often as Keanu says, "Dude."

It's all part of the mass-marketing mentality that dominates the industry. When the Walt Disney company calls a brand new film a "classic," you have to wonder if their copywriters own a dictionary. And it seems as if every director who does something slightly outside of the mainstream (while still working in the studio system) is instantly dubbed a "visionary," regardless of how derivative their style is or how wanting their abilities are.

Copping your look from Edward Gorey, the Cure and the circus doesn't make you a visionary, Tim Burton. And even the most visually exciting film falls flat if all the other storytelling elements don't, oh, shall we say, reload the Matrix.

So when a filmmaker comes along who does seem to be able to blend all the collaborative aspects of the medium of film into a mosaic that is not only distinctive, but rewarding, it's a cause for celebration. So let's all jump for joy at the release of "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," the fourth film from contemporary visionary Wes Anderson.

Anderson's first feature, 1996's "Bottle Rocket," is his most straightforward film. This tale of a trio of inept would-be criminals has little of the visual idiosyncrasies that would mark Anderson's later movies, but the theme of misfits following their hearts (regardless of the odds) is very much in place. Still, unlike his trademark later pictures, "Bottle Rocket" takes place in the real world, where bullies reign and the dreamers struggle, often in vain. "Bottle Rocket" was the teaser for the slightly skewed worlds that Anderson would next create.

"Rushmore" (1998) tells the tale of overreaching underachiever Max Fischer (Jason Schwartzman). Max is the worst student at Rushmore Academy, partly because all of his time is taken with every conceivable extracurricular activity: French Club, Stamp & Coin Club, debate team, Calligraphy Club, choir, Bombardment Society, the Rushmore Beekeepers and more. But Max's true loves are the Max Fischer Players — a theatrical troupe that puts on elaborate stage versions of things like the '70s cop film "Serpico" — and Miss Cross (Olivia Williams), the beautiful but lonely first-grade teacher. Max befriends a wealthy steel magnate (Bill Murray in the role that rejuvenated his career), who likewise develops feelings for Miss Cross and a bizarre quasi-romantic triangle builds.

The New England setting and tone of "Rushmore" make the film feel like it's not quite in the real world anymore, but rather a world slightly skewed toward Max's perspective. It's a world where a school allows Max to present "Heaven and Hell," a Vietnamese War play with tons of gunfire and real explosions. Adults bend to the whims of children for no apparent reason other than the force of their convictions. The oddballs have a slightly easier time of it. It feels much like the surreal suburbia of "The Adventures of Pete and Pete" or Stars Hollow in "Gilmore Girls." (Trivia note: Alexis Bledel of that show is an extra in "Rushmore." She sits next to Max at Grover Cleveland High). It's probably no coincidence that Anderson used Vince Guaraldi's "Peanuts" music in two of his movies. Max Fischer could be Charlie Brown as a teenager.

Anderson's third film, 2001's "The Royal Tenenbaums," deals with family dysfunction and unrealized promise. The estranged patriarch of a family of former child geniuses, Royal Tenenbaum (Gene Hackman) makes a last ditch effort to reconnect with his family, all of whom are going through a personal malaise. It's Anderson's saddest film, a tragicomedy about squandered potential, misplaced nostalgia and staggering loneliness. But "Tenenbaums" is not a cautionary piece; no lessons are taught. Anderson is startlingly unsentimental. That's not to say cynicism runs rampant — quite the contrary. There's an emotional honesty and a refreshing lack of hipness and pretension that makes you care about people who are not at all cuddly.

"Tenenbaums" is so meticulously art directed that some viewers felt overwhelmed to the point of distraction (even aside from the scene in the jammed games closet, where that was the intent). But the recurring motifs (such as the use of the same simple Helvetica font for everything from signage to book covers and the symmetrical placement of household items) give the film a unique formality that takes it into that slight surreality that serves the characters so well. None of the details are affectations for their own sake. Unlike the monkey barrels of disparate flourishes that rarely coalesce in the films of, say, Joel Schumacher, everything works in sync in Anderson's world.

Adding to the emotional depth is Anderson's smart use of music in his films. In addition to scores by Devo's Mark Mothersbaugh, the movies utilize songs that complete the scenes and the characters. The Faces' "Ooh La La" with its "I wish that I knew what I know now when I was younger" chorus succinctly summarizes as the characters dance at the end of "Rushmore." The late Elliott Smith's "Needle in the Hay" rings with an even sadder irony now during a suicide attempt in "The Royal Tenenbaums," and the slow-motion shot of Gwyneth Paltrow walking from the bus to Luke Wilson as Nico's "These Days" plays is an utterly perfect cinematic moment.

Another trait Anderson's movies share is the lack of a happy ending in favor of a bittersweet one. The characters have changed, they're almost all in a different place than when we first meet them, but, like the end of "The Graduate," their fates are still uncertain. We hope they'll be happy, we hope Max will go on to greatness, we hope Chas Tenenbaum will be able to move on from grieving for his dead wife. But we're not sure.

That's one of the main things that make these movies resonate so powerfully. Wes Anderson (and his co-writer, Owen Wilson) makes those rare movies that take us someplace that's not real, but to which we can relate, sometimes too much. Many of us wish we could be something more than what we are, and none of us knows our future. But that's life's rich pageant, with its struggles, pain and uncertainty — if we accept its absurdities and follow our hearts, it can be a rewarding piece of art

David Bowie Gets A Bossa Nova Makeover In Wes Anderson's 'Life Aquatic'
Source: MTV News 12.16.2004

Wes Anderson is to movie scores what Quentin Tarantino is to film casting: He revives old relics and dusts them off for a new generation.

Of course in Anderson's case, the music he uses is by no means forgotten; rather, he takes underground
 
'60s and '70s classics and recontextualizes them for his well-defined film world.

Fans wait with bated breath to see what songs he's going to use next. "[I listen to] the Rolling Stones one week and then Radiohead the next," Anderson said nonchalantly. "But it kind of goes in cycles. It's always changing."

In Anderson's debut, "Bottle Rocket," the musical focus was '60s psychedelia (obscure cuts by Love and the Rolling Stones); in "Rushmore," the British Invasion seasoned the seriocomic tone (the Kinks, Donovan, the Who, Creation and the Stones); and in "The Royal Tenenbaums," the musical themes were tethered by melancholy folk and classic rock (the Velvet Underground, Nico, Elliott Smith, Nick Drake and again, his beloved Keef and Mick). All of Anderson's films have been scored by the idiosyncratic Mark Mothersbaugh, the driving force behind late-'70s pop deconstructionists Devo.

With his latest, "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," the director again taps vintage rock classics (Zombies, Scott Walker, Stooges), but this time, with a twist.

The tastemaking filmmaker decided he wanted to take the songs of David Bowie and give them a worldly feel appropriate for the movie's international cast and at-sea setting.

Enter Brazilian samba star Seu Jorge, who was asked to take lesser-known Bowie classics ("Queen Bitch," "Rock N' Roll Suicide" and "Five Years") and give them a bossa nova spin. In total, Jorge remade 11 Bowie songs, all of which were used in the film.

"Seu Jorge is a great musician, and I think he made these really beautiful pieces," Anderson said. "Because the songs were woven throughout the whole movie, it's something that ties it together. For me, he's an important character in the film, even though his only line is, 'I didn't see it, boss.' He's a real presence in the movie."

In the film, Jorge's character, Pelé dos Santos (an obvious homage to '70s Brazilian soccer superstar Pelé), serenades the crew upon the Belafonte (an obvious homage to Jacques Cousteau's Calypso), the vessel owned by oceanographer Steve Zissou (Bill Murray).

But Jorge (who also played Knockout Ned in the acclaimed Brazilian film "City of God") was initially worried that 11 songs might be overkill. "I thought it might be like drowning your food in ketchup, with me being the ketchup — too much," he said. But once he saw the film and the way the songs carried the emotional arc in brief snippets, the musician/actor thought the balance and tone were "perfect."

"I think [Anderson] is inventing a new form of language in comedy," said Jorge in his heavily accented English. "He's so soft, but so particular; he likes the details. I liked the movie very much."

Why Bowie? The answer is simple. Anderson's been dying to use his songs since "Rushmore."

"I'm a big Bowie fan, and I've never used one of his songs in my movies," Anderson said. "There's one that I'd been thinking of, 'When I Live My Dream,' which is an early Bowie song that I tried in 'Rushmore.' This was a chance to use a bunch of them. Halfway through the writing, we made the character Brazilian, [so] the songs needed to be in Portuguese."

During the film, Anderson was never quite sure if Jorge's bossa-styled Bowie translations were "faithful renditions," and as it turns out, they weren't.

"I look to the [characters] in the film and to my life, and I create the songs," Jorge said of the way he tweaked the lyrics. He cites his version of "Changes" as a song he found inspiration for in his own life, having gone from being a homeless addict to a national pop star in the span of a decade. More recently, Jorge, like the rest of the cast, had to uproot his life to Italy for the film's arduous six-month shoot.

Another interesting surprise: Jorge didn't know any of the Bowie songs that Anderson asked him to cover. "It's a different culture in Brazil," he said. "We only know 'Let's Dance.' " But he quickly took to the task, stripping the songs of all their embellishments until they were just vocals and acoustic guitar.

The rest of "Aquatic" is marked musically by the cheesy, Casio-electronic and characteristically regal orchestration of Mark Mothersbaugh and Sven Libaek's score to the 1974 television show "Inner Space."

Acquiring the rights to classic David Bowie songs is no easy feat, even for Anderson. (So far the only person Anderson's been turned down by was Yoko Ono, who wouldn't allow him to use the Beatles' "Hey Jude" and "I'm Looking Through You" in "The Royal Tenenbaums.")

So what does David Bowie think of all these changes to his songs?

"Well, we had to license [the songs] from him. David's heard them and supposedly he's really liked them," Anderson said. "He was on the radio a few months ago, and he was very positive about [Jorge's versions], but I [haven't] spoken to him about it yet."

Quote(So far the only person Anderson's been turned down by was Yoko Ono, who wouldn't allow him to use the Beatles' "Hey Jude" and "I'm Looking Through You" in "The Royal Tenenbaums.")

Sorry to get off topic, but I always wondered why he was denied to license Beatles' songs, but he was able to license John Lennon Songs in Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums.

Quote from: russiasusha

Quote(So far the only person Anderson's been turned down by was Yoko Ono, who wouldn't allow him to use the Beatles' "Hey Jude" and "I'm Looking Through You" in "The Royal Tenenbaums.")

Sorry to get off topic, but I always wondered why he was denied to license Beatles' songs, but he was able to license John Lennon Songs in Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums.

it's very very rare that an actual Beatles' recording gets used in a film. maybe they figured that their music would be used so much people would get tired of it. it's also frustrating that Wes uses great Rolling Stones' songs and never gets them on the soundtrack. in a way i guess that's smart on the RS's part because i've bought every album of theirs that has a song from his movies.

Quote from: russiasusha

Quote(So far the only person Anderson's been turned down by was Yoko Ono, who wouldn't allow him to use the Beatles' "Hey Jude" and "I'm Looking Through You" in "The Royal Tenenbaums.")

Sorry to get off topic, but I always wondered why he was denied to license Beatles' songs, but he was able to license John Lennon Songs in Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums.

you have to get permission from all beatles (or estates) and he wasnt able to get those two because george harrison was dying at the time.

just as I don't understand how people could love AI, I don't understand how people could not like this movie.  what's not to like?  even if you weren't moved you oughta at least laugh out loud a lot.  man, I was just in tears all the time, like when watching Almost Famous (or any in-flight movie).  Though I dunno, I think Last Life in the Universe might be my favorite movie of the year...
This movie did not disappoint me at all.  I loved it.

Quote from: themodernage02

Quote from: russiasusha

Quote(So far the only person Anderson's been turned down by was Yoko Ono, who wouldn't allow him to use the Beatles' "Hey Jude" and "I'm Looking Through You" in "The Royal Tenenbaums.")

Sorry to get off topic, but I always wondered why he was denied to license Beatles' songs, but he was able to license John Lennon Songs in Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums.

you have to get permission from all beatles (or estates) and he wasnt able to get those two because george harrison was dying at the time.

this is a guess, or you have read this? i'm not doubting you, it's just that it is very very rare to see an actual Beatles recording in a film. why weren't they able to use Beatles songs (the original recordings) in American Beauty and I Am Sam? my only explanation to fit in with what you said is that they ask for a very very high price.

Quote from: cowboykurtisout of curiosity -- for those who saw zissou; how was the quality of the film print? mine was very washed out and desaturated -- i think it's a result of what I think is a very flawed post technique, digital intermediate. D.I. looks great on dvd and digitally projected but on print it looks muddy and flat. did anyone see a print that had the usual vibrant color pallette that his previous films established. the shitty print really detracted from the film -- curious to see how this looks on dvd. this whole D.I. process is a real problem, that will most likely only be solved once the exhibitors switch to digital projection -- which is far from ideal, but unfortunately the most commmon outcome. i feel if one is going to a projectedd film print, avoid D.I. at all costs -- however one must take into consideration their final dvd image which will benefit form teh D.I process -- its a long winded subject -- any opinions?

but like 90% of all films from the past three, four years were done on DI.  I don't think Bottle Rocket and Rushmore were ever that vibrant.  Rushmore was particularly flat.  DI also has created some vibrant looking pictures, like O Brother Where Art Thou.  The Green scenes in Hero were processed with DI.  Films have lost their integrity through all sorts of chemical processes and transfers, super 35 and anamorphic included, it's a generational thing, I don't really think you can blame DI.  I think most of Wes's films are desaturated and I think that's an aesthetic choice.

apparently this isn't opening too wide...........it looks like it's not showing around here
=(

Look for the 25th, not the 24th.  It doesn't start Friday like most movies do.  That's what had me confused at first.

yeah, i did. what pisses me off is that the paper's online entertainment section has a review of the movie. i'm guessing they just get it from a national news service since i believe I Heart Huckabees was reviewed and it never came here.

The Life Aquatic: Out to Sea With Team Zissou
Source: Coming Soon.net December 22, 2004

For The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou, Wes Anderson's fourth film, the director crafted a high seas adventure starring Bill Murray as an acclaimed oceanographer hunting the legendary "jaguar shark" that killed his friend. Along for this quest is his newly discovered son Ned Plimpton, played by Owen Wilson, an actor whose career has been linked to Anderson's both as writing partner and actor, since his first movie Bottle Rocket. (Murray has also worked extensively with the director, appearing in his last two films.) This film had a few new variables, such as actors Willem Dafoe and Jeff Goldblum, but for the first time, Anderson collaborated with two other filmmakers, writing it with indie director Noah Baumbach and using the stop motion animation of Henry Selick to bring the sea creatures to life.

ComingSoon.net talked to Anderson and his collaborators both old and new about every aspect of this very unique movie. (Look for our exclusive interview with Selick sometime in the next week.)

How They Came Up With The Idea
Wes Anderson: The germ of the idea was the Cousteau stuff from TV that I watched growing up. Jane Goodall, National Geographic specials, Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom and all those hero scientists we don't have too many of any more. The name Zissou comes from this French photographer Jacques Henri Lartigue, one of my favorite photographers. His brother was nicknamed "Zissou," and he was this amazing inventor around the turn of the century who built airplanes and little cars that would go downhill and things for going under water. [Lartigue] took some of his most beautiful photographs of him with his crazy inventions that worked or didn't work. I just liked the spirit of that character.
Noah Baumbach: When we first started talking, he kept referring to a short story he had written, and I didn't know what was he talking about. I think it was basically a paragraph. From what I remember, it was the idea of an oceanographer who had a show called "The Life Aquatic With Steve Cocteau." He was showing me his notebook and it had things like "birds fly around house" and the cross-section of the boat. He always had that idea, which I loved. We had already been working together because I had written a script based on my childhood, and he really liked the script and came on as a producer for that. I was going to direct, so he was helping me cut it down and focus it.


Steve Zissou And Ned Plimpton
Bill Murray: [Wes's characters] don't have any controls on them, especially this fellow I play. He doesn't have any censors that say the next thing you're going to say might be bad behavior, so you might want to hold that back. He just sort of lets go, and all the emotions are expressed. That's kind of fun to play. You don't get to do that in life that often, since you're supposed to obey some rules of politeness or respect. We don't have time for that in the movies. People try to make characters like this all the time and they usually fail. I'm just surprised to hear that it's based on me. Some of the lines in the script I've actually said, but (Zissou) has some good qualities.
Baumbach: I think we always knew that we could push the character really far in terms of we didn't have to worry in a lot of cases about him being likeable. I think what was a real pleasure knowing that Bill Murray was going to do it, was that you can push a lot of things, because I think he's so innately sympathetic as an actor. That was the main thing.
Owen Wilson: When I got the script, I didn't really see myself as this character, because he seemed sort of like a straight man and very sort of sincere and kind of innocent. When I went to meet with Wes in Rome and started working on it. We came up with making him more of a Southern gentleman, so then he became more fun for me to play.

Anderson's New Writing Partner
Baumbach: I didn't think about it beforehand, just because Wes and I have been friends, and the collaboration came out of our getting to know each other and our dinners together. I think that's probably why we wrote the movie in an Italian restaurant, because it was a way to fool ourselves into working, because we were used to meeting there anyway to hang out. I knew Owen a little bit through Wes, but it sort of felt like a whole other thing. I never felt like I was replacing anybody.
Anderson: To me the tone is pretty similar to the other movies that Owen and I did together, but I think the fact that it's an adventure, and there's a pirate attack and bigger things, that sort of makes a shift. But I still feel like the characters in this movie could walk into one of the other movies that I've done or vice versa in a way that they wouldn't be very comfortable walking into somebody else's movie.
Wilson: It's hard for me to see a huge difference, maybe because I'm too close to it. So I read the script and I didn't miss my voice in it. It seemed like he didn't miss a beat with Noah, and I thought they did a good job.
Baumbach: The way Wes and I wrote, we came up with everything together right in front of each other. We didn't write separately and bring it together like how I hear other people collaborate. So by the time it was finished, it really felt like a crushed version of both of us. To me, when I saw the movie, it felt very much like what we wrote, but it also felt like a Wes Anderson movie to me.
Anderson: In a way, because we always had Owen in mind because we were writing for him. We had a character, and we knew he was going to play a big role, so I was always conscious of him being involved.
Baumbach: I always knew that Wes was going to make the movie, so I went into it with the idea to contribute to what was going to be very much his world. The concept of using an oceanographer was his. It was a movie that I was never going to come up with myself, so it was great to be able to participate that way. We're both very polite, so it was always very passive/aggressive but in the end, we lived with it so long, we both had a pretty good idea what we thought should be in there.

Writing In An Italian Restaurant
Anderson: It's our neighborhood place, and they don't mind us taking over the back table and staying there all day long, so they let us have it as an office, rent-free.
Baumbach: We used the restaurant as much as possible, but I guess we did keep office hours. A lot of the fish are named after items in the menu, and there was a photo of Florence, which we'd stare at.

Improvisation
Baumbach: What is really great with what Wes does is that he casts a lot of actors who, in a lot of cases, improvise in other movies and have this chaotic spirit as actors, but when they're in his movies, they really stick to the material. There's something in that sort of conflict that really works great.
Anderson: One thing that came from Bill was where he points a gun at the pregnant reporter. That wasn't in the script. In fact, he did it when he was off screen, and I just saw something coming from the bottom of the frame on the monitor, a little black thing, and I didn't know what it was but then I realized. 'Did you just point that gun at a pregnant woman?'


Shooting Such A Big Movie
Anderson: I never felt daunted by it, because I always felt like it gave me some sense of purpose. I had a lot of things to figure out, and that's like a chance to come up with some new ideas. If I had known what it really was going to be like, I would have been very daunted. Most of the movie is the same as the other movies I've done-- two people talk in one room, and then these two people talk in another room, and then maybe we get three for a scene, and then we're back to two, and then a couple of times in the movie there's a whole bunch of them--they all just have these different conversations. In the case of this movie, every now and then a scene happens under water or they are talking with their helmets on or something like that. The scene we do have with them underwater having a conversation could very easily have happened in some lobby somewhere. It has nothing to do with being underwater. The thing with this one was that I never filmed on a sound stage before. It's about building all of these huge sets. We built this compound next to this castle and we renovated this ship that we bought in South Africa, and they were just huge things to do. The other thing that was new for me was that there was another unit going on in San Francisco doing this animation, and I've never had somebody working somewhere else making part of the movie. Each of those things was just a separate problem to deal with and I learned all kinds of new things but it wasn't ever a change in my approach to how the movie's going to be made. It's just new problems to deal with.
Murray: I knew we were going to Italy-you couldn't make this movie in America at this price-- and I knew it was going to be big. I knew there was going to be a ship involved as well as a set as big as the ship. I knew that was where he was headed, because he had been going this way for some time. All directors, once they have some success, want to spend a whole heck of a lot of money.
Wilson: I don't see a big change, at least in the way Wes directs. I think maybe he gets more confidence and a bigger budget and more time to shoot, so he has more time to get things exactly the way he wants it. The way he directed me in "Bottle Rocket" is not that different from the way he did it in "Life Aquatic". It's always been pretty consistent.
Baumbach: Wes is incredibly precise and specific, and there's this idea that he knows exactly what he wants. He doesn't know it going into it but he knows when he sees it. The writing process, we really built it out of nothing like putting one thing in front of another, we knew sometimes what we were going to get, but even with a precision and specificity in a way knowing somewhere in him what kind of movie he wanted to make. He also had no idea what kind of movie he was going to make and neither did I. I think that's what makes it so unusual, too. What I love about the movie is that it's not like anything. You can't compare it to anything whether you like it or not. I think a lot of that really did come from out of thin air.

The Ensemble Cast
Murray: It was like a family on the set; we were stuck with each other. You really do bond and have to look out for each other, because making movies is far more dangerous than people appreciate, and being at sea on a ship is even more dangerous.
Wilson: We would work out together a lot. (laughs). No, how do you work on your chemistry? I think it was just going along with what the script called for. It wasn't that we did so much bonding outside of work. In fact, we never really hung out that much. [Bill] really had to work a lot because he was in almost every single scene, so there was probably a little resentment that I had left. I saw him not too long ago, and said, "God, don't you miss Rome? I loved it." He was like, "No, I don't." He had to work his ass off there, and I had more time to enjoy it.

Murray's Misery
Murray: I was physically and emotionally drained after it, not just from the work. It was a torturous experience to be away from home for that long, so I hated going to work. Personally, I was so miserable, that it was really a challenge to work every day because I was so lonely and missed my folks so much. It was what like I imagined being in prison is like. And the weather was miserable. You don't think of Italy as anything but sunny, picking a grape and lying on a hillside, but it got bone-cold out on the Mediterranean, shooting at night. You got cold like nobody's business, colder than I've ever been in Chicago.
Anderson: [Bill] has to go through his own process, because I have so much I have to deal with. I just worry about what is going to happen in the scenes, and he's always there in the scenes. He did get cold, and he worked every day of the movie, and it was kind of brutal for him, but also, he loves being in Rome. It's almost a shtick now about how miserable he was in the movie, but I was there and I saw him have some amazing times. He brought that onto the set almost every day of the shoot and there are worse tortures than going to Italy for six months.


Those Portuguese Bowie Songs
Anderson: Well, Bowie's one of my favorites, and I've never used him in a movie, so I just thought I was going to have a bunch of songs that were going to be sung by one of the characters on the deck of the ship. It seemed like Bowie was the best bet.
Baumbach: At one point, the Zissou team was less international, but once we came up with this international flavor and made [the character] be Pele, we said we should keep the Bowie. None of us could have imagined that it would have turned out as well as it did and that he would actually be a pop star in Brazil. I don't think Wes even cast him knowing how well he played guitar at that point, so that worked out great. But that was written into the script as just a line: "Another David Bowie song is played."
Anderson: Bowie's heard them and he said he loved them. I never spoke to him, but a friend of mine heard him on the radio talking about a "top secret project" in which a fellow sings some of his songs in Portuguese and it's "very interesting." That's the only report I've heard.

That Unwieldy Title
Baumbach: That's the name of his show. We called it "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" the whole time and then, I kept seeing it referred to as "The Life Aquatic" and I assumed someone somewhere thought it should be changed. Then I saw it came back, so I was glad, because it seems not like the title of a movie.
Anderson: Somewhere along the way, people got the impression that the title had been changed, but it never was. They were just simplifying it in press releases and stuff, but I never wanted to change the title because it's probably safe to say it's kind of a terrible title in and of itself. Any time anybody asked me what the movie was called, ever since we were first writing it and decided that's what it's called, I was reluctant to say, because people are not sure what to make of it. I do feel like it can be a good title once it's connected to the movie and it's set. It's just a title that's hard. It doesn't serve the purpose of grabbing people when they know nothing about the movie.

Bill Murray Sports Tiny Trunks for Film

Bill Murray's choice of swimwear in his new movie leaves little to the imagination. But the star of "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" says he wasn't embarrassed to be seen in a tiny bathing suit.

"Being in a Speedo with other men in Speedos, you know, is like you're on a swimming team," he told reporters at a recent interview. "It's the other men that are not in Speedos that are the problem because they're kind of going, 'Can you get a load of the guy in the Speedo?'"

The 54-year-old actor said he didn't see his character being physically vain.

"I like to say I made the acting choice to have a little bit of a belly. I could've gotten really in shape, but I didn't think Steve Zissou would be a guy who would be completely buff," he said. "I actually had to get a little out of shape."

hallelujah, this is showing 40 miles away!!

i saw this and it was good

Quote from: NEON MERCURYi saw this and it was good

yeah

Quote from: peteFilms have lost their integrity through all sorts of chemical processes and transfers, super 35 and anamorphic included, it's a generational thing, I don't really think you can blame DI.

this statement doesnt make sense to me -- can you explain... how are the anamorphic and super 35 processes lacking integrity? -- also super 35 and anamorphic have nothing to do with chemical processing/transfering.

Quote from: NEON MERCURYi saw this and it was good

This has been seconded.

or perhaps thirded since sleuth seconded it firsted.

Quote from: ranemaka13

Quote from: NEON MERCURYi saw this and it was good

This has been seconded.

or perhaps thirded since sleuth seconded it firsted.

i enjoyed it.
totally worth the 15+ minute wait in line in the cold.
i shall read all of your thoughts that i've been avoiding as not to spoil the film.

Quote from: cowboykurtis

Quote from: peteFilms have lost their integrity through all sorts of chemical processes and transfers, super 35 and anamorphic included, it's a generational thing, I don't really think you can blame DI.

this statement doesnt make sense to me -- can you explain... how are the anamorphic and super 35 processes lacking integrity? -- also super 35 and anamorphic have nothing to do with chemical processing/transfering.

super35 requires a processing of some sort, usually back into matted anamorphic, in order for it to play in the theaters.  they don't lack integrity, they LOSE integrity when transferred.  happens all the time, everywhere.

this was some good shit.  my favourite wes anderson movie.  yes, shocking to say but this one really hit me.

I might need another watching of this, it just didnt connect with me like his other films have first time around, as i was watching it i kept telling myself that the writing seemed to be off, lack of wilson? perhaps, i was let down.

okay, i saw this for the second time last night and i think i felt about the same about it.  it doesnt always work, but there is enough good stuff there to make it worthwhile.  so even as a misfire, i think its pretty great.

I really gotta stop coming here and reading posts about the movie before I see it. My problem is that I'm addicted to the insight and always feel the need to share it with others because I feel it will make their cinematic experiance more enjoyable with the knowledge.
But now of course I'm gonna be looking for 'what doesn't work' in the film which will no doubt spoil my enjoyment.

Spoilers Major One!!!!!!


So i was reading on another board that they see a guy standing on the boat at the very end, possibly Ned, so their thinking is that Steve faked Ned dying (which was already hinted at thoughout the movie of Steve making things up) in efect bringing back his fame because this last film was so good, what do yall think?

you know, i never found Cate Blanchett to be attractive, but she's dang pretty as a pregnant woman.

SPOILERS GALORE




how do you fake a helicopter crash? there are too many elements that could go wrong. i thought it was brilliant how we think Ned is dead, then he speaks so we think he's alive, then you see the spot of blood on the camera and then the red water. anyways, a lot of the time i was thinking maybe Steve was making most of it up. the part with the glowing jellyfish on the beach that announces CAte Blanchett's entrance seemed like they were making something up for one of his films, but i think it was just Wes going for cheap 60's fake movie looking props. and the jaguar shark turned out to be real as well. i guess that's part of the movie.........is Steve faking it or are his adventures real?

i agree with mod.  no rushmore or tenenbaums, but enjoyable overall.  i'd like to think of it as a pleasant bridge from his last great film to his next one.

So that's what happens when you remove Owen Wilson from the writting equation. I have to say, as I was watching, I couldn't help thinking I was disappointed. Then, in the car ride back with my sister, she hated it, and in defending it, I realized that I liked it.

Its really interesting to see what Anderson brings and what Wilson brings. If they had collaborated again, it would have been funnier and those awkward moments would have been hysterical. But, its nice to see that Anderson is responsible for all the really poignant moments.

Spoilers:
Obviously, the visual style was great (i.e. props). It took me a while to accept the editing, but it worked if you think that its edited like a '70s documentary.As for the sequence where they walk all over the ship and the camera 'goes through the walls' (obviously because its just a set) was amazing. I could barely contain my glee that he didn't even try to make it realistic. And the fact that every single scientific thing they say is completely fabricated bullshit was good. My mother keeps saying she wants to see this because she really loved Jacque Cousteau as a kid, but in many ways its a mock of Cousteau. If Zissou had been actually interested and knowledgeable in the science, he would have been a character based on Cousteau. This works much better (course I think he still is based on cousteau, but whatever). Loved the closing credits, too. I like closing credits that show you something without showing you anything (other than establishing that Zissou continues on with his adventures)

I'm really POed cause the theatre I was in had fucked up sound, so it kept switiching to mono the whole time, which made the music unbearable to listen to cause it would burst your eardrums. But I really enjoyed the sequences where the sound would muffle out, like the gunfights, etc. It really added to the emotion, even though it was ridiculous. How many bullets did he have?
I still think Tennenbaums was his best, but this was good.

EDIT: oh, and too bad the dialogue wasn't as snappy. 'You wanna talk some jive?'...classic.

i liked it. it's not tenenbaums, but i liked it. willem stole the show. and the whole "Steve, you're rescuing me? FOLD!" and then BAM! that was classic.

I liked it too. I'll admit, it's not the best film of the year or anything, and it's no Tenenbaums, but I liked it a lot.

Yeah, strangely enough it's not Tenenbaums, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.

This is the first Wes Anderson film I've ever felt emotions throughout, and the amazing overshadowed any of the awkward, which I found to be only in 1 or 2 spots overall.

I think Cate Blanchett was great because it was like she was taking a break but added shades to the character impulsively.

As for the action scenes, where most people say  :elitist: I said  :bravo: . Fuckin cool.

Not to mention this has some of the best laughs of any of the movies.  Already looking forward to Wes' next departure.

I EFING loved this movie!

SPOILERIFIC
when the helicopiter goes down, didn't the editing remind you of the cuts during the suicide scene in Tenenbaums? Same when the intern gets stabbed by the pirate with music only and no sound, echoes the scn. in Tenenbaums when the boy finds Richie on the bathroom floor after he's slashed his wrists. Wonderful moments.
END

ANyway, not really at all understanding why some of you here, especially fans of Wes were dissapointed. It was all so good. So funny and really quite magical.

saw it christmas, liked it but easily my least fav of his films.

and don't get me wrong, some of it was brilliant.  i loved the action sequence on the island and not to mention the crazy boat set.

just felt like there was no heart in it, there were times when i was choked up in tennenbaums and rushmore; even bottle rocket had a reflexive ending.  maybe the actors didn't give a shit as much i don't know, but it didn't feel like they were as real characters as the other films.  the classic slow mo shot at the end didn't have the punch that rushmore and tennenbaums had.  i think this is the case because i really didn't care about the characters.

i think the boroque thing might be playing itself out too.  i'll pick it up for sure on dvd but i'm a little worried how thin he'll spread himself in the future.

shit, just thought of that shot were murray is shooting the gun and then runs into the room.  i laughed myself silly.

Quote from: pete

Quote from: cowboykurtis

Quote from: peteFilms have lost their integrity through all sorts of chemical processes and transfers, super 35 and anamorphic included, it's a generational thing, I don't really think you can blame DI.

this statement doesnt make sense to me -- can you explain... how are the anamorphic and super 35 processes lacking integrity? -- also super 35 and anamorphic have nothing to do with chemical processing/transfering.

super35 requires a processing of some sort, usually back into matted anamorphic, in order for it to play in the theaters.  they don't lack integrity, they LOSE integrity when transferred.  happens all the time, everywhere.

there is no matte in anamorphic, that's the whole idea of anamorphic.  it's a lens thing, lens on the camera vertically stretches the 2.35 image to 1.33 so it fits on super 35 appurature (which is 1.33).  then the projector takes that scrunched up image and pulls it back out sideways to 2.35 for the theatre.

processing is all about the contrast ratio and film speed.  the only problem you get with anamorphic is the focus pulling is a nightmare and when you rack focus you can see a slight distortion in image.  check out an anamorphic 2.35 image and you'll see what i mean if you don't know already.

though if a film is matted back for an old theater, if they don't have anamorphic lenses, i guess you're right; never thought of that.  i'm pretty sure most modern theaters do have the lenses though.

-sl-

go back to one of my other posts for talk about some clever editing.

the theatre i went must not have been projecting it quite right because when there were some titles in the bottom left i couldn't quite read them.

Quote from: mutinycoThis just isn't good. It's in the realm of Hudson Hawk.

This statement is completely false by the way.
Why did you think it was so bad? And did you dig any of the humor or any of it aside from production design?
People keep saying things like "it doesn't work" but how so? I thought it worked just fine and was in tune with it's format and what it was trying to achieve and all that.

So much to love here that I'm upset about not having noticed the first time.  There are few things as endearing, funny, and beautiful as Bill Murray holding a model saying, "Let me tell you about my boat" (by the way that shot reminded me of the picture Buster Keaton gives his girlfriend in The General), or when he goes on talking about it and says that he thought up one of its feautres in a dream.  The innocence I've appreciated in his previous films is here in full force, not as accesible or even as subtle but more potent and beautiful than ever.  The jaguar shark scene just might be my favorite moment in any Wes Anderson film ever.

Seeing this a second time proved to be a solution to what I've been wondering about the film ever since I saw it last month, and that was whether or not his departure from his normal style was good or not.  The Life Aquatic is an undeniably lesser film than his previous works in terms of structure; it's his most uneven film.  The middle section does drag and yes, it does meander, does get overly whimsical, is a little too clever for its own good, and isn't as tightly constructed as his other films, which I was expecting from this one.  His other three films all benefit from a sense of great preparation, where every shot and every cut was calculated beforehand resulting in meticulousy crafted, fine pieced of cinema.  

As obvious as a parallel as this may be, Wes is, at this point, like Zissou in the film; through cinema he is trying to show us something that has, until this point been exclusive to him.  There's Robert Bresson quote ("Make visible what, without you, might perhaps never have been seen.") that I think Anderson is now striving to do as an artist.  Zissou in the film is the only one who had seen the jaguar shark and spends the film in pursuit of it, at first to kill it but you get the sense by the time they see the shark that he never wanted to kill it, just see it again and show it to other people, that his tenacity and all the trouble he went through was founded in a desire to share something.  Why else make a film about it?

Zissou isn't perfect in his pursuit for the shark and neither is Anderson, but in making such an uneven, flawed film, the poem "Delight in Disorder" by Robert Herrick comes to mind; Anderson breaking away from his own conventions and the expectations of just about everyone is exciting, a brave search for self and expanding his capabilities as a filmmaker.  That or it just seems that way.  For all I know this was an easier film to make than his previous three works because it's so personal (this is his most personal film).  What I was once unsure about I am now confident -- Wes Anderson's departure is without a doubt a good, if not great thing resulting in what I honestly think is his best film despite its flaws.  Those who stick around and dilligently follow Anderson with his imperfections like I did the second time watching this will be greatly rewarded.  The climax that I once found strangely poignant is now one of the most deeply resonant and moving moments in all of the films I've seen this year and it left me in tears.

What this all comes down to is that I was wrong the first time and absolute adore this movie with every fiber of my being.

Quote from: POZER

Quote from: mutinycoThis just isn't good. It's in the realm of Hudson Hawk.

This statement is completely false by the way.
Why did you think it was so bad? And did you dig any of the humor or any of it aside from production design?
People keep saying things like "it doesn't work" but how so? I thought it worked just fine and was in tune with it's format and what it was trying to achieve and all that.

he won't be able to answer you anymore; he's done with this board.

Hudson Hawk Schmudson Schmawk.  

Despite the tightness of Tenenbaums and Rushmore, I think that led to their emotions not hitting home for me.  Real life is slower and more freed up, and there was so much unexpected stuff in this movie.  Great!!! I love alot of moments in Wes Anderson films, but this is the first one I almost cried watching.  And the



MAJOR FUCKING END-OF-THE-MOVIE TYPE-SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS!!!!




part with Klaus' nephew and the uniform "joining the team" was such a surprise even though it's in the previews.
The red and white full screen during the copter crash was pretty visually brilliant if you ask me, almost like Kubrick.
And maybe this is a movie about Wes Anderson not always going to do the same thing over and over again.  I mean, when all the Wes Fans saw the slow-mo and thought "no way! this can't be IT!" we soon found out there was MORE! A regularly-paced ending.  Yah, that's new!
After all, "This is the Adventure."





END O' SPOILAHS!!!!



So Far, I like Bottle Rocket and The Life Aquatic the best.  They're worlds apart but I think they're Wes Anderson's freshest works.
Shoot me with your Rushmore/Tenenbaum arrows and watch them bounce off me!


Now just wait for the next PT Anderson movie to come out and watch me write praise all over that board.

ENDING SPOILERS AHEAD:

No one's pointed this out yet, but I thought it was funny how the ending credit sequence, with everyone stepping in behind/alongside Steve as they walk to the Belafonte, was an "Buckaroo Bonzai" homage (minus the choreography, plus Jeff Goldblum).  First time that's happened.

Of course... Buckaroo Bonzai... good catch

I really liked this one, not much to say that hasn't been said... I feel it's the weakest of his films (yes, including Bottle Rocket whoever just said that!), but still great.

It does worry me that he's losening the connection between stylistic tricks like the music cues and the actual story.

Spoils:

Ned is dead, they weren't filming his death and we watched him die.

I loved the movie, because it had as much Wes Anderson as any of his other movies, but...



LOTS OF EXTREME SPOILERS



Guns and CGI in a Wes Anderson movie is just wrong. I felt like those scenes should have been more theatrical (and less cinematic) like Max Fischer's Serpico production or something. The CGI creatures really took me out of the movie. At least they looked like claymation instead of George Lucas animation, but in the end I'd rather not see fake invented fishes in a Wes Anderson movie. The shark is enough.

But I still loved the movie. I thought it was going to end for the last 45 minutes. This movie is possibly the least predictable Wes Anderson movie, which is really amazing when you think about it, because it's a revenge movie, it's a father/son movie, it's a mid-life crisis movie, and it's a washed-up idol movie. It should be predictable.

I think this is the kind of movie you have to see twice, because it needs to be seen with the plot out of the way.

There were definitely shades of Royal Tenenbaum in Steve Zissou. Do Gene Hackman and Bill Murray have just different interpretations of the same character? (remember the "sinking battleship" thing?)

The scene with the coffin sinking in front of Angelica Houston is the greatest moment of the movie... I almost cried when I saw that.

but there were guns in both bottle rocket and rushmore!  plus, it wasn't CGI, it was claymation or something, right?
I met Owen Wilson's aunt today.  She came into my movie theater.  I commended Owen's performance in Pluto Nash and Shanghai Knights, ESPECIALLY Shanghai Knights.  she laughed.  sorry for the lame story.

There is no CGI in this film.  It is all stop-motion provided by the guy that did Nightmare Before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach.

*Spoilers*










My favorite shot was the stockfootage, shown after Ned's death, of wilson and murrey pointing their fingers to the left of the screen, Bottle Rocket cover style (it's weird b/c I have always hated that cover.)

SPOILERS

Quote from: petebut there were guns in both bottle rocket and rushmore!

But they were like theatrical props. There wasn't like death and murder and stuff or serious cinematic violent action. Like the moment when Jeff Goldblum was shot... that was disturbing. And I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's just different. Actually I would love to see a really violent Wes Anderson movie... it would be mindblowingly surreal.

Quote from: peteplus, it wasn't CGI, it was claymation or something, right?

Alright, let's call it animation. It had about half the feeling of CGI, which was enough to take me out of the movie. But really, all the silly fish they created, it's just not worth it (aside from the shark).

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Alright, let's call it animation. It had about half the feeling of CGI, which was enough to take me out of the movie. But really, all the silly fish they created, it's just not worth it (aside from the shark).

Really? I thought they were nice touches. It worked with this type of movie and I found myself smiling everytime it appeared.

Quote from: POZER

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Alright, let's call it animation. It had about half the feeling of CGI, which was enough to take me out of the movie. But really, all the silly fish they created, it's just not worth it (aside from the shark).

Really? I thought they were nice touches. It worked with this type of movie and I found myself smiling everytime it appeared.

I liked them too.  They put an emphasis on the childlike sense of innocence and imagination that Anderson seemed to be going for.  That and they were just amusing in and of themselves not to mention visually pleasing... not in a distracting way, either.  They're like visual details that serve the same purpose as Zissou saying, "Let me tell you about my boat" as if it were show-and-tell.

SPOILER



was the mating crab thing supposed to be a joke? it looked to me like one killed the other.

SPOILERS HERE TOO!!!!

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanSPOILERS

Quote from: petebut there were guns in both bottle rocket and rushmore!

But they were like theatrical props. There wasn't like death and murder and stuff or serious cinematic violent action. Like the moment when Jeff Goldblum was shot... that was disturbing. And I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's just different. Actually I would love to see a really violent Wes Anderson movie... it would be mindblowingly surreal.

I read an article somewhere in which Anderson said people ask him why he doesn't go for anything violent in his movies, and he responded by saying he's seen enough of those movies and just wasn't interested in doin it at the time.  I have to say that the violence seemed quite effective in genuinely scaring people during the movie.

My friend said that he would rather the Jag Shark pick up and eat people during the course of the movie, and I told him that would have made the movie S-U-C-K.  We've seen that kind of shit enough!!!
And besides, that's not what the movie was about.

Speaking of surreal, and mindblowingly...I kinda think this movie WAS =D

As for theCrabThing  I think it was supposed to be a little symbolic of what was happening between Eleanor and Steve.  There's alot of looking to nature in this film as something simple and amazing and relatable.
I reallly love that swimming lizard =D


Again, Bravo, Loved Every Second of This Movie, Hope I Will Again The End

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI'd rather not see fake invented fishes in a Wes Anderson movie.

Oh, wow, I'd really have to disagree.  Just saw the film tonight, so I'm still feeling a little bit of the rush from it, but I was hooked the moment Bill Murray carried the rainbow-colored seahorse away in a champagne glass.  That was so beautiful it almost hurt.

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanThe scene with the coffin sinking in front of Angelica Houston is the greatest moment of the movie... I almost cried when I saw that.

But there, I agree with you.  That was so effing poetic, I got a little choked up myself.

2LB

SPOILER

You know which scene makes me laughthe most evertime I think of it. When everyone is upset with Zissou and they're expressing their feelings and Klouse says he thinks they have him pegged wrong, then he leaves and his head quickly pops up through that porthole like window on the door.
Godbless that Willem Dafoe.

Just saw this and just, wow, look at that first streak of blood that comes in the wave after the crash. If cinema was a knife stabbing the audience this is what it would feel like and it did. More painful perhaps than any single moment I've ever seen in a movie.

yeah, i love that. i talked about it a few pages back but noone was interested. there are quite a bit of theories going on at the Yankee Racers board.

What and where is the Yankee Racer's board? Clearly a Wes fan page, but a link maybe? Thanks.

ah, my hood:
http://p210.ezboard.com/byankeeracers33503

He's the other Steve Zissou
A New York lawyer was 'a little annoyed' to share his name with the title character in 'The Life Aquatic.'
Source: Chicago Tribune

In the end credits of Wes Anderson's "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," there's an acknowledgement that Steve Zissou (played by Bill Murray) is a real person.

No, it's not a joke.

Though writer-director Anderson ("The Royal Tenenbaums," "Rushmore") made the name up, the script clearance department at Buena Vista Pictures found a real Steve Zissou. That Zissou is a criminal trial lawyer based in Bay Side, N.Y., not a burned-out underwater explorer.

"When I found out it was part of the title, I was a little annoyed. It's a unique name, and I really didn't want to share it," says Zissou, 49, but he observes he had few legal options because Anderson's film wasn't directly about him.

"They could have made a movie about a New York lawyer who was an anti-Semitic terrorist pedophile, and I still couldn't do anything about it," Zissou says. "If it's about the real Steve Zissou, then maybe you have a shot, but then you have to prove damages."

Perhaps to be on the safe side, the movie studio negotiated with Zissou over use of his distinctive name. He declines to answer questions about the agreement's confidential terms except to say he is acknowledged as a New York attorney in the film credits.

T. Ernest Freeman, a Houston-based entertainment attorney, says obtaining permissions "really gets down to due diligence."

"The question is, if it's a private citizen, would the person whose name is being used be readily identifiable? It's a subjective test applied to the movie," Freeman says.

Case in point: More than 11 years after Richard Linklater's cult hit "Dazed and Confused" opened in theaters, a trio of Texans (Andy Slater, Bobby Wooderson, Richard "Pink" Floyd) is suing the filmmaker and Universal Studios Inc. for "defamation" and "negligent infliction of emotional distress." The suit claims that Linklater did not obtain permission to use the names of former high school acquaintances in his film.

Freeman, representing the plaintiffs in that litigation, says that in the case of Steve Zissou, New York attorney, the studio's legal department was probably playing it safe. "Any diligent studio would make sure there wouldn't be a problem."

Despite his original discomfort at the thought of his name being used, "it's been, to my surprise, a lot of fun," Zissou says. "And I think Bill Murray is America's greatest living actor."

Quote from: UltrahipMore painful perhaps than any single moment I've ever seen in a movie.

i hope you're kidding

wait, i just realized something - where was kumar?

Quote from: UltrahipJust saw this and just, wow, look at that first streak of blood that comes in the wave after the crash. If cinema was a knife stabbing the audience this is what it would feel like and it did. More painful perhaps than any single moment I've ever seen in a movie.

true, i felt the whole scene kind of came out of left field though.  anderson should have built it up a bit more.  Deus ex machina if you ask me.

-sl-

Quote from: socketlevel

Quote from: UltrahipJust saw this and just, wow, look at that first streak of blood that comes in the wave after the crash. If cinema was a knife stabbing the audience this is what it would feel like and it did. More painful perhaps than any single moment I've ever seen in a movie.

true, i felt the whole scene kind of came out of left field though.  anderson should have built it up a bit more.  Deus ex machina if you ask me.

-sl-

I think the fact that the helicopter wasn't taken very good care of was set up pretty well on Steve's island.

Quote from: Ultrahiptrue, i felt the whole scene kind of came out of left field though.  anderson should have built it up a bit more.  Deus ex machina if you ask me.

POSSIBLE SPOILERS

I'm undecided on that part...  on the one hand, a LOT of things happened with only a slight bit of set-up (pirates come to mind).  

On the other hand, I'm not even sure why Ned had to die, even though it gave us the great drifting coffin moment, mentioned upthread.  I only saw the movie two days ago, so I'm still working through it.  I'm assuming his death was meant to affect some final change in Steve's character...  but I think I need to see it again, knowing what's coming, so that I can see what that change is.

2LB

Quote from: UncleJoey

Quote from: socketlevel

Quote from: UltrahipJust saw this and just, wow, look at that first streak of blood that comes in the wave after the crash. If cinema was a knife stabbing the audience this is what it would feel like and it did. More painful perhaps than any single moment I've ever seen in a movie.

true, i felt the whole scene kind of came out of left field though.  anderson should have built it up a bit more.  Deus ex machina if you ask me.

-sl-

I think the fact that the helicopter wasn't taken very good care of was set up pretty well on Steve's island.

oh yeah i forgot about that.  i guess he did have it backed up logistically.  thematically, it just kinda felt like, oh cue the death scene, we need some drama.  he could of thought of a better set up.  like if they were on an adventure, like trying to kill the fish and they confronted it, then owen's character died because of that.  it would be more emotional pull.

-sl-

possible spoiler

but did you think richie's suicide scene or dignan getting dissed by futureman were set up better?  I don't think the tragedy was suppose to move you that much anyways (and tragedies in Wes Anderson's films are never that sad--it's the reaction to the tragedy that he's interested in), the death itself was a set up for the final confrontation with the shark, when Ned's death made Steve no longer vengeful or crazy.  I think the payoff was when Steve said if he wondered the shark remembers him and everyone put their hand on his shoulders.

I'm a big fan of the movie and I think that Richie's suicide in Tenenbaums was set up much better. His troubles and emotions were felt in every scene he appeared in and when the moment came, it felt painful and right. I saw Life Aquatic twice and didn't really notice the Klouse is supposed to inspect the helicoptor every six months or whatever reference the first time around. but when it became aware on second viewing, it did feel pretty weak after knowing what was to come. Too quick and underdevloped even for a Wes Anderson movie. That doesn't mean it's not still a beautiful scene, but the flaws became more irrelevent to me apon second viewing.

Let's not forget that this was an accident. It's supposed to come as a surprise. As an accident, it's set up perfectly. Any more foreshadowing would have been silly. You can't really compare this tragedy to the ones in the other films because those involve human behavior and emotions, while this one was purely mechanical (aided by human negligence).  Like Pete said, it's the reaction to the tragedy that is most important to the film's narrative.

Quote from: peteI think the payoff was when Steve said if he wondered the shark remembers him and everyone put their hand on his shoulders.

This is kinda what I thought, but as I said, I really need to see it again since it all just took me by surprise the first time around.  

2LB

do you feel the box office performance will have any effect on wes' next attempt? i think it's safe to say that this movie bombed financially. i think its only made 4 million in its first two weeks.

any thoughts?

it probably will effect Wes in some way. not too much, but royal tenenbaums more or less doubled it's budget in grosses and I doubt Aquatic will do that, even though it should.

I think Wes already kinda sees the poor performance coming, since he's been kinda smug in the interviews, talking about how he liked Huckabees because Huckabees wasn't afraid to alienate half of its viewers to please the other half...and Anjelica Huston in an interview said that you have to be smart to appreciate the movie...etc.  I think it'll just make Wes more smug.

Quote from: cowboykurtisi think its only made 4 million in its first two weeks.

But weren't the first two weeks when it only played in LA and NY?

Quote from: cowboykurtisdo you feel the box office performance will have any effect on wes' next attempt? i think it's safe to say that this movie bombed financially. i think its only made 4 million in its first two weeks.

any thoughts?

yes.  i think it'll probably hurt his ego a little bit, although i think as pete said he probably saw it coming.  his next film will probably be a little less out-there and try to win back some (mainstream) audience.  but i was also thinking (and more concerned) with him being able to get disney to give him a decent budget again.  it seems like they're not going to be too happy for losing them atleast 30$ million dollars.

OK, maybe this is a reach, but do y'all think a drawn-out, awkward title like "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou" hurts word-of-mouth for a movie?  

The few friends I have who've seen it just refer to it as "The Life Aquatic," but that's still harder to say than the names of any of his earlier films.  Are people less likely to mention a movie to their friends if they find the name of it awkward to say?  

2LB

Quote from: MacGuffin

Quote from: cowboykurtisi think its only made 4 million in its first two weeks.

But weren't the first two weeks when it only played in LA and NY?

its been playing 2 weeks nationally --  its made around 4 mil accumulative including the la/ny run -- so essentially its been playing for almost a month now. i definately think disney will be less likely to fund such a large endeavour for wes-- either that or they'll put some larger retraints on him eg. production executives with microscopes - im very suprised by the performance at the box office -- where did the audience go who made tenenbaums a 55million dollar movie? -- the only variable i can consider is that the senior citizen audience was turned off -- when i saw tenenbaums in the theater i can say about 75% of the audience was over the age of 50. when i saw life aquatic there were about 10 walk outs, all of which were senior citizens -- this film's content seems much more "offensive" and less innocent than his previous films -- zissou seemed to have a much more bleek sardonic tone -- for example the second the phrase "bull dyke" was uttered from zissous lips 3 people stood up and walked out -- could be a stretch, but it's the only thing that seems logical.

I think "hard to say" titles is something marketing people made up ENTIRELY, and when I say ENTIRELY I mean the idea about of and the people it supposedly affects.

I thought the movie was doing well, both times I saw it there was a much bigger audience than I expected (at least over 30 people) and only on the second time did a group of four people walk out

What are the exact numbers?

Quote from: Sleuth

What are the exact numbers?

This (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?yr=2004&wknd=53&p=.htm) weekend take was 4.4 millions, total gross so far is $15,418,007 (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=lifeaquatic.htm), my guess is that it'll gross between 25 - 35 mil. tops, if it's the latter I don't think Disney will be that mad about it, sure will do better on dvd.

i stand corrected -- i believe that number is still below expectations

well, I think Disney is doing this just to make Wes happy, really.  The studio is building a relationship with the director, for a long-term investment (especially with the up-and-coming claymation project) so it can afford to lose a little domestically--with the international grosses it'll surely break even.   Plus I think Disney semi-gave up on the project in its release, not pushing the film half as hard as the tenenbaums.  but I don't have a TV so you can correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote from: petepossible spoiler

but did you think richie's suicide scene or dignan getting dissed by futureman were set up better?  I don't think the tragedy was suppose to move you that much anyways (and tragedies in Wes Anderson's films are never that sad--it's the reaction to the tragedy that he's interested in), the death itself was a set up for the final confrontation with the shark, when Ned's death made Steve no longer vengeful or crazy.  I think the payoff was when Steve said if he wondered the shark remembers him and everyone put their hand on his shoulders.

i think richie's suicide was set up perfectly, you first learn how he's in love with his sister to the point of it professionally ruining his life, then you learn how she was a slut the whole time while he was in despair. that's enough to drive anyone mad and suicidal.

in life aquatic, it's just that suddenly owen dies.  if the theme of death somehow was connected to bill murray and owen wilson's characters better, like explore the stuff with his mother more or somehow owen's character could save bill's life more prominantly.  if that was established better, then there is a sense of debt.  the "accident" theory were it should just come out of the blue just because it is in fact is an accident, doesn't gel with me.  that's poor writing, it only ever worked in adaptation because the whole idea of deus ex machina is brought up by brian cox, and therefore the alagator is ironic (or not ironic as the case may be)

i see your point with the final confrontation with the shark.  true, if they had met up with it prior then it wouldn't have as good effect.  i'm just saying that the film needed one or two other scenes, not really knowing what they should be, but knowing the film needed it.  i know the tone of what i'm talking about, not specific scenes.  your right about the pay off with the hands on the shoulder.  I just didn't really feel it.

i find the tragic moments in wes' films catastrophic.  i almost cried like a little girl when ben stiller delivered the line "dad, it's been a rough year."  so far up until that moment i'd been laughing at the very behavior that stiller's character's been producing because of something very tragic, his wife's death.  then when he addresses it directly, and not just reacts like an idiot because of it, my heart went out for the guy.  I think that's my fav scene in any of his films, then Royal puts his hand on his son's shoulder (same act as above but worked better) and says, "I know Chase."  shit man, that's fantastic!  not to mention the music was really amping that scene something fierce!  maybe that scene in aquatic needed better music too; can't really remember it but it wasn't good enough to stand out either.

-sl-

little spoilers for all wes anderson's movies galore

yeah but that's exactly as what I've said before--that was a reaction to Chaz's tragedy.  The plane crash was almost played for laughs when it showed Buckley alone in the mountain, surviving the crash.  Buckley's death was as accidental as Ned's, in many respects.
I was sad when Ned died, I didn't feel cheated, but it was not as moving as the ending.  I don't think Wes foreshadows or builds up the tragedies in his films much, in fact, they're usually played off as dark comedy.  Eg. "so we both have dead people in our family", or the opening sequence in Tenenbaums, or Dignan revealing that he's been fired.  Ritchie's suicide was probably a bad parallel.  Maybe everyone else saw it coming, I dunno.  I also felt like their exchange on the helicopter, when Ned read his original letter to Steve (and that's when you find out what Steve meant when he said "the first answer is always") and that was as strong as their bond's ever been, when the father-son arc completes, that's when Ned dies.  I feel like everything's all there, just underplayed.

Quote from: petelittle spoilers for all wes anderson's movies galore

yeah but that's exactly as what I've said before--that was a reaction to Chaz's tragedy.  The plane crash was almost played for laughs when it showed Buckley alone in the mountain, surviving the crash.  Buckley's death was as accidental as Ned's, in many respects.
I was sad when Ned died, I didn't feel cheated, but it was not as moving as the ending.  I don't think Wes foreshadows or builds up the tragedies in his films much, in fact, they're usually played off as dark comedy.  Eg. "so we both have dead people in our family", or the opening sequence in Tenenbaums, or Dignan revealing that he's been fired.  Ritchie's suicide was probably a bad parallel.  Maybe everyone else saw it coming, I dunno.  I also felt like their exchange on the helicopter, when Ned read his original letter to Steve (and that's when you find out what Steve meant when he said "the first answer is always") and that was as strong as their bond's ever been, when the father-son arc completes, that's when Ned dies.  I feel like everything's all there, just underplayed.

i didn't think i saw it coming with richie's attempted suicide, i just think it was emotionally justified; but not in the case with owen's character.  it doesn't need to be foreshadowed per say, just not surprising either.

interesting points though,  i think i'll go see it again.  i think it might have been my frame of mind.  it just feels like the characters are going through the motions, not living it as with the case with all his other films.  maybe it was an acting thing.  i don't know,  cause i do like it, it is funny.  but i guess that's it, it's more funny then anything else.

i will check it out again for sure.

-sl-

well, this is probably my favorite film of the year. Eternal's pretty close, but I think this will be the film I will keep coming back to year after year.

i got the soundtrack a couple of days ago. it's a lot better than i thought it was going to be. i like Mothersbaugh's use of electronic beats/keyboards (or is it technically Mothersbaugh as Wolardarsky?). it seems this will turn me on to Bowie. i've wanted check him out and this will send me over the edge.

for those with the soundtrack, the computer link was a huge jip wasn't it?
i put it in thinking there would be some exclusive content......
no way
you go to a page and it says something like "thanks for purchasing the soundtrack." then there is a small survey (age/sex/etc). you fill that out and nothing happens. that's it. i'm wondering if this is why they didn't put Staraflur on the CD to make room for that. if so, that's ridiculous.

FEATURE - Anderson, Murray's LIFE Cinematic
Rushmore; The Royal Tenenbaums; The Life Aquatic. Filmmaker Wes Anderson and actor Bill Murray talk very much like collaborators who are just getting started. By Todd Gilchrist, FilmStew.com

In recent years, Bill Murray has revealed a daring secret about his incalculable comedic filmography; namely, that the mush-mouthed silliness of his early films was strictly a crying-on-the-inside kind of clowning. Movies like Rushmore and Lost in Translation, while outwardly humorous, suggest deep reserves of pain that have gone unexplored over decades of filmic fluff, even in bona fide classics such as Ghostbusters and Groundhog Day.

At the same time, Murray’s closest recent collaborator, filmmaker Wes Anderson, has similarly uncovered a glaring truth that amidst his collection of quirky, melancholic films went mysteriously unnoticed: specifically, that behind that poet’s soul hides the mind of a whip-smart stand-up comedian. Bottle Rocket and The Royal Tenenbaums are introspective films both, but they possess a comic timing that frequently rivals the best mainstream buffoonery in the movie business.

Working together, however, seems to best bring out these impulses in both performers, resulting in some of the most inspired and evocative moments in recent cinema. Although The Life Aquatic is only just now about to creep past the $20 million mark at the U.S. box office, and its awards season run so far is limited to a Best Ensemble Cast nod from the Boston Society of Film Critics and three nominations for the International Press Academy’s Golden Satellite Awards, it contains Anderson’s most ambitious work to date as well as some of the most difficult challenges of Bill Murray’s career.

“To me, the tone is pretty similar to the other movies that Owen [Wilson] and I did together,” suggests Anderson during a recent interview in New York with FilmStew. “But I think this one, the fact that it’s an adventure, and that there’s like a pirate attack and some kind of bigger things, that sort of makes a shift.”

In terms of the characters he has created with co-writer and filmmaker Noah Baumbach (Kicking and Screaming), Anderson feels he’s merely adding a new wing as it were to an already well laid out cinematic blueprint. “I still feel like the characters in this movie could walk into one of the other movies that I’ve done, or vice versa, in a way that they probably wouldn’t be very comfortable walking into somebody else’s movie.”

For the notoriously cantankerous Murray, creating that hermetically sealed world proved to be a particularly taxing experience this time around. “I was physically and emotionally drained after it, and not just from the work,” Murray says. “It was a torturous experience to be away from home for that long. I hated going to work. I was so miserable, personally, that it was really a challenge to work everyday, because I was so lonely and missed my folks so much.”

“It was what I imagined being in prison is like.”

That said, Murray explains that he was well aware of the production’s daunting scope long before he went to Italy, where The Life Aquatic was filmed. “I knew that's where I was going,” he says. “You couldn't make this movie in America at this price. I knew it was going to be big.”

“I knew there was going to be a ship involved and that there was going to be a set as big as the ship,” he continues. “I thought, ‘Well, here we go.’”

Describing Anderson’s evolving oeuvre, Murray jokes that the scope of this latest $25 million Scott Rudin production was entirely predictable. “I knew that was where Wes was headed,” deadpans Murray. “All directors, once they have some success, want to spend a whole heck of a lot of money.”

In paying homage to Jacques Cousteau, it wasn’t just a matter for Anderson of naming the boat piloted by Bill Murray’s title character ‘The Belafonte,’ as in Harry Belafonte sings calypso songs and Cousteau’s ship was ‘The Calypso.’ It was also about filming the seafaring scenes against the craggy and authentic backdrop of a place such as the Mediterranean.

“The underwater conversation scene could very easily have happened in some [hotel] lobby or something,” Anderson admits. “It has nothing to do with being underwater. It has to do with nicknames.”

“I [also] never filmed on a sound stage before,” he adds. “We built this compound next to this castle and we renovated this ship that we bought in South Africa. Each of those things was a separate problem to deal with and I learned all kinds of new things. But it wasn’t like a general change in my approach to how the movie’s going to be made; it’s just new problems to deal with.”

For Murray, the joy of playing oceanographer Steve Zissou involved the fact that the character does not censor any of his thoughts or worry about the perception of misbehavior. “He just sort of lets go,” says Murray. “All the emotions are expressed; he is hit, bang, and out it comes. That's kind of fun to play. You don't get to do that in life that often.”

“In real life, you're supposed to obey some rules of politeness or respect; we don't have time for that in the movies,” adds the actor of Anderson’s liberated approach. “We gotta move right along. Wes wants to see the emotion right now. Again, it's kind of a treat to do that.”

Despite - or perhaps because of - their longstanding relationship, Anderson pulls no punches when he explains how little he ultimately does to make his star feel comfortable. “You know, he has to go through his own process,” he says. “He worked every day of the movie, and it was kind of brutal for him, I think, but also, he loves being in Rome.”

“It’s almost a shtick now about how miserable he was in the movie,” adds Anderson, referring to Murray’s repeated complaints to the media about the cold and wet shooting conditions. “But I was there and I saw him have some amazing times, and he brought that onto the set almost every day of the shoot”

“You know, going to Italy for six months, there are worse tortures than that.”

Anderson says that his ideas for movies come from a variety of different sources. In the case of The Life Aquatic, the notion of a hero scientist is rooted in the filmmaker’s extensive memories of growing up watching Jacques Cousteau, National Geographic and Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom TV fare. But the rather unusual last name of Murray’s character can be linked to a more esoteric source.

“'Zissou' comes from this French photographer Jacques Henri Lartigue, one of my favorite photographers,” Anderson explains. “His brother was nicknamed Zissou, and he took many, many photographs of him.”

“[Zissou] was this amazing character who was an inventor,” the filmmaker continues. “He built airplanes and little cars that would go downhill and things for going underwater, and Lartigue photographed him with his crazy inventions that worked or didn’t work, crashed or didn’t crash. I just liked the spirit of that character.”

For his part, Murray had no trouble identifying with some of Zissou’s idiosyncrasies. “Some of the lines in the script I've actually said,” he reveals. “People try to make characters like this all the time and they usually fail. I just think the kid is really good; I think it was a very hard job to do; and I think I did a type of acting that I've never done before.”

Meanwhile, although Anderson admits he occasionally fears for the believability of the insulated cinematic realities that he creates, he ultimately tries to remain true only to the individual vision of the stories he tells. “I always worry about that because I got that criticism quite a bit for The Royal Tenenbaums,” he recalls. “Smart people who hated it often pointed to that, and I’ve been self-conscious about it.”

“But at the end of the day, I just kind of get going by my own instincts,” he concludes. “I think both of those movies end up being filled with all of these details and all of these ideas, but I don’t really mean for them to be.”

I'm such a huge fan of "Harold & Maude," that seeing Bud Cort was one if the many things I loved about this flick.  From sfgate.com:

---------------------------------------
Cort plunges into 'The Life Aquatic'
- John McMurtrie
Sunday, December 26, 2004

Every year or so, Bud Cort gets a check in the mail for something like $11. The money is all he earns for having played a lead role in the beloved 1971 film "Harold and Maude." Cort says his paltry residual payment is the only thing that upsets him about the cult film, yet even this he seems to take in stride.

"I make more money every year for one scene as a fry cook in 'Heat' than I do for 'Harold and Maude,' " he says with a chuckle. "But it doesn't matter because you can't put a price on that. You really can't."

It's been decades since Cort's young, earnest and suicide- obsessed Harold -- along with Ruth Gordon's old, mischievous and zesty Maude -- became a countercultural hero, thanks to director Hal Ashby's bittersweet and one-of-a-kind love story, shot in the Bay Area. Cort, now 56, continues to appear in films, but only every few years and mostly in low-budget movies that don't draw a lot of attention.

So it's a treat to see him pop up in Wes Anderson's most recent offbeat comedy, "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," which opened this weekend in the Bay Area. Cort's role in the movie is small, but it's a tribute to his acting chops that he brings added life to a part that, in the wrong hands, could easily have been overlooked.

"The Life Aquatic" concerns the adventures of Steve Zissou (Bill Murray), a dispirited oceanographer on a quest to hunt down a mysterious shark that killed his partner. Traveling with him and his motley crew is an Air Kentucky co-pilot (Owen Wilson) who may or may not be Zissou's son.

Cort plays Bill Ubell, who is keeping an eye on team Zissou's finances --

or, as Zissou routinely calls him, he's "the bond company stooge."

Ubell certainly looks the part of a bond company stooge -- he's dumpy, balding and mustachioed and wears a hideous brown tie, ungainly glasses and a bland short-sleeved shirt that even the most unfashionable accountant would find repulsive. But Cort manages to make him a humorous and sympathetic -- if pathetic -- character. When provoked, he protests. "I'm also a human being," he asserts, his innocent, puppy-dog eyes open wide.

When Filipino pirates raid Zissou's ship (off the coast of Italy, of all places), the stooge acts as a negotiator -- it so happens he speaks Tagalog. The unlikely sight of a bumbling, half-blindfolded American pleading for mercy in fluent Tagalog is the sort of wonderfully absurd and droll detail that director and co-writer Anderson, who also helmed "Rushmore" and "The Royal Tenenbaums," delights in.

"I've gotten to know Bud over the past few years, and I wanted to write a part for him," Anderson says by phone from New York. "That character is there just so there's something for Bud to play."

Anderson (who was 2 when "Harold and Maude" came out) says what drew him to Cort were the actor's minor but effective roles in the 2000 biopic "Pollock" (as Howard Putzel, Peggy Guggenheim's charming right-hand man) and the 1995 thriller "Heat" (as a surly restaurant worker).

"He's very emotionally accessible," Anderson says. "You can really connect with him. He's absolutely and utterly unique -- there's no one else like him."

When Anderson sent Cort the "Life Aquatic" script, the actor recalls it as one of the best he had ever read.

"Halfway through it, I was sobbing," he says from New York, where the native of nearby Rye (and a longtime Angeleno), was attending the film's premiere. "It was just so touching to me -- the whole fear of abandonment and loneliness of people choosing a life on the ocean. I come from a whole family of fishermen from Gloucester, Mass., and most of them were lost at sea. "

The ocean is close enough to Cort's heart that he says he worked some of his feelings about politics and "the death of the sea life" into his dialogue with the pirates. That was when he was learning his lines in Indonesian -- before problems ensued.

"I was about to get on the plane to go to Italy and Wes called and said, 'Listen, um, I hate to ask you, but we can't find any Indonesian actors over here. Would you mind learning it in Filipino?' I said, 'Well, sure, Wes.' I started to learn it, but Filipino has nothing to do with Indonesian, so it was a very stressful situation."

As much fun as Cort had in Italy -- bonding with the cast (and going on a bender with Murray, an old friend) -- the actor says the six-month shoot was "very, very, very tough" for everyone, largely because they were at sea in the middle of winter. And because Cort's character gets kidnapped by the pirates (and is held at the shabby remnants of the improbably named Hotel Citroen), Cort decided he needed to lose 50 pounds to look the part of a kidnapping victim.

"Wes was scared," Cort recalls. "He said, 'I think it's dangerous.' And I said, 'I like a challenge.' So I did it."

In the process, Cort got quite ill on a few occasions. (It doesn't help that, unless you know him well, he says, you don't really notice his weight loss in the film.)

Raised as a "very strict Catholic," Cort attended Mass every Sunday (as he usually does) to pray for good health during the shoot. While in Italy, he bought all sorts of religious jewelry -- "as protection to get me through the goddamn movie," he says with a laugh. "You should see what I'm wearing now. I'm wearing a cross, I'm wearing a jade Buddha, I'm wearing a Mother Teresa from the beatification, I'm wearing a Padre Pio. What else have I got here? I'm wearing the blessed Virgin, I'm wearing St. Christopher."

Discussing his weight loss, Cort acknowledges that he gets immersed in his roles more than other actors might: "I kind of get fixated on projects and characters, and I guess the smarter thing would be to just hop, skip and jump from (one film to the next). I don't know -- I like to really work on stuff. "

Regarding his long career, he says, "I have this bizarre track record. I spent seven years trying to do a film with Marlon Brando, and the day I got him to say yes, the money fell through."

Cort also spent years developing a one-man show about Truman Capote. "It's very painful to talk about," he says, adding only that the idea was stolen from him.

Looking back at "Harold and Maude," Cort recalls it as "a glorious, serendipitous occurrence of great script, great director, fabulous actress. It was a once-in-a-lifetime kind of thing."

He says he sees its influence "in 10 movies a year," citing "Garden State, " "Secretary" and "Igby Goes Down."

"I see scenes from it or moments from it, but they're not it," he says. "They're attempts at it."

As fond as he is of the film, Cort has also worked hard to avoid being typecast as Harold. Before "Harold and Maude," the former stand-up comedian (born Walter Edward Cox) was in two 1970 Robert Altman films, "MASH" and "Brewster McCloud." After playing Harold, Cort got so many offers to play weirdos that the actor, then an occasional resident at Groucho Marx's mansion, didn't work for several years. A serious car accident in 1979 was another setback.

Cort has appeared in dozens of films and TV shows (some with cringe- inducing titles, such as "Invaders From Mars" and "South of Heaven, West of Hell"). "I think people realize that, yes, I did that film," he says of "Harold and Maude." "But I've certainly done enough things to give an idea of the breadth of curiosity I have for all kinds of people."

As for what the future holds, Cort, who doesn't even have an agent, is doubtful. Acting in "The Life Aquatic" was a pleasure and a rare privilege, he says, because "most of the stuff I see is just such swill, and most of the stuff I read is such swill. And what people think I might be in love with, I'm pretty much not. I'm more interested in what I wouldn't be thought of for."

So I saw this on Christmas Day and enjoyed it a lot.  Haven't been able to write anything about it until now, and this is an attempt at a somewhat more formal criticism, as I've submitted for a campus publication as well.  I tried a few things: no serious spoilers, no serious plot discussion (a bane of good criticism), and no mention of actors (people can find that information on the Internet, and it's distracting reading parentheticals).  I don't know if this approach is right.  Comments would be helpful, and discussion of the film even better.  I didn't discuss SPOILERSthe helicopter crash, which is really what made the film for me, so more on that would be good.  It was an excellent moment, because it depicted with a realism not seen in a long time what a crash is actually like.  There shouldn't be any more spoilers after this, but for those extremely careful, our definition of "spoiler" may differ.

The piece:

Wes Anderson's "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" is a welcome departure from his earlier works.  It can't be qualified or quantified based on any previous notions of what a film should be, and that is what it should be appreciated for.  Preconceived notions will get you nowhere.  Anderson has become way too smart (and he probably always has been) to make this into a mess.  Even if it is a mess, it is a glorious one.

"Aquatic"'s plot is paper thin, but "plot" is a four-letter word anyway, too often drooled across the lips of people way too accustomed to those same preconceived notions.  Great films don't get made when they adhere to these unwritten, arbitrary expectations.  For the pedantic, though, Steve Zissou is a washed-up Cousteau-esque oceanographer.  He sets out to find and destroy the shark that ate his friend, with help from his crew, his ex-wife, her new husband, a pregnant reporter, and Ned Plimpton, a man who may or may not be his son.

Gripes that "Aquatic" is brimming in style and suffers in substance are both substantial and frivolous.  Consider the Crayon Pony Fish.  In a fitting tone-setter, Zissou is given this fish as a gift from a young boy who admires him.  During a scuffle, the bag holding the fish is punctured.  Zissou pours the fish and water into a champagne flute and holds it high above is head, to protect this gift as he wades throug the crowd.  It is only after the matter of Zissou's son is settled that this little boy appears again, and when he does, "the adventure" Zissou has undertaken will have been worth it.

The film does have structure, and is punctuated by a black minstrel singing David Bowie songs in Portuguese.  That alone is worth seeing.  The film flows through this structure, much like the good ship Belafonte, moving from scene to scene with the only reason being whatever makes sense to Anderson.  He has invented his own version of film language by borrowing from vocabularies of other filmic staples, such as the French New Wave and certain movies of the action genre.  Through this language, Anderson wants to show you "this and this and this" -- little snapshots of life with these people so as to illuminate what makes Zissou tick.

The downside to this approach is that many characters are underwritten.  Most interesting are Eleanor and Alistair; Jane, the pregnant reporter and involuntary wedge between Steve and Ned is also a bit neglected.  The familial relationships were the most interesting thing about "The Royal Tenenbaums," and the subtext of a mother's absence gave a lot of its poignant sadness to "Rushmore."  No matter how surreal the action scenes were, they truly detracted from a lot of the poignancy to be had in the film -- the poignancy Anderson is known for.

The film does have its problems, but any film as experimental and daring as this one is bound to have them.  Anderson concentrated so much on the minute and miniscule details that he couldn't quite see the forest for the trees, but that is forgiven.  After all, "what might have been" fits for the reality of this film just as much as it does for the world inhabited by Steve and Ned.

ted would be proud.

i never found cate blanchett attractive before her portrayal of Jane.

has she been the female object of affection in any films before?

Quote from: bigideasi never found cate blanchett attractive before her portrayal of Jane.

has she been the female object of affection in any films before?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2FB00005V4XW.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=d987b9ea428f057ece48ff6c524a97b4aabcf9ec)

Also: Pushing Tin.

are those movies worth watching?

i saw Life Aquatic for the third time last night. i wish people here knew how to setup the projector. the left side was cut off, so you couldn't read parts of the lower left titles.

The title "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" is overly long and awkward, but sorta cute when you think about it. The movie is overly long and awkward, and is sorta cute when you think about it.

When you stop thinking about it, you realize that all the gags (matching outfits, adidas shoes, orca, colorful sealife) are just backflips because the movie doesn't have anything real or new to say. It just doesn't have anything to say at all.

I wanted to believe that Wes Anderson had grown as a filmmaker and Life Aquatic would be something new and exciting from him. But it's just a rehash of every Wes Anderson movie that came before it. Even worse, it's a sloppy re-hash. I don't think you can really defend it's sloppiness by saying "but real life is loose." This isn't real life. It's a sloppy movie that tries too hard, does a lot of cute-at-first blackflips and pratfalls, but you can only patronize it for so long.

Like the Crayon Pony Fish, The Life Aquatic is a one trick pony that some people will love because "hey, look it's a crayon pony fish!" If you get off on that cute, kitschy stuff, more power to you.

i imagine you quietly saying that in the corner of an enormous warehouse or airplane hanger, perched on a tiny wooden stool while looking down, arms folded. in a good way.

If you imagine me like that, it's because everyone else is in the other corner of the hangar staring at a crayon pony fish in a wine glass and singing it's praises.

Quote from: MeatballThe title "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" is overly long and awkward, but sorta cute when you think about it. The movie is overly long and awkward, and is sorta cute when you think about it.

When you stop thinking about it, you realize that all the gags (matching outfits, adidas shoes, orca, colorful sealife) are just backflips because the movie doesn't have anything real or new to say. It just doesn't have anything to say at all.

I wanted to believe that Wes Anderson had grown as a filmmaker and Life Aquatic would be something new and exciting from him. But it's just a rehash of every Wes Anderson movie that came before it. Even worse, it's a sloppy re-hash. I don't think you can really defend it's sloppiness by saying "but real life is loose." This isn't real life. It's a sloppy movie that tries too hard, does a lot of cute-at-first blackflips and pratfalls, but you can only patronize it for so long.

Like the Crayon Pony Fish, The Life Aquatic is a one trick pony that some people will love because "hey, look it's a crayon pony fish!" If you get off on that cute, kitschy stuff, more power to you.

It sounds like you got lost on the details

i thought it got panned by critics and got low ratings on the tomato meter and maybe imdb, too. if you were to go through all these posts on xixax i imagine it would 50/50 or maybe slightly towards the negative side.

Lots of people at Xixax have a bittersweet, appreciative-yet-let-down attitude towards the film.  On IMDb the film has a 7.4/10, which is around three out of four stars, considering the best films ever get roughly between 8.2-9.1.  That is the public's approval rating, mind you.

Film is about creating memorable images, realizing them, and capturing them.  Many successful filmmakers are artists (some who I love, some who I don't like much at all), but they still are incredibly skilled at manufacturing indelible images.  Stanley Kubrick, Luis Bunuel and Salvador Dali, Sergei Eisenstein, David Lynch, Peter Greenaway.  Many of these guys are love-'em-or-hate-'em.

That you simply don't understand why the crayon pony fish scene is more than just a gimmick simply shows where you're coming from.  We read movies differently, and obviously this one didn't meet your expectations.  You were lost in the details, yes.  Anderson has finally made a film where he really demands a lot of the audience.  Those who are lost in the demand will be left behind.  This is evident, considering the path his other three movies have taken.  Rushmore is his most conventional, most accessible, most universal.  (I would say Bottle Rocket is even more so, but I've only seen bits and pieces so I can't fully judge it.)  Tenenbaums first truly experimented with a style that would potentially alienate people.  And here is Life Aquatic, not giving a damn what anyone thinks, asking you to take what he says and accept it or not, on those terms.  It is the "how" that really matters.  The father/son/revenge-for-a-friend stories have been done so many times.  But never like this.

many people say Eleanor is the brains behind team zissou.
what is steve?

He's da Zissou.

Wes Anderson is the cult filmmaker of the moment. Criticizing his work is as useful as criticizing Star Wars. Sides really are chosen for everyone already. That being said, I enjoyed this film more than Royal Tennebaums and little less than Rushmore. That's it. The average criticism could be that Anderson indulged too much on this one. That the film, for me the combination of theme and storyline of Rushmore (revenge, blacker humor) and Royal Tennebaums (dysfunctional family tenderness), went past its 90 minute catchiness and just dragged on, resolving itself with less clarity and certainty than his last two previous works. I don't really believe that criticism, but its the main one that went through my head while watching it. Anderson has made a successful film for his audience. He's developed his unique taste to a story that broadens his filmmaking abilities. He's made the success he's wanted and I'm happy for him. And besides, a lot of worst filmmakers could have the privelge he has right now.

Wes Anderson a talented director, and I'm eagerly awaiting his next film. However, I still think Life Aquatic was a stinker. If I'm stuck on the details, I'm stuck on the film and the film alone, NOT Wes Anderson behind it. It seems that many who appreciated Life Aquatic would rather watch the making-of-Life Aquatic or a documentary on Wes Anderson then look at the film by itself and face the fact that it isn't that good.

Quote from: bigideasi imagine it would 50/50 or maybe slightly towards the negative side.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/life_aquatic/

50/50

I still think Bottle Rocket is his best. It seems that with one central character like Dignen in Bottle Rocket there is less emphasis on the "details". It's a given that his films have had progressively more lavish production designs (a long way from punctuality badges to a full size, cutaway boat set) but is this because of a bigger budget/or Anderson finding his style/or scripts that have gradually become more about the ensemble?

Looking at the latter: Bottle rocket was about three guys at the most. Then there was Rushmore that had a whole school of characters to play with (yes Max was the center, as was Dignen, but in Rushmore the support is larger and more varied), Tenebaums was a whole family and more, and Aquatic was a pack of strays.

Its interesting that Anderson was concerned with peoples criticisms of his attention to detail yet still went on to make Aquatic which is probably his most adventurous film to date, in this area. I think that this element of his style is just to be expected now. I don't think its a weakness like a reliance on special effects could be, as his stories are always worthy of the work. I think its strange that somone who goes to such lengths to transport an audience into another world/environment should be criticised for doing so. Especially in the manner that he does it.

Film history has shown that a film on the ocean is always going to be a huge undertaking. Particularly one involving pirates and dynamite. But even with its flaws I still love it, and just enjoy watching it, even if I do find it to be the saddest of all of Andersons films. And from a filmmaking perspective its extremely impressive.

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWes Anderson is the cult filmmaker of the moment. Criticizing his work is as useful as criticizing Star Wars. Sides really are chosen for everyone already.

well not really.  you arent a fan and said you basically liked the movie and most of his biggest fans here have been disappointed.  so i guess, he can be discussed just like real filmmakers after all and not dismissed as a novelty before looking at the actual film.

Quote from: themodernage02you arent a fan and said you basically liked the movie and most of his biggest fans here have been disappointed.  so i guess, he can be discussed just like real filmmakers after all and not dismissed as a novelty before looking at the actual film.

I know nothing about Wes Anderson EXCEPT his films,  minus Bottle Rocket which I haven't seen, and I think The Life Aquatic might be my most favorite of his films.

BTW, this isn't meant as a rebuttal or answer, modage,  your comment just put me in mind of something I wanted to say.  

It's a hard call...  if I went back and watched Tenenbaums or Rushmore right now, who knows...  I know I sure loved both of them (and I saw them in order, as they hit theaters) but at the moment, after seeing The Life Aquatic once, it feels like my favorite.  

I think the undercurrent of sadness may be what makes this a richer film to me...  it was there in Tenenbaums, but you could ignore it beneath all the noise of that big, busy household.  At the beginning of The Life Aquatic, there was never any doubt Steve Zissou was reaching the end...  he'd lost his soulmate (Esteban), people were no longer interested in his films, and his ship was on borrowed time from the first time we saw it.  His whole life as he'd imagined it was over...  now what?  

It's not that things go wrong, as you get older, it's just that they play out.  Early on, you think, "I'm going to do THIS, I'm going to be THIS person," and indeed you are, but after a decade or so, the thing you're doing or the person you are stops making sense.  You have to stay aware of the world around you, and you have to change.  That's where Zissou is...  he's being forced into a change, and he HATES it because he was so comfortable where he was before, that he doesn't want to leave it.  But leave it he does, and the results aren't comfortable; they're awkward, and painful...  yet he had no other choice.  

It's kind of like being born.  Zissou meets the circumstances that life throws at him, and while he overcomes most of them, he fumbles a few important ones.  Even at 50, he's awkward, and still learning how to deal with jealousy, with intimacy, and with something he THINKS he knows well, leadership.  I think that's part of what The Life Aquatic is about, and I'm impressed as hell that a guy Anderson's age has this kind of understanding, about what it's like to have led a very fulfilled life, and then you have to stop living that life because it just reaches its natural conclusion, and yet you're still alive and kicking, so you have to figure out where to go from there.

2LB

nice.

Quote from: themodernage02

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWes Anderson is the cult filmmaker of the moment. Criticizing his work is as useful as criticizing Star Wars. Sides really are chosen for everyone already.

well not really.  you arent a fan and said you basically liked the movie and most of his biggest fans here have been disappointed.  so i guess, he can be discussed just like real filmmakers after all and not dismissed as a novelty before looking at the actual film.

I never said his biggest fans have been dissapointed with this movie at all. My take on the average criticism of the film would be closer to me channeling Mutinyco's likely explanation. I am not a fan of Wes Anderson, but I'm not feeling angst toward him either. When Royal Tennebaums came out, it really just fell flat for me. There I felt angst because it was really agreed upon as being great. I'm thinking Life Aquatic isn't getting its deserved recognition. And also, I always liked Bottle Rocket and most of Rushmore.

And yes, maybe's there room to criticize Wes considering many of his fans are doing that right now. I still think this movie has as lovely moments as anything he's ever done though.

yo, golden trumpet, where's that thumb goin?  anyway, go out and buy(download) all the Harry Belefonte songs you can for the fun of it.  who do y'all think actually ownes that boat noW?  probably the most expensive chunk of movie memoribeelyaa yet?  maybe not pound for pound but shit...is that thing on ebay?  I've got some cash I was saving for a 1991 mazda 323 but, fuck, why not...

Who else wishes this "private witt" stayed private?

nice.

TAKE 5 WITH WES ANDERSON

With every film, Wes Anderson retreats farther into the world of his imagination, drawing audiences deeper into the curious menagerie of quirky characters and situations that stow away there. The jump from 'Bottle Rocket' to 'Rushmore' was rather easy for moviegoers, with each story retaining enough ties to the real world that Anderson was able to pass his vaguely off-kilter scenarios off as a heist movie and coming-of-age story, respectively. But 'The Royal Tenenbaums' was a different story, the big-screen equivalent of a drawing-room puppet show about an eccentric family of weirdos, each played by actors dressed in perfect little uniforms and shuffled about through dollhouse rooms. In 'The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou,' Anderson's universe has expanded, and yet the glimpse into his mind has grown still more intimate. You want to take in all the scenery and decipher the many obsessions (literary arcana, scientific ephemera and, of course, cinematic references) that explain it. For Anderson's fans, we offer a head start as the director describes five movies that influenced him.

Day for Night (1973)
(dir: François Truffaut; starring: Jacqueline Bisset, Valentina Cortese)
From the point of view of my career, [Federico] Fellini and [François] Truffaut are two of the filmmakers who have inspired me the most, and '8 1/2' and 'Day for Night' both inform this movie a lot. They're movies about a filmmaker, and although 'Life Aquatic' is the story of an oceanographer, it's also about a filmmaker. [Those movies capture] a lot of the things that somebody who's making a movie goes through. '8 1/2' is the most glamorous, romanticized vision of an artist trying to find himself, whereas 'Day for Night' is the most naturalistic, affectionate and microscopic version of that. It's filled with details that are instantly recognizable to anybody who's ever made a movie, like the scene in the hotel hallway where he says, "What about this vase? We could use this in the scene with such-and-such," so they steal the vase, or walking down the street on the set and having a props guy come up to ask which gun you want and all that kind of stuff. [In 'Day for Night,'] those connections are so tangible, and it also has a very romantic feeling.

The Day of the Dolphin (1973)
(dir: Mike Nichols; starring: George C. Scott, Trish Van Devere)
I saw 'The Day of the Dolphin' five or six years ago because it was a Mike Nichols movie. It's not one of my favorite of Nichols' movies by any means, but it is very beautiful. He's made so many movies that are tremendously influential on everybody, but that one influenced 'The Life Aquatic' in that George C. Scott's character has this compound on an island that inspired a whole setting for our film, the research island that [Steve Zissou] has. [The idea for 'Life Aquatic'] also comes from PBS documentaries and wildlife stuff from the '70s, like the show 'Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom,' where they would go out in Africa and film animals and stuff.

L'Avventura (1960)
(dir: Michelangelo Antonioni; starring: Gabriele Ferzetti, Monica Vitti)
We looked at Michelangelo Antonioni's 'L'Avventura' when we were writing, and my director of photography and I watched [it again later]. It was always something we kept in our repertoire of things we would refer to, just because of its graphic look and location. [I just love the way Antonioni captures] this very beautiful feeling of '60s Italy and the Mediterranean. Shortly into the movie, we're on a boat, and then we're on these volcanic islands, and the characters are all these beautiful, but disillusioned rich people. 'L'Avventura' is a very mysterious movie. It's very spare, and visually, it's unlike anything I'd seen before. [A major component of 'Life Aquatic'] is the connections among these characters, but there's also a certain amount of it that's about the way they don't connect, and Antonioni is all about people not connecting. [He creates] this space among his characters, this kind of deep-focus relationship between them. The images are very chic, but there's a tension in them, and the story is the slenderest thread, it's barely there at all. This girl disappears, and we never find her, but there's this great mystery and pain among the characters.

Tess (1979)
(dir: Roman Polanski; starring: Nastassja Kinski, Peter Firth)
Polanski influenced me more than anybody else in terms of how I shoot my movies. He is the most clear and refined filmmaker that I can think of. His shots have a simplicity that is just very beautiful and elegant in the way they photograph actors. Polanski also has a similar taste to mine in terms of lenses and things like that. He made a number of movies that use the anamorphic widescreen format in exactly the way that most appeals to me. One that I really love is 'Tess,' his [adaptation] of 'Tess of the d'Urbervilles' with Nastassja Kinski. Polanski uses the widescreen to get three characters in the frame at once, then he gets as close as he possibly can, so it's almost like you're looking at three [separate] closeups. The way he shoots, he tries to stage the action in continuous shots and saves the real close-ups for when they're going to have the most impact. The thing with Polanski is that he makes his movies according to the idea of filming them from a point of view, and I think that is a good way to approach things, because then the audience is like a character.

Melvin and Howard (1980)
(dir: Jonathan Demme; starring: Jason Robards, Paul Le Mat)
Jonathan Demme is one of my favorites, and of his films, I like 'Melvin & Howard' a lot. It's about the relationship between Howard Hughes and this crazy oddball that he meets. Demme's movies are always about these sort of oddball characters, who are often outsiders, but I always feel like he's very attached to them, and the warmth that he feels towards those characters is always an important part of his movies. For instance, Melvin a is very appealing character, and I like the way this guy's life is turned upside down and how he responds to it. Demme has also made movies that are very intense, like 'Something Wild,' which goes to a very dark place. In 'Silence of the Lambs' and some of his later films, like 'Philadelphia,' he will have people look right into the lens, which is a strange thing to do, but he uses that, and I feel influenced in that respect. I really like 'Beloved' also. It took me two viewings to really get with it, but that movie is this strange literary adaptation where you get a strong sense that you're coming from a book, but it's filled with these very palpable sensations.

I can't believe I missed this....room for a sparring match!

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanGuns and CGI in a Wes Anderson movie is just wrong. I felt like those scenes should have been more theatrical (and less cinematic) like Max Fischer's Serpico production or something.

First, because I'm American, about the guns... The theatrical touch worked better for Rushmore. A major theme of the story was Max Fischer's desire to be something great. He just never was in the way that made him happy and so when a dose of actual violence hits in the movie, it is as artificial as being in one of his plays because he could never be the character he played in it. Life Aquatic, on the other hand, is full out cinematic and actually very realistic considering everything. I expected a film way more artificial considering he filmed at Cinecitta (where Fellini worked) and the one time Fellini had his studio double for the sea it looked as fake and artificial as it could. That was the entire theme of Fellini's film though! Anderson's still in the realm of fantasy, but its the way he relies on realistic props and keeps the humor dry that he has of way of keeping it grounded on earth. And besides, the gun fights in the film are hardly the showmanship ones of others. *Spoiler* The first one basically ends in Muarry scaring off the pirates by shooting and missing them so much. And the second is more about the search before and escape after. Also, as you pointed out about the theatrical nature of the guns in Rushmore, its all about context.  

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanThe CGI creatures really took me out of the movie. At least they looked like claymation instead of George Lucas animation, but in the end I'd rather not see fake invented fishes in a Wes Anderson movie. The shark is enough.

Was going to disagree, but I won't. I liked it was the one aspect that did look fake, but I kept thinking during the film they could have found a better fake representation of sea creatures than those 8th grade CGI attempts. I wish they would have just made actual model fish and shark - but not the Jaws type. Again, I would have liked something out of Fellini's And the Ship Sails on..... (movie I was referencing up top)

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWas going to disagree, but I won't. I liked it was the one aspect that did look fake, but I kept thinking during the film they could have found a better fake representation of sea creatures than those 8th grade CGI attempts.

for the millionth time...
www.imdb.com/name/nm0783139/

Quote from: themodernage02

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWas going to disagree, but I won't. I liked it was the one aspect that did look fake, but I kept thinking during the film they could have found a better fake representation of sea creatures than those 8th grade CGI attempts.

for the millionth time...
www.imdb.com/name/nm0783139/

Well, the 8th grade CGI I think is what they were trying to achieve (just not my description of it). I liked it but yet...there was a feeling they maybe could have chosen a better way of representing the sea creatures. But, if CGI is the way, they did the best they could.

dude, its NOT CGI.  its stop motion animation. the only thing a computer is doing is compositing the images.

http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=pageone&article_no=2328

Quote from: themodernage02dude, its NOT CGI.  its stop motion animation. the only thing a computer is doing is compositing the images.

http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=pageone&article_no=2328

OK, its stop motion animation. You're right, I'm wrong. I promise to write it 100 times on the next chalkboard I see.

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI promise to write it 100 times on the next chalkboard I see.

:yabbse-thumbdown:

8th grade or not, whatever....
But come on..
The JAGUAR SHARK?

Pretty fucking incredible
It worked because it didn't seem cheesy, nor look it.  That can be hard in mixing live action with animation, or just in animation ALONE, believe-you-me

I saw Life Aquatic a second time. There is still a lot of things I think are gratuitous, but I actually enjoyed it this time around. Maybe I was influenced by the drug-induced cackles of the woman a few rows up. She laughed at everything. Absolutely everything. When Cody is hit with the magazine. When the first hint of blood starts to wash up into the camera. Good times.

There was a guy like that the second time I saw it, and his laugh was completely terrible.  I thought he was faking it at first, like being sarcastic "aHUH HEH HUH HARN HIGAGIGIGGALAGOO, that was REAAAL funny  :yabbse-rolleyes: " but it continued through the whole movie, even at those parts

I loved this movie, but I have to say, Cate Blanchett stole this thing.  Between her subversively cute British accent, her Chuck's, the bubble gum...and she was pregnant to top it off.  I don't see how she was not the first choice for that part.

Because both Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman would've both knocked that role out of the park, and Blanchett just illustrates how underwritten it is?

Like the movie, just saying.

yes, CB was a real surprise to me.

i can't even being to imagine Nichole Kidman or Julianne Moore in a Wes Anderson film.

Quote from: bigideasi can't even being to imagine Nichole Kidman or Julianne Moore in a Wes Anderson film.

In complete agreement about Kidman and Moore.

Blanchett was the most enchanting thing about the movie.

Quote from: Meatball

Quote from: bigideasi can't even being to imagine Nichole Kidman or Julianne Moore in a Wes Anderson film.

In complete agreement about Kidman and Moore.

Blanchett was the most enchanting thing about the movie.

i would have thought the same thing about paltrow but she dominated.  i think wes can bring that dry dead pan style out of a lot of actors.  moore and kidman can be weird enough that you never never know...

-sl-

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI can't believe I missed this....room for a sparring match!

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanGuns and CGI in a Wes Anderson movie is just wrong. I felt like those scenes should have been more theatrical (and less cinematic) like Max Fischer's Serpico production or something.

First, because I'm American, about the guns...

I like the guns. They scared me at first, but now they've grown on me. That scene with Jeff Goldblum playing cards is just beautiful.

It's just that when I saw Team Zissou frolicking flamboyantly/haphazardly with guns that were actually shooting and actually killing people I think my "this is wrong" sensor was activated.

Anyone know where you can get a replica red hat? They've got the swim shorts and the sneakers on the official site, but no hat. I really wanna hat...

I have the hat from working at a stupid "indie" theater.  it says "the life aquatic with steve zissou" on the back of it though.

As I feared, The Life Aquatic is just a fashion accessory.

they got Addidas to make the Team Zissou shoes?

i thought i've been reading about people that have been trying to find them.

From The Digital Bits:

Sources in the House of the Mouse are telling us to expect Buena Vista's announcement of Wes Anderson's The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou on DVD in the next 2-3 weeks.

Quote from: MacGuffinFrom The Digital Bits:

Sources in the House of the Mouse are telling us to expect Buena Vista's announcement of Wes Anderson's The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou on DVD in the next 2-3 weeks.

Don't let the Buena Vista tag scare you. It's Criterion all the way. Buena Vista may distribute and even control the price, but the Criterion banner and quality will be on the disc. Royal Tennebaums went through a similiar phase and even for 2 weeks had a shit dvd cover suggesting something other than Criterion.

I know this is going to sound like bullshit but a friend of a friend of a friend of mine works for Criterion and the friend of a friend of mine was the one who told me that his friend had a screener copy of Life Aquatic a few weeks before it was released because they were getting ready to start doing work on the DVD for it.  Sadly, I haven't seen this guy since before Christmas so I can't confirm this any further.

I wouldn't believe me either but, as far as I know, it's all true.

it should be interesting to see what Criterion does for the cover.
they may just do the theatrical poster like they did with TRT.

Quote from: bigideasit should be interesting to see what Criterion does for the cover.
they may just do the theatrical poster like they did with TRT.

But that really wasn't the cover. It was the slip case and used for marketing reasons. The actual cover was the drawing like for Rushmore which I imagine will be carried over to The Life Aquatic as well.

yeah, that's right.

i wonder how Eric Chase Anderson's book will be.

The word "crew" is very important in anderson's films:

B Rocket:  Dignan's fasination on Mr. Henry's crew
rushmore: Max uses the word when Mr. guggeheim interupts the aquerium perceedings
royal t's:  Royal uses the word when walking/talking with Etheline

but

I cannot recall it being said in the life aquatic...can someone help me out w/ this?

-Russiasusha

Quote from: russiasushaThe word "crew" is very important in anderson's films:

B Rocket:  Dignan's fasination on Mr. Henry's crew
rushmore: Max uses the word when Mr. guggeheim interupts the aquerium perceedings
royal t's:  Royal uses the word when walking/talking with Etheline

but

I cannot recall it being said in the life aquatic...can someone help me out w/ this?

-Russiasusha

every ship has a crew, even the belefonte - there

i've decided that if I have a boy I am going to name him Wes after Wes Anderson. But so far everyone I tell thinks I am naming him after Wes Craven.
I am not dissing on Craven, I just wouldn't ever name my spawn after the man.
Anyway, The Life Aquatic was beautiful. My lover affair for Angelica Houston has strengthened all the more.

you're insane

Wes Anderson Says He's Drawn to Failure

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fentertainment.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fent%2Fap%2F20050216%2Fyber110_germany_berlin_film_anderson.sff.jpg&hash=073b23123dc91e3dabcf1d2e77b3c32dd8de2e0e)

Wes Anderson said his quirky undersea adventure "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou," which screened Wednesday at the Berlin film festival, allowed him to continue exploring a long-standing interest in failure.

"It's not like I ever had any intention to write about failure or focus on failure but I feel like I have utterly," Anderson, whose previous movies include "The Royal Tenenbaums" and "Rushmore," told reporters. "Every movie I make is about someone who can't fit in or can't make things work or is dealing with failure."

The takeoff of undersea adventure movies stars Bill Murray as the Jacques Cousteau-like explorer of the film's title. The crew, assembled by Zissou to hunt for a rare shark that killed his partner, has to cope with mutiny, pirate raids and other problems.

Anderson said Cousteau provided the inspiration for the film.

"He was my hero as a kid," he said. "Not only was he an oceanographer, but he was an adventurer and a filmmaker and a kind of movie star and I've always been fascinated with him."

Source: DVDaficionado.com
DVD Release Date: May 10th, 2005

my rip from the oscar screener shall tide me over until then.

Quote from: MacGuffin
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fentertainment.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fent%2Fap%2F20050216%2Fyber110_germany_berlin_film_anderson.sff.jpg&hash=073b23123dc91e3dabcf1d2e77b3c32dd8de2e0e)

damn, how would you like to wake up next to that

Quote from: Meatball
Like the Crayon Pony Fish, The Life Aquatic is a one trick pony that some people will love because "hey, look it's a crayon pony fish!" If you get off on that cute, kitschy stuff, more power to you.

"A deliberate and irritating absence of dramatic momentum is accompanied by delicious, often magical, moments. At the film festival Murray is given a plastic bag containing an exotic seahorse and when it begins to leak he snatches a champagne glass from a passing stranger, puts the fish into it and proceeds on his insouciant way. "

watching this forum dead for a straight month would be too painful.

I saw it again the other day on DVD and I just love it... I dont get why some people hated it... you might have some problems with it... but Bill Murray is the best... and the movie is funny and very well done...

Quote from: andykalI saw it again the other day on DVD

Since when have you had access to a time machine?

Quote from: ono mo cuishle

Quote from: andykalI saw it again the other day on DVD

Since when have you had access to a time machine?

I dont have the original released version... I have one of those screeners they send for awards show... I get most of the 'big-award-worthy' films. I'm not a member of the academy, but our investors put money on films and are constantly involved, so we get all the films :)

Wes' work is best viewed on the small screen.

Quote from: MeatballWes' work is best viewed on the small screen.

I don't think that is true.  I think that his films benefit from repeat viewings, and for many that comes on the small screen.  But I think that his widescreen compositions benefit with the big screen.

i thought this was okay when i first saw it, i was expecting more, but I think when I watch it on video it will be alot better, i do think his films are better on the small screen, i'll pick it up first day of release.


*when I was it was okay, i mean in a wes anderson way, meaning even an okay movie of his is better than most movies, so up against most movies, it's really good.

give it a time. it's not only his best film  ,it is the best film.

Quote from: flagpolespeciali've never shed a tear in a cinema during a wes film. this was the first time. just near the end.  

Me too! The end was not just part of the movie: it was a Moment.

I was disappointed in this film.  I remember hearing negative things about it (haven't looked at this thread until today) but I just couldn't believe that a Wes Anderson film could let me down.  Maybe having expectations that high meant I was asking to be let down, but I was disappointed in the film.


SPOILERS





The idea of an underwater filmmaker whose films grow increasingly unpopular is a good one but I didn't like the plot of the film.  Somehow the characters never came to life for me.  I did like the opposites that Zissou (deep sea) and Plimpton (the skies) represented at the beginning, and that Murray unwittingly brings this guy down (a pilot buried at sea).  But the sort-of rivalry with Hennessey, the vying after Cate Blanchett (I didn't see why Zissou and Plimpton would be after her), the pirate attack (where did THAT come from?!) didn't work for me.

As with the other WA films, I admired the style.  The sequence with the camera peering into the various parts of the dissected boat was terrific.  I didn't have any problems with the animated sea creatures.  I thought they were a good fit for the artificiality of WA's films.

Life Aquatic isn't a bad film, and I didn't hate it, but I didn't like it as much as I like Rushmore, even with its flaws, or The Royal Tenenbaums.  Still, I may pick up the DVD if I find it cheap, just to keep up with the Criterion Wes Anderson discs.

My return to Xixax will be marked by a not so positive mark on one of my all time favourite filmmakers. Basically, I agree with what Ravi just wrote. However, I'm willing to go with my younger brother (who's 11 and already loves all the 3 previous Wes films) to the theatre and give it another shot. Goddamnit, I really wanted to love it, but I couldn't bring myself to it. Something must be wrong with me.

Quote from: ElPandaRoyalMy return to Xixax will be marked by a not so positive mark on one of my all time favourite filmmakers. Basically, I agree with what Ravi just wrote. However, I'm willing to go with my younger brother (who's 11 and already loves all the 3 previous Wes films) to the theatre and give it another shot. Goddamnit, I really wanted to love it, but I couldn't bring myself to it. Something must be wrong with me.

unfortunately nothings wrong with you, just the film.  and a second viewing does little to change that.   :(

Quote from: themodernage02unfortunately nothings wrong with you

:saywhat:

i guess i hate it also.

i nominate you for the most inane 1782 posts of all time...phuck it...i have followed you around all nite and have cum to the con clu shun that its time for ewe to grow up or shut up...

an open challenge....

post something pertinent and original in any thread at any time...

con trary to pop u lar be lief...antagonistic bee have your bores me two tears

cry me a river...rat

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuicidegirls.com%2Fmedia%2Fauthors%2F1434%2Farticle.jpg&hash=728d9018b60469ca8522be809b85d969e5f647af)

I first heard of Wes Anderson when watching the 1996 MTV Movie Awards. They announced that the Best New Filmmaker was going to Wes Anderson for the movie Bottle Rocket. When that tall lanky dude with the coke bottle glasses accepted the award I still had no idea what movie they were talking about. Later that year I rented Bottle Rocket and was blown away by how funny and personal it was. Wes Anderson subsequently went on to reinvent Bill Murray in Rushmore and now he’s cast Murray again as the lead in The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou.

Daniel Robert Epstein: Why do you see so much sadness in Bill Murray?

Wes Anderson: Because it’s there. If you look into his eyes you can’t really escape it, like the way he is in Lost in Translation and Rushmore. I met him and when I saw the dailies in Rushmore I felt like there was something tragic in him.

I guess I must have known it was there beforehand. I loved him in movies like Stripes and Ghostbusters but the movies of his that really grabbed me are Mad Dog and Glory, Razor’s Edge and Tootsie. Those movies were really why I wanted him to be in Rushmore. He’s so great in Mad Dog and Glory and he really has that sadness there but also a lot of anger as well. I think he was great in Razor’s Edge but he was slaughtered for it. Maybe it’s not that great a film and it doesn’t gel well but he’s very appealing in it. He was doing this thing where he’s a comic actor taking a dramatic role but he’s still funny in it.

DRE: The Life Aquatic is similar in tone to John Huston’s Beat the Devil [released in 1953]. Was that an influence?

WA: I don’t think so but I know what you mean. That’s a movie I had to watch three times before I quite got it then I really loved it. I think you are right.

DRE: Do you think Steve Zissou would have killed the jaguar shark if he was given permission?

WA: No, I think he’s not really a hunter in the end but he’s not a scientist either. He’s a filmmaker and a storyteller.

DRE: How was it working with Cate Blanchett?

WA: She was pregnant for one thing which was a good thing because about halfway through we were able to get rid of the fake stomach so we could use her real stomach. I cast her because I was a fan and I wanted to work with her. She is easily the most prepared actor I’ve ever worked with. She arrived with questions that one would only have if you had been rehearsing it yourself extensively. She’s got everything worked out which is quite different from someone like Bill [Murray] or Owen [Wilson] who are people who I will see running lines while they are getting wired up for sound. Weren’t they in their trailers for three hours watching pay-per-view? But that’s their approach because everything for them is spontaneity. Even though they didn’t really improvise for this movie they are two of the best guys to improvise in front of a camera. There are no two people better to give an idea of a scene then step back and let them come up with that.

DRE: Did they improvise at all?

WA: There is a scene in the movie where Bill Murray points a gun at the pregnant reporter. That was improvised.

But with someone like Cate, she is so prepared which can be intimidating for guys like that but that’s good because I think their characters are bit intimidated by her character.

DRE: Were you intimidated by her?

WA: A little bit.

DRE: You came up with the story for Life Aquatic in college, has it changed much since then?

WA: The story I wrote in college was only a paragraph long. In the short story there is this guy Steve Cocteau which I later changed to Zissou, his wife Eleanor and then his ship the Belafonte.

DRE: At this point your films are insanely popular with a certain type of audience member while also being highly personal. Were you surprised to find people that connect so much with your work?

WA: I was never more confident than when we made Bottle Rocket [released in 1996]. I was like “Wait until they see this. It’s going to be great.” I had people warning me that it was an odd movie but I knew they didn’t understand. After our first test screening my confidence level was brought down to its current state where it’s stayed. We had 85 people walk out of the 250 seat theatre. We started rewriting the movie even though it was all done. We wrote a new opening and shot all sorts of things. Because we had James L. Brooks producing he could get us more money to fix it. From then on I’m always surprised and pleased to have any kind of audience enjoy my film.

DRE: Your budgets keep getting larger, what would a $150 million Wes Anderson film be like?

WA: That would scare me. The $50 million for Life Aquatic scared me enough. It’s really been incredible luck. We wrote the first movie to be made for $25,000 and maybe for the next movie we would have gotten a million. But we couldn’t get the $25,000 so we spent three years searching around then suddenly James L. Brooks appeared and said “We’ll do it but it has to cost six million because my deal doesn’t permit anything less.” Then I got $10 million then $25 million and now $50 million.

DRE: Your fans are so loyal. I’ve even heard of people getting tattoos with names of characters.

WA: It’s really weird but it doesn’t happen everyday. But kids that age right now do tattoos. They are always tattooing something so I’m happy to get a few of those slots.

DRE: Why did Steve Zissou need to be such a failure?

WA: He is somebody who is caught up in his own sense of failure. Everything is unpleasant about him which is a result of his unhappiness. He doesn’t quite express it until two-thirds through the movie. The idea of failure has always been more appealing, sympathetic and interesting to me more than success. He was reaching some kind of redemption with his son who he abandoned even before he was born.

DRE: How difficult was it getting Bill Murray?

WA: It wasn’t difficult. It was easier to get him for Rushmore than for The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou. For Rushmore his agent gave him the script and now he doesn’t have an agent anymore. He read Rushmore and I got a call ten days later from him saying he was going to do it.

DRE: Did you have any trouble getting this movie set up at Disney?

WA: It’s just a matter of somebody supporting the movie and wanting to do it. In this case it was Nina Jacobson and Dick Cook at Touchstone Pictures. For them it’s a low budget movie. It’s a third of the cost of a Pirates of the Caribbean and will probably be an eighth of the gross.

DRE: How did you end up casting Bud Cort?

WA: I’m friends with Bud so I wrote it for him. I wanted him in there so we came up with the character of the bond company stooge.

DRE: Are you surprised by Owen’s success in the past eight years?

WA: No, it seemed to make sense as we went along. Owen is very smart, very funny and charismatic. The end result is surprising but incrementally I was never too surprised.

DRE: How is working with Mark Mothersbaugh on the music?

WA: This is my fourth movie with him. We start working a year before shooting so he is involved all the way through. The main theme of the movie we wrote a year before shooting.

DRE: What is the animated movie you are doing?

WA: Noah Baumbach and I are adapting the Roald Dahl story, The Fantastic Mr. Fox, which Henry Selick and I will direct. Noah and I are about halfway through the script.

Finally saw this. incredible! Beautifully shot, wonderful characters, wildly funny, very moving. this was Wes at the top of his form. I loved everything about this film.

minor spoilers

Like all Wes films, there were so many beautifully writing intimate moments. Some great scenes that come to mind: blanchet/murray interview, murray and wilson's conversation after overhearing some guy putting him down in the bar, final scene with Klaus' son, when ned and steve first meet (muray, overwhelmed with emotion, walking off in the middle of the conversation at the climax of life on mars). so many more that i cant recall right now

The relationship between murray and Wilson was excellent (edgier and more involving then any relationship in tennenbaums). I also think Blanchett's character is by far the strongest female character wes has written. The soundtrack was perfect, as usual with wes' films. A very inspired selection of music. The obscure alien-like undersea was a great touch, too. The sets were incredible, and gave the film a real surreal epic feel.

It's a shame to hear so many wes fans were disappointed. Its not my favourite wes film (rushmore still is) but I'd take this over Tennenbaums any day. This is my favourite film of 2004, hands down. Cant wait to see it again. Wes is the fucking man!

Quote from: brocklySome great scenes that come to mind: blanchet/murray interview

i thought that was a flat-out bad scene. the writing was trying to be clever by being childish, but it was sooo childish that it was just childish.

aside from that and the whole love triangle idea i want to see this again right now.

Quote from: picolas

Quote from: brocklySome great scenes that come to mind: blanchet/murray interview

i thought that was a flat-out bad scene. the writing was trying to be clever by being childish, but it was sooo childish that it was just childish.

aside from that and the whole love triangle idea i want to see this again right now.

cant remember the scene in great detail (dont even recall it being childish). really need to see the film again bad. but i remember there was something about it i reacting strongly to. loved the way murray was caught off gaurd by the questions (it was obviously the first time he had been interviewed by a professional journalist), and how murray gets agressive during the interview, then backs down when he sees her crying and acts all sorry, telling her he was only defending himself. cant remember what cate gets upset over (though that was one of the reasons why i loved the scene), or how the interview ends...

Quote from: brocklycant remember the scene in great detail (dont even recall it being childish).

u listed it as a great scene that came to mind just over an hour and half ago.. and now u can't remember it?

Quote from: Pubrick

Quote from: brocklycant remember the scene in great detail (dont even recall it being childish).

u wrote ur review  an hour and a half ago, where u listed that as a great scene that comes to mind.. and now u can't remember it?

why do you have to make me write one of these ghey useless little defensive replies that makes me look like im going through too much effort to rescue my own self esteem. like you even care man.... here goes:

i do remember the scene, just not in great detail, like i said.

i also said:

Quotei remember there was something about it i reacted strongly to

and went on to describe what i remember loving about it:

Quoteloved the way murray was caught off gaurd by the questions (it was obviously the first time he had been interviewed by a professional journalist), and how murray gets agressive during the interview, then backs down when he sees her crying and acts all sorry, telling her he was only defending himself.

just couldn't remember every detail, which is why i finished my post with

Quotecant remember what cate gets upset over (though that was one of the reasons why i loved the scene), or how the interview ends...

the reason i noted the scene was because i was thinking about random scenes i remembered loving while watching film and that one popped into my head.... i also thought it was funny how cate would turn the recorder off everytime she said something she wanted kept off the record and then turned it back on again straight away.

whoa a little whoa aren't whoa

that was some p reference.

Quote from: brockly

why do you have to make me write one of these ghey useless little defensive replies that makes me look like im going through too much effort to rescue my own self esteem. like you even care man....

hahaha. Only these sentences were needed.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuicidegirls.com%2Fmedia%2Fauthors%2F1433%2Farticle.jpg&hash=89e2caa6b2cbee54a5fb6a109c6b072d31430ae6)

No one comedian has had more influence on my life than Bill Murray, both personally and professionally. I have seen many of the movies that Bill Murray starred in the 1980’s, such as Caddyshack, Stripes and Ghostbusters, a minimum of 50 times apiece, probably a lot more. Much of the way I crack jokes, the way I move my face to emphasize something and even the way I walk can be traced back to the genius that is he, the fifth of the Murray children.

The films I mentioned above are known to Murrayphiles as the first wave of his film career. The second wave includes Ed Wood, Quick Change, Breckinridge, Groundhog Day and What About Bob? In fact Bill Murray’s dramatic skills in those films impressed me so much that in 1994 I said to any who would listen, “In five years Bill Murray will be nominated for an Oscar.” When Wes Anderson discovered new facets of Murray for Rushmore I thought my prediction was coming true. But the third wave, Rushmore, Cradle Will Rock and The Royal Tenenbaums bore no fruit until Murray was in Sofia Coppola’s Lost in Translation as Bob Harris, a far past his prime American film actor. Though he lost the award to Sean Penn things may change this Oscar season when Wes Anderson’s The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is released on December 25th.

Daniel Robert Epstein: I like your Blues Brothers t-shirt.

Bill Murray: I like yours too, Sean John.

DRE: I don’t think we’ve seen you smoke pot onscreen since Caddyshack.

BM: I haven’t been keeping track of it but yeah.

DRE: Is that sense memory?

BM: Well actually they usually give this herbal dust stuff which makes you cough. It’s not really pleasant so you want to make sure you nail it on the first take.

DRE: Is this the hardest movie shoot you’ve ever been on?

BM: Yes it was. This was by far the most physically demanding, the most emotionally demanding both personally and professionally. Also the most ambitious.

DRE: Would you have done a movie like this with anyone but Wes Anderson?

BM: I don’t know. If you read the script and you didn’t know who was in charge you would be much less confident. I sure as hell wouldn’t leave the country and go over there for just anybody. You have to have faith in some people.

DRE: Wes has mentioned that it was harder to get you for this film because you no longer have an agent. How come you left CAA?

BM: It was a lot of things but it was a mutual separation. It was just time. Michael Ovitz was my guy and he became the pariah. The business also changed and I like to cut my own lawn now so I don’t need a landscaper. I really don’t get work from agents and I haven’t for a long time. People call me. I had a long run with CAA but it wasn’t working for me.

DRE: People have called this the serious phase of your career.

BM: My blue period.

I think all phases of one’s career are serious if you take it seriously no matter if you are doing high profile dramatic pieces or not. That’s just a perception. I’ve taken all the work seriously but you can’t take the response and reaction to it too seriously. But you can’t get all bent out of shape if it’s not pleasant. I just love the shooting of the movies when the camera is rolling.

DRE: Did Wes have to hound you do this role?

BM: Wes told me about this thing years ago when we were making Rushmore but I didn’t make anything of it. He didn’t come after me much at all. I have a lot of faith in him so he doesn’t have to explain much to me. If I feel I need something explained then I ask. When we were discussing this movie we were taking a boat trip. I told him I wanted to rehearse and he was like “What?” and I said “Yeah I want you to tell me the story.” So he had a script to him and he read it to me. I just laid back sunbathing while he read it to me. It was like a bedtime story. That was all he did. We didn’t even finish, at one point I just said “Ok that’s enough.”

DRE: As someone with improv background, is it difficult to follow a script to a T?

BM: I don’t mind it. I still get to improvise when there is something there. He did make a script that was really hard to speak. I defy you do some of these tongue twisters with another actor two or three times in a row. But it’s nice to have a script where I don’t have to improvise. I used to have to rewrite whole movies.

DRE: Angelica Huston has called you melancholic. But Steve Zissou is melancholy and lovable at the same time. Is that difficult to accomplish?

BM: To be melancholy and lovable is the trick. You’ve got to be able to show that you have these feelings. In the game of life you get these feelings and it’s all about how you deal with those feelings. A melancholy can be sweet. It’s not a mean thing but it’s something that happens in life like autumn.

DRE: Do you find that you still follow the teachings of Del Close when you improvise?

BM: Well it’s sort of in my blood and bones now. He was a genius that made improvisation a high art. He was one of the brightest men I ever met and a really deep soul. He’s gone now but a lot of people live on that know part of what he knew. I feel like I got some award because I worked with him and now we’re supposed to go on and tell people something he told us.

DRE: Do you ever get back to Chicago?

BM: Yeah I went to a four game series with the Marlins. I went to the new Frank Gehry bandshell and it’s just mind boggling. It has those towers.

DRE: What do you think of finally getting that Oscar nomination for Lost in Translation?

BM: I think it’s going to be a thing where once every 25 years I will get an Oscar nomination.

DRE: Have you kept in touch with Scarlett Johansson?

BM: It’s funny because you just don’t keep in touch with people that often. My wife would feel funny if I spent too much time with this 18 year old girl.

DRE: Did you keep any of the Speedos from Life Aquatic?

BM: I don’t know where all that stuff went. Usually you steal your wardrobe but they held it in case of a reshoot but I haven’t seen any of it. I remember being freezing while wearing them though.

DRE: What do you think hurt Steve Zissou more, that [Cate Blanchett’s character of] Jane Winslett-Richardson told him he was too old for her or that his son got together with her?

BM: I think they are both sides of the same coin. His son is the representation of his youth is the killer. A girl telling you that you’re too old is a bull dyke, that’s the game, but your son hitting on the girl you have a crush on is tough because you can’t claw over him.

DRE: You’ve spent a lot of time in France. Do they treat you differently over there?

BM: People in Europe only know me from the movies so they see me as a film character. People here have seen me on television playing wacky characters on sketch comedy. When you do David Letterman it shows people a different side. I’m just a citizen here but in Europe they see me in a more artistic sense.

I like it over there. Their film culture permeates the culture a little more there than here. When I lived in France I went to the Cinematheque everyday. There is a paper telling you exactly what film is playing and every detail. They don’t have that here.

DRE: Were you surprised when Lost in Translation became such a phenomenon?

BM: That’s a good question. Why did that film get so much attention? The film is so interesting because it shows a personal decision we all have to make sometime. It’s when you bump into someone that’s not your mate, husband or wife and something happens between you. How do you behave in that situation? I read a definition this year that a hero is someone that does something they don’t want to do. The thing is that Bob Harris really wanted someone to make him feel. Nothing happened between him and that girl which made him a hero, a different kind of hero. It’s the kind that everyone can be. Not everyone can be Indiana Jones or a Ghostbuster but everyone can make the decision to do that thing they want to do.

DRE: Both Steve Zissou and Bob Harris spend a lot of time looking back over their career. Do you do much of that?

BM: It’s not that they are looking back so much but that they had success and now they are concerned about having success in the future. Where their next meal ticket and the thing that makes them feel good will come from. Zissou goes back to the ocean because he loves the ocean and how to make a life out of it. But to be able to keep going back to the ocean he’s got to make a documentary. For Bob Harris, he likes being an actor but to stay known he’s got to make a commercial so that he makes some money to live his lifestyle.

For me I’ve had lots of things to do and a few years I thought about whether I should be a big movie star. But I didn’t want to be a big movie star so I decided I want to live my life and see what happens. At the same time I took these jobs where I don’t make a lot of money but I work with good people and I do what I want to do. I thought that maybe one of them will be a hit one day and I will get what I need in terms of being noticed and damn, Lost in Translation did that. But between that I made seven movies that were good but didn’t have it all work at once like that. I like working to not be the biggest star in the world. I’m trying to help Life Aquatic but I don’t want to feel desperate. I don’t want to be that guy mumbling into his drink at a bar. I’ve had a great run and if I change careers that would be an adventure too.

DRE: What would you do if you changed careers?

BM: I’m not sure but I’ve been thinking about it. It would be bold to say that I did that and had some success. I would like to write a play. I always felt that’s what I should do.

Quote from: picolas

Quote from: brocklySome great scenes that come to mind: blanchet/murray interview

i thought that was a flat-out bad scene. the writing was trying to be clever by being childish, but it was sooo childish that it was just childish.

aside from that and the whole love triangle idea i want to see this again right now.

I think it's funny when people say stuff like this.  Wes was "trying" to do this, "trying" to do that...when's the last time we bitched about this especially in a "Wes" movie?  Maybe he wasn't even trying to be clever. Did ya ever think of that? And to think people complained about the "awkward" action scene in this movie but gave no mention to the Chas versus Eli  fighting at the end of Tenenbaums which was constricted and kind of flat.  I don't complain that much.  "Wes was going for upbeat and swift but gave it a constricted edge so the scene just came out constricted."
I think we sometimes think our favorite artists try too hard.

(https://xixax.com/templates/xixax/images/lang_english/icon_delete.gif)

Why do people often think that Wes directed I (Heart) Huckabees? Has anyone else heard this?

First it was one of my friends, who I corrected, then, just yesterday as I was going to see this again, I overheard two guys talking:

"Yeah, I haven't seen this one, but I just watched the one he did before... I heart Huckabees - one for The Life Aquatic - it was pretty crazy."

So, okay, sure, only one was confused. But I'm confused as to how people are getting confused.
Does David O. Russell spell his name like Wes Anderson now?

Perhaps Schwartzman is the connection?

perhaps mild retardation is the cause?

Actually, my environmental science professor assumed Wes Anderson directed I Heart Huckabees. I didn't inquire why, but the Schwartzman explanation makes sense. he's pretty good with films too. I think a lot more knowledgeable than the local film professor.

Quote from: ranemaka13Why do people often think that Wes directed I (Heart) Huckabees?

They have the same haircut.

The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou Criterion Collection DVD Preview
Hunting the jaguar shark on two amazing discs.

Despite widely varying appraisals of Wes Anderson's filmmaking skill, one thing seems indelibly clear: his films have made some of the best transitions to DVD in recent memory. Both Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums scored Criterion Collection versions, and Anderson's latest, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou has gotten the same treatment.

The film stars Bill Murray and features a zany band of sea explorers who roughly approximate Jacques Cousteau's crew on ecstasy. The Life Aquatic tells the story of Steve Zissou, a failing documentarian whose life really starts going downhill when his best friend is eaten by a shark. The film chronicles Zissou's quest for revenge and his connection with a long-lost son (Owen Wilson) who appears at the beginning of the expedition.

There is an extensive explanation of the disc's transfer in the fold-out, so we'll let that speak for itself: "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou is presented in its original aspect ratio of 2.35:1. Black bars at the top and bottom of the screen are normal for this screen format. The original 35 mm cut negative was scanned at 4k resolution on an Imagica "Imager" XE Scanner. The final down-sampled 2K files were color corrected using a da Vinci 2K Color Corrector and recorded to an HD 24-frame progressive D5.

The soundtrack was mastered at 24-bit from the original magnetic tracks. Enhanced for widescreen televisions, the transfer was supervised by Wes Anderson and director of photography Robert Yeoman. To maintain optimal image quality through the compression process, the picture on this dual-layer DVD-9 was encoded at the highest possible bit rate for the quantity of materials included." Wouldn't it be great if every disc listed this much information?

As you'd expect, the discs are loaded with special features, including the following:

*Commentary by Director Wes Anderson and Writer Noah Bamubach
*This is an Adventure, a documentary chronicling the movie's production.
*An interview with Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach on the Italian talk show Mondo Monda.
*Video interview with Mark Mothersbaugh, composer and former Devo member.
*Ten video performances by Seu Jorge, who performed the Portugese Bowie renditions for the film.
*Video journal of Intern #1 (actor Matthew Gray Gubler).
*Interviews/behind-the-scenes footage of cast and crew.
*"Starz on the Set" behind-the-scenes featurette.
*Deleted scenes.
*Theatrical trailer.
*Original art from the film.
*Behind the scenes photos.
*Fold-out insert featuring a cross-section of the Belafonte, as drawn by Eric Anderson.

In addition to the foldout, the disc features the same style of hand-drawn art that Eric Anderson crafted for Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums' Criterion editions. Here is a bunch of images of the box art:


(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081059141.jpg&hash=63a1012cc6050b5de84aeae11ba9bc160305180a)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081059969.jpg&hash=c7acf94634a977e8d960803bb76e52328519ee82)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081059703.jpg&hash=6c8859ab27164f98afac5b96e446618d7845cee4)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081101453.jpg&hash=c2f7f0c8c83057f63931130ed1aa91d5710b8257)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081100531.jpg&hash=c98755693de0afcd3c669ffdef9a6e510de8badc)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081057391.jpg&hash=a791e714c2014471bffdfc949ffa63a6cafbcb6e)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F608%2F608209%2Flife-aquatic-with-steve-zissou-the-20050428081058766.jpg&hash=8d3f8325b2616ac2da82ed5a80e720f3356fef4a)

Fax machine anthems get your damn hands up- Hell yes!

i think this is the first dvd review:

http://dvd.ign.com/articles/609/609696p1.html

no talk of the "This is an Adventure" doc unfortunately.

i got the DVD last Monday. For anyone in New York City, you can buy it at Kim's Video. It's on display

Quote from: meatwadi got the DVD last Monday. For anyone in New York City, you can buy it at Kim's Video. It's on display

You just made my day!   :-D

Quote from: hacksparrow

Quote from: meatwadi got the DVD last Monday. For anyone in New York City, you can buy it at Kim's Video. It's on display

You just made my day!   :-D

My day was unmade when I checked Kim's on Thursday and there were no more!  

Now I have to buy it tomorrow like a goddamn commoner!   :yabbse-angry:

DVDFile Review:
http://www.dvdfile.com/software/review/dvd-video_11/lifeaquatic.html

Funny thing, I always screw up and buy the single disc instead of the double, sometimes I open it then I have to go through the return hastle etc.
this time I caught myself as I was approaching the line. I'm getting better.
p.s. the dude in front of me is how I caught my mistake. he was buying Life Aquatic and the new Weezer which is exactly what I was buying. Geeks.

Weezer and Wes Anderson, bringing in the dough using the geek aesthetic.

The good: No "Coming Soon on Disney DVD" ads.

The bad: Those stupid briefcase snappers.

All bads are outweighed by the fact that we get an affordable 2 disc criterion release.

I'm slightly frusterated because when I ordered it I preordered the Casino Special Edition with it so I won't be getting my 2 disc till June.

Quote from: SiliasRubyI'm slightly frusterated because when I ordered it I preordered the Casino Special Edition with it so I won't be getting my 2 disc till June.

Woe, Wooooeeee is you!

Quote from: POZERhe was buying ... the new Weezer

poor sod.

I just watched this movie two times in a row, having only seen it in the theater once.  After the first time I wasn't sure if I liked Rushmore or The Life Aquatic more, but now I can say with minor emphasis that The Life Aquatic is warmer, more personal, more ballsy, and smarter than any prior  Wes Anderson effort.  Also, it has action sequences.

But this is the 47th fucking page and everyone else probably already knows how everybody else feels.  So if I'm agreeing with someone from page six or twenty three or thirty nine or whatever than awesome.

no, you're wrong.  its more flawed.  the characters arent as good.  and the pace is weird.  its a good loose sketch for a movie to be finished sometime later.

Quote from: MacGuffinThe bad: Those stupid briefcase snappers.

My 2-disc didn't have those.  My condolences to anyone whose copy does.

It's so much better the second time around, now that I can pay attention to what it actually is instead of what I expected it would be.

Quote from: Weak2ndActAll bads are outweighed by the fact that we get an affordable 2 disc criterion release.

I'm not a complicated man. I just like the simple pleasures like butter in my ass, and no latches on my DVD case.

Quote from: themodernage02no, you're wrong.  its more flawed.  the characters arent as good.  and the pace is weird.  its a good loose sketch for a movie to be finished sometime later.

I think the pace is fucking perfect.  I think it's a pace that isn't beset by rules and abritrary traditionlism, but is allowed to flow natural, this natural flow becomes cumbersome, but this is true to life.  I think the structure of the movie buttresses the character of Steve Zissou, and it is only as flawed as he is, that it is a flawed human making a movie about another flawed human.

I think scratching the surface of this movie brings up a lot more than any previous film of Anderson's.  By the end of Life Aquatic I know the characters as my friends, it is inviting and comforting, I think the Life Aquatic creates a world that we can step into, not observe from afar like Royal Tenenbaums.  The progression of characters makes more sense in this movie, the sequence of events is more surprising and more jarring, the camera is looser and subsequently more provocative.  The Life Aquatic is ballsy as fuck, there's no argument to me made there.  Wes attemtped to evolve, he attempted to probe the human condition, to share one man's burdening, one man's uncompromising path.

I completely fucking disagree, basically, personally.

yeah, i know what wes attempted to do.  but the movie comes off forced.  everything wes was able to do so naturally, (the humor, the music, the characters) all the 'quirks' that made his previous movies so great seemed shoehorned into this movie and overall, it just did not work.  its good, mostly and nobody is arguing whether its admirable.  but its just a miss.  sorry/.  go back a bunch of pages and read my 3000 word review.  i tried to make excuses for it, too.  :(

Quote from: themodernage02yeah, i know what wes attempted to do.  but the movie comes off forced.  everything wes was able to do so naturally, (the humor, the music, the characters) all the 'quirks' that made his previous movies so great seemed shoehorned into this movie and overall, it just did not work.  its good, mostly and nobody is arguing whether its admirable.  but its just a miss.  sorry/.  go back a bunch of pages and read my 3000 word review.  i tried to make excuses for it, too.  :(

Alright, I'm game.  It's on page 30, by the way.

I must, once again, disagree. I don't think the film is diffuclt, I don't think it's an unexpected or even illogical advancement for Wes, and I don't see the film as loose.  I think that this is exactly where Wes Anderson needed to go.  On page 31 I found A.O. Scott's review, which had a very smart observance:

QuoteHe is a child's fantasy of adulthood brought to life, and at the same time an embodiment of the longing for a return to childhood that colors so much of grown-up life.

Wes Anderson's previous films had a large barrier between their characters and their emotions, but the Life Aquatic is Anderson at his rawest yet, the greatest attempt at sublimation he has had yet.  Anderson's discomfort with himself is in every frame.

I've said other times on this forum that the most important quality in a film for me is its effort in sharing an idea about the human spirit.  If you like your films non-confrontational themodernage02, than I can completely understand why the Life Aquatic is not favorable to you.  But for me, the movie does more soul searching and character deconstruction , it goes beneath the surface and becomes a revelatory piece.  This makes sense too, seeing as how the story was over a decade old for Anderson.  You can see him getting tired of the story, you can see the shift go entirely to the struggle of Steve.  That's fucking great movie making to me, when the filmmaker loses his self-consciousness.

It doesn't need excuses made for it.

Quote from: MacGuffin

Quote from: Weak2ndActAll bads are outweighed by the fact that we get an affordable 2 disc criterion release.

I'm not a complicated man. I just like the simple pleasures like butter in my ass, and no latches on my DVD case.

Good news. There's no latches on the 2-disc DVD case. Bad news. You're out of butter.

The Life Aquatic is Wes Anderson's The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. And it plays better on the small screen.

theres latches on my 2 disc dvd case.

Quote from: AwkwardAsIAmIt doesn't need excuses made for it.

alright, just for you.  when i watch it again i will make a list of 100 things that bug me about the movie.

I guess I got lucky. Since latchless is a precious thing here on Xixax, who wants to buy my case?

Quote from: themodernage02

Quote from: AwkwardAsIAmIt doesn't need excuses made for it.

alright, just for you.  when i watch it again i will make a list of 100 things that bug me about the movie.

But then you'd be judging the movie by the quality of its presentation and not the quality of its essence, which is what enamors me.  I've already said:  Yes, if you like your movies nice and tidy, his earlier works are obvious choices.  Hell, you could even say that his earlier movies are just as personal, it is just that for me The Life Aquatic is reflective of his fucked up, human side, not his usual idiosyncratic, perfectionist side.

So spare me the list.

To me, Wes' movies are like intimate bedtime stories. Not meant for the theatrical masses, which is how I saw Life Aquatic for the first time -- and hated it. Now that's it's humbly spinning in my DVD player, it's much more enjoyable.

I also like the simple pleasure of no LOUD restaurant background noise on my commentary tracks. But that could be just me.

Quote from: MacGuffinI also like the simple pleasure of no LOUD restaurant background noise on my commentary tracks.

But I don't like the loud *BEEP* where Cousteau's name should be.

Quote from: hacksparrow

Quote from: MacGuffinI also like the simple pleasure of no LOUD restaurant background noise on my commentary tracks.

But I don't like the loud *BEEP* where Cousteau's name should be.

I HATE THAT TOO! What's the point of it? The revelation was so weak...stoopid Anderson and his would-be clever little devices.

Quote from: POZER

Quote from: hacksparrow

Quote from: MacGuffinI also like the simple pleasure of no LOUD restaurant background noise on my commentary tracks.

But I don't like the loud *BEEP* where Cousteau's name should be.

I HATE THAT TOO! What's the point of it? The revelation was so weak...stoopid Anderson and his would-be clever little devices.

it's mentioned in this thread above i think, but i'll reiterate.

cousteau's name is bleeped due to legal issues concerning the source material for the character of Steve Zissou. these issues revolve around Cousteau's estate, and their limitations on the amount of reference and homage allowable for the film.

Quote from: analogzombiecousteau's name is bleeped due to legal issues concerning the source material for the character of Steve Zissou. these issues revolve around Cousteau's estate, and their limitations on the amount of reference and homage allowable for the film.

Which is really weird since the film is basically dedicated to Cousteau, if I'm not mistaken....

analog didn't get it

its a digital bleep.

FEATURE - The LIFE Didactic with Jeff Goldblum
It’s the actor’s most prominent role since his days of battling the dinosaurs. And Jeff Goldblum has his own unique way of ensuring he doesn’t himself become one. By Todd Gilchrist, FilmStew.com

“Anything to drink? Would you like anything to eat? A club sandwich? A Monte Cristo? A Reuben sandwich?"

These are the first words I hear from actor Jeff Goldblum, doing precious little to dissuade me that even after all these years, he’s no less nutty than his film roles would suggest.

"Lamb shank? Beef Wellington?" he continues, to which I attempt to respond with a courteous ‘No thanks.’ "A nice Long Island Iced Tea?" Appreciative though I am - and despite an increasing need for something alcoholic - I politely decline, and launch right into questions about his latest project The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, which makes its debut on DVD this week in a sterling Criterion Collection two-disc set.

In the film, Goldblum plays Alistair Hennessey, the well funded arch-nemesis to Steve Zissou (Bill Murray), and coincidentally, ex-husband to Steve’s ex-wife Eleanor (Anjelica Huston). Though the actor has certainly enjoyed a spate of roles that trade upon his idiosyncratic line delivery and studied behavior, Goldblum says that the character was never an intentional send-up of his intellectual iconography.

"You know, I’ve played some of those parts,” he begins in that typically staccato speech rhythm of his. “I’ve had a variety of parts and maybe so, but I hadn’t thought of it that way. But you know, there’s something wry about [writer-director] Wes Anderson, who I consider a genius.”

“There’s something droll and wry and ironic about his sensibility,” he continues. “A lot of the jokes and humor in this movie have that color. There might be something kind of. ‘This is who I am and who I’ve been,’ but it wasn’t intentional. We never talked about that- ‘Hey, let’s poke fun at that.’"

Anderson’s developing oeuvre (Bottle Rocket, Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums) is in many ways as eccentric and rewarding as Goldblum’s; in the span of just four films, he’s developed an imprint that audiences and actors alike respond to with dogged persistence. But his Life Aquatic collaborator reveals that the director did not in fact write the part for him, despite the outward similarities between Goldblum and Hennessey.

"He wrote it as a British character," Goldblum reveals. "He and Noah Baumbach, the lovely writer-director, had a couple of British actors in mind. Then we had kind of an impromptu reading with a bunch of actors. I read... [and] I didn’t even know what I was reading, but it was so rich and beautiful and my part in the movie is so unexpected. He said, ‘I’d like you to do it’ after that."

Goldblum’s star has fallen from the Hollywood sky in recent years, taking a back seat to the industry’s pretty young things, even though he has long since proved his mettle as a dramatic actor (The Fly), action hero (Jurassic Park) and compelling comedian (The Big Chill). Despite the qualitative consistency of his performances, he says that he takes on each role individually, shaping the character according to the demands of the script and what the director requires of him.

"I’m nothing if not conscientious,” he maintains. “From the time I get the part, I do a lot of stuff. Sometimes you know, you have it, and sometimes you have to go ‘Hmm, will that work in such a way that it dries it up?’ Or, you know, it’s a funny kind of work."

"But there is a kind of work," suggests the now 52-year-old actor. "I’ve discovered for myself what I can do, and keep doing and sculpting at where good things can happen, at least for my taste, that feel right to me. And a lot of it is instinctual; sometimes I can’t tell you, but on this I did a lot of research.”

“I saw some documentaries, there’s a beautiful state-of-the-art undersea series that I saw, which was great and excited me about the whole world, and I read some things about the work going on oceanographically and, you know, I didn’t feel like I needed to do much more than that. I did things that were more instinctive and intuitive."

The Pittsburgh, PA native says that no matter what are his ambitions, the director’s vision always comes first; in the case of Life Aquatic, Goldblum knew how much time and detail Anderson devoted to the conception of his characters, and simply tried to play his role effectively in the context of the picture’s sprawling ensemble.

"No matter how much work you do or what you do, it is so collaborative and you have to count on the director," he explains. "It feels like to me at this point that you can do a lot of good stuff, but the director’s got to use you well."

"[Wes] is so meticulously designed and visionary about everything and so interesting," Goldblum gushes. "He pre-designed it so even the tip of the iceberg of something that you say and wear makes something interesting that refers to a whole world of who you must be. The work is done for you because it’s so interestingly conceived and it’s so surprising and it’s so interesting on its own."

The director’s meticulous approach notwithstanding, Goldblum says he found the filmmaker to be surprisingly flexible once shooting began. "He reminds me of Robert Altman in some ways and some directors I’ve worked with who are very improvisational. Kind of, ‘Whatever happens, I’ll include it’."

Goldblum says he was mildly overwhelmed by the illustrious history of Rome’s Cinecitta studios, where the film was shot, but ultimately regained enough focus to provide the right brush strokes to complete - and hopefully perfect - Anderson’s singular universe. "It’s hard when you have been in Rome for a few months, which is delightful,” he recalls. “It’s an enchanted kind of place, like this movie, and with this group of people it’s an enchanting experience, but then you come in just here and there to do a little thing."

"It’s one little moment in a painting that is big, so you want to just get it right,” he continues. “You have to just do something sort of right, and you don’t have too many chances. That’s challenging."

As a longtime leading man, Goldblum has shared the screen with countless actors of merit, but he insists that the process is the same whether you’re anchoring the experience or simply helping push it out of the proverbial harbor. "Even when you’re the lead in the movie, no matter who shows up, no matter how much they have to say or do, it still feels like a game played between you and them," he observes cryptically. "The better they are, the better you are, and what you do is determined by them.”

“I enjoy that part of it, that listening to and relating to and being connected to people whom you’re playing,” he says. “It’s determined in some part at least by what happens. So I like the ensemble aspect of anything, whether it’s very few things or just you by yourself."

In spite of his minor resuscitation, which is poised to continue with Mini’s First Time, co-starring Alec Baldwin and Luke Wilson, and his current run on Broadway in Martin McDonagh’s The Pillowman, Goldblum insists he has no false expectations. "It’s a tough game," he concedes nonchalantly. "But to me, I stay focused on the sheer act of enjoying what I’m doing; it’s true now more than ever that’s what I’m doing."

“My desire to act was a matter of crazed passion," he concludes. "By the time I was in high school, I was baying at the moon about needing to do this, and so I was never particularly strategic about it, or a career animal of one kind or another. Having said that, I have very nice kind of good people around me, trying to make the most of things."

I was looking through the memorable quotes section on IMDB and I came across this:

Quote from: IMDBSteve Zissou: [bursts onto the surface from an underwater dive, shouting hysterically. Written text of what Steve is shouting rolls onto the screen as he speaks] Shark-like fish... ten meters in length... irregular markings... I tagged it with a homing dart...
[camera zooms in on Steve]
Steve Zissou: [shouts] Esteban was eaten!
Klaus Daimler: Is he dead?
Steve Zissou: He was eaten!
Klaus Daimler: A shark bit him?
Steve Zissou: A shark *ate* him!
Klaus Daimler: [shocked] It swallowed him whole?
Steve Zissou: No!... *Chewed*!
Klaus Daimler: [to the camera] He's got hydrogen psychosis, the crazy-eye!
[camera zooms in on Steve's face - his eyes are dilated ridiculously large, actor is wearing fake contacts]
Klaus Daimler: Steve! They say you've got crazy-eye!

And it got me thinking about what Jane said to Steve in that one interview attempt, when she says that it seemed to her like some aspects of the latest film were fake.  Add to that the clip of them swimming in the Arctic and, very obviously staged, Steve hearing the animal distress call and rescuing the otter (or whatever it was, I forget at the moment) and its babies.  

Was Wes trying to get it across that the exchange right after Esteban's death was dramatized after the incident and that Steve was acting in what we see in The Jaguar Shark Part 1?  Is that what everyone found fake?

Because I never got that from the clip.  I thought it was just Wes' usual quirkiness in directing his film showing through as opposed to Steve Zissou's ego in directing his film.

Does any of this make sense?

but he IS wearing fake contacts... the crazy-eye is that spiralled red-eye... they had to use contacts.

I think that theory is shared by others anyway.

yeah i dont think that was intended.  theres no mention of it on the commentary or on the making of doc when they're filming that scene.

Question: Are these criterion interviews staged? by 'these' i mean the mondo monda interview on life aquatic and the peter bradley one on royal tenenbaums. these interviews are some of the funniest things i've ever seen. i seriously almost fell off my chair during mondo monda. were they intended to be serious interviews that wound up in another direction, or they intentionally this way? i'm leaning towards intentional because they're too funny not to be, but if someone could confirm this for my piece of mind, that'd be cool. thanks.

yes its staged - the italian interviewer is an actor in the film - the announcer at at the film fest

who is really a guy who interviews people, just like he did bill murray in the film, which is why wes used him in the part.  he was a friend.

Quote from: themodernage02who is really a guy who interviews people, just like he did bill murray in the film, which is why wes used him in the part.  he was a friend.

does that mean you think its fake or real?

- its fake

i havent watched it yet.  i just know that guy is in real life, normally an interviewer, not an actor.  he just played the part cause wes knew him and thats what he does in real life.

i think on the commentary it said hes a nyc prof as well

DVD Q&A: Wes Anderson
Source: Entertainment Weekly

The director who transformed Bill Murray into a Speedo-sporting action hero chats about The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou.

Life has pirates, explosions, chases -- are you now an action director?

Michael Bay does good action sequences. I do, um, odd action sequences. I may have invented a new genre.

This is your first movie without Owen Wilson as co-writer.

By The Royal Tenenbaums, Owen was kind of a movie star. On Life, [co-writer] Noah Baumbach was able to meet every day. I like somebody to talk with every day.

Why have an actor cover David Bowie songs in Portuguese?

I thought it would be funny for someone to sing to the crew. Any why not David Bowie songs? Then I made it an international "Benetton" crew, and it turned out one actor was also a pop star in Brazil. So it snowballed.

Quote from: cowboykurtisi think on the commentary it said hes a nyc prof as well

He's also on the 8 1/2 Criterion as a commentator.

Quote from: Ultrahip...i mean the mondo monda interview on life aquatic and the peter bradley one on royal tenenbaums. these interviews are some of the funniest things i've ever seen. i seriously almost fell off my chair during mondo monda.

Come on, really? It wasn't that funny.

The funniest part of the extras was during the behind the scenes doc when they were filming the helicopter crash, doing a bunch of takes and Wes kept wanting it different after each one. After one of the takes Wes says to Bill: "Delay the arm Bill, delay it for a second." Bill turns to Owen and says: "Can't do anything right with this guy...just can't."
Now that's ha-ha funny.

Quote from: POZERThe funniest part of the extras was during the behind the scenes doc when they were filming the helicopter crash, doing a bunch of takes and Wes kept wanting it different after each one. After one of the takes Wes says to Bill: "Delay the arm Bill, delay it for a second." Bill turns to Owen and says: "Can't do anything right with this guy...just can't."
Now that's ha-ha funny.

Have you watched the easter egg on Disc 1? There's a four minute plus take of Murray trying on the shoes with Wes shouting different directions to him.

that was good too, but the mondo monda thing, it's just noah baumbach's whole demeanor more than anything else. i just look at him and it cuts me right down the sides! he tells it like it is.

Yeah, he is pretty good, Barry.

hello.  i have quick question, hopefully someone out there knows it- it's not that important or anything but, on the trailer to the Life Aquatic a song is played in the background, that isn't used in the movie.  the song is qued once the Wes Anderson credit pops up, it's sounds similar to the gut feeling devo track... i'm wondering what it is.. thanks in advance. sorry if this query was already answered.

ceremony by new order

which is track one on disc one of the album Substance.  and as Wes mentions on the commentary was originally planned to be used in the "Life On Mars" scene when Zissou learns Ned may be his son and walks along the boat.

After watching "This is an Adventure" I'll go out on a limb and say I do not think Bill Murray will work with Wes again.

Their working relationship by the end seemd far from symbiotic.

Many sources seem to give similar insight into Murrays growing frustration of Wes and his working methods. That documentary further soldified what I'd heard to be true. He did not look like a happy camper.

thats funny, because i just wrote in the murray thread that i thought during the extras he seemed to be having a fine time compared to the stories of misery he's been telling.

Quote from: cowboykurtisAfter watching "This is an Adventure" I'll go out on a limb and say I do not think Bill Murray will work with Wes again.

Their working relationship by the end seemd far from symbiotic.

Many sources seem to give similar insight into Murrays growing frustration of Wes and his working methods. That documentary further soldified what I'd heard to be true. He did not look like a happy camper.

have his meathods gone worse?  if so then he should go back cause the films in the past were better anyway.

i'm interested, can you be more specific?

-sl-

Lot of rolling of the eyes from Murray, him getting pissed with Wes wanting too many takes, things of that nature.
But I mean, it was a huge shoot under difficult circumstances. People are gonna get frustrated and on each other's nerves in those situations. especially with someone like Wes who sees something good, then wants to perfect it by trying many different ways.
In post interviews, he describes Bill as one of his favorite actors. I'm sure they'll work together again. Hopefully on something smaller.

Watched this in theatre, and seen it twice since I bought the DVD on Tuesday.  At first, the movie was a disapointment but the more I watch it, the more I pick up on it and love it.

I do agree about Bill Murray.  I hope I'm wrong and I hope that he continues to work with Wes Anderson but I get this impression that in Bill's mind the film could have been much more then it was and after making Lost in Translation, he was hoping for the perfect project.

Quote from: POZERLot of rolling of the eyes from Murray, him getting pissed with Wes wanting too many takes, things of that nature.
But I mean, it was a huge shoot under difficult circumstances. People are gonna get frustrated and on each other's nerves in those situations. especially with someone like Wes who sees something good, then wants to perfect it by trying many different ways.
In post interviews, he describes Bill as one of his favorite actors. I'm sure they'll work together again. Hopefully on something smaller.

i love the bit when murray looks to wilson and says something like, shit you just can't do anything right for this guy.  wilson looks at him with approval.  after watching the docu and seeing the way anderson works i've got to say i was surprised how unprofessional he was.  he wasn't a tyrant or having tantrums or something, but he just doesn't know how to talk to actors.

-sl-

Hmm, I think you definately see him directing in the most unfavourable scenes/situations on the DVD. The chopper. Underwater with Seymour Cassel. The 'new shoes' easter egg is just a 2 second shot in the film. What you dont see is how the conversational scenes come to be so well paced and staged. The hot air balloon scene for example. The cutting remarks and to the point dialogue in his last three films require a great understanding of/instinct for timing to work as well as they do.

Quote from: MacGuffin

Have you watched the easter egg on Disc 1? There's a four minute plus take of Murray trying on the shoes with Wes shouting different directions to him.

Where is this?

Quote from: POZER

Quote from: MacGuffinHave you watched the easter egg on Disc 1? There's a four minute plus take of Murray trying on the shoes with Wes shouting different directions to him.

Where is this?

From the Main Menu, the arrow will start on PLAY THE MOVIE, Arrow Left will take you to Subtitles. Arrow Up to "STARZ ON THE SET." Arrow Up again and the arrow will appear on the ship. Press Play.

thank you, my friend.

Quote from: POZERLot of rolling of the eyes from Murray, him getting pissed with Wes wanting too many takes, things of that nature.

I remember Bill Murray saying how every take he'd say things differently, and then at the end, Wes would tell him what he liked the most, and they'd do it again, with Bill piecing Wes' favorite parts together.

I was listening to it, and wasn't watching it, so I could've been missing some body language.

yeah, that stuff must have been toward the beginning of the massive shoot. that shite would get really old after a while.
finally watched the easter egg and i know wes is a perfectionist times two and all, but come on, that many takes for that two second shot of him trying on the shoes. to me, this shows signs of bad directing- wasting all that time and energy for that one little spot. that had to be toward the beginning of production cause bill wasn't as annoyed then, but i can now easily see why he would get fed up with his antics.

Quote from: POZERcome on, that many takes for that two second shot of him trying on the shoes. to me, this shows signs of bad directing- wasting all that time and energy for that one little spot. that had to be toward the beginning of production cause bill wasn't as annoyed then, but i can now easily see why he would get fed up with his antics.

I'm sorry, but I don't really think you know what you're talking about.

That was just one mag they shot for that.  You want it to be funny so you try a few different things, it wasn't really that long considering that shooting one scene often takes a lot longer and they did it all in one take.  It's not like he's Kubrick or anything.

dude, it was annoying.

Quote from: POZERdude, it was annoying.

Welcome to the world of filmmaking.  

I hope you're not an actor.

haha. no, i was just saying i could see why tensions would run so high with a guy like wes at the helm. i should not have used the term bad directing though. you're right, it does take a lot to pull off a comedy bit like that.

I have mixed feelings on this article.  

http://www.slate.com/id/2123292/


The O Factor
Was Owen Wilson the key to the Wes Anderson phenomenon?
By Field Maloney
Posted Tuesday, July 26, 2005, at 3:15 AM PT

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.slate.msn.com%2Fmedia%2F1%2F123125%2F2067927%2F2114141%2F2122782%2F050726_dvd_WesAnderson_ex.jpg&hash=bf68c3d38d141955bd7affb4cd728e66436cf922)
Is Wes less without Wilson?


Once upon a time, a young filmmaker from Houston, Texas, put together a yellow submarine of sorts—an enclosed cinematic world with a style and affect that was entirely his own, peopled with his friends and screen heroes. USS Wes Anderson delivered a couple of films that were small-scale but brilliant in a modest, eccentric way. They had what fiction writers call "voice"—a coherent and distinct cinematic language and sensibility. Anderson seemed poised to become the next major American director. Certainly, the eyes and hopes of a generation of sneaker-wearing, thrift-shop dandies, young men and women who cultivate affectlessness but have sentimental hearts, were fixed fast upon Anderson and his merry band.

True, USS Anderson had some nagging tics, and each film seemed more enclosed in the storybook boundaries of Anderson's fantasy world than the one before. After being rescued by Gene Hackman's performance in The Royal Tenenbaums, USS Anderson finally ran aground last winter, with The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou. Rather than develop as a storyteller, Anderson appeared to have floated off to an adolescent never-never land where everyone wears Lacoste, colorful and quirky toys abound, and a vintage emo soundtrack gets piped in whenever a little poignancy is required—a Michael Jackson ranch for the Salinger set.

The disappointment was widespread, yet the critics at the major papers and the hipster blogs all overlooked one important fact: The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou was the first Wes Anderson film in which Owen Wilson didn't share the writing chores. What if Owen Wilson, America's resident goofy roué with the broken nose and the lazy nasal drawl, was the rudder keeping USS Anderson on course, steering its captain away from solipsism and ironic overload?

Owen Wilson has always been taken lightly. The shaggy blond hair, the slightly dazed stare, and his careless, surfer-dude mien make him easy to underestimate, both in terms of acting talent and brains. Yet, there's something wolfish about Wilson, a sharp-edged intelligence gleaming underneath the chilled-out Texas veneer. For a recent example of Wilson's verbal counterpunching, see the letter he wrote to The New Yorker in response to a takedown of Ben Stiller.

It's not surprising that so little is known about him as a writer. Even while the Anderson/Wilson writing partnership was extant, it was mysterious. Barry Mendel, a producer of Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums, told a reporter, "Frankly, I have never seen them working together." Luke Wilson, who lived with his brother and Anderson in Los Angeles, and who appeared in all three Anderson-Wilson films, once said, "They're like one of those couples that you wonder, 'Are they really together?' It was kind of a closed-door affair sometimes. I get the feeling they both toss out names, ideas, fragments. But I couldn't tell you. And if I can't, I think probably nobody can."

But there are clues. The Criterion Collection DVDs of Rushmore, Tenenbaums, and the recently released The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou contain revealing audio commentaries, especially Rushmore's. Both Anderson and Wilson—neither of whom went to film school—come off as formidably conversant in cinema, Blockbuster autodidacts for whom a camera angle or line of script conjures up a stream of movie references. And both men are appealingly generous but unshowy with their knowledge, demonstrating copious wit and insight and sensitivity. Of course, we've long been told all this about Anderson, but it comes as a surprise how much it's equally the case for Wilson.

Ben Stiller once described Owen Wilson as having "a library in his head," and hearing his Rushmore commentary bears that out. He calls Max Fisher a "James Gatz" figure, which is the kind of Great Gatsby reference dropped by people who have actually spent time with the book. But for the most part, Wilson's references are cinematic, not literary. Unlike Anderson, whose film vocabulary is impressive but top-heavy with auteurs—Jean Renoir, Truffaut, Michael Powell—Owen Wilson draws on the rich mine of the American middlebrow. When Max, facing expulsion from Rushmore Academy, asks his headmaster: "Can you get me off the hook? You know, for old times sake?" Wilson points out that it's a Godfather reference. When Max, alone in a classroom with his love object, the beautiful young teacher Ms. Cross, gets up, mid-conversation, to stick a pencil into an electric sharpener, Wilson recalls a moment in Terms of Endearment when Jack Nicholson, driving in a convertible across the beach, runs his fingers through Shirley MacLaine's hair and shouts, (according to Wilson): "Wind is in the hair, lead is in the pencil!"

But the most telling moment in the Rushmore commentary comes later, during a long, panning group montage shot—a Wes Anderson trademark—that segues into a scene of an angry and frustrated Max finally confronting a just as angry and frustrated Ms. Cross, who finally tells Max off:

Ms. Cross: "Do you think we're going to have sex?"

Max: "That's kinda a cheap way to put it."

Ms. Cross: "Not if you ever fucked before, it isn't."

The first voice, commenting on the group montage, belongs to Anderson:

"There's a storybook feeling, something about trying to create these insular worlds in these movies. I don't know exactly why we're doing this, but ..."

Then, cut to the classroom scene, where we hear Owen Wilson in the background. "In Bottle Rocket and Rushmore there's an innocence to the characters," Wilson says. "This scene feels very real in a movie that in a lot of places seems sort of dreamy. This scene has a cringe factor to it because the movie has an innocent feel and this sort of breaks through that. It makes you uncomfortable, which is appropriate because it has to puncture Max's make-believe world."

Telling lines, and, one can't help suspect, somehow indicative of the larger system of checks and balances in the Anderson/Wilson partnership.

Wes Anderson's new screenwriting partner is Noah Baumbach, the youngish filmmaker behind the slight but sharp indie films Kicking and Screaming and Mr. Jealousy. Life Aquatic, the first film he co-wrote with Anderson, doesn't bode well for their creative duet, and the two are working on another script, for a movie based on the Roald Dahl children's book The Fantastic Mr. Fox. In a clubby touch, Baumbach and Anderson conduct the DVD commentary for Life Aquatic over dinner at Bar Pitti, a hip restaurant in Greenwich Village. Baumbach's first movie reference is to Fellini's 8 1/2—part of the canon, of course, but not as much of a gut-punch as Terms of Endearment.

One of the good things about old friends is they never tend to be that impressed with you, because they knew you way back when. Judging from the DVD commentary, Baumbach seems a little in awe of Anderson, his superstar director pal, or at least more inclined to second Anderson's vision than to challenge it, as Wilson had seemed to. You're left thinking that the Anderson-Baumbach partnership is not letting much new air into Wes Anderson's world.

Wilson, for his part, seems to be the one who dropped out of the writing partnership with Anderson. Wilson's acting career took off, and time became scarce. He told a reporter a couple of years ago that he preferred acting to writing because it was more social and spontaneous—you could always improvise lines in the moment; whereas to him, writing a script felt like holing away on a term paper. Fair enough. (Most writers, when confronted with the same choice, would follow Wilson's lead in a finger snap, if only they could.) And Wilson's improv approach to comic filmmaking—an approach shared by his coterie of pals (Stiller, Ferrell, Vaughn, et al.)—has yielded some gems. The best line in Wedding Crashers, hands down—"Scientists say we only use 10 percent of our brains, but I think we only use 10 percent of our hearts"—was reportedly a Wilson original.

And the Wilson-Anderson writing collaboration didn't always sound easy. Wes Anderson once described the producer James L. Brooks' role during the writing and revising of the Bottle Rocket script as partly "refereeing our head-butting matches, Owen's and mine." Brooks put it this way, "Wes is very opinionated and very stubborn. And Owen, who does not think the same way as Wes, is also stubborn." Just as you can't blame Lennon and McCartney for going their own ways, neither can you begrudge Wilson and Anderson. But for those for whom watching USS Anderson's first three movies was like, for another generation, hearing Sgt. Pepper's for the first time, Owen Wilson's shore leave can only dishearten.