The Phoenician Scheme

After reading a few user reviews of this movie I have concluded that too many get hung up on what the actual story is. To me, the story is not that important. The entertainment comes from the characters, the situations, and their interactions.

My wife and I were watching it, streaming on Peacock. At about 45 minutes she left, she was getting sleepy and found that the movie didn't hold her attention. I was not surprised, I think most lovers of mainstream movies are not good candidates for watching Wes Anderson movies. It is a unique style, and it always amazes me how he gets so many A-list actors to participate.

Benicio Del Toro is Zsa-zsa Korda and it wouldn't surprise me at all if he based his inspiration on the businessman who currently is President of the USA. Zsa-zsa has a grand plan for several interdependent projects in a desert area and needs financial help from a number of others. He is a schemer who has no integrity, he lies about the project and changes agreements without informing others. He is distant from his children and has adopted several young boys to make sure he has one that isn't a "loser." He has survived several plane crashes, flying on his own airlines, seems someone is determined to kill him. But he manages to survive, sometimes including a short trip to the afterlife.

Mia Threapleton (daughter of Kate Winslet) is Zsa-zsa's estranged daughter Liesl, now in a convent, he gets to her and tells her she needs to leave that avocation so she can be his business successor.

The movie is madcap, scenes seldom end where you think they will. It is a great demonstration of the artistry that Wes Anderson surrounds himself with.

For me, totally enjoyable, I will watch it again.

Many world-renowned auteurs with distinct styles take years between projects-filmmakers like Christopher Nolan, Kathryn Bigelow, or Steve McQueen. Wes Anderson is inarguably in league with them. Yet lately, he seems to be hurting his own legacy by producing too much, too quickly. In the past five years alone, he's released four feature films and four short films-including The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar (2023), which finally earned him his first Oscar. The latest in this near-annual output is The Phoenician Scheme (2025).

The Phoenician Scheme tells the story of wealthy and maligned industrialist Zsa Zsa Korda (Benicio Del Toro), who, after surviving one too many assassination attempts by rivals, names his forgotten novitiate daughter Liesl (Mia Threapleton) as his sole heir-over his eight sons. Together with Liesl and his insect-obsessed secretary Bjorn (Michael Cera), he sets off to secure his magnum opus: a network of infrastructure projects in Phoenicia.

Since Isle of Dogs (2018), Anderson's films have increasingly felt like cast reunions performing stylized imitations of his earlier work, rather than urgent artistic ventures. Both The French Dispatch (2021) and Asteroid City (2023) wandered through quirk without narrative drive-pleasant but aimless. His Roald Dahl short films, by contrast, felt stronger, largely because they stuck closer to plot, message, and character. In The Phoenician Scheme, Anderson attempts a return to plot, giving his aesthetic more structure and a clearer objective.

Yet the story at the film's core feels creaky. It plays like a director trying to reawaken his own narrative instincts, so strong in weaving together tones and threads in The Royal Tenenbaums (2001) or The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014). The Phoenician Scheme in contrast lacks emotional depth. It rarely moves beyond clever quips and fails to fully explore the father-daughter relationship central to the film. The political commentary, meanwhile, is blunt and didactic, sacrificing subtlety and impact in favor of heavy-handed messaging.

Anderson has always toyed with caricature and cliché-it's part of his charm. But here, the self-awareness seems to have dulled. There are still magically hilarious moments where everything clicks-like a high-stakes basketball game featuring Tom Hanks and Bryan Cranston-but many other scenes come across as oblivious to their own hollow aphorisms and tropes.

The cast, as ever, is impressive-and thankfully more curtailed than in recent ensemble-heavy efforts. This tighter scope allows for some character development. Newcomers Threapleton and Cera adapt well to Anderson's rapid-fire, deadpan style. Del Toro, however-despite being one of the most talented and underrated actors of the past few decades-feels miscast. His gritty, grounded style clashes with Anderson's hyper-stylized cadence. Del Toro seems out of sync, his performance feeling stiff and unnatural. Zsa Zsa doesn't come across as a genuine industrialist, but rather as someone pretending to be one.

That said, Anderson's signature aesthetic remains intact. The film is visually immaculate, his humor still lands in places, and the editing maintains that conspiratorial wink to the audience. Wisely, Anderson pulls back from the exaggerated look of Asteroid City and The French Dispatch, which had begun to feel like parodies of his own work.

Ultimately, The Phoenician Scheme corrects some of Anderson's recent missteps but still leaves viewers emotionally cold and narratively uninvested. The technical mastery is still there, and familiar faces remain endearing, but Del Toro's misaligned performance in such a pivotal role weakens the film's core. The result is a forgettable, if not unwelcome, addition to Anderson's unique filmography. One hopes the American director continues to pursue his singular style-but slows down and reinvests in story and heart next time around. There's no need to rush.

'The Phoenician Scheme (2025)' is, unsurprisingly, unmistakably a Wes Anderson movie. At this point, a "Wes Anderson movie" is almost a genre in and of itself. I'm pretty sure the quirky writer-director could do this in his sleep by now, and it kind of feels like that's what he's been doing recently. He consistently churns out films with no real theme or narrative drive or even reason to exist other than to suitably fit into the twee style he has curated over his career, crafting experiences that are ostensibly style as substance but often feel closer to all style and no substance. What I mean is that where his earlier films felt as though he was using his style to tell a specific and meaningful story, his more recent efforts feel like he is fitting a story into his style. He comes up with quaint nonsense that can be easily configured into the still-pleasing shape all his work takes, putting very little into things like theme or character or emotion. His work is starting to get a tiny bit tedious because it feels like he's simply going through the motions, never really challenging himself or using his specific talents to do anything other than the same thing he's been doing for years. That's not to imply that his newest stuff is bad, as they're just as good as any of his holistically more successful efforts from a formal and technical point of view, but they do lack a certain essentiality that makes them feel ever-so-slightly ho-hum. His latest feature - a business-centred pseudo satirical comedy starring a deadpan Benicio Del Toro, a commanding Mia Threapleton and an absurd Michael Cera, alongside a litany of famous faces both familiar and new - is a perfectly serviceable effort, filled with plenty of visual delight and enjoyable eccentricities. It's undeniable Anderson has complete control of his craft, capable of finely tuning his oxymoronically homogeneous idiosyncrasies so they still enchant even if they no longer surprise. However, it's sort of expected at this point that he can - and will - deliver something like this to this level of quality, which has the unfortunate side-effect of dampening the effectiveness - or, at least, novelty - of his cinematic prowess. The strength of his direction and the specificity of his writing aren't as potent as they once were precisely because they've been at the same level for so long that they're part of the proverbial furniture at this point. Of course, taking excellence for granted isn't something that ought to be encouraged, but it's undeniably difficult to get excited about something we've seen so many times before. Plus, it doesn't help that nothing in this flick hasn't been done better before in one of Anderson's earlier efforts. To be fair, it isn't actually any worse than his previous few, at least formally and technically speaking. However, there is a sense that he's running out of steam - or, at least, resting on his laurels - and comfortably releasing self-eating snakes that are so specifically 'Wes Anderson' that they're almost parodies of actual 'Wes Anderson' films. Still, the movie is enjoyable enough for what it is. It's never boring, moves at a pleasant pace, is well-made in its every aspect, and also provokes a handful of chuckles. The problem is that it only ever connects so deeply, that it never truly moves or inspires. That's primarily because there's no real sense of emotion to it, despite it having a family-focused central arc, and it also isn't really about anything. It's a good effort, for sure, and will probably feel extremely refreshing if you aren't all that familiar with its directors work. It's just a little hard to get excited about something that honestly seems a bit perfunctory. Maybe that's too harsh a term, but it's certainly something that comes to mind as you watch the feature unfold. Again, it is entertaining and it is well-crafted. Its cast, most of whom are now veterans in this field, know exactly what to do with the dialogue they're given, and Wes Anderson's signature style is still fairly fun even after all this time. It isn't hilarious, but there are a handful of funny gags and even more mildly amusing moments, and the narrative is engaging for its entirety. By the same token, though it's only ever mildly amusing, never really getting out of second - or, potentially, third - gear and therefore feeling like one of its director's more minor efforts. It's good enough for what it is, and - again - is very confident and compelling when it comes to its form, but it's just lacking a certain something that's difficult to put my finger on. It's a solid effort, and I definitely don't regret seeing it, but it certainly isn't one of Anderson's best. It's inessential, but enjoyable nevertheless.

While watching this film I felt a bit sad because it reminded me how funny Gene Hackman was as the disillusioned patriarch, a recurring theme in Wes Anderson films.

There is much to like in the Phoenician Scheme:

* Stravinsky - the use of music in the film is very good. I have always liked these pieces of music but to hear them together, in an up front way was special. I also loved Moonrise Kingdom for its extended use of Benjamin Britten.

*End Credits - worth watching as they tastefully but playfully hold your attention.

* Costumes and sets - as always of the highest quality * Colour Pallette - the most confectionary-like cinema has ever been; a mixture of stop animation, play within a film and situationist comedy.

It's easy to dismiss Wes Anderson films as being all the same but if this were the only film he'd made it would easily be the best of the year so far. Only because we as viewers have limited memory to store a few classics by each filmmaker, unfortunately Anderson's last few films have been slightly overlooked.

If you love mid-century fashion and decor and Benecio Del Toro, they'll carry you at least a quarter way through the schemes of 1950's shady industrialist Zsa Zsa Korda (Del Toro) as he plans a byzantine scheme of stock battles to build a railway through old Lebanon. Then the typically precious, overelaborate Wes Anderson dialogue, animatronic cardboard characters in place of actual feeling ones and general sense of being caught in the slow turning pages of a hipster control-freak children's story book will gradually diminish your interest in the film. It's nice someone still employs Michael Cera, but even my grandparents would start checking their watches at The Phoenician Scheme.