Comments on: The Very White Self-Indulgence of Wes Anderson Studies

By: notlikeothersheep

notlikeothersheep — Sun, 10 Mar 2013 23:51:41 +0000

Aaron (see remark above), give me a break. “…Not every film is a should exclusively refer to the intricacies of racial, gender and class discrimination…”? That’s blindly untrue. All cinema, modern and postmodern – is essentially about political and cultural ideology and its aesthetic connections to social consciousness as well as our collective “psychological” response to history.
Put simply, whether a film maker chooses to or not, he or she is making a conscious (or unconscious) decision about race and class et. al.

By: Mr.D

Mr.D — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 14:01:12 +0000

I don’t trust anyone that uses the word whimsy.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 05:52:06 +0000

To refer exclusively to the race and class of Wes Anderson’s characters is reductionist. Not every film can or should exclusively refer to the intricacies of racial, gender and class discrimination and all an artist can do at their best is give their perspective of the world through a unique lens. Wes Anderson deserves much more credit than someone like Sofia Coppola because his characters are much more fully realized and have more complex personalities with recognizable faults and strengths. He is not saying that the privileged people that inhabit his films are worse off but he depicts how the cold nature of upper middle class and upper class living creates a climate of neuroticism, mental disorders and lack of real adult maturity. He is not glorifying the childish acts we see onscreen but depicting them because he has a unique statement to make about them. And while his films have often been criticized as style over substance one only has to remember the end of each film to realize that all of the gorgeous cinematography and production design was misdirection so he could set up his cast’s genuine performances and the collective scripts’ most intimate perceptions.

By: Jenny

Jenny — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 14:06:28 +0000

Just as well your not making movies Peter.
Your comments are as useful and insightful as the act of staring at ones belly button. What’s with the white person comments? White people, blue people… yawn. I just saw the film and it was fun. Fun is fun in any language. A little whimsy is all. Lighten up, go make a cup of tea.

By: Lozzo

Lozzo — Sun, 24 Jun 2012 23:31:21 +0000

It is always something of a fascination to watch a Wes Anderson movie.His attention to detail and visual millieau is spellbinding.It is unmistakable that every true artiste leaves their signature mark on a potential masterpiece and the genre of their medium.Anderson is a well read man.Methodical and a painstaking perfectionist. In each of his films the central protaganists are quirky,larger than life characters. Manipulative,intelligent,but endearing. But middle Americans.
A tip for up and coming film makers.Make a feauture film no longer than 1OO mins. Very old school.Some of the greatest movies of all time are this length.
This is what Anderson does and it works for him.The general rule is: the more serious the story; the longer the duration.

By: Milton

Milton — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:53:52 +0000

As a black man I never understood why there is the following acronym : SWPL. I personally like Wes Anderson films due to its sense f humor, visuals and characthers. I haven’t seen any of Whit Stillman’s works so I don’t know how similar they are to the ones done by Wes. I have many black friends who loved Lost In Translation, but also have black friends who hated it. I believe that an acronym like SWPL is ridiculous nowadays. It makes black/asian/you name it people look like they only see Tyler Perry/Bollywood/you name it movies.

By: Carl Eric Scott

Carl Eric Scott — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 17:36:50 +0000

The thing about Wes Anderson films is that you remember the visuals, or the soundtracks, better than you do the plot, the characters, or the dialogue. Maybe this one gets past that.

This whole SWPL thing annoys…the guy hit the nail on the head on 70% of the stuff, so long as you remember he’s really describing a certain segment of SUBURBAN people, most of whom are white, and using certain resilient aspects of Afro-American culture to draw the contrast. And here you see how it collapses Stillman and Anderson, which Brian is right to be annoyed by.

P.S. While “Lost in Translation” may be a SWPL film, it is in fact perhaps the most hated film, especially by culturally-Red white folk, of the last few decades. I join their hatred of the film getting so hyped, even if my annoyance with the film itself did not rise to the hatred-level.

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:00:02 +0000

Most of this analysis seems spot on. But isn’t there a way in which Anderson, despite his confusions, really does tap into modern dissatisfactions with the way we live that admit to our culture’s ills? Yes, one really should be able “to find happiness and fulfillment in doing what you’re supposed to as an adult married with children.” And it is simply wrong to conclude as many today do that the family or man as a social and political creature is toast. But the sentiment behind this train of thought seems to be right, namely that our culture make it profoundly difficult to be good spouses, good parents, good children and friends, and that we often don’t “get” as much out of these relations as we think we should. And so there has to be a kind of frustration at the root of this dynamic, become most such persons would never consider the possibility of a God who animates the whole with providential love: they are trapped in the absurdity of this dysfunctional modern order that they mistake for a representation of the true limits of humanity. There is indeed a tremendous amount of smug self-satisfaction in Anderson films and in the life of the sort of person who would like his films. But I do think that there’s some real disquiet underneath that doesn’t quite know that it’s restless and is seeking peace.

By: Friday News Round-Up 6/15/12 | The Rushmore Academy

Friday News Round-Up 6/15/12 | The Rushmore Academy — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:43:42 +0000

[...] The Very White Self-Indulgence of Wes Anderson Studies is an interesting perspective on the director’s work and his fanbase. [...]

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:54:00 +0000

Andrew: Four movies, although you’re somewhat forgiven for missing his recent film since it sure seemed to have a much more limited release than his prior work.

Stuff White People Like.