i really liked it a lot actually. i still think there's a good deal to critique about this film and the "wes andersonisms" that provide the bulk of TLA's style, but my gut reaction on the first viewing - i found it mostly contrived - dissipated within 2 minutes of the film's beginning. instead, i looked forward to the pirate attack, the character nuances, the visual jokes, etc. i still think this rates a B in the Wes catalog, but it's a solid B.

to those of you who weren't completely turned off by it the first time around, i definitely would recommend giving it another shot. and hopefully the theater will be full with folks who genuinely seemed to be enjoying the film -- that always helps and certainly did this evening.

KPH

glad to hear you liked it better the second go-round.

i genuinely enjoyed it upon my first viewing.

I, too, wholeheartedly enjoyed this movie. I think doing so required a bit of abandon, a bit of ignorance toward the sneaking inkling that the flick is mediocre at times (or just wholly understated, in a way). But it's difficult not to be willing to let go for it. It's visually stimulating, (knowingly) clever, very well cast, and puts a little Bowie back into everyone's lives.

I completely agree. Went out and did the second viewing and because I knew what to expect I was able to appreciate the good parts more and focus on what was really enjoyable about it and not brood in the disappointment that it is compared to his other stuff.

Wes Anderson movies are, as a rule, better upon second viewing. I beleive this is becasue the viewer can concern themselves with style, music, etc. as opposed to plot.

I haven't seen it yet. I think I am scared to...it wasn't playing where I was for 2 weeks during the holiday. Ordinarily I would go see it the opening night...but now the gusto is gone and I am worried about the inevitable disappointment.

i agree, i've never loved a wes anderson movie the first 5 times i've seen it.

I liked it allright - just a bit hollow I guess.

I wouldn't worry about lost gusto. It's still a fun movie to see. Go for a good time. Note that it's getting mixed reviews but if you liked other Anderson flix or you're a fan of Bill Murray then you're set.

Don't expect a lot of gut busting laughs. I snickered a lot through the whole movie with an odd chuckle thrown in. Plus I had a stupid grin on my face the whole time.

I agree that it should definitely be seen a few times over. That way you are expecting some of the great dialogue and lines that are coming up. Also, you'll notice a few more of the details in the set, costumes and other stuff.

As for Bowie, I'd say this movie has brought him into my life. I had some albums I'd throw on every now and again and I knew a lot of the singles but damn, yo! Now I'm out there searching and listening to whatever I can get.

I loved it, not as much as I did Royal Tennebaums, but on par with Rushmore, maybe even more after I see it as many times. I think the animated fish and bizarre seascapes are a bit over the top, but I thought the rest of the film was outstanding, especially the Seu Jorge covers of Bowie and the use of Sigur Ros during the final underwater scene.

i would buy a full length of seu jorge doing covers and interpretations of just about anything. that guy should give this some thought.

KPH

for the record, i just saw it and really liked it. it's not so much "hollow" as much as not packed full like his last film, imho. i feel like it had more room to breathe and didn't rely on being quaint or smarmy like the last two. in that way it felt more subtle like "bottle rocket"--which happens to be my favorite.

whatever. . . i liked it fine.

c.

saw it last night. meh.
better than most films, but the plot sucked, as did the script.
the bowie covers were genius though