Wes Anderson's The Grand Budapest Hotel

that feature is unique in a number of ways.

particularly when i read reviews that ascribe to the film a particular profundity in its lamentation of a lost world etc

i've long been in the unusual (?) position of being a wes anderson supporter (even in tough times) who finds such critical plaudits missapplied.

I don't remember how many characters are presented as Jews in the Lubitsch film. (Not Benny and Lombard, I think.)

a lot of it is just in the casting. there are certain actors who pop up and they might as well have payos down to their toes, they are so strongly marked as jewish.

one such actor being lubitsch in weimar-era germany btw

how about to be or not to be?

Tanked at the box office btw

Greenberg even gets to make the Shylock speech!

Hollywood's "mittle-europa"

I think this is the key phrase, the film is set in a Ruritania/Syldavia/Freedonia, a pastiche of a pastiche of Europe.

Greenberg even gets to make the Shylock speech!

― J'ai toujours préféré la folie des passions à la sagesse de (Michael White), Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:27 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

^^^ this

It'll get a terrific laugh...

yeah I remember that scene now. I still don't think WA's film is intended to be similar in style or content, tho.

Reminds me of the Wilder/Wyler exchange at Lubitsch's funeral. Wilder ruefully said, "No more Lubitsch," and Wyler said, "Worse than that. No more Lubitsch pictures."

seeing this tonight!

Reminds me of the Wilder/Wyler exchange at Lubitsch's funeral. Wilder ruefully said, "No more Lubitsch," and Wyler said, "Worse than that. No more Lubitsch pictures."

― J'ai toujours préféré la folie des passions à la sagesse de (Michael White), Thursday, April 17, 2014 10:15 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

then they both nodded and said in tandem, "let's write that down."

And then they made out.

this was great, Morbz otm. having spent some time in Eastern Europe just after the wall came down it was very evocative of a specific kind of "lost" age, the crumbling hotels, former glories etc.

also yeah Kovacs is a specifically Hungarian name, but not one that's specifically Jewish. (Oddly unlike s1ocki all the Hungarians I know are non-Jews)

why would that be odd?

When Hungary joined the war against the Allies, nearly 20,000 Jews from Kamenetz-Podolsk who held Polish or Soviet citizenship were turned over to the Germans and murdered. However, the extermination phase in Hungary only began later, after the Nazi invasion in March 1944. Until then Horthy refused to succumb to Hitler’s pressure to hand over the Jews. At this time there were more than 800,000 Jews living in Hungary, as a result of annexations of regions from Slovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia. In May 1944 the deportations to Auschwitz began. In just eight weeks, some 437,000 Jews were deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau. After October 1944, when the Arrow Cross party came to power, thousands of Jews from Budapest were murdered on the banks of the Danube and tens of thousands were marched hundreds of miles towards the Austrian border. In all, some 565,000 Hungarian Jews were murdered.

http://www.yadvashem.org/yv/en/holocaust/about/09/hungary.asp

it's just odd that our experiences with Hungarians are with exclusive subsets

I am well aware of the Hungarian holocaust btw

i imagine you are, it's just odd to wonder why all the hungarians you met aren't jews....

my wonderment goes the OTHER way, ie s1ocki must know a fairly unusual group of Jews who got out before the war or something (altho tbf there are still a bunch of Jews in Budapest)

We all know Andy Grove

my grandfather got out long before the war, though he has some fairly incredibly tales to tell about brushes with violent anti-semitism (or rather, had stories to tell).

i also know some who survived the holocaust.

and i believe some who got out in '56, when everyone else did.

visual effects breakdown

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/watch-impressive-vfx-reel-for-wes-andersons-the-grand-budapest-hotel-20140428

Great movie

Best WA since FMF

I'm a little ashamed at how skeptical I was upthread

Somebody mentioned WA's 'natural voice' upthread and I think his truest voice might be Eli Cash's writings in Royal Tenanbaums ("the friscalating dusklight") + Gustaf's poems in this

found this quite enjoyable, but it didn't leave much of a mark

Best WA since FMF

you're only dissing one film there, but i don't believe so anyway

Me and my gal both dug it a lot. Of the zillions of details to enjoy, my favorite was the late-'60s Soviet iteration of the hotel.

Glenn Kenny has my favorite take on the film as a whole:

All of this material is conveyed not just in the standard Wes Anderson style, e.g., meticulously composed and designed shots with precise and very constricted camera movements. In "Hotel" Anderson's refinement of his particular moviemaking mode is so distinct that his debut feature, the hardly unstylized "Bottle Rocket," looks like a Cassavetes picture by comparison. So, to answer some folks who claim to enjoy Anderson's movies while also grousing that they wish he would apply his cinematic talents in a "different" mode: no, this isn't the movie in which he does what you think you want, whatever that is.

What he does is his own thing, which in terms of achievement is on a similar level of difficulty to what Nabokov kept upping the ante on in his English-language novels: to conjure poignancy and tragedy in the context of realms spun off from but also fancifully, madly removed from dirt-under-your-fingernails "reality."

Only thing I'd add is that complaints about the fussiness of his style tend to gloss over the rawness and physicality of the stories. He does design these snowglobe worlds, but then he fills them with messy, awkward people and events. People get hurt a lot in his movies, in black and blue ways.

Thing that annoyed me the most: Saorse Ronan's character dying in a great epidemic after the war, which is clearly meant to invoke the Spanish Flu, which was after WWI not II. I thought it really suffered from dabbling in such a vague and badly defined 'europeanness'. Not as bad as the 'indianness' of Darjeeling, but still just so bloody turisty.

it's not a history doc, i'm fine w/ remixing the facts in such dreamscapes

(ie, i'm not sure an On Her Majesty's Secret Service luge chase could've happened in '30s Europe)

Well, so am I. I just don't think it works in this case.

Thing that annoyed me the most: Saorse Ronan's character dying in a great epidemic after the war, which is clearly meant to invoke the Spanish Flu, which was after WWI not II. I thought it really suffered from dabbling in such a vague and badly defined 'europeanness'. Not as bad as the 'indianness' of Darjeeling, but still just so bloody turisty.

― Frederik B, Wednesday, May 21, 2014 11:56 AM (49 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

did you not mind then that he completely fudges the dates of World War II as well? the whole thing is deliberately off-kilter from actual history, I think that's part of joke so to speak.

i think this is canny of him btw.

there are a lot of hollywood movies of the 1930s (esp. mid-late 1930s) that are ostensibly looking back on the period before/during/after World War I but which are obviously also looking forward to the war that's coming up (which after a certain point everyone knew was going to happen). the way that GBF plays with the timeline evokes that sense of temporal vertigo.

even Grand Illusion did.

yeah, that's a good point, I was thinking of Hollywood movies.

also G.I. ref for ski chase.

Wait, how is he fudging the timeline? This is an imagined country, I just figured they had a semi-fascist takeover of their own. I was annoyed at how vague Edward Norton's character was, however. He seemed like he should have given so much more to the thematics of the film.

i'm just saying if you are imagining the film to be taking place during WWII, as you seem to do (since you were expressly annoyed that the reference to the spanish flu was anachronistic), then the dates simply don't track. the whole thing is a deliberate mishmash of European history, a kind of fantasia of European history. in that context it seems weird to object that one particular element seems anachronistic.

I did not say that. I said it was the thing that annoyed me 'the most'. And no, the film does not take place during wwii, but in the period leading up to it. I'm not complaining that it is anachronistic, I'm complaining it is facile because it's too vague.

huh? you said that it annoyed you b/c it was something that happened during WWI, not WWII. i said that it's weird that this would annoy you but (implicitly) the other anachronisms didn't.

I said it was what annoyed me the most. Some of the other anachonisms work, some don't. I get that he is creating a fantasia, meant to evoke the loss of a certain Europeanness, but I just don't think he manages to do so very well. It's too vague. And part of it is how he doesn't really get into the whole social dimensions of it, like, who is defending what and who is attacking what. What values are he defending? Well, sort of aristocratic values, but he makes sure to have the villain be the rich guy. Instead, it's just some sort of cosmic catastrophe that hits Europe, and putting the flu into it really helps with that.

yeah i wouldn't worry about it too much. in some ways i think it is all a red herring anyway--I don't think Anderson has anything to say about Europe in the 20th century. he's just toying with the settings and style and motifs of some films he likes. i know a lot of his biggest fans would disagree with me--certainly plenty of critics found this film deeply resonant as a reflection on WWII or something--but I think they are barking up the wrong tree.

if you just presume the film exists, like "inglourious basterds," in movieville, then I think some of the objections you might have would grow fainter.

or stronger, who knows?

He, I love Inglourious Basterds, and find it to be very insightful about WWII... But that's another debate.

Yeah, most Anderson-films don't have anything to say about their subjects. But Moonrise Kingdom was so great about childhood - the final rendition of Cuckoo slays me every time - and critics were so positive, that I couldn't help but expect more out of this. It just felt empty to me, but also a bit too serious to be as empty as it was.

I thought it really suffered from dabbling in such a vague and badly defined 'europeanness'. Not as bad as the 'indianness' of Darjeeling, but still just so bloody turisty.

the whole thing is deliberately off-kilter from actual history, I think that's part of joke so to speak.

to start with I found the way Zubrowka lurches around Europe from the Alps to the Baltic and everywhere in between kind of offputting, but eventually it all just added to the dreamlike charm

but yeah, it did make me retrospectively uncomfortable abt Darjeeling Ltd, that it was probably at least as made-up as this and as a white person maybe I should feel bad about watching other white people's made-up ideas of India and not even stopping to think how made-up they are

fair but then of what % of all movies about anywhere could the same be fairly said, and not as if Anderson sells documentary

I think that when the three main characters of a film are doing silly made-up versions of the country's religious dances, then it's probably time to pause...

Man, I didn't like Darjeeling.

it was probably Anderson's most beautiful film, cinematographically

Not big on Darjeeling, but it did give us this: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ycmVoOay4Vs