I’d go straight to Truffaut’s Stolen Kisses and don’t pass go.
If you like Schwartzman, maybe some suggestions might be the TV Show Bored to Death or I Heart Huckabees.
The Brothers Bloom perhaps?
I was going to say The Brothers Bloom! Which I think is better than most of Anderson’s films.
I agree with Pierre about Truffaut, but I think the most Anderson-esque of the Antoine Doinel films is Bed and Board. Doinel is trying to sell hand-painted flowers; that’s an occupation that would well suit one of Wes’s charming ne’er-do-wells.
Wes Anderson’s aesthetic is very similar to that of Peter Greenaway’s 80s films.
I dont know what it is about Wes Anderson but he is such a great an unique director when i first saw the royal tenenbaums i fell in love with it and i fell in love with him as a filmaker and he made me like owen wilson alittle bit more
I used to love love love Anderson but have lately grown tired of his schtick. As I’ve grown as a film watcher, he hasn’t grown as a filmmaker IMO.
“Ceremony” by Max Winkler has gotten alot of comparisons to Wes Anderson’s work.
Have to disagree with that Japeman. I like the way Anderson’s films have evolved, taking in greater physical as well as emotional terrain. His films have always been a pleasure to watch aesthetically, but I also think he reached deep in Royal Tennenbaums. Marvelous film on so many levels. I also very much liked Darjeeling Limited. It was a visual feast, owing quite a bit to Jean Renoir, I thought, illustrating a further maturity in his work.
I think it is more a case of some viewers not having grown themselves since Bottle Rocket and Rushmore.
thanks to everyone who replied!! probably going to have a massive spree on amazon, probably including 300 blows, stolen kisses and brothers bloom.
Wes Anderson’s aesthetic is very similar to that of Peter Greenaway’s 80s films.
True but Greenaway didn’t steal from Starewicz nor attempted to “illustrate” a Cousteau homage.
Anderson’s minor successes won’t boost his career enough, he’ll live up to become though a John Hughes for the more “alternative” folks. Sensitive characters with a wee bit touch of class instead of teen angst.
Granted, his cinephilic knowledge is that of a Tarantino aka he knows his stuff but man, this is a nerd-fest of minstrels: some are quite enjoyable but most of the times, they’re vignettes stuck together as features.
The new films Ceremony and Submarine all owe a debt to Wes Anderson. Check out Submarine first, it’s a lot better than Ceremony.
Dimitris said, he’ll live up to become though a John Hughes for the more “alternative” folks. Sensitive characters with a wee bit touch of class instead of teen angst.
I think that’s pretty good. I don’t know if Dimitris meant this as a slight, but I don’t take it that way.
Dimitris said …some are quite enjoyable but most of the times, they’re vignettes stuck together as features.
I don’t know if they’re vignettes, so much as floundering character studies in search of a narrative (or maybe indifferent to any coherent narrative). I think Bottle Rocket has the strongest, most cohesive narrative of his films that I have seen (haven’t seen Zizou or Darhjeling). I’m beginning to wonder if the problme is with me. Am I expecting a stronger narrative when the films don’t really require one?
@Jazz — I’m not crazy about Anderson either, but it’s not for the lack of narrative coherence. Rushmore is the only film of his I truly like.
@Kate
Maybe coherence is not the right word. I just think the films lack a strong story. They’re just quirky characters floating around in different scenes/situations. Btw, one of the reasons I was excited to see The Fantastic Mr. Fox was because I thought the book would provide a strong story for the film (plus, I thought the use of claymation with Anderson’s approach would perfect). Well, I loved the animation and the characters—and then, inexplicably—the film just seemed to run out of steam for me. I couldn’t figure out what it was. I think the problem might stem from a lack of narrative drive and energy. I feel like the energy of a the story sort of wanes or dissipates (from what I remember Rushmore was like this, too).
I liked Rushmore and The Fantastic Mr. Fox – loved The Royal Tenenbaums. There were so many great actors at their best in that film and the narrative was like a urban fairy tale, Anderson created a little world of quirky but not twee New Yorkers that reminded me of the best aspects of early Tim Burton without the gothic overtones. It’s was a self-contained universe of people and a mythical, trans-historical New York.
As an Anderson fan, it sort of surprises me to hear someone say that they like one movie but not any of the others. They are all of a piece, evoking similar moods and character types. Emotionally, the only film that doesn’t work for me is The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, and I can’t even pinpoint why. I rank Anderson thus:
1. The Royal Tenenbaums
2. The Darjeeling Limited
3. Rushmore
4. Bottle Rocket
5. Fantastic Mr. Fox
6. The Life Aquatic.
@Jazz — Exactly. I see Wes Anderson as fashionable quirk. He has a great eye and a great ear (for music), but his films are kind of shallow. Even the characters seem contrived, with a few exceptions. And I agree that his stories lack umph, but that wouldn’t bother me if his characters displayed more depth.
@Nathan — Anderson’s style is consistent throughout, but Rushmore’s characters seemed the least contrived. I was able to at least get invested in them.
I find all of his characters contrived, but then again everything about an Anderson film is. But it’s because he’s created his own world that I find emotional resonance with most of his films.
^ Yes. They are clearly characters not modeled after real people or at least with little attention to verisimilitude but that fits in very well with his aesthetic and narrative tone imo.
I found Ben Stiller’s character in TRT absolutely heartbreaking…
I agree that they fit into the world he’s created, but it’s not a world I find interesting, only pretty.
Dr. Strangelove is a good example of a film that has effectively stylized characters thanks to brilliant acting and dialogue, and by hitting a note of relevancy in satirizing familiar types.
Wes Anderson is no Kubrick. His sense of humor, while charming at first, is kind of limited and tends to get stale after awhile, a lot of his characters kind of talk the same, and mostly they don’t seem to connect with any real life types that might make them more interesting.
WA reminds me of a precocious kid who has created this elaborate imaginary world he’s always describing in great detail to anyone who will listen. It’s just not a world I have any desire to visit, at least not more than once.
Kate said, _ His sense of humor, while charming at first, is kind of limited and tends to get stale after awhile, a lot of his characters kind of talk the same, and mostly they don’t seem to connect with any real life types that might make them more interesting._
Yep, I agree with this (although I don’t know if my problem is that WA’s characters don’t connect with real life types.)
WA reminds me of a precocious kid who has created this elaborate imaginary world he’s always describing in great detail to anyone who will listen. It’s just not a world I have any desire to visit, at least not more than once
Yeah, we’re pretty much on the same wavelength. My sense is WA films don’t go beyond just giving us his world and his quirky characters (which are pretty similar from film to film), and, personally, that’s not enough for me.
I still like the John Hughes for alternative folks, though.
Wes Anderson makes good films. I suppose expectations have been risen too high in many cases, judging by the negative comments, but I like the way he approaches his subject material, and retains a freshness in his films. I really liked Darjeeling Limited. Anderson’s sense of color, development of story, and pace of film showed a nice maturity. Seems to me a lot of persons are unable to look beyond Bottle Rocket and Rushmore, which are fine films, but Anderson has moved beyond this. There has always been an emotional detachment in his characters. Essentially, he makes movies about privileged rich kids unable to make sense of what is going on around thim. In this sense, his work is more akin to Whit Stillman. I have a hard time seeing much connection between Anderson and Greenaway, and he is way above John Hughes. I suppose to some his movies are boring, but I like the way Anderson deals with his characters, and the way they come in contact with people around them. Bottle Rocket and Darjeeling Limited share a lot of similarities in this regard, but Anderson explored the family dimension much deeper. I also enjoyed the misdirection tricks he employed and a number of other tricks of the trade, showing he has a great sense of the craft.
Yes. They are clearly characters not modeled after real people or at least with little attention to verisimilitude but that fits in very well with his aesthetic and narrative tone imo.
This says more about you the viewer, than it does Anderson the filmmaker. He modeled his characters after persons he knew. You don’t come up with stories like he does without drawing on personal experiences. You may be unable to relate to them, but that doesn’t make his characters any less “real.” He creates situations that are unusual, but his characters respond to them in ways that suit their personalities.
^ they might be “influenced” by people he knew but they are clearly highly stylized. And I have no problem relating to them, in fact I was arguing that this was not a flaw in his style. Read the comment more closely. I’m just saying that Anderson is not the director one goes to for in depth realism or character studies.
@Post
I’m just saying that Anderson is not the director one goes to for in depth realism or character studies.
Yeah, I don’t think the films are trying to be realistic, which is fine. I also don’t think his films are about telling a great story. But I do think the films are about the characters; yet, I sympathize with the remark that you don’t watch a Wes Anderson film for a good character study. In a way, his films seem to be in limbo—not strong narratives, not strong character studies, not an exploration of themes/issues—but just a quirky filmmaking style with quirky characters aimlessly existing on the screen. That’s the sense I get anyway.
Yeah, I always get a strong sense of his characters because they are so visually coded but rarely do I get much interiority from them except in brief flashes. My main love for Anderson really lies in that he has a wonderful insight into social/familial dynamics and an amazing sense of how those relations are linked to a particular setting or place, whether that be a private school, New York, in transit in India, or Texas. I wasn’t kidding about the comparison to early Burton, Anderson constructs a similarly comprehensive fictional world.
There were so many great actors at their best in that film
I hope you don’t mean Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson and Gwyneth Paltrow ;)
They are all of a piece
I appreciate parts of his work because they do leave this catalyst at times, a dead end but in a positive fragrance even though a Life Aquatic didn’t need so much sarcasm and father-son hints, a bit like re-cycling Rushmore’s mentor-student analogy (which I still like very much) for a broader “indie” mass.
….and I mean everything I said in an honest way, I’d have been hard as a stone if I were to be ironic in any matter.
his work is more akin to Whit Stillman.
I’ve only seen one Stillman film and it beats anything Anderson ever tried to make. It even beats everything I’ve watched from John Hughes, not to mention the early Burton analogy.
Fuck, I couldn’t make it through one Stillman movie – maybe it’s time for a rewatch.
lol, I even gave Paltrow and Wilson a pass for that film.
Joseph James Clark
i have just seen Wes Anderson’s debut for the first time. i loved it just as i have loved every one of his films that i have seen.
anyone have any suggestions of film of a Wes Anderson-esque nature that i may like?
bare in mind i also love Jason Schwartzman and other of Anderson’s regular cast choices so any of their films would be great too.
Cheers!