Skip to main content

"I love you too, but I'm going to mace you in the face!"

This weekend, The Boyfriend and I ordered up some Indian food and settled in to watch The Darjeeling Limited. As a fan of Wes Anderson, but also a person who can admit that I find some of his work very uneven, I wasn't sure to expect.


The film follows the meandering story of the Whitman brothers (played by Owen Wilson [my favorite Wilson!], Adrien Brody, and Jason Schwartzman) who travel across India in a train on a reluctant spiritual journey. I was pleased with the casting--obviously Wilson and Schwartzman are Anderson favorites, but Brody fit in rather nicely to the Anderson asthetic and was perfect as neurotic, kleptomaniacal middle brother Peter. Owen Wilson, usually known for his wacky stoner-type characters pulled back a little to play the bossy but fragile oldest brother Francis. Schwartzman was also good as youngest brother and peace-maker Jack. The brotherly dynamic was great, and it was interesting to watch the three of them play off one another. It was also sort of fascinating to try and figure out what had led their relationships to the current point and to wonder where they where headed.


The movie is definitely a character study, since really almost nothing actually "happens." It's basically 90 minutes of watching the Whitman brothers haul around their monogrammed baggage while trying to connect with each other and themselves. Anderson has let up on the precociously whimsical aspect that I felt sort of dragged down The Life Aquatic and this time allows his characters to interact a little more naturally.


Another thing that was particularly interesting to me was the way he almost made India a character in the movie. Having all three main characters in a place where they were uncomfortable and out-of-place created a situation that led to more conflict. I know that feeling of being the only white person in a place, wondering what people are thinking yet unable to find out because no one is speaking your language. It definitely makes you both extremely self-conscious and at the same time sort of uninhibited--self-conscious because you're completely different from everyone around you and you don't know what they're saying, yet uninhibited because none of these people know anything about you and most probably don't know know what you're saying about them, either. It's a set of circumstances that allow the Whitman brothers to put down a certain number of their defenses under the guise of trying to have a spiritual experience.


I definitely liked the movie, although I think I'd probably have to watch it again to even start to get everything. Like Anderson's other films, it's got a lot of visual depth and an astounding number of details that will require multiple viewings. I found it both funny and moving, closer probably to Tennenbaums and Bottle Rocket than to Rushmore or Life Aquatic. I recommend it to anyone who is willing to sit down and really WATCH it (it's not a movie you can put on as background--it will need you to devote your full attention).


Sidenote: Wes Anderson really has a thing about absentee parents. There is at least one in every one of his movies, except maybe Bottle Rocket. In Tennenbaums, Royal has been absent for most of his children's lives, and Chaz's wife is dead, leaving his two sons to deal with missing a parent. In Rushmore, Max's mother is dead. In Life Aquatic, Steve Zissou IS the absent parent, and Ned is the child learning to deal with that absence. And in Darjeeling, the Whitman brothers lost their father a year previous, and their mother has disappeared on them too. I don't know what it means, except that maybe ol' Wes has some parental issues.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CR3 # 17: Mount Misery by Samuel Shem

Mount Misery is the sequel to Samuel Shem's first book, House of God (review here). It follows Dr. Roy Basch as he leaves the House of God and moves to psychiatric hospital Mount Misery to begin his psychiatric residency. Unfortunately, it turns out that psychiatrists are just as crazy, confused, and often detrimental as medical doctors. As Dr. Basch cycles through the various sectors of the hospital (talk therapy, admissions, Freudian Analysis, drug therapy) he is horrified to discover that it seems everything he is being taught is not only wrong, but potentially dangerous. He begins to fall into terrible patterns of behavior, mirroring the problems his patients are having. Each area is worse than the last, with one doctor who thinks the best way to treat is to be aggressively hostile, one who cares only about insurance premiums and efficiency, one who treats with silence and "regression," and one who thinks the only viable treatment is to pump every patient full of exp…

CBR9 #2 - Southern Gods

I've had Southern Gods on my TBR list for so long I no longer remember why I put it there. Was it a recommendation from Amazon? From Goodreads? Did someone I know recommend it? Did it cross my path as a "If you liked __________ then you'll like this too!"

Maybe I heard it through the grapevine?

I only know that recently, I happened to come across it on my wishlist and decided to go ahead and splurge on it.

I'm glad I did.

In 1951 Memphis, war veteran and leg-breaker-for-hire Bull Ingraham gets a new assignment: a record company has lost one of their employees somewhere. Early Freeman set off to deliver new records to radio stations, and has seemingly disappeared off the face of the earth. His boss at Helios Records is anxious to find him...and also anxious to find a mysterious blues musician whose music can do terrible things to the living -- and to the dead.

Meanwhile, in Arkansas, Sarah Rheinhart leaves her abusive husband and returns to her family home, where …

CR3 #30: The First Wives Club by Olivia Goldsmith

I saw the movie of The First Wives Club before I read the book. It's a cute chick flick, in which scorned women take comedic revenge on their former spouses. They become better friends and everyone winds up happy in the end. I was somewhat surprised (though not much--the differences between film and literature are often wide) at how different the book was--I am used to changes in plot or small character changes (combining two characters into one, or perhaps changing to a more pleasant ending) but the major change here between novel and movie was the tone.

The story is basically the same; After a close friend's suicide, three middle-aged female friends get together and beginning reviewing their lives. They realize that much like their late friend, they have been screwed over by the men in their lives--the men used them to get to their high social and financial positions, then screwed them over both personally and financially. The three women decide to use their wits and their co…