Moonrise Kingdom

Something Wes Anderson This Way Comes

Wes Anderson has always been a filmmaker I've never fell in love with, but I recognize his appeal. Most of the time, I find his filmmaking style slightly annoying, and often find his stories lacking an emotional element.

The first film of his I saw was Rushmore, which I liked a good deal. I then saw The Royal Tenenbaums, which despite the stellar performances, underwhelmed me (mainly because of that emotional component that I felt was lacking, along with a less than satisfactory third-act). That film has grown on me. I also greatly enjoyed Bottle Rocket, and never saw The Darjeeling Limited or Fantastic Mr. Fox. No matter what, he's undeniably an original voice as a writer and director; you can virtually instantly recognize a Wes Anderson film after seeing a single frame.

This is especially true of Moonrise Kingdom, which is Wes Anderson style at its purest. The perfectly balanced frames. The highly recognizable use of primary colors. And his quirky, original characters, and the tangled, bizarre stories that they weave.

After first seeing it, I thought it was my favorite Wes Anderson film. After a few days, I don't think it is quite that. I think Rushmore is. And I need to rewatch The Royal Tenenbaums, as that is the favorite (or one of the favorites) among many people whose opinions I greatly admire. Moonrise Kingdom, however, is a delightfully bizarre comedy, with a touching love story unlike any other at its center. The two main child actors (both in their film debuts, I believe) are phenomenal, Edward Norton is hilarious as the Khaki Scout leader who can't quite keep control of his troop, and Bruce Willis gives a chuckle worthy, unusually controlled performance.

This is a good film. A funny film. A touching film. And a visually fascinating film. It is not deep, unlike Anderson's Rushmore, which suggests many emotions and conflict below the surface. Moonrise Kingdom doesn't. But it is good entertainment. It may end up on my Best of 2012 list come the end of the year, but it won't rank near the top. We'll just see how the year turns out. Either way, I do recommend seeing it. It's definitely an experience worth... experiencing.

***1/2/****

The Master

"He's Making All This Up As He Goes Along..."

Paul Thomas Anderson has long been one of my favorite working directors - quite possibly my single most favorite director, along with the Coens. They are both masters of highly original work that only they could make. Tarantino, one of my other favorite filmmakers, makes films that only he could create, but he doesn't have a perfect track record (nor do the Coens, but their finest films are pure brilliance), and Tarantino has a style that is clearly evident in every single one of his films (pop culture references, loads of dialogue, etc.). I have read his script for Django Unchained, and it certainly doesn't deviate from that style. It is a good script (aside from the disappointing final act - a problem in many Tarantino films). I await that film with great anticipation.

Back to Anderson. I fell in love with him when I first saw Boogie Nights, early in my film-watching career. The ensemble film about the rise and fall of a porn star during the Golden Era of pornography, with its stylish and utterly phenomenal use of music, to its array of unique and fascinating characters, to the sheer brilliance of filmmaking on display gave me a cinematic boner. I next saw, in theatres, There Will Be Blood, which was one of the best theatrical experiences I've ever had (along with Grindhouse, The Dark Knight, and Superbad. It was my second favorite film of the year, behind No Country for Old Men. It was certainly more ambitious and epic in scope than No Country, and it was a magical experience for me. That's saying something, because I knew nothing about it (I can't say the trailer was very compelling to me at the age of 17, when I had seen few films). And I was definitely prejudiced against longer-films (my attention span back then was limited at best), as well as period pieces. No matter. I was riveted from the very opening to the dark, gleefully over-the-top, much talked about final scene.

It was after seeing There Will Be Blood that I sought out Anderson's other films. I watched Hard Eight. Loved it. I watched Magnolia. *Really* loved it. I watched Punch-Drunk Love, which I also loved. I even sought out, and eventually found, online copies of Cigarettes & Coffee (the short film basis for Hard Eight), as well as his 1988 short film, The Dirk Diggler Story. I absorbed everything PT Anderson. And ever since that life-changing moment on January 25, 2008 at the Rave Cinemas Theatre (I credit There Will Be Blood along with Pulp Fiction, Grindhouse, and No Country for Old Men for thrusting me into the world of screenwriting - for best or for worse), I have awaited his next film. And this month, I was finally able to see it.

Before opening in wide, it had a run (as most films of this ilk do), in limited release. Usually reserved for such larger cities as New York or Los Angeles, meaning I couldn't see it until its wide release. I generally avoid reading reviews of films before I see them, 1) so as to not taint my opinion of the film, and 2) to avoid spoilers.... however #2 was moot as I had read the script a while back when it was floating around as The Untitled Scientology Script. But, I couldn't resist, and read a few reviews of the film from reviewers (and friends) that I greatly respect. None of them were overly enthusiastic, and many were downright negative. The general consensus of these films was that The Master was muddled, boring, incoherent at times, and too ambiguous and inexplicable at times. So, while I initally had high hopes for the film, I went in with much lower expectations, and in fact was prepared to be disappointed due to these reviews and opinions from those who I respect. I must say, and this is not out of some loyalty to Anderson (I'm readily open to hate any film I see, even from filmmakers I most admire - just ask me about The Hudsucker Proxy or The Ladykillers), that The Master was as spell-binding as its titular character (in an Oscar-worthy performance from P.S. Hoffman), and one of the best films of this new century (and certainly the best of the year so far). Joaquin Phoenix seems destined to win an Oscar, unless another film showcases some kind of miracle of a performance this year. He takes the complex, highly original character of Freddie Quell and doesn't just make it his own - he BECOMES Freddie. Not for a moment was I unconvinced of his performance, not for a moment did I detect a flaw in performance. The same goes for Phil Hoffman, as well as Amy Adams, who gets little screen time compared to the other two, but she's in total command of her character.

To describe the plot may not be a waste of words, but it seems pointless. The beauty of this film is the unveiling of each plot point. Not to mention, the masterclass acting on display, and the perfection of the filmmaking. The score, the cinematography, the set design... everything is perfect. But, a little on the plot: when the film first opens, we see Freddie on a ship during WWII. Not long after the opening, the end of the war is announced, and Freddie is released back into society. One of the most stunning images (which is repeated symbolically several times in the film) is the wake from the ship in the deep blue ocean. The colors are gorgeous. And people say "film" is dead. Anderson filmed this in glorious 70mm (though I saw a digital projection of it), and it's simple gorgeous.

After Freddie is introduced to society, he drifts from one job to another, drinking and getting in trouble, until he sneaks onto the ship of Lancaster Dodd, aka The Master (Phil Hoffman). From there, the plot develops, never as we expect, and that is one of its truly great joys. I shall describe it no further, other than to say there are two exceptional scenes - one between Dodd and Freddie as Dodd questions Freddie about his past. This could have been a droll, boring Q&A session. Anderson elevates the material to make it absolutely riveting. The other is a scene in jail, brilliantly, with nothing more than visuals, showing the differences (and ultimately similarities) between Master and Freddie.

Anderson has, with The Master, continued his streak of creating daringly original, beautifully filmed, exceptionally acted pieces of art. This film is far from boring; far from shallow; far from confusing and incoherent. It certainly deserves a second viewing, but don't all great films?

Also curious to note is that 90% of the first teaser trailer, and at least half of the second teaser trailer has footage that is not found in the film. Very interesting marketing campaign this film has run.

A must see for any cineast.

****/****

Compliance

A decidedly Milgramish cinematic examination

Compliance concerns a story that is essentially an amalgam of 70 real-life incidents. Undoubtedly it embellishes for dramatic potential, but the brilliance of the film rests not in its compliance (pun definitely intended) with the real events, but rather how a disturbing and unnerving story can develop from a series of actions that from the outside seem completely illogical, but in the framework upon which they build on each other contain just enough internal logic to explain why a story such as this could happen and actually did happen. Sometimes, truth is stranger than fiction.

When the film premiered at Sundance 2012, it was greeted with many walk-outs. This wasn't a response reserved only for the Sundance screening; it happened at theatres all over the country. Most of the criticism regarded the seeming idiocy of the characters to behave as they do. What I suspect, however, is that many of these dissenters have not read social behavioral theorist and psychologist Stanley Milgram's Obedience to Authority. I was 16 when I first read it, not as an assignment for my AP Psychology class, though that is where I was first introduced to it. The Milgram experiments were conducted in 1961, when Yale Professor Stanley Milgram theorized that during the Holocaust, many of the accomplices to the Nazi agenda were in fact morally opposed to the party's policies, but aided in their execution simply because they were told to by a higher authority. The experiment involved "the teacher" and "the learner" as well as "the confederate." Teacher and Learner were placed in separate rooms where neither could see the other. The Confederate would issue orders and guidance to The Teacher, who would ask The Learner questions, and for each wrong answer, The Teacher would issue an electric shock to The Learner; shocks would increase 15 volts upon each wrong answer. The Teacher would continue to issue shocks, under the reassurance from The Confederate that they would not be held responsible for any harm to The Learner, etc. The Teacher could not see, but could hear, the reaction from The Learner, which escalated into pleading, screaming, and crying in pain. In reality, there were no electric shocks. Prior to the experiment, Milgram polled psychologists and colleagues, who believed very few subjects would go beyond strong shocks. They were wrong. In his first study, 65% of subjects advanced to administering the strongest shock of 450 volts, despite admitting they were uncomfortable doing so.

It is very easy to sit back and declare people's actions to be illogical and beyond moronic from our third-party, hands off point of view. It's not so easy to imagine how an illogical situation can develop from seemingly simple levels of logic; and how going from point A to C in one huge jump would be preposterous, but going from A to B to C in gradual steps actually exhibits an inherent, twisted logic. Showing us that development is Compliance's greatest success.

This is the best film I've seen yet of 2012. It has not the entertainment or laughs of my second favorite film, 21 Jump Street, but the kind of fascinatingly detailed mechanisms of structure that allow us to believe an improbable scenario; not to mention, the self-reflection spurred by watching how all the pieces construct themselves in an elegant, simple fashion. I'd much rather rewatch 21 Jump Street, though.

****/****