Tres son multitud

As I watched this film, I couldn't help but find brief and twisted similarities between Max Fischer's school days and that of Edward Albee of 'Who's Afraid of Virgina Woofe' fame. Before you laugh let me explain:

Max recieved a scholarship for a play written in childhood, showed significant reluctance to follow the curriculum, and rather chose to pursue his own interests, especially play writing.

Edward Albee, in most of his biographical information, comments on his difficulities in school, and dropping out of college after about a year and a half, to focus on his writing. Further, Albee's work became recognized at the early age of thirteen when he wrote 'The Zoo Story'.

Max was not from the wealthy family as Albee was. Although, the greater than $10,000,000, Herman Blume, (dissatisfied with the conventional, insensitive , sterotypical jock, twins of his own) "abopts" Max as a surrogate son.

The father of Max was reminiscent of Thorton Wilder who encouraged Albee to follow his instincts and become a play write.

As we leave Max he has written his successful work 'Heaven & Hell', his stage production of 'Apocalypse Now'. At this point in time, this is Max's theatrical master piece, his 'Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolfe', if you will.

Also, don't forget the name of Miss Cook's deceased Edward Appleby...

Now, for those of you who have never been mistaken in reading the undertone of a movie, cast the first stone. I would welcome the comments. For those of you few that may agree, please let me know, possibly there are more correlations.





.

Max Fischer (Jason Schwartzman) is an odd friendless teen at a private school with lots of useless extracurricular activities. He get put on academic probation, and falls obsessively in love with elementary teacher Miss Cross (Olivia Williams). He befriends an equally odd wealthy Herman Blume (Bill Murray), the owner of a pipe company. She dates Dr. Peter Flynn (Luke Wilson) which raises the ire of Max. Then Herman becomes infatuated with the lovely teacher and Max gets kicked out of private school.

These are truly uncompromisingly odd characters. They are a quirky unconventional group. They are not immediately hilarious but funny in how wacky Schwartzman gets. The dialog is sharp with a lot of unusual Wes Anderson takes. Bill Murray extends his range starting an acting relationship with Wes. It's a wonderful move forward for Wes and friends.

Wes Anderson's first big success came with "Rushmore," released in 1998.

And with approval I can say that it is a funny movie. With characters like Max Fischer (played by Jason Schwartzman) or Herman Blume (played by Bill Murray), it features two unique and compelling characters. They made me really laugh several times. Especially in the first half of Max with subliminal jokes.

It's an unusual plot. Sometimes with humor, sometimes with full seriousness, about love and friendship to ambition and passion. Although the plot does not always follow the same direction and digresses from time to time, nevertheless, development in character and plot can be seen.

It is a film of the classic kind. Anderson's unique film style as in "Grand Budapest Hotel" or other films is not yet pronounced. Nevertheless, the film is produced in a high quality.

I think if you're looking for a straight up comedy, you'll be disappointed. This is not an easily classifiable film, but one that I love for its unique spin on some interesting characters. I especially like the fact that Max is not completely lovable, but in the end you root for him anyway. I found all the various reconciliations quite touching, and there's an interesting emphasis on friendships between people with lots of differences. Max's sidekick is younger than him, his crush is on a teacher much older, his friendship with Bill Murray's character who could be his father. Lots of heart here.

Rushmore was the first Wes Anderson film I saw, and I didn't think much of it the first time. I used to think that Royal Tenenbaums was Anderson's first good film. I thought Bottle Rocket wore its rookie status on its sleeve; I thought Rushmore was flawed; and I thought Tenenbaums finally showed that Anderson had honed his craft and he would start making great films. I then re-watched Tenenbaums and found it to be even more satisfying on additional viewings. I realized that Anderson had actually crafted one of those rare pieces of cinema that reveals itself more and more upon repeat viewings. So I of course decided to give Rushmore a second look.

Now that I've had a chance to see the DVD, I've had a much different experience viewing the film. Perhaps because I saw it on Pan and Scan VHS previously? Or perhaps because Anderson's vision requires an adjustment period?

Some people will never like Anderson's films. They simply will not appeal to those out there who want clichéd Hollywood fodder. Some people will love Anderson's films from the moment they see them. Others, like myself, will need to see the films more than once to truly appreciate them. Anderson breaks convention in ways no one has done before - One has to understand that his films are deep where most films are shallow, and shallow where most films are deep. This will throw A LOT of people off, as evidenced by many of the comments on the message boards. Anderson's films begin where others end. In Rushmore, we see Max's fall from grace, not his climb up to become head of every club in his school. In Tenenbaums, we see the aftermath of the child prodigies, not their glory years. Again, this will throw a lot of people off, and indeed I heard this criticism of Tenenbaums quite a lot. Anderson constructs the world of his films around a cinema storybook. They are episodic, told in chapters. Some will find Anderson at first glance to be a rather egotistical filmmaker, as I once did. However, upon second glance, you can begin to see the rich text woven deeper in the films that might be hidden beneath quirkiness or drastic breaks from convention. The first time I saw Rushmore, I felt shock, embarrassment and confusion (Mostly at Max and Rosemary's bizarre interaction). I was lost and unfamiliar with this world Anderson has created. The second time I saw the film I felt Passion, Love, Tragedy and ultimate Redemption. I found the heart in Anderson's film.

If you felt Rushmore was not all it could have been the first time you saw it, please give it another chance. You'll find which side you fall on.