Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Bresson isn't tided over by THE LIFE AQUATIC!

Hey folks, Harry here with a rather discouraging review regarding Wes Anderson's LIFE AQUATIC. Having said that, I have found that Wes Anderson - like the Coen Brothers and Woody Allen - is a talent that isn't, unfortunately, a talent that everyone recognizes or appreciates. On the otherhand, I find them to be breathtakingly refreshing when placed against the rest of my yearly intake of film. Beware of spoilers here... but also take into consideration... it's a Wes Anderson movie - it takes the peculiar to truly appreciate. heh...

Hey Harry, here's a LIFE AQUATIC review if you need one:

One trick pony. That was the deep, sad feeling I got while walking out of LIFE AQUATIC. Is it a bad movie? I don't think Wes Anderson is capable of making a bad movie -- not bad in that Brett Ratner way. He's too talented, too capable. But with LIFE AQUATIC, Anderson's limitations are showing. He's original, but not innovative. He has vision, but is not visionary. In brief, he's beginning to repeat himself.

There isn't much point in reiterating LIFE AQUATIC's plot. There isn't much of one. It's basically ROYAL TENENBAUMS on a boat. Bill Murray, in another terrific, late career performance, plays essentially the same character as Gene Hackman did in TENENBAUM: the once talented and famous patriarch of a ragtag, eccentric group (this time, the only difference is that he's not related to any of them) that he manages to hold together with a combination of awe and chicanery. The basic elements of the story is that Murray's oceanographer Steve Zissou has just lost his friend and business partner to a mysterious giant shark, and embarks with his crew to find and kill it. In one of the funniest moments of the movie, when Zissou is told he cannot kill the shark, Murray deadpans, "I'll find it. But I won't kill it." Complicating his task is the sudden appearance by someone who may or may not be the son from an affair Zissou had in his youth. Played by Owen Wilson with a Kentucky accent and a Rhett Butler moustache, the performance is surprisingly effective, especially given the low regard I generally hold for Wilson's acting, which often tends to second banana straight man in subpar studio films cooked up in Monday morning development meetings. Here, as often happens with Wilson in an Anderson movie, he actually gets to play a character and its both amusing and, at times, moving.

Using this, Anderson sends his crew of Team Zissou out to water to do, seemingly, everything but look for the shark. They steal supplies from a competitor of Zissou's, played hysterically by Jeff Goldblum, who steals every scene he's in, even from Murray. A reporter played by Cate Blanchett shows up to interview Zissou, and quickly becomes the object of affection to both father and "son". And then there's a subplot about pirates that provides some of the movie's most awkward scenes. Note to Anderson: Don't direct anymore action scenes. Please. All this, of course, culminates in typical Anderson fashion: the sad realization of opportunites lost (Murray has a killer line summing this up) and the obligatory slow motion shot that concludes every Anderson movie.

As previously stated, where LIFE AQUATIC goes wrong is in its familiarity. I sat there and couldn't help but think that I've seen this all before, and done better. This goes beyond the visual style. Anyone who's seen Anderson's films should be familiar with his style by now, and nothing here will surprise you. The addition of Henry Selick to provide some animated monsters is amusing, but unnecessary, even distracting, as they have no bearing on the characters except to add another layer of quirkiness and as a cutaway whenever Anderson needs a laugh. (To add to the precious level of the film, Anderson has included, yes, an actual yellow submarine)

What is most surprising about LIFE AQUATIC is how unsure Anderson seems a lot of the times. Many scenes seem to stutter and meander. The scene where Wilson greets Murray for the first time is so awkward and unnatural, that it goes beyond two characters playing it that way. It seems Anderson isn't sure where he wants this scene to go -- so he kicks in one of the soundtrack's many vintage 70s Bowie songs. And the movie goes on and on about how Zissou needs funding, providing more scenes that seemingly go nowhere. And then, we get back to the problem of familiarity. A big chunk of the movie's conflict is between Wilson and Murray vying for Blanchett's affection, another reiteration of the relationship in RUSHMORE, except done with none of the wit and freshness that that movie had.

For me, the performances were the saving grace of this movie, even though, unlike TENENBAUM and RUSHMORE, I thought Anderson and co-writer Noah Baumbach shortchanged their development, making them seem even more cartoonish. Willem Dafoe plays Zissou's loyal German sidekick, but we know nothing about him beyond that he's German. Bud Cort, when not consigned to being an extra in the group shots, is amusing as a bond company man sent to keep an eye on Zissou. Angelica Huston plays Zissou's benefactor, who herself has been a victim to his years of reckless selfishness. The only disappointment in acting is Blanchett. One of my favorite actresses, she never registers as the object of affection between father and son.

Again, there is enough in this movie to make it watchable, even funny at times. There are many things I love about this movie, but many more things I can't get over. PREMIERE magazine gave this movie a rave review, but the critic also echoed my fear: that this may be the beginning of Anderson showing his limitations. Every great filmmaker has changed things up, be it stylistically or thematically. Coppola changed things from GODFATHER to APOCALYPSE NOW. Scorsese changed things up with MEAN STREETS and ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE. Does Anderson have what it takes to do something unique and different in the coming years? Only time will tell. But if this movie is any indication, Anderson should stay away from logistically complicated films. It doesn't seem to play to his strengths and, perhaps, may have even distracted him.

If you use this, call me BRESSON.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus