With Asteroid City, Wes Anderson's obsession with symmetry, balance, and immaculate arrangements may finally have gone to his head; he even puts the horizon smack-dab in the middle of the frame on occasion -- epically defying what John Ford might have once dictated. Pretty based, if you ask me.
Jokes and Fabelmans references aside, I can see why this has been dubbed the most "Wes Anderson" Wes Anderson film to date. (When idiots on TikTok use AI and/or basic principles of symmetry and color palettes to "mimic his aesthetic", this is the film they probably THINK they're creating.) This time, he tells the story (which is a play inside another story) of an Atomic Age desert town -- named Asteroid City, because it's situated near the crater left by a meteorite -- where the looming threat of nuclear war infects all, yet it is a place of nostalgia, escapism, and stargazing wonder. Junior Stargazer contestants annually present inventions and gizmos that seem plucked from the pages of a 1950s sci-fi magazine.
Speaking of stars, the film features many. Jason Schwartzman, Scarlett Johansson, Tilda Swinton, Bryan Cranston, Adrien Brody, Edward Norton, Liev Schreiber, Willem Dafoe, Stephen Park, and Jeffrey Wright are of course no strangers to Anderson. New to his postcard multiverse are Tom Hanks, Maya Hawke, Hong Chau, Sophia Lillis, Steve Carell, etc. I've heard strangely mixed things about the cast and the acting here.
Some argue that these are some of Anderson's most one-note characters yet (his characters are often derided for being monotonously quirky in ways that make them seem interchangeable, while the ones who denote exceptions to the rule never leave whichever setting they're on). Others opine that these figures have more depth in their eyes than ever; that their "Andersonisms" seem like mere masks for deeply human truths.
You might say this stark disagreement among viewers is by design. Asteroid City is one of the more willfully vague, interpretable, and I guess "artsy" Wes Anderson pictures. Some will see a mess; others will see too much to appreciate in one sitting.
To steal a line from @firagawalkwthme: "Anyone saying they 'know' what Asteroid City is saying is missing the point ... the film is intentionally obtuse and open to multiple interpretations. 'You can't wake up if you go to sleep' is an evocative phrase but not even the actors in the film can agree on what it means". From the same thread: "The movie 'feels' like it's about a few different things, yet it's also a refutation of the idea that it's about anything. Schwartzman not knowing why his character does what he does feels like an admission that absolute meaning isn't real -- in movies or life." Do they mean Schwartzman IRL or the stage actor that Schwartzman plays in the film's framing story? The answer's probably yes.
I assure you, regardless, that these performers are all quite funny and, as overcrowded as the cast may seem, each character leaves a distinct impression. You will care more for some than others, of course, but creating so many memorable figures in a relatively short window of time is no small feat. (A friend jokingly observed that the film features both Margot Robbie and atomic bombs, proving that the Barbie-Oppenheimer hype truly is felt everywhere.)
There's charm to the use of practical models, vintage props, and stop-motion as usual. I do understand why it's been dismissed as More of the Same, even though it could also be regarded as a climax; a logical conclusion to a career-long celebration of, among other things, cartoons (the world of the play is one in which Road Runner or Yosemite Sam could pop up at any moment and I wouldn't question it).
In any event, I also understand how this one cuts deeper and gets some of you so very nostalgic and misty-eyed. One critic viewed it as a return to the sort of familial themes Anderson explored in his early days in titles like Rushmore and Royal Tenenbaums, as opposed to the modern hits he saw as being eccentric for its own sake -- paying homage to, say, New Yorker comics without the resonance that's achieved here (David Ehrlich called The French Dispatch the "most visually inventive" but "least emotionally involving" of Anderson's films). Again, though: it comes down to what you seek within the pastel Rorschach test.
As a quirky comedy, Asteroid City works well. As a dreamlike drama, it works better. Either way, as a piece of craftsmanship, boy is it so very "Anderson". I'll have to see it again to decide where it ranks in his library, but I do unquestionably need to see it a second time -- (1) because it invites deeper examination that may lead to even greater admiration, and (2) because I very much want to.
Jokes and Fabelmans references aside, I can see why this has been dubbed the most "Wes Anderson" Wes Anderson film to date. (When idiots on TikTok use AI and/or basic principles of symmetry and color palettes to "mimic his aesthetic", this is the film they probably THINK they're creating.) This time, he tells the story (which is a play inside another story) of an Atomic Age desert town -- named Asteroid City, because it's situated near the crater left by a meteorite -- where the looming threat of nuclear war infects all, yet it is a place of nostalgia, escapism, and stargazing wonder. Junior Stargazer contestants annually present inventions and gizmos that seem plucked from the pages of a 1950s sci-fi magazine.
Speaking of stars, the film features many. Jason Schwartzman, Scarlett Johansson, Tilda Swinton, Bryan Cranston, Adrien Brody, Edward Norton, Liev Schreiber, Willem Dafoe, Stephen Park, and Jeffrey Wright are of course no strangers to Anderson. New to his postcard multiverse are Tom Hanks, Maya Hawke, Hong Chau, Sophia Lillis, Steve Carell, etc. I've heard strangely mixed things about the cast and the acting here.
Some argue that these are some of Anderson's most one-note characters yet (his characters are often derided for being monotonously quirky in ways that make them seem interchangeable, while the ones who denote exceptions to the rule never leave whichever setting they're on). Others opine that these figures have more depth in their eyes than ever; that their "Andersonisms" seem like mere masks for deeply human truths.
You might say this stark disagreement among viewers is by design. Asteroid City is one of the more willfully vague, interpretable, and I guess "artsy" Wes Anderson pictures. Some will see a mess; others will see too much to appreciate in one sitting.
To steal a line from @firagawalkwthme: "Anyone saying they 'know' what Asteroid City is saying is missing the point ... the film is intentionally obtuse and open to multiple interpretations. 'You can't wake up if you go to sleep' is an evocative phrase but not even the actors in the film can agree on what it means". From the same thread: "The movie 'feels' like it's about a few different things, yet it's also a refutation of the idea that it's about anything. Schwartzman not knowing why his character does what he does feels like an admission that absolute meaning isn't real -- in movies or life." Do they mean Schwartzman IRL or the stage actor that Schwartzman plays in the film's framing story? The answer's probably yes.
I assure you, regardless, that these performers are all quite funny and, as overcrowded as the cast may seem, each character leaves a distinct impression. You will care more for some than others, of course, but creating so many memorable figures in a relatively short window of time is no small feat. (A friend jokingly observed that the film features both Margot Robbie and atomic bombs, proving that the Barbie-Oppenheimer hype truly is felt everywhere.)
There's charm to the use of practical models, vintage props, and stop-motion as usual. I do understand why it's been dismissed as More of the Same, even though it could also be regarded as a climax; a logical conclusion to a career-long celebration of, among other things, cartoons (the world of the play is one in which Road Runner or Yosemite Sam could pop up at any moment and I wouldn't question it).
In any event, I also understand how this one cuts deeper and gets some of you so very nostalgic and misty-eyed. One critic viewed it as a return to the sort of familial themes Anderson explored in his early days in titles like Rushmore and Royal Tenenbaums, as opposed to the modern hits he saw as being eccentric for its own sake -- paying homage to, say, New Yorker comics without the resonance that's achieved here (David Ehrlich called The French Dispatch the "most visually inventive" but "least emotionally involving" of Anderson's films). Again, though: it comes down to what you seek within the pastel Rorschach test.
As a quirky comedy, Asteroid City works well. As a dreamlike drama, it works better. Either way, as a piece of craftsmanship, boy is it so very "Anderson". I'll have to see it again to decide where it ranks in his library, but I do unquestionably need to see it a second time -- (1) because it invites deeper examination that may lead to even greater admiration, and (2) because I very much want to.