The Anderson Brothers (Part 2)

A continuation of Part 1, we continue the somewhat tedious process of comparing the overlapping themes within the work of Wes Anderson and Paul Thomas Anderson.

In Part 1, we discussed how themes of family and growing up play large parts in the two filmmakers' movies. This time, we take a couple more themes to further show just how cohesive these two Andersons happen to be.

Violence/Crime

 

For two storytellers who tend to stray from strict genres for the most part, both started off their feature film careers with crime stories. Wes Anderson's Bottle Rocket involves three friends trying to pull off a complex robbery. As it already may seem, they are not exactly equipped to pull of this kind of crime and things don't go exactly as planned. But there are never really a whole lot of stakes when we see the crime in Wes' films. We are very casually shown Royal participate in dog fighting twice in Tenenbaums, but it's treated like a  throwaway joke (a joke I don't think could've been pulled off had the film been post-Michael Vick arrest). In Life Aquatic, the submarine crew casually strips an observatory lab of all its equipment. None of this is considered with much seriousness, and the resulting theft from the observatory is treated with ironic humor when we learn that the observatory was run by Alistair (Jeff Goldblum), Steve's rival.

P.T.A., though, fills the criminal activity of his characters with enough tension for the both of them. Hard Eight's protagonist, Sydney's past as a criminal is brought to the forefront when John hold a man hostage when he won't pay his prostitute wife, Clementine (Gwyneth Paltrow) for a job. When Sydney comes to help the young newlyweds, it's a scene with taut, rigid emotion. In his very first film, P.T.A. establishes that he does not treat violence as a laughing matter. Scorsese has always been a pretty obvious influence for P.T.A., and it shows most when we see violence occur. Consider this scene toward the end of 'Boogie Nights', which isn't necessarily a crime film or a particularly violent one, but it's an obvious example of how P.T.A. uses a stark, unflinching reality in the face of violence in a very Scorsesean manner, treating it with the utmost seriousness. Now, consider the pirate shootout in Life Aquatic, where there's significantly less blood and the actual combat is so flippant. All Steve does is fire a few bullets, kill one of them, and the entire flock runs out of the boat. Significantly more playful (and even scored to the tunes of Iggy Pop and the Stooges) than anything we'd catch from P.T.A.

The Anderson Brothers (Part 1)

This is the inaugural article of A Blogwork Orange's 'Paul Thomas Anderson Appreciation Month'. Please check in for more through out the coming weeks. Oh, and forgive the length of this piece. They won't all be this long. #PTAAM

Every generation of film students have their collection of contemporary filmmakers that are generally appreciated and celebrated more than most. From my crop, it's the likes of Quentin Tarantino, Darren Aronofsky, David Fincher, Danny Boyle, and to an extent Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan. Basically, filmmakers whose flourish began in the '90s, shaping the minds of future film nuts during that time, creeping into the term papers read by numerous film professors during the mid-to-late 00's. But amongst this group, there are two filmmakers that have always been connected in a strange, omnipresent way that's always been hard to explain. I'm speaking about Wes Anderson and Paul Thomas Anderson.

There's always someone somewhere placing those two names in some form of cinematic argument, usually in an attempt to prop one up while slamming the other down. It's easy to do, considering the drastic gulf between the two's heavy styles. ("Hey well, at least P.T.A. doesn't have dopey mat sets and 60's music." or "Well, at least Wes doesn't have it rain frogs at the end." etc.) In the end, there is always a the declarative statement of which one is better, which seems particularly silly when you consider just how different stylistically these two are. They differ visually (P.T.A. is a schizo cameraman, mixing winding track shots and staccato handhelds; W.A. is more methodical and intent) and tonally (W.A. a master of dry subtlety, with dark tones only arising when need be; P.T.A. loves big, chewy drama shown off in rambling monologues and swelling emotions). Even their influences seem on the opposite ends of the map - P.T.A. showing much love to the Altman/Scorsese/Lumet group from the 70's, while W.A. prefers the Woody Allen/Hal Ashby variety from the same time.

So why are these two always mentioned together? There are shallow, uninteresting reasons. Both had their first feature released in 1996, both hold a devoted - sometimes rabid - fan base, and both were christened with the birth name 'Anderson' (but that seems almost too obvious to mention). Wes is generally considered more prolific, though by the end of this year, he will have released seven features to P.T.A.'s six. Both tend to focus their stories on the privileged, with few moments of attention on the working class. In really internally discussing the question of their constant comparison, I've realized how many overlapping themes these two actually have. And even though they seem to do it in opposite ways, these are two Andersons who have been telling the same story about family, aging, crime and love. Here's a breakdown...

September 2012: Paul Thomas Anderson Appreciation Month

By the power vested in me (and because his newest film The Master comes out later this month), I declare September of 2012 to be 'Paul Thomas Anderson Appreciation Month'. We will be celebrating this on the blog through various articles, essays and argument pieces dealing with our very own PTA at the heart. I will also keep posting contemporary film reviews throughout the month as well, but this month's main focus will be dedicating as much energy as we can to the awesome of Mr. P.T. Anderson.

Feel free to show your PTA love in the comments!

The Expendables 2 (**)

THE EXPENDABLES 2
Directed by Simon West

**

Even without any introduction via the 2010 film The Expendables, you would know within ten minutes of watching The Expendables 2 that it is not a movie to be taken seriously. And why is that? Because before the ten minute mark we see martial arts movie star Jet Li punch someone in the face until it explodes. I'm the last person in the world who should be commenting on the physical possibilities within fighting, but even I feel confident saying that something like that is pretty excessive.

Ruby Sparks (***1/2)

RUBY SPARKS
Directed by Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Davis

***1/2

Films about the creative process don't always work. There's a kind of self-referencing egomania that the audience can sense when we see something written about writing. But Ruby Sparks, the new film from Little Miss Sunshine directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Davis, is filled with such wonderful charm and sweet humor that it is able to overcome that. A love story at its core, Ruby Sparks is a fantastic film about the pressure put on artful creation, and the kind of person that the creative mind can make.

Hit Me With Your Best Shot: 'Dog Day Afternoon'

I've always been a big fan of The Film Experience's series 'Hit Me With Your Best Shot', but have never had the motivation to participate, whether it be because of the film choices or (the more likely scenario) a grand abundance of laziness. But Dog Day Afternoon - a film that I have loved for most of my life - has pushed me out of my apathetic hovel and led me to add to the series.

I've seen the film close to twenty-five times and I've always thought it was a masterpiece, but like all great films, each viewing brings some small detail to light, making the film that much more great. As I sat down to watch it again, pondering which shot to use, I was most struck by the performance of John Cazale. Which is why I went with this shot:

Watching this film for the millionth time, it was this shot that stuck out to me so strongly. They've already been inside the bank for quite some time at this point of the film, but the FBI has stepped in and turned off the electricity. Threatened, they look outside and see FBI agent Sheldon (a terrifically underplayed James Broderick) calling for Sonny to come outside.

The Campaign (***)

THE CAMPAIGN
Directed by Jay Roach

***

If I had to choose a classic cinematic model that set a template for The Campaign, it would probably be Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. On the surface, it seems hard to imagine someone the likes of Frank Capra inspiring a film who has a lead who likes to shave handlebar mustaches into his pubic hair. But if you look at the basic fundamental ideals behind this sophomoric political satire, it's not unlike the optimistic naivete of Caprian classics, where the little man is always able to rise up against the political machine with nothing but his integrity and small-town wherewithal. Yet, like Capra's great film, The Campaign finds the real charm in this tale, even if it seems totally unrealistic in today's cynical society.

Beasts of the Southern Wild (****)

BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD
Directed by Benh Zeitlin

****

Occasionally, a film comes along and it's very scope and cinematic vision leaves you frustrated with the limits of contemporary narrative films. Talk about a film that is astonishingly beautiful and wondrously innovative without James Cameron-like resources. Taking place somewhere in between fantasy and reality, Beasts of the Southern Wild erupts time and time again with so much unbridled emotion and enthusiasm. Not too shabby for a film that takes place in a setting that is so lofty, they call it The Bathtub.

Discussing 'Batman' and other things with Sean

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Waiting for 'The Master' (from a P.T. Anderson fanboy)

Has anybody seen the new trailer for new Paul Thomas Anderson film, The Master? Well, if you haven't, here you go...

It's unbelievably Andersonian, from its astonishingly crisp shots to it's unorthodox but effective music (working again with Radiohead's Jonny Greenwood after their spectacular combination in There Will Be Blood). And I know you're probably foolish for judging a performance from a two-and-a-half minute trailer, but Phoenix looks to be at his fierce finest in a role that could probably bring him back into the public's good graces after his much noted failed experiment I'm Still Here. And the cast around him, including Oscar-winner Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams, are some of the most consistent talent in Hollywood right now, and working with a genius filmmaker known for his work with actors, it's easy to assume they'll be superb. I've had a friend tell me that Anderson only looks like an "Actor's Director" because he only gets the good actors. Well, let's stop to see why they want to work for him in the first place.

The film is slotted for a very cozy October 12th release, which pleases me since I won't have to sort through the December prestige film glut. Hopefully I will be in New York by this time so that way I won't have to wait till Thanksgiving for it to get to my town. PTA FTW!

The Dark Knight Rises (***)

It must take some kind of film event to bring me out of film review hibernation. Alas, The Dark Knight Rises comes along and leads me back to the keyboard, one year after my last post to pontificate cinematically. Not that I'm doing anything original or new in going to the internet to talk about what will probably be the most talked about, most dissected, most hyperbolic-opinion-spreading movie of 2012. As soon as the screen went dark on The Dark Knight in 2008, there has been a large mass of the population waiting for this film, the conclusion of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, which is probably some of the most beloved and praised comic book films in the history of the genre.

Horrible Bosses (***)

HORRIBLE BOSSES
Directed by Seth Gordon

***

Horrible Bosses totally works because it accepts how absolutely preposterous it is. Everything in this film happens in a way that's convenient to the characters and the story arc. In a way, that's part of the screenplay's charm. To say that this film doesn't take itself seriously is a gross understatement. It takes all thoughts of an efficient, more functioning structure and totally chucks it out the window. Why would it do that? Well, it just makes for a funnier movie.

Beginners (****)

BEGINNERS
Written and Directed by Mike Mills

****

There's a certain charm behind the kind of film that would give a dog subtitles for dialogue. This is an act that could always come off as campy if done gratuitously, and worse yet, could seem pretentious if done more tastefully. Beginners is a film filled with small details and motifs that could be construed as reaching and silly if not executed with very precise delicacy. Yet, director Mike Mills so expertly weaves through all the fuss, crafting a wonderful mosaic and telling a beautifully melancholy tale about a man reaching forty who still can't seem to find out why he's so unhappy.

Larry Crowne (**)

LARRY CROWNE
Directed by Tom Hanks

**

I feel like I can say this with certainty: anybody who doesn't like Tom Hanks is probably a very unhappy person. Growing up in the 90's, it was hard to miss him as he starred within some of the decade's biggest hits and won himself two Oscars. There's something noble about a star the size of Hanks willing to take on directing, and Larry Crowne is his shot at it since the surprisingly peppy and enjoyable That Thing You Do! in 1996. His debut was a good but not great film, while his sophomore effort is okay but not good. In many ways, Hanks is both the best and worst part of his own film.

The Tree of Life (***)

THE TREE OF LIFE
Written and Directed by Terrence Mallick

***

I defy anybody to give any kind of definitive opinion on The Tree of Life based on one viewing. Anyone. The film is too slippery. Too unwilling to stick to its own narrative which so desperately hangs around the film like an unwanted child. No, this is not a film that is meant to be consumed and then dissected by intellectuals - though, there is no doubt that that is what is happening across the country as the film makes its steady expansion to different theaters - but it is instead meant to be marveled as one of the single most transfixing visual experiences in a very, very long time.