Directors in focus: Wes Anderson

It’s hard to write about something that almost defies description – or, at least, something which has so many moving parts, so many substantive and stylistic components all in the mix, and can be seen, interpreted, and judged in variously opposed ways. It leaves you feeling elated or, alternatively, fatigued. It seems superficial, but provides a depth that most imitators don’t or can’t provide. It supplies itself as whimsical caricature, but hints at emotional integrity. It reminds you of what it was to be young, but affirms the superiority of age. I guess these dichotomies and quasi-paradoxes are the best – though probably not the easiest – way to describe the films of Wes Anderson, who has always supplied this mixture of slightly amplified absurdity and idiosyncrasy to accentuate the inner-life of his characters, who usually begin his films lost, though they often don’t realise they are, and end them found.

Wes Anderson was born in Houston, Texas, in 1969. While studying philosophy at the University of Texas, he became irritated by another student who kept sitting away from the main table, just as he did. Anderson was uncertain whether this opposite number was mocking him subtly or just liked that seat. At the beginning of the following term his former class-mate approached him and asked which class he thought they should take, acting as if they were already good friends. The other student – who happened to be Owen Wilson – and he became best friends and, inevitably, cinematic collaborators and mutual pillars of support. Despite this apparently propitious beginning, success wasn’t assured, and almost never arrived. After graduating university the two became writing partners, penning the script for their own film, Bottle Rocket, which they made as a short film to show around film-festivals. Famous film and television producer James L. Brooks heard of the project, and, in a miraculous stroke, approached the two with the desire to help them turn Bottle Rocket into a full-length movie. Not only was he willing to put up production-company funds to help, he spent time showing Anderson the mechanics of film-making on a large scale.

Released in 1996, Bottle Rocket featured a trio of young, dispossessed characters that fall in with the charismatic Mr. Henry, owner of a landscaping company and occasional thief. This was followed by 1998’s Rushmore, once again co-written with Wilson, which followed precocious teen Max Fischer’s (Jason Schwartzman) efforts to win the love of one of his elite school’s teachers, as well as his friendship and eventual rivalry with a wealthy industrialist (Bill Murray), and his penchant for producing elaborate stage plays. In 2001, Anderson directed his most successful and praised film, The Royal Tenenbaums, which featured an all-star cast including Gene Hackman, Ben Stiller, Gwyneth Paltrow, and the now-recurring Bill Murray, along with Owen Wilson and his brother, Luke. The films which followed – The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004), about a Jacques Cousteau-like character (once again played by Murray) that had lost all sense of direction in his life, and The Darjeeling Limited (2007), a story of three brothers travelling across India to recover their missionary-running mother, which was in part a tribute to the films of Satyajit Ray – though staged on a much more ambitious scale than his earlier output, led many to argue that he was telling the same stories over and over again. His more recent adaption of Roald Dahl’s Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009) led to a softening of criticisms, however.

And we’re back to the problem of describing something which is still moving. It’s possible that Wes Anderson – who writes, casts, and scores his films, as well as directing them – will move on from the patented archetypes of rudderless individuals who undergo an odyssey of quirky self-discovery, and do what Shakespeare did: let others supply the stories and spin them in his own indelible way, re-tooling the characters and supplying all the trademark whistles and bells for which he’s known for – the heightened sense of reality, the witty and inimitable dialogue, the hand-drawn illustrations by his brother which adorn the artefacts with which he populates his films, and the moveable feast of friends and collaborators with whom he’s worked so well. Maybe that would be fine. It’s certainly a fascinating prospect, and if it’s good enough for Will Shakespeare, then why not Wes Anderson? The well of creativity is only so deep, and perhaps it’s best not to exhaust the supply all in one career. That’s alright, but there are probably still a lot of cool stories down there. Let’s hope the odyssey of quirky self-discovery moves to new levels.

Add Comment

You must log in to submit a comment.