I really like nearly all of Wes Anderson’s work. I heard someone say this was like Wes Anderson trying to make a Wes Anderson movie… and I agree. Not that that’s a bad thing, but things can often come across a little cheesy when someone knowingly “turns it up to 11” so to speak.

Also, it felt like this was (perhaps arguably) Anderson’s most “meta” film. Again, not terrible, but also very on the nose and not very subtle.

All said, I do feel like I would like to watch it a few more times before really cementing where I put it among Anderson’s other work. Right now it’s probably mid-tier for me.

Love to hear other people’s thoughts.

  • eramseth@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    I put some thoughts to words in replying to another post about Asteroid City. Love to hear if anyone buys this analysis. I’m no critic or film theory expert, but I have seen most of Anderson’s other films.

    My take after a single watch is

    spoiler

    I think it’s possible the entire construct of what was happening in black and white was not really happening at all, but just an invention of Jason Schwartzmann’s character to help him deal with the grief of losing his wife.

    Conversely, I think everything that happened in color was really happening.

    Interestingly this is a wild inversion of what’s presented on screen (where we’re supposed to believe that what’s happening in color is all a production being put on by actors and is NOT real, while the black and white stuff is what’s real.

    I’ve only seen it once, but I suspect there are really subtle hints to this peppered throughout.

    I believe the climax of the movie is when Jason Schwartzmann’s character “walks through the set” and ends up encountering his wife / “the actress who was supposed to play his wife”. That it began snowing afterwards is a strong visual Cue.

    This is literally just my take. I haven’t bothered reading any analysis. I probably won’t until I see it a few more times.