Home » Anderson World of Fiction and Man-made

Anderson World of Fiction and Man-made

by Pansy Robbins

To look at and think about the things that make up Wes Anderson movies

It became a note on the world of Wes Anderson rather than a review of The French Dispatch’s work. I thought of a more unique interior than an eye-catching exterior.

It’s a little tricky to criticize a director named Wes Anderson. We always speak less of him for his fame and his accomplishments. To be precise, it tends to only repeat itself in certain topics. Impressive “picture beauty” and splendid “color” are the sounds that come out with each release of his film. Of course, this is not a story that can be avoided, as the director himself is obsessed with designing a screen that is precise enough to look obsessive. Its staging is immediately beautiful, and it is not easy to deny it. However, it is somewhat unfair that only his visualist aspect is particularly emphasized, considering that he is as adept as he is at organizing the internal order of the film as much as he brilliantly cuts out the outer skin. of the movie.

the , which he directed 20 years ago, was a film about lies. Royal (Jean Hackman), who is on the verge of being kicked out of the hotel he has been staying at for a long time, sleeps with his ex-wife, Eslyn (Angelica Huston), after lying to her that he would die soon after contracting an incurable disease. The story that began with a lie goes through pranks big and small, and at the end ends precisely with the sentence written on his gravestone. The line is an excerpt from a line that Royal thought was cool during his lifetime, and it’s ironic that it doesn’t match his life at all. The family knows the facts (it’s not true), but it doesn’t matter. Returning to this small example, Anderson has long explored the possibility of a fiction divided into pieces by going deeper into the fictional framework of the narrative.

assembled fiction

In the process, devices such as a story in which the act and the chapter are divided like a play or a novel, and a plot with a sequenced frame structure are mobilized. Anderson’s films often divide the overall scheme into a prologue, each chapter, and an epilogue. Rather than directly explaining what he is trying to say, he adds and subtracts the necessary materials into a uniformly designed structure. For example, the story continues indefinitely as a stream of consciousness, and as they follow the breath, parts hidden behind the viewer’s memory reappear and acquire concrete annotations. Personally, these are the times that I would like to call bookmarks or dividers, as the story that was intentionally cut picks up from that point. For example, the reason Margot’s (Gwyneth Paltrow) ring finger was cut in , where the secret love between her and Richie (Luke Wilson) appears briefly in the prologue featuring the Tenenbaum family, then disappears, then reappears after a long time. . Of course, the technique of delaying and disseminating information is not in itself special. However, Anderson’s is distinguished by the fact that it takes place in the artificial and decorative world on which he stubbornly painted himself. His fiction always comes with an artificial appearance, but this ostentatious exterior seems so perfect that it is more of an imperfect world. So, it looks like the fictional pieces are put together after some omission or washing rather than being poorly connected. However, this increases the level of storytelling while allowing for the intervention of redundant anecdotes.

Meanwhile, another point that is often mentioned in connection with his films is that he discriminates against minorities such as people of color and women. In the poignant work of Cathy Park Hong , there is also a critical passage in which he criticizes his nostalgic world due to the selective / exclusive memories of white men. He spoke of the impact that “Holden Caulfield’s Stagnation Legacy”, a reference to JD Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, had resulted in mass production of boy characters in American pop culture, even in a time of intense racial trouble. . that the film is filled with “artificial, narrow and interlaced”. The fact that the people of color in the film appear as secondary beings who have lost their concreteness should not be overlooked. This is a valid criticism. But, paradoxically, this point states the nature of Anderson’s films with supreme precision. This is because, within its framework, everyone is equipped with narrow artificiality and frivolous exaggeration, and most importantly, it is life-size. Of course, different contexts are formed based on the characteristics that make up an individual, but the fact that all of the characters in his films exist to serve a certain purpose of “Anderson’s world” doesn’t change. In other words, his characters are not even subjected to a common character analysis. When he speaks harshly, the actors in his (live) film are the stop-motion animation

moments of contention

New appears to be a film that contains more information than any of Anderson’s work. Then again, a fictional town appears, and Blaze, introduced by Sajerack (Owen Wilson), has a mid-20th century French style that seems to have been vaguely seen in literature, photography, and film (of course, it doesn’t is not possible to make a fixed judgment, it is literally virtual). appears to be the city of). The articles / accounts of the three reporters appearing later are also developed on such an artificial basis. A little ridiculously, French Dispatch, a magazine built on a French town, writes and publishes books in English despite its geographical location. The premise of this incongruity is the landscape of the magazine and the condition of community that Anderson paints. When tears fall, the editor’s office has to bear the slogan “No Tears” in its heart. Here, the scene where the magazine members get together and have a conversation, each person takes a photo at each seat and ties it to each other, confirming each other’s existence as a big one with the other draped one over the other.

The magazine creation process by the authors of The French Dispatch is told in conjunction with the manuscripts they write, the words they speak, and the experiences they have actually lived or covered. On the first page “Arts and Artists”, Berenson (Tilda Swinton) introduces the artist Rosenthaler (Benicio del Toro) from the pulpit. If so, is this time of introduction and explanation, which is interrupted with each introduction and medium, also used in the manuscript as an essay? If not, is it written only in historical time, like the artistic exchanges between Rosenthaler and Simon (Lea Sedou) and the deal between Cardaggio (Adrian Brody), which sometimes alternate between black and white? How will Simon’s verses, which mostly speak French, be transferred to Berenson’s manuscript? In the film, there aren’t enough scenes where reporters actually write, and most importantly, by not clearly explaining how the cover becomes a manuscript, the film continually spins the sense of weird incongruity. In the process of loading the three articles, little anecdotes as well as open questions from the audience continue to interfere with the gap between the fiction. Much like the late editor Arthur Howitzer Jr. (Bill Murray) reads and gives his opinion to reporters. The truth is uncertain, but does it matter? It’s clear that is an ironic and heart-warming film that faithfully repeats what Wes Anderson focused on.

Related Videos

Leave a Comment