300 The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

[Poncho Punch]

I've kind of always thought that Anderson's films were based around the negative aspects of his characters, the "wrong" things they do or say or think. The quirkiness and comedy seems there only to make the film bearable to watch, so the audience won't leave in disgust.

Well, obviously it's not that cut-and-dry, but I do think that the "bull dyke" comments Zissou makes are more important to the film than his little dance when he's showing off the radios they have in their dive suits. I wrote this about Bottle Rocket a little over a year ago, but I think it's relevant to the conversation because I see it as a comparable display of the ugliness that Anderson allows his protagonists to have (mild Bottle Rocket spoilers):


"While many of the jokes are definitely memorable (“He’s just a messed-up kid”), more often than not they’re also devices used to get the audience to put their guard down just long enough to hit them with a scene as disturbingly real as when Dignan loses his optimism and cool just long enough to slash at Anthony with a screwdriver, something which the audience immediately knows he would never do under normal circumstances, and something which Dignan himself immediately regrets and hates himself for as he walks away. When he calls out to Anthony some weeks or months later, it’s evident to both the audience and Anthony that that moment has been on Dignan’s mind all that time, and that he truly needs Anthony, that he is almost as devoted to him as he is to his own plans, schemes and dreams."

[ben d banana]

But as a white heterosexual male, I roll my eyes and shake my head when Zissou says "bull dyke", and find him even MORE pathetic because of it. Does it make me roll my eyes at the film? No. I'm distinguishing the character's intentions and behaviour from the film entire, which I would hardly call homophobic.

Well, I call them homophobic because that is the best description for them.

i believe he's saying the comments the zissou character makes are homophobic but the movie itself is not, which is to me something of a no brainer, but it has become the topic.

[Michael]

As a gay man, no the film itself is NOT homophobic. However, Zissou's remarks are very annoying. Which is probably the point. After being familiar with Wes Anderson's films, I just wish that he could do something better (more intelligent or original) to make Zissou more supposedly pathetic than having him sprouting those stupid slurs.

Go see Almodovar's Bad Education. It has a bunch of "faggot" slurs throughout but Almodovar takes it to the next level. I've never seen the use of that so brilliantly in any films. But you won't get it til the second or third viewing.

[ben d banana]

of course it's the point, and has been used by anderson before...

As per the disdain from various members of the forum about Zissou's homophobia, I find this somewhat short-sighted. Royal Tenenbaums, which Matt gushingly adores, features (yet another) bastard father character who barely tries to conceal his racism: he refers to Danny Glover's character as "that big black buck", for instance, and riles him up by calling him "Coltrane", and taunts him with "you wanna hear some jive talk?" etc. Does this put people off of Royal Tenenbaum? Yup, it's supposed to. It points to one of many gross character flaws of Royal's: he's a bigot. His bigotry plays no little part in his jealousy and wish to reclaim his family from Henry. Does this turn me off the film? No. Royal is supposed to upset me, as a viewer, I'm supposed to love and loath him, and be taken in by his conversion later in the film.

certainly it's more comfortable (and perhaps better done, but you can't really say more effective as you were supposed to be upset by zissou's comments and you were) if an openly homosexual director's film has homosexual slurs in it, just as if female, jewish, black, etc were substituted for homosexual. the problem for me is if you're going to be pc about it you really have to be all or nothing, not just when your personal situation is commented upon. i know it's natural to have an initial reaction, but logic must come into play.

[Steven H]

A discussion about bigotry and small minded racist remarks in Anderson's films is interesting. In Bottle Rocket there seems to be some racism towards hispanics (a few general comments that I can't seem to specifically remember), in Rushmore Max makes fun of someone for being Irish, Royal Tenenbaums has Royal being racist towards Henry, and in Life Aquatic there are many slurs against homosexuals.

[Nihonophile]

O/T but...I was thinking about Life Aquatic and Fishing with John.

What if Dafoe did another episode with Lurie where Dafoe was Klaus?

It would be hilarious and you know you'd watch that. I wish Lurie could make more of that show...

[Steven H]

an interview with Wes Anderson in the guardian.co.uk.

a nice snippet:

With every movie I want to do something different. I have ideas in my mind that I've been saving, but then later I realise, this is a lot like something else. Anjelica is fulfilling the same role she did in the last one. I just can't seem to get away from it. I'll probably try harder with my next movie to make it different. But I dunno. It's all coming from the subconscious. I'm not really in control."

[DrewReiber]

It's all coming from the subconscious. I'm not really in control."

As it should, for any true auteur.

What makes filmmakers like Scorsese so great is his overall conscious or subconscious motifs and meanings carry through as he matured as a person and artist. Watching his religious and spirtual beliefs manifest and change... his approach to women... and self-destruction... these elements make his filmography an experience. The relatively similiar characters (with the same actors) and themes he revisits are a part of him, and help us see how those parts evolve. We need the similarities to pose contrasts, or there wouldn't be any signifigant consistency in his body of work to bother seeking out his films.

Making movies with different plots, characters and so on is good, but if Anderson tries to get too far from what he feels the need to say underneath... he'll cut off his unique voice. If I want a completely different film, I'll find a completely different director and/or writer.

[Pinback]

http://www.dvdanswers.com/index.php?r=0 ... &n=1&burl=

[denti alligator]

That's a whole lot of spine numbers to account for in just one month.

[Pinback]

I was just thinking that....there must be a giant Mizoguchi box set also due in May to account for the other numbers....

[denti alligator]

Yes, that's one possibility, but still: eleven spine numbers!

Hoop Dreams, Bunuel and Burden of Dreams count as three, that leaves 8: one for the box itself, seven others for films!

[Lino]

Two editions? A single and a double set? I think they finally learned that marketing gimmick after the success of the Fanny and Alexander title.

Oh, and if you look closely on the bottom right of the single edition, we'll have a reversible cover a la Tenenbaums! And from the looks of it, the double disc packaging is going to replicate that title's as well - double amaray with different cover artwork (done no doubt by Wes' brother) and a jacket.

All good news on a saturday!

[Lino]

Hoop Dreams, Bunuel and Burden of Dreams count as three, that leaves 8: one for the box itself, seven others for films!

Let's not forget that last year May was a killer month as well! It seems they are repeating the dose!

[Narshty]

Jesus, that cover is FOUL.

[justeleblanc]

Hoop Dreams, Bunuel (2), Burden of Dreams, Life Aquatic (2).... I count five different spines for May.

287, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300

With the 6 from these titles we already know about (I'm guessing Aquatic will count as two spines) and Bunuel as two titles, Milky Way and Phantom, That leaves 6 or 7 more to be released.

Unless my math is wrong.

[Pinback]

Maybe they'll put out spine #300 before some other numbers, leaving 294-299 till June. Perhaps #300 was earmarked for The Life Aquatic for some reason, which had to be released in May....

[BWilson]

There's a very good chance that Criterion simply wants Life Aquatic to be #300 so they'll jump ahead a few numbers and release it in May, then fill in the rest later. It's not the first time it's happened.

[Lino]

Maybe they'll put out spine #300 before some other numbers, leaving 294-299 till June. Perhaps #300 was earmarked for The Life Aquatic for some reason, which had to be released in May....

I was thinking the same thing.

[FilmFanSea]

According to Amazon, the pricing structure for these releases seems very odd:

2-disc SE: $32.99 (SRP)
1-disc: $29.99

With only a $3 difference in price, why put out two versions???

[exte]

Single and double-disc sets better not become the standard at Criterion, especially if they have exclusive extras on the one disc. This would be a nightmare for a rerelease for Seven Samurai! I'd hate to triple-dip!

[exte]

I'm reading $20.99 and $23.09 at Amazon.com...

[denti alligator]

(I'm guessing Aquatic will count as two spines)

why?

[FilmFanSea]

I'm reading $20.99 and $23.09 at Amazon.com...

SRP=Suggested Retail Price, which is what I quoted above.

Either way, it's only a $3 difference ...

[Jeff]

Single and double-disc sets better not become the standard at Criterion, especially if they have exclusive extras on the one disc. This would be a nightmare for a rerelease for Seven Samurai! I'd hate to triple-dip!

I don't think that this will become any sort of trend. There was a legitimate reason for the decision with Fanny & Alexander, and I doubt that the decision to do two versions of The Life Aquatic had anything to do with Criterion. Buena Vista will be responsible for the marketing and distribution of this title. I'm sure it was their call.