zhoyt

The devil is in the details, or so goes the cliché, but it really does hold true in film making. Wes Anderson is the first director to really open my eyes to this. Film is an art form that can be broken down to a synthesis of photography and literature. When the narrative of a film started to become the most important aspect however, the emphasis on composition was lessened. Composition is a broad subject, but it is part of the composition specifically that I want to discuss, the mis en scene. Wes Anderson uses the mis en scene in a way that really catches my eye. Sometimes it seems like films don't spend too much time thinking about mis en scene, how many times have we seen the same locations used over and over again? Wes Anderson manages to create his own worlds in film without being fantastical or clichéd. Every scene is so rich with detail that it is impossible to absorb it all in one viewing. Each room in the Tenenbaum house is so full of life and memories. One of my favorites is the game closet. All of the dusty board games hold so many memories. Also all of the paintings done by Ritchie in the film (actually done by Wes Anderson's brother) are the perfect fit for the film; sweet, innocent at first glance, but holding so much more. The films of Wes Anderson are exactly the same way. The soft colors, fun tunes, and quirky humor really bring you in to the movie, and when you are drawn in the characters begin to open up and you begin to see the dark side of things. In Rushmore Max's puppy love crush on his teacher seems sweet and funny, but when it turns into obsession filled with lies and attempts on his friend Bill Murray's life you aren't sure whether to laugh or not anymore. A similar situation happens with Ben Stiller in Tenenbaums. We all laugh at his jump suits and crazy mannerisms, but once the first giggles wear off we see through these quirks to the cause, his wife's untimely death, and see a sad neurotic individual who isn't so funny anymore. It this constant up and down between comedy and tragedy that really makes Tenenbaums special; we get both a hilarious family comedy and a serious epic chronicling the history of a family. Anderson is obviously referencing The Magnificent Ambersons and he succeeds in capturing the scope and feel of this classic, at the same time the movie manages to be one of the funniest I've ever seen. It's amazing that he can fit that much into a movie. Of course some may argue that he tries to fit too much into the movie. And to a point I agree. There is so much backstory and so many characters in Tenenbaums that it is easy to get lost as all of them attempt to have their own stories. There is a focal point though, and it is easily Gene Hackman. His portrayal of Royal is easily my favorite part of the movie. He is just a really loveable son of a bitch of a character, and Hackman plays him perfectly. I really like how the movie is presented as a novel. I found myself wanting to go out and buy this book. It was a nice way to segment the story and remind us of its literary lineage. My favorite is the reference to From the Mixed Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler. All in all, I really love this film. It may be a little too ambitious, but it has so many things going for it. This is the only movie I've paid to see in the theaters more than three times. Every time I watch it I get something new out of it and spot another great little detail that makes the movie so much funnier or deeper.

`Just because a romantic comedy is Indian doesn't make it any better', I thought to myself. And as I came in to the movie, I was very stubborn about liking it, but eventually it won me over. But for the last minutes of the movie I couldn't help but smiling. Monsoon Wedding did so many things right I don't know where to begin. First, the characters; there are so many characters in this movie that it seems impossible to make them work without being contrived stereotypes. Maybe some people saw them like this, but I really felt like they were fleshed out well. We don't need an hour of screen time to develop a character when you can learn so much from a glance or a single line. For example when the pedophile uncle first makes an appearance, the look on both his and Ria's faces let you know exactly what is going on. This could go either way of course, it could be that we know what's going on because we have seen the same thing countless times on Lifetime, but I give the benefit of the doubt to MW and say that it is just superbly done acting and editing. We get the same feeling with the initial meetings of Dubey and Alice. The painful awkwardness and obvious tension between them feels excruciatingly authentic. Throughout the film we see very small scenes and pieces of dialogue that tell so much. We spend very little time with many of the characters but we feel like we know their whole lives. The relationship between the bride and her ex lover when they meet in the car, the friendship between the mother and her sister as they remember their honeymoons, the background of the Australian, the obnoxious uncle, etc. There are so many people in this film, but they all come together and we get a feel for all of the characters which is very hard to pull together when there are so many people. The same technique that we familiarize ourselves with the characters is used to tell other details. The direct conflict between old/new and east/west in India is very prominent, but it is entirely understated. The scene on the golf course, the argument over the wedding tent, the music, the mobile phones, the drinks, the clothes, it all blends together to make one interesting cocktail. I think one reason the film endeared itself to me was its shear beauty. The colors are so vibrant and lively, and the shots are composed so artfully. Some of my favorites were when Dubey is working in the yard lovesick. Also of special note were a few shots that were completely out of the narrative. Especially while traveling. There was a shot from the back of a bus (I think) that just caught the rain and the distortion so nicely, the distortion and the camera movement worked together so well to convey a mood of confusion and sadness. It almost looked like a bit out of an art film. Another thing I liked about the film was the way song worked into it. In most American films I see the musical numbers are entirely forced and out of place in the film. In contrast, the song and dance numbers in Monsoon Wedding flow completely with the story. You don't even notice it's a musical sequence, it just seems like part of the natural flow of the movie, and it doesn't hurt having such catchy tunes. The last thing I will rave about is the camera work. The many instances of the handheld camera and the in your face style brought a real nice verite style to everything, adding to the realism of everything. Also nice was the breaking of the frame, as you mentioned in class. The camera in many instances seemed less like an omnipotent eye, and more like a POV shot of an unmentioned character, you. There are probably problems in Monsoon Wedding, but I didn't notice any in my one viewing. I came out of the theater in a daze of happiness, a true feel good movie, not dwelling on any mistakes that may have been made, but remembering all the subtle touches, the rare spices added in such small amounts to be hardly noticeable, but without them this stew wouldn't be as unforgettable as it is.