Another Disappointment

I guess when you watch a lot of movies, you're bound to be disappointed once in a while. I have always enjoyed the work of Wes Anderson, from the early days, with Bottle Rocket, to one of my faves, Rushmore, and then the very enjoyable The Royal Tennenbaums. But it has been the law of diminishing returns for this very talented, and rather celebrated young director. I just caught his latest work, The Darjeeling Limited, once again, with high expectations. Big mistake.

It was beautifully shot, as his films always are, by Robert Yeoman, who Anderson has worked with on all his prior films. The setups are meticulous and the look is consistent, which clearly is the advantage of working with the same director of photography on each project. His films are always cleverly written, and intriguing in the approach, as well as imaginative in the devices that are used to develop characters. In this case, the film takes place in India, and much of it on a train, so it is both exotic and a throwback to a different time from the get go. Several of the usuals make appearances, such as Bill Murray, who appears at the beginning and end of the film, though I don't believe he has any lines. Also included in the cast are Owen Wilson and Jason Schwartzman, who both seem to work perfectly within Anderson's framework.

I think one of the downfalls of this film was that it tried to be too clever, and though the plotline had promise (a journey film, particularly one with brothers reconnecting after a long absence is always a good choice) it fell flat because there was a real lack of story. Perhaps even more than a lack of story was the lack of motivation for the characters actions. They just didn't seem believable to me. I kept thinking, if they are so irritated with one another, why did they bother going on the trip in the first place? And then at the end, they suddenly are close as can be? It just felt forced.

Before I end, a word about lighting. Watching today's Hollywood films, even low budget productions, the lighting is not something you necessarily notice. And that's a good thing. It's like editing. It is necessary to make a film work, but it should be seamless and therefore, not evident or distracting from the telling of the story. We don't typically walk into a room and say, 'wow the lighting in here is fantastic!' We don't notice it, unless the lighting is bad or in some cases, overpowering. The same is true with film and video, though it is much more of a challenge because the camera does not record things the same way our eye sees them. Something to be aware of and to strive for in your work this semester. Hopefully this week's reading helped with that. We will be talking more about it in class, but as you watch films this semester, look at how scenes are lit. Look for motivated and unmotivated lighting sources. Look for shadows that distract. Look at the different styles from different eras. If you watch film noir from the '40s or '50s, and then compare it to today's films, you would find stark differences. Also, look at everyday lighting, from how rooms in your homes are lit, to different places you go, to outdoor lighting conditions at different times of day. Notice how bright or dark it is and what kind of light exists there. Consider how you might want to light the space if you were shooting a scene there. If natural light is involved, consider how you could use it to your benefit.