Review: Fantastic Mr. Fox

It's been a good number of weeks since I saw Fantastic Mr. Fox and it just so happens that I'm getting around to it now. Luckily for any of you unfortunate enough to stumble onto my blog from time to time, the movie may still be playing in a few theatres or it could be on its way to DVD. So that has to be some kind of boon right?

Anyways, Fantastic Mr. Fox is the story of a wily, fast-talking fox determined to live life stealing chickens and engaging in devilish mischief as any proper fox would do. Upon being cornered on a particularly dangerous raid of a local farm, Fox is told that his wife is pregnant. This revelation, along with an earnest urging to give up his life of danger, spurs Fox to retire from the scheme business and get an honest job. The film flashes forward a few years and Fox is working a day-to-day job with an altogether average home life. Of course Fox has never given up the ghost of his past life and it is none too soon that he is up to his old shenanigans once again which leads to inevitable trouble for his friends and family, and the crux of the entire film.

All in all, it would be tough to say that this movie is a fresh story all things considered. The real draw of the film lies in three significant factors. The first and most obvious is the animation style. Utilizing stop-motion and other visually quirky elements, Fantastic Mr. Fox is a very entertaining film to see. While some viewers will likely find the admittedly odd style of the film to be anywhere from off-putting to disturbing, it is safe to say that Wes Anderson stalwarts will be delighted how well this new medium accents the directors approach to movie making. This leads into the next significant draw of this movie -- Wes Anderson. It would be reasonable to assume that if one did not enjoy any of the director's previous cinematic efforts, Fantastic Mr. Fox will not change any minds. Another common mistake in assessing the merits of this film would be to immediately dismiss it as a children's movie. While I would say that a child could see this movie and not walk away with any deep psychiatric scarring liable to manifest itself in adolescence; I would say that older audiences are much more likely to cull enjoyment from the various things Anderson does in this and all of his films. Wes Anderson is quite skilled at creating a universe for each of his movies that feels grounded in reality, but just 'left-of-center'. There's an odd quirkiness inherent in a movie by this director that at once unsettles the viewer while making them that much more engaged in the incredibly detailed world presented. As always, experiences will vary from person to person.

The final selling point in this movie's favor is the superb voice casting. All audio recording sessions were performed in the areas they were appearing in the movie. For example a scene in a barn was audio recorded in a barn. To be honest, it's a small detail that likely will not register in your head as you watch, but upon thinking back I found it to add a nice level of texture to the proceedings. I've always been a fan of George Clooney as a comedic actor. I find his willingness to go the extra mile for a laugh commendable, and as a voice actor he's really able to go for it in a way that tickled me from start to finish. Clooney plays Fox with a manic kind of energy that propels the film and the character scene to scene and stands as perhaps one of the key lynch pins in achieving the tone of the movie. Clooney is joined by Meryl Streep as Mrs. Fox who surprises with her great comedic timing and wonderful ability to play straight girl to Clooney's manic show-stealer. Playing their son is Jason Schwartzman as Ash. Schwartzman is at his best when in an Anderson film and this is no exception. Here he plays the part of misplaced and slightly depressed child forced to live in his own father's shadow to both humorous and heart-warming effect. These actors are joined by appropriate and inspired voice casting the likes of Bill Murray, Owen Wilson, Wes Anderson himself, Michael Gambon, and Willem Defoe.

There's not much else to say about Fantastic Mr. Fox. Like almost all of Wes Anderson's movies it has equal parts humor, drama, and in the end heart-warmth (if such a thing exists). Without sounding like I'm knocking the film, it's a light affair. Nothing too heavy or emotionally charged, but at the same time this stands as one of those movies that I personally could watch almost any day at any time on a whim. Long story slightly less long? See this movie if you're looking for some entertainment on a level not as low as something like Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (which is not by any stretch a bad film), but not as intense as something like Away We Go.

Review: The Darjeeling Limited not Hotel Chevalier

What can be said about Wes Anderson movies that hasn't already been said.... somewhere other than here? Not much I imagine, but here I go anyways. Offbeat, quirky, oddly hilarious; these are all things that one could and will say about any given Wes Anderson movie. The director excels at creating worlds that, while more or less similar to ours, differ in enough ways that the viewer gets a really unique foray into some undeniably amusing locales. Things like time period, styles, and even technology become ambiguous in Anderson's worlds and this allows him to effectively pull off some otherwise too-strange story lines. Perhaps his least quirky film to date, The Darjeeling Limited, was met by fans as either acceptable or not really a "great" Anderson film. I find myself in an altogether different category: The Darjeeling Limited stands as the definitive Wes Anderson film, the maturation and mastery of his balance between the offbeat and the real. The pitch perfect realization of believable characters existing convincingly in a the slightly left-of-center universe; The Darjeeling Limited succeeds on many levels both subtle and overt, intentional and not.

Ok, so that's pretty high praise for a movie regardless of its pedigree. Let's start with the most basic element of any movie that can make or break it before any of the other elements can be taken into regard: the performances. Almost from the very first scene with all three principle actors together (after a fairly amusing and welcome cameo from Steve Zissou himself, Bill Murray), it's clear that the chemistry is natural and believable. Jack (Jason Schwartzman), Francis (Owen Wilson), and Peter (Adrian Brody) act as though they really have grown up together and carry all the social quirks, awkward interaction, and comfortable banter of real brothers. Whether this is a testament to the writing, script, or acting ability of the people involved is unknown, but as is usually the case with such a successfully executed film it is most likely a combination of all three factors. From a personal standpoint, my own close relationship with my younger brother greatly informed an added appreciation of the accuracy of the fraternal bonds on display here. I knew the movie was on the right track when Owen Wilson's character spoke this line to his brothers over a remotely uncomfortable dinner early in the film: " Did I raise us? Kind of?" While it may seem included for laughs or perhaps a slightly off-kilter informing of Francis' character, it spoke to a very peculiar portion of myself as an older brother. Of course to say such a thing is not only slightly arrogant, but mostly unfounded in general; I still found it resonant in the sense that I've had this thought at one time or another (perhaps to a lesser degree).

Each brother plays a different part in a dynamic which in real life plays very similar to the display shown here. Francis Whitman is the oldest brother and therefore takes on many of the leadership qualities (for better or worse) of his parents, most notably his mother. This plays with his brothers in interesting ways. Peter resents this attitude and vocally expresses his dislike of his older brother's domineering. This is emblematic of many middle children and, in my experience, of any younger sibling faced with the challenge of establishing their own identity. Jack takes the commands in a much more laid back fashion. It's clear he's young enough to heed his older brother as an authority figure, but also detached enough to not care if it inconveniences him. Individually, the brothers interact in very accurate and interesting ways too. Francis and Peter butt heads a lot in an effort to establish dominance: Francis because he feels it's his right as oldest and Peter in an effort to prove his worth in the middle. Meanwhile Peter and Jack get along much more amiably. To Peter, Jack is just his brother, feels no need to be his better, and can easily trust him almost to spite the smug Francis. Jack views both Peter and Francis as the same with very little variance. Francis and Jack share a similar relationship, the difference being that Francis regards his littlest brother as someone to be shepherded while not realizing Jack is unaffected either way.

So, why take up all this space to break down the relationship of the three brothers? Two reasons: Firstly to really define what I find is the core of the film and the fulcrum on which the rest of the movie clicks so well. Secondly to emphasize what I find to be the effectiveness and accuracy with which a sibling relationship is portrayed here, and why this makes the movie the best at having 'real' characters in an exaggerated world. Tie this all together with the fact that each brother is still reeling from the tragic death of their father a year earlier in their own unique way, and the rest of the movie can't help but benefit.

From here the fairly simple 'self discovery' plot is elevated to a much, much more meaningful level than it may have been had the core dynamics been as cliche as it certainly had the possibility of being. The three brothers, brought together by Francis after a near-death experience (highly suggested to be an almost suicidal event), set off on a train (the title-sharing Darjeeling Limited) across India on a journey of discovery, recovery, and (unbeknownst to Peter and Jack) a potentially chaotic reunion with their wayward and perhaps errant mother. It all plays with the trademark quirk and wit that's a staple of Wes Anderson movies. There are plenty of laugh out loud situations juxtaposed with fairly dramatic moments throughout. It becomes clear to the audience fairly early on that the brothers are using hefty emotional barriers as well as strong, illegal narcotics to numb themselves to the true issues at play. Before long the tensions become too hard to smile and ignore and, like any good healing process, the brothers tear into each other. It's fun to watch the brothers' infighting and how they are still uniquely close and brotherly through it all. So brotherly are they that they get themselves kicked off the train. Without their narcotics and only their sparkling personalities to comfort each other it isn't long before they each learn to overcome their differences and their hang-ups. Oh, and there's the amusing reunion with their mother (Anjelica Huston) who just so happens to be a nun.

The Darjeeling Limited is by far the best Wes Anderson film because it portrays an effective and relatable relationship, makes you want to go on an epic journey across India in search of self realization, and leaves you feeling like even though life may throw some rotten things at you that the answers are as close as you're willing to be to face them. Now if only we could somehow get a nice Criterion Collection release of this movie like all of the other Anderson films, we could all die happy.



Side Note: Coming Soon! Chapter by chapter book reviews... maybe?