Comments on: Berlin Review: Wes Anderson’s ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ Starring Ralph Fiennes, Bill Murray, Jude Law & More

By: Stefan Zweig

Stefan Zweig — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:10:48 +0000

Dear Jessica:
As a citizen of Zubrowka, and, therefore, raised in another language, I may be totally wrong, but couldn't you have sent out one of those many 'we's to check the difference between 'affection' and 'affectation' ?

By: Jimbo

Jimbo — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:10:47 +0000

I just saw this (wonderful) movie. What's the cheat you think you saw in the cable car sequence? Whatever it is, I missed it, and absolutely loved that bit.

By: Marc Schenker

Marc Schenker — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:10:47 +0000

My God, is this a preface to a book? You can't do a movie review in, oh, 800 words. Ok, good review, can't wait to see it, etc. Economy! It's the stuff of clarity!

By: TAB

TAB — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:10:47 +0000

Thoroughly insightful and pertinent review. I think people like/dislike Wes Anderson, but what cannot be contested is that he's an exceptional film maker. The Royal Tenenbaums/Life Aquatic are indie masterpieces, and that set a precedent and expectation to Wes Anderson flicks which is incredibly difficult to follow, especially if WA's creative objectives shifted, god forbid want to try something new.

Although I concede, there is definitely an issue with pace in his movies, whether someone likes or dislikes is kind of irrelevant. It's opinion, and you know… everyone's got one. He is a master film maker with a definitive style. Just look at the cast of Grand Budapest. Casts of that calibre don't flock to anyone but a master craftsman.

WA plays with space. Not just in the structure of scenes and performances, but emotional space. There is a detachment in his work which some can find alienative, a nihilism which could be interpreted as indifference.

I find his films very moving, from Bottle Rocket to Moonrise Kingdom. He achieves poignancy and emotional engagement that is very relevant to my generation. There is something of the loss if innocence through experience, the imagination as our inner child, and a tremendous sense of play and fun.

Plus the sumptuous vibrancy of his films aesthetically is a celebration of life. I do admit, WA scripts need the hell cut out of them. They could be a lot tighter, and paced with more crescendo in mind. But then they wouldn't be a WA film I guess. I can identify plenty of opportunities to chop reams from most of his films.

He is shielding this sense of innocence, imagination and play, in a market where the masses are addicted to violence-porn and 'based on a true story' suffering dross. If he slips under the radar and falls into the 'dislike' opinion pile of people on the way, then that's OK by me. I am pretty sure it'd be Ok with him as well, as he persists working at the highest level. I am looking forward to the film immensely.

One question: you mentioned in the review that Ralph Fiennes was (possibly) the biggest revelation. Then you don't pick up on that. Are you suggesting that RF was an unknown entity as lead for this film? RF is one of the most gifted screen actors working today, so am keen to get some more exposition about the revelationâ¦

By: Leigh

Leigh — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:10:47 +0000

You seem to be trying to convince yourself that you like it more than you actually do. Is this because it is a Wes Anderson film? It's okay, you don't have to act like you like it if you really don't like it just because you didn't get what this "great" auteur was trying to do. He really is not that awesome. Actually, he's quite emotionally shallow as a filmmaker. His best film was "Bottle Rocket", his first film. Owen Wilson was awesome. Since then, Wes (nor Owen, for that matter) has made anything nearly as moving, for the most part.