The Magnificent Andersons

The Magnificent Andersons




Paul Thomas Anderson and Wes Anderson are not related, yet they seem to occupy the ying-yang auteurship in the current state of the cinema. Wes’ films are understated and unassuming. Paul Thomas’ are in-your-face evocation of Martin Scorsese/David Mamet’s style. Last year marked the first time I actually looked forward to plucking down $11 for a matinee at the local infinity-plex to watch “The Darjeeling Limited” and “There Will Be Blood.” If anyone was interested, I placed those 2 movies in my top 2 of the year. Sure “No Country for Old Men” was good, deep, polished, but as much as I enjoy the Coen Brothers’ cleverness, emotionally I’m left with a void. Nothing wrong with that I suppose. I mean I laughed, thought…I guess that’s all I felt with NCFOM. But with the Andersons’ work, an emotional residue has always existed.

The first time I watched “The Royal Tenenbaums” by Wes Anderson was in an art house theater in Pasadena. A friend had previously loaned a DVD of “Rushmore” to me and I loved it. I was curious to see if perhaps there was a sophomore slump. I didn’t realize “Bottle Rocket” was his first full-length release. Anyway, I watched “Royal” with some expectations. I liked it. I didn’t love it. After the movie my friend and I dined at a sandwich place next door. She said she really loved Ben Stiller’s character. “He was trying to grieve for his wife, but he didn’t know how.” To me this family of geniuses were detached, distant. I couldn’t relate. I love my family but we weren’t as accomplished at the Tenenbaums. However my friend’s comments made me rent the dvd once it was released. I re-watched it. Strange, the 2nd viewing tugged my emotional wires and pulled tightly. Ben Stiller’s character was trying to grieve for his wife, freaking out when he sons went missing and harboring resentment toward his free-spirited, irresponsible father. When he reaches his boiling point he comes down hard, literally and figuratively in of all places, a zen garden in the Japanese Consulate next door. Comically brilliant. But when Hackman’s Royal replaces the deceased dog with another, Stiller finally breaks down and says “I’ve have a rough year.” That was pretty emotional and I felt tears welling up. But I swear it was the chili I was eating. (Coughs)

Like Wes, Paul Thomas Anderson’s stories revolve around relationships. Like “Tenenbaums,” films like “Boogie Nights” and “Magnolia” interweaves characters, though not as subtlely and thankfully so. With “Magnolia” I had the same initial apathetic reaction. I thought it was too long, and somewhat indulgent. By chance I was the video store a year after it was released on home video. I rented it. Too long? What was I thinking? The movie moves swiftly and deftly. I got into each character’s personal story and like a good novel, once you’re involved you’re lost in their world. When the movie ended I started to see Anderson’s style. The hardened façade gave way to tenderness and a sense of humanity that a lot of filmmakers of his generation scoff for the sake of making a violent gangster noir movie. Not that there is nothing wrong with that. But as a viewer, if I don’t care about the characters I’m not going to care about the movie. It’s just refreshing to see a movie that is about something and not some pompous homage to “Pulp Fiction” or works by Martin Scorsese. I ended up buying “Magnolia,” “Boogie Nights” and “Punch Drunk Love,” the latter being a film that I could really relate to especially since I’m the youngest of 3 boys. I felt Sandler’s rage in the same way I commiserated with Stiller’s character. So therein lies the difference between the two, the ying and yang. Wes Anderson…a quiet epiphany, Paul Thomas Anderson…rage slowly simmering.

Their latest works shows a lot of growth in their own way. Critics complained that “Darjeeling Limited” follows a line of Wes’ films that look and feel the same. Again, the changes are subtle. Beginning in his home state of Texas, Wes’ stories have carried him across the states and now to international waters. It’s not the change in scenery either. “Rushmore” dealt with a school boy crush on a teacher with a father figure intercepting the plans, “Royal Tenenbaums” dealt with a dysfunctional family, “Life Aquatic” dealt with the reconnection between a father and son and “Darjeeling Limited” tells of loss and gain between brothers. “There Will Be Blood” however showed a growth unlike PT’s previous work. Gone were the long passages of dialogue peppered with playful expletives, dolly shots into action, and frogs raining down. However that intensity worked through Daniel Day Lewis as Daniel Plainview, a driven mean son-of-a-bitch hell bent to win at every deal. The film was reminiscent of Kubrick at the beginning of his iconic stage with shots reminding me of “2001: A Space Odyssey” with a little wicked sense of humor found in “The Shining.” I have always had a fondness for film openings that don’t require words, with the sole exception being narration read by an unseen person. So imagine my thrill at the beginning of TWBB.

Anyway, this is not to single out these two as the most influential and important filmmakers of this generation. We still have the masters like Scorsese around, and of course people like Tarantino are still around. But for me I can look at the Magnificent Andersons as part of the few auteurs around who call their own shots in medium and even society leaning more and more toward the corporate side. I can’t wait for their next movies.