Benutzerrezensionen

Wes Anderson has always been a favorite director of mine. I have seen all his movies - but for me, the magic is gone.

I feel like The Grand Budapest Hotel was his masterpiece. Where every aspect that makes his films special was at its peak. The characters, the cast, the sets and, of course, the visuals were up to an 11. His craft was perfected - and it's one of my top 5 films of all time.

When I saw Isle of Dogs, I started to feel full. I felt like I had seen Wes's style a bit too much. And now this.

I feel that Asteroid City is pretty bland. The visuals are fantastic - but we've seen this all before. Instead of a compelling lead who has an interesting problem to solve - we get several bland characters who are quirky, and that's it. The acting is great though. But it's not that funny nor intriguing.

We were eight friends who saw this film together. Every one of us was pretty bored after a while. One of us really liked it though - but she had only seen 50% of a Wes Anderson film before. The rest of us felt... full.

Few independent filmmakers have a style as unique and distinctive as Wes Anderson's, whose signature aesthetic is almost immediately recognizable upon watching one of his films. Yet his films are not just aesthetically engaging; they tend to be hilarious and well-written in a quirky, down-to-earth way. As a fan of his work, I was looking forward to "Asteroid City." This retro sci-fi tale of a UFO/alien sighting in a 1950s desert town certainly delivers Anderson's expected vibes, but fails to pair the visuals and auteurist elements with an engaging, emotionally impactful plot or character development that is equally strong and/or effective.

The film is a true ensemble piece, and doesn't have a clear main character. This would be fine if the wide array of characters involved were more compellingly written, but the screenplay treats their motivations as simply second fiddle to "style," world-building, and more abstract themes. Thematically, the film also seems a bit inert, seeming to jump around in subtext without providing the plot context to justify it--including through the framing device of a play. Anderson's large ensemble cast generally does pretty well with the material they are given, but their actions feel removed from consequence or plot relevance to make us feel a lot fo their characters. The brilliant craftsmanship on display mildly offsets these concerns--from the outstanding production design, cinematography, costume design, and editing--which are well-done even by Wes Anderson's standards. Yet the lack of a comparatively developed plot or character motivations is a bit jarring compared to his better films, such as "The Grand Budapest Hotel," "Moonrise Kingdom," "The Royal Tenebaums," and "Fantastic Mr. Fox." Even the anthology structure in "The French Dispatch" felt more character-driven and authentic, and thus more conceptually engaging than this film. Make no mistake, Anderson is and has always been a creative visionary, and his fans should generally have a good time while watching this film. It's just a little bit unfortunate that the film comes off as more hollow and forgettable than it should, despite plenty of positive qualities as well. Recommended only to Wes Anderson fans. 6.5/10.

Wes Anderson drummed up a magnificent cast. At least ten of them could carry a triple A movie by themselves. Unfortunately, Wes forgot that a good movie needs a good plot as well.

The visuals are outstanding, almost every shot is also an award winning photo. The acting is superb. The setting is magnificent and almost everything about this movie is perfect.

Everything but the plot. If you like humor, you'll like this film. If you come for the visuals, you'll love this film. If you're into acting, you'll have an excellent time. But if you want to be engaged? Look elsewhere.

Dear Wes, your dialogues are hilarious and witty. Your plots lack substance. Work on your plots.

People were laughing in the quaint historic theater I watched this film in. But I was not. I laughed one time, when you watch it you'll know the time.

The striking thing about these last couple of Wes Anderson movies is how they're becoming a parody of themselves. I can appreciate film as art vs film as entertainment. This takes entertainment disguised as art and commercializes it to a degree I find distasteful.

It was a pretty film. I loved the colors. I can respect it's aesthetic and that's where all the stars came from. I also love Schwartzmann.

The way the story was told as some kind of slowly unfolding meta-melodrama of a play within a film managed to completely chop the film into indigestible pieces. Ive rarely been that disinterested in the plot of a film.

Last thought. What on earth makes all of these famous actors want to be in these films??? Is it money? Is it the desire to see your own face with some pretty symmetrical colors in the background? Wes Anderson hasn't made a good film in years. We can continue to respect him from afar for doing something unique. Far enough away we don't have to watch....

Those who thought this was a "boring" film, should not be criticized for thinking this. Asteroid City is a visual wonder and treat of world building. Wes Anderson's productions are easily well-known for their impressive artistic visual structure and camera work. No disappointment in any of these categories. Featuring a massive array of talent which included a cast of 4 Oscar winners and 9 Oscar nominees, all giving solid theatrical-style performances. The setting is an absolute delight, and ranks as one of the top production designs in any Wes Anderson film. All the characters are carefully pieced, selected, and framed. All building up to a finale which I considered a pretentious, underwhelming, and slightly dissatisfying. It's hard to not see this particular story as Wes Anderson being unsure about which direction to go in. This was easily a story Anderson wrote/worked on while stuck in quarantine during COVID. The themes of loss, uncertainty, entrapment, search for answers, childhood into adulthood are all well-received and present. However, once the themes completely over take the narrative and substance, that's when the movie starts to disappoint. All these themes could've fit well into a story which resulted in a fun gimmicky alien invasion story, just like in "Mars Attacks!" which the film even makes a hidden reference to. Or a narrative which leads into alien abduction. Something....anything. Any conflict better than simply, "they're all stuck in quarantine". Another problem with Asteroid City is the story's massive number of characters. I love a story which gives every little character a unique presence to the story. Problem is, there are enjoying scenes with these characters, but when the movie ends I was still pondering if these scenes were needed. They added little to the narrative, took time away from the main conflict, and resulted in a unbalanced flow of the narrative. A successful balance of adults and children in the narrative was achieved far better in Moonrise Kingdom than in Anderson's effort this time. While the character payoffs do make sense, some of the key payoffs feel shallow than unsatisfying. The payoffs you would easily imagine the film going in simply do not happen. Asteroid City is easily one of my favorite world buildings in a Wes Anderson film. I was hooked within the opening minutes, and yet it felt unused to its full potential. Shame too, because this could've easily have been a great film.

There is enjoyment to be found throughout Asteroid City, but in the end the descriptive words used regarding the narrative would have to include, "underwhelming" and "cheated".

I saw 'ASTEROID CITY' yesterday...and I have a mixed feelings about it.... As usual, stylistically very impressive, with strong emphasis on ensemble work of actors, as it's usually happens in Wes Anderson's movies.

When movie is considered ensemble piece the pressure of a film success falls on the shoulders of the director. In a normal narrative film the protagonist and antagonist often take the burden of film success on themselves, hoping that the audience will emphasize with our lead characters and their character arc, to be immersed in the story during the full running time.

There is a risk however if the audience doesn't connect with performances the status of leading man or a woman is in jeopardy, with producers in the future not wanting to green light another film with actors, which were unable to handle the "weight" of the movie.

This is why plenty of actors like to work on movies which offer ensemble feel. They don't have to spend many months on filmset, instead they come for few days, shoot their scenes and can move on to the next project. If their performance didn't work they are always supported by other quality actors, so it doesn't ruin the whole film. In ether way Wes Anderson's style always comes on top, as actors who work with him understand the particular speed of lines delivery, as well as dryness of the dialog.

Stylistically it's very much what we expect from Anderson. Cinematography is more interesting then usual with a strong emphasis on production and costumes design. The camera movement feel bit more free then usual and yet the composition is always full of symmetry, which is the calling card of Wes. He even included few inserts (close ups of objects, which normally make thinks appear more cinematic) which for his filmmaking style is rather unusual. As well as few "Dutch angles", which make the audience feel sense of distorted reality in moments of surrealism.

The color correction ranging from black and white to colorful over saturation is rather visually interesting.

There is a lot of quality here, but I am afraid 'ASTEROID CITY' might not be everyone's taste, although fans of Anderson know what to expect and should have a good time.

More casual viewers might feel like this film is a little stylistically disjointed.

For me I appreciate what Wes was trying to accomplish and always admire his stylistic consistency, which has its benefits (you know what to expect), but also it's throwbacks, when Wes just like in this case is trying to explore a new filmmaking narrative techniques.

Recommend! 👍

As much as I love the artistic visuals and whimsical charm of a Wes Anderson film, this one was mildly disappointing. There were long speeches that didn't land with humor, weird pacing issues, and a nested framing device of a TV broadcast, the play, and its real-world creators that didn't do anything for me. Maybe it would take a repeat viewing, because the intention behind this was confusing, and it overshadowed the fine little moments that were scattered throughout the movie. As with The French Dispatch, the cast is jam-packed with stars, but unnecessarily so, as many seemed underused, and it felt like there were too many characters. This one needed simplification, a better story, and more heart.

It is hard to think of a movie as underwhelming or as twee as Wes Anderson's 'Asteroid City,' a meandering, grandiose comic-drama as overlong as it is overindulgent. As it begins, we are told the film is in fact a televised production of a play by a fellow named Conrad Earp, which follows a ragtag bunch of misfits who gather on the isolated titular town to partake in a science convention. Among them is recent widower and war photojournalist Augie Steenbeck, who hits it off with noted actress Midge Campbell. Meanwhile, the actor playing Augie has doubts about his performance, and fears he doesn't understand the play.

A fear shared by this viewer. 'Asteroid City' is a film packed to the rafters with nothing of note. The narrative is overloaded with unnecessary stylizations that distract rather than engage. Moreover, the switching back and forth between the play and the show about it is jarring throughout, while the overarching structure is alienating. It is difficult to immerse oneself in the world of the film as one is constantly reminded it is fiction. Similarly, it is no easy task connecting with the characters when the film they're in keeps telling us that they and their conflicts are imaginary.

Additionally, Anderson doesn't fully explore any of the innumerable story threads he begins to unravel, nor does he properly develop his themes, whether they be about reality and fiction, the role of science and technology or the search for identity and belonging. He introduces thematic ideas in a superficial and inconsistent way, without giving them enough depth or resolution. This makes the film feel unfocused and incomplete, as it leaves the viewer with many questions and loose ends.

For instance, he introduces the idea of a nuclear war looming over Asteroid City, but doesn't explore its implications or consequences for the characters or the world. He also introduces the character of Conrad Earp, the playwright behind it all, but never explains his motivations or his relationship with the actors or the audience. Moreover, he fails to conclude any of the various subplots in a meaningful or coherent way, seeming to prefer endlessly switching between different levels of artifice in a vacuum of self-satisfaction.

Furthermore, the characters are all Anderson stereotypes dialled up to the max. We've seen the quirky neurotic Steenbeck before in projects like 'Rushmore' and 'Darjeeling Limited', while Campbell is essentially just Margot Tenenbaum with better hair, or any number of the beautiful, aloof ladies Anderson has given the world over the years. Each and all eccentric and mannered, the people that populate 'Asteroid City' feel like they were created by artificial intelligence trying to emulate Anderson's earlier, better movies.

Likewise, the dialogue is your typical Anderson fare, full of cutesy phrases and obscure references that'll make grey-haired hipsters chuckle; though is a different breed from the likes of, say, 'The Grand Budapest Hotel.' For all its faults, that film had plenty of rapid-pace witticisms and verbal sparring matches, which 'Asteroid City' has a dearth of. The dialogue is largely uninspired and inane, when it isn't contrived and artificial, as it is whenever Steenbeck's son has to converse with anyone, or when Steenbeck and Campbell share their woes through their windows.

Narratively, 'Asteroid City' isolates and irritates, while Robert Yeoman's striking cinematography is cartoonish and extravagant. Yeoman makes use of bright colours, symmetrical compositions and retro-futuristic props and costumes to create a distinctive, whimsical aesthetic that reflects Anderson's trademark visual style. The attention to detail on display is laudable, while the intricacy of the sets and staging is staggering. However, Yeoman's work also contributes to the tacky artificiality and lack of subtlety of proceedings, meaning that, instead of enhancing the mood or meaning of the film, his exaggerated stylizations serve only to distract. Additionally, the score-a jumbled mixture of 50's country songs and synthetic pop- is as forgettable and bland as saltless porridge.

Though Anderson has assembled a truly awesome all-star cast, nobody is giving anything particularly interesting or challenging to do. Though Jason Schwartzman does strong work as the quirky, self-absorbed neurotic Augie Steenbeck, it's a role he's played dozens of times before in better projects and to greater effect. Similarly, Scarlett Johansson impresses as the austere Midge Campbell, showing her vulnerability in a way most nuanced and affecting; though is underutilised and ultimately reduced to a mere plot device.

Additionally, Bryan Cranston does a half-decent Rod Serling impression as the narrator of the piece and Tom Hanks brings pathos and power to his all too small role as Steenbeck's father-in-law, though both characters are woefully one-dimensional. Also worthy of note is Jeffrey Wright, who's consistently amusing as a caricature of an army general, and Tilda Swinton, who engages in more of the jittery over-acting that has endeared her to so many. The rest of the cavalcade of stars are generally commendable, but have little to do in the face of Anderson's scant characterisation and unengaging narrative.

In conclusion, 'Asteroid City,' like 'The French Dispatch' before it, is very much a case of style over substance. Anderson's best films- perhaps tellingly all written alongside Owen Wilson- have heart and soul to match their kooky characters and painstakingly intricate visuals. 'Asteroid City' is a heartless, soulless exercise in pretension; a meandering mess of a motion picture. Though it boasts some fine performances, there's very little on offer in 'Asteroid City;' and it's certainly not a place you'd want to call home.

According to IMDB, the cast of "Asteroid City" was like one big, happy family. The cast ate together and apparently had a lovely time making the movie. Sadly, I think the average viewer didn't have nearly as much fun watching this movie...one that looks amazing but has a script that seems unfinished. And, I agree with one review which described the film as "all style and no substance".

It is difficult, if not impossible to describe the plot. Like most of Wes Anderson's films, it's made up of a wide variety of almost cartoon-like characters...most of which are VERY famous, as Anderson seems to be able to get many of Hollywood's best in his quirky films. But this time the sets ALSO look much like cartoons and the look of the film is amazing. But the plot involving an asteroid in the city, stargazers and a visit by aliens simply makes little sense and isn't designed to make sense! It just IS.

Overall, a confusing mess of a plot...that REALLY looks great. It's less a comprehensible story and more a case of performance art put up on the screen. Interesting...but not especially satisfying.

Near enough the definition of style over substance. At times seemed deliberately boring. Too much effort was spent in an attempt to seem clever, and not enough effort spent trying to be enjoyable.

Occasional lines were enough to raise a slight chuckle, or an exhale of air, but they are much too few and far between in the vast stretches of emptiness.

The impressive cast assembled don't do an awful job with what they've been given, but none of the characters have any depth whatsoever. Even if they were, there are far too many characters to form any kind of cohesion.

It's quirky at best and painfully dull.

"An apocryphal fabrication"

Rather than the usual "inspired by actual events," Wes Anderson's newest satire, Asteroid City, admits it's untrue, an especially important declaration for newbies to the Andersonverse. The deadpan take on America in the 50's as it responded to alien invasions via UFO's and the chaos of changing post WWII life including love is refreshingly honest, hopeful, and fearful. As it is not his best work, Asteroid shares endearing but minor chords with The Life Aquatic an The Darjeeling Limited. For me, the pinnacle of Anderson genius still is occupied by Fantastic Mr. Fox and The Grand Budapest Hotel, not Asteroid City.

Armed with the blue sky of the desert and the stars of the cinematic universe including Tom Hanks, Scarlett Johansson, and Tilda Swinton, to name just a few of the A-listers, Anderson and writer Roman Coppola get our attention with a form of cosmic exploration of the universe and the private psyche. The meta part of the film is framed in multiple ways such as a TV show within a movie within a play, or whatever.

Per usual, Anderson tightly controls his mise en scene while the pastel coloring and acting are circumscribed by the apparent tacit agreement among the entire crew that minimalism is the mode, especially in speech where the aud must think about what's being said because actors barely reveal what they are about through body language and inflection. What to make of the strange romance between Jason Schwartzman's grieving Augie and Scarlett Johansson's suicidal movie star with attitude, is one of the challenges of a perplexed audience, which must factor in that the lead actors also play their characters in a New York teleplay (check out Brian Cranston's host as stand in for Edward R. Murrow).

Why Tom Hanks's Stanley, a hip curmudgeon, carries a gun behind his belt may take a while to figure out in the context of characters looking for control in their lives. The participants in the Junior Stargazing convention, including Augie's "brainiac" son Woodrow (Jake Ryan), are blameless in their ignorance of a romantic life, relying on adults who are not capable of controlling even their little lives. Almost everyone is at least a bit lost as they face post-WWII love of the good life juxtaposed with dangers like the periodic mushroom out in the desert.

As the complex plot winds down to a nostalgic relook at Spielberg's Close Encounters, the omnipresent pastel landscape and benign characters create a peacefulness for the film/TV production itself and the future as Anderson sees it in its multihued and vibrant human connections.

For Asteroid, few visitors and 47 denizens care about the ancient crater outside their doors. For audience, the memorabilia include a diner, motor court, single pump gas station, and occasional cop chase. Most memorable of Anderson's quirky touches is the vending machine that sells miniscule plots of land.

Besides the audiences' scratching their heads at Anderson's off-the-wall motifs, the aud must also consider that as the alien (Jeff Goldblum, who better?) leaves, the town is put in quarantine, which is like the audience itself stuck in a blended world of Anderson tropes.

It's how to deal with the vagaries and beauties of life as they are, even in an arid Southwest Americana town, that gives this city a place for the audience to stop, but thankfully not forever.

There were two perspectives I noted while watching it.

1.) It is commentary on the state of cinema. A movie within a movie where the production of the "blockbuster" makes no sense. But as the actors in the film slowly question why they are even making it, they realize its ok if the film they're making is fun. Life sometimes has no rationale, it's just something we experience. Trying to find meaning in something so ridiculous is the point of Asteroid City.

2.) It is commentary on the 2020 Covid Pandemic. Asteroid City bears witness to a life-changing event and is forced into quarantine. Characters try to find meaning to all of it but life has a funny way of making no sense. Eventually, the quarantine lifts and life resumes. What was once a traumatic event feels like yesterday's news.

In a literal sense, it's a movie about a stage-play. Asteroid City is the play, and the black and white stuff is real-life. When the playwright dies unexpectedly, the actors are left confused because they never found out what the point of the play was. A sense of loss both literally and metaphorically.

It's very much about the struggle to make sense of an absurd world, and the different ways people cope with that. It's a VERY existentialist film, and IMHO steeped in the philosophy of Camus and Sartre.

I live in Paris and I accidentally ran into Wes Anderson on my way back from the office a few months ago. I am a devoted fan to the extent that I completely froze and could not utter a single word to him; I simply stood there, smiling at him stupidly.

You get the picture (pun unintended): I had been awaiting this movie for so long. Like many other fans, watching a good Wes Anderson movie feels like an out-of-body experience. For a couple of hours, you are not the person you are, you do not lead the normal life you lead. Instead, you're in the Wes Anderson Universe.

While most people consider the visual aspect of Wes Anderson's movie as the most quintessential, I consider that the general feeling his movies will leave you in is his most important trademark. The fans of The Royal Tenenbaums, Darjeeling Limited and Life Aquatic will know all too well what I am talking about. The movies are just so heartwarming; hardships, loss and betrayal happen, but people ultimately find a way to their loved ones. Even if it's not perfect. It's like real life, but better.

Alas, Wes Anderson did not deliver on this front with Asteroid City. Just as he did not with the French Dispatch. The movie is visually stunning, but I just expect something else from Wes Anderson. To take me away for one hour and forty-five minutes. That did not happen. The characters are not endearing; the soundtrack is subpar; and the storyline is mildly entertaining.

Maybe we rely too heavily on Wes. Maybe that is a responsibility he should not have to bear. Hopefully, I will run into him again. Only this time I will be able to strike a conversation and show him my "Accidentally Wes Anderson" photo collection.

A theatrical piece of art taking place back in 1950's in a town called "Asteroid City", with a chaotic ambiance. But, what actually makes me like that film is that we (the spectatorship) get to see how this theatrical work within the real life is created. We witness all the efforts and worries of the luvvies striving for giving their best performance and also trying to fully comprehend what in fact the moral of the play is. Hence, in terms of story, it did an unparalleled work thanks to the brilliant editing as well. Having 2 main stories is an uncommon situation compared to a vast majority of films. Nevertheless, it achieved to arrange the course of events of the two stories and reflect them simultaneously. We can clearly see how much labour has been put in the work by the editor.

Regarding the cinematography of the film, Robert D. Yeoman used colors very well especially in this one. He utilized both vivid and black-white colors just for aiding us in distinguishing easily to which main story we pass throughout the picture. Besides, in a few particular scenes with profuse dialogue , he fit two shots going on at the same time in one single screen,giving us the impression of no matter how far the characters stand , they talk as if they have really close distance between them.

The casting was tremendous and was plenty of numerous familiar faces. Of course, a couple of them had major roles than the others. According to the successful performances, I can tell all of the leading actors and actresses embraced the project. But, I cannot disdain the performances of the ones with minor roles such as Edward Norton, Adrien Brody, Margot Robbie, etc.

Aside from the ones that we know, new acting talents showed up. The triplet girls are literally gifted in terms of acting. The way they complete each other with their lines and mimics is stupendous and exquisite. Seemingly, they have a bright future in the industry.

This picture is may not be the best of Wes Anderson, yet it deserves a solid 7 out of 10. I suggest that it will be a good experience if you want to see it in theatres. Don't miss this one!

Although I found Astroid City to be enjoyable to watch & thought provoking, I did not find it half as funny as the rest of my theater. Wes Anderson's first truly sci-fi movie shines in a way many modern sci-fi movies fail, by not saying or explaining everything out loud. The movie's strengths lie in its questioning, a non-circular plot, and evaluation of grief.

This cast shines but the character development was especially uneven for what I come to expect with a Wes Anderson film. For a man who can make The French Dispatch, a collection of short stores, with such powerful individual characters, the supporting characters could've been done better.

I found Schwartzman & Johansson excellently paired with an awkwardly strong chemistry to match Anderson's often deadpan tone. Steve Carrell & Tom Hanks are given the best comedic roles and deliver the funniest lines of the film.

Anderson's ability to showcase childhood love is woven more subtly into this plot with a standout performance by Jake Ryan, who plays Woodrow, Schwartzman's character's son. The science experiment fair type thing was a fun plot device and not familiar for the sci-fi genre. The child acting in this movie is very strong.

This is not my #1 Wes Anderson movie but I had fun and enjoyed it.

Asteroid City (2023) is a movie my wife and I watched at the Alamo Drafthouse last night. The storyline follows the making of a movie called Asteroid City and what went into the writing of the storyline, selection of the cast, how the movie came together and what's it's purpose.

This picture was directed by Wes Anderson (Moonrise Kingdom) and stars Jason Schwartzman (Rushmore), Scarlett Johansson (The Avengers), Tom Hanks (Big), Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad), Jeffrey Wright (The Batman), Liev Schreiber (Scream) and Edward Norton (Fight Club).

The way this movie is put together is pure magic. You feel like you're drifting through a fairy tale. The storyline is interesting, unpredictable and does a great job capturing your imagination. The sets, props, backdrops and attire are all beautiful. The camera angles and cinematography is top notch. The cast is brilliantly constructed and everyone delivers a tremendous performance. There's so many subtle details to grab your attention. I loved the road runner. The conclusion has magnificent depth but also leaves room for interpretation.

Overall, this is a fun trip with a worthwhile story and entertaining characters. I would score this a 7/10 and strongly recommend it.

This is by far the worst of his movies. Such an incredible cast and he did nothing with them, the acting is good but the lack of an interesting story is unbelievable. It's a pretty film, yes, but even visually, it's the least interesting from his work. French dispatch was his first strike, Asteroid city is his second, really hope there's not a third. Hope he hires a good writer or writers to help him with his next films. We know he can do art direction, photography, and a few funny bits, but he needs someone to help him with plots. Really, with such an amazing cast, to come up with this, is so so so sad. What a waste. Truly disappointed.

Asteroid City is the cumulation of Wes Anderson's style. It's beautifully meta, beautifully beautiful, and painful hurt. The pacing of the movie throws you between contemplative emotional scenes and unexpected humour in a way that keeps you guessing what is going to happen with delightful results. It does this more elegantly in my humble opinion than the other entries in his catalog, managing to avoid the sometimes inscrutable randomness of some of his movies. Everything even the oddities feel like they have a reason and a purpose. The movie itself is directly interested in finding purpose and that pulls you in.

All of the characters feel like they have a story and depth which we only get to glimpse in passing. My only regret about this movie is that there isn't going to be more of it.

Hemorrhoid City: Whimsical absurdist pointless humor. Silly at best. Stupid at worst.

Monty Python did better 50 + years ago.

Cute homage to 50's dust blown desert towns locked in child memories- for the first few minutes- then the artsy bits appealing to psuedo-intellects who must find "deeper" meaning in all of life, especially cinema art.

Mere mortals cannot grasp the intricacies. Being mortal, I walked out to the lobby to watch the popcorn machine pop. Heavy stuff, man.

Really? Did all these A list actors need work, or was this a Community Service punishment for too many parking tickets?

I'm glad we had discount tickets. My head hurt.

As always you get a big, all over the top Anderson experience, meaning it was aesthetically pleasing and compelling to think a bit more freely about life.

This was not my favorite movie of his but I enjoyed it nonetheless. The score by Desplat was excellent.

I particularly liked Schwartzman's role. In some moments it almost felt not like a role but like he was truly experiencing a chaotic situation with us the audience. Feeling just like as baffled in his effort to understand life and it's meaning. Both in his role in the play and his life as the actor.

My favorite moment of the movie was the conversation between him and Brody at the end of the movie.