The Darjeeling Limited

[Bossanova]

Has anyone else seen this movie? We just watched it last night and I can't stop thinking about it. This is by far my favorite Wes Anderson film and maybe my favorite pic in quite some time. I just wanted this film to get some recognition, I highly recommend

[King Hippos Bandaid]

good enough sell, ill blockbuster it on Thursday

[Doctor Z]

good enough sell, ill blockbuster it on Thursday

What is this, the 90's?

[King Hippos Bandaid]

What is this, the 90's?

access

i can either go onliine or go to the store

I can walk to my blockbuster sir

[Bossanova]

Oh yeah, the short with Natalie Portman before the film is a must. And this was one of the few films i enjoyed Owen Wilson, his best role by far for me

[Marc with a c]

why don't you marry it

[jetdog]

This is a beautiful movie, very underated. Very moving...

The river scene is a product of genious, Wes Anderson has cemented his place in cinematic history, if not with the Life Aquatic, then certainly with this movie.

[hammersavage]

This was actually my 3rd favorite WA movie. I thought the dramatic tone that it went to was a great touch that I hadn't seen too much of in his movie. Thought it was well done and that Wes fans woulda liked it more but oh well...

[Mullenax]

I had a really hard time getting into the characters, and I thought that physical romance between strangers has never been more boring. Beautiful cinematography. Blatant symbolism (baggage, of all things).<p> I want to like it. Maybe I suck.

[BeerBandit]

I had a really hard time getting into the characters, and I thought that physical romance between strangers has never been more boring. Beautiful cinematography. Blatant symbolism (baggage, of all things). I want to like it. Maybe I suck.


You do not suck, but this movie did. All that it had going for it was that it was beautiful to watch. The dialogue, which is usually top notch in WA films, was uninteresting. The acting, even Schartzman, although I thought Brody shined again, was appalling. The plot was weak, but if anything else worked in this movie I could've gotten by that. This just felt like an excuse to shoot India.


I don't know maybe something was lost in translation.

Yechh!

[Piuki]

Blatant symbolism (baggage, of all things).

Honestly. I mean, just hand it to me next time. Don't try to make me think or anything.

I agree with the Bandit, though. Adrian Brody was great. I find his huge nose oddly attractive.

[foodcourtdruide]

I had a really hard time getting into the characters, and I thought that physical romance between strangers has never been more boring. Beautiful cinematography. Blatant symbolism (baggage, of all things).<p> I want to like it. Maybe I suck.

Why is blatant symbolism a bad thing? I thought it was clever. I highly recommend this movie too, it's not my favorite WA film, but it's up there. The cinematography is incredible (as always with WA) and I loved the acting. The short film with Natalie Portman is really great. No one visualizes the notion of love like Wes Anderson.

[Doctor Manhattan]

I liked the film. Brody was fantastic and Owen was very good as well. Jason Schwartzman was perfect in Rushmore but I have not liked him in anything since. I liked Owen here much more than in the other WA films. I still like The Royal Tenenbaums better (as I really liked the dynamic between the cast) But This film is excellent. I would watch it again and again.

[BeerBandit]

Why is blatant symbolism a bad thing? I thought it was clever. I highly recommend this movie too, it's not my favorite WA film, but it's up there. The cinematography is incredible (as always with WA) and I loved the acting. The short film with Natalie Portman is really great. No one visualizes the notion of love like Wes Anderson.
The point of symbolism, I feel, is to be veiled, and as a culture progresses it becomes harder and harder to use symbolism because patrons begin to look for it. If not done well, it becomes cheesy. When I read The Scarlett Letter in HS, I was still rather inexperienced in literature, and the naming of the Dimmesdale character seemed novel and brilliant. Looking back now it seems kind of corny. I recognize it worked back in 1850, and as a historic piece of literature, it's geniusly veiled allusion. Now in Darjeeling, they're taking a "spiritual journey," and they're on a train. Get it? Yes we do. And they've got their father's luggage. Get it? Yes we do. It just comes off as shallow and easy, especially with the weak dialogue, discombobulated plot. I guess I just expected a bit better.

[foodcourtdruide]

The point of symbolism, I feel, is to be veiled, and as a culture progresses it becomes harder and harder to use symbolism because patrons begin to look for it. If not done well, it becomes cheesy. When I read The Scarlett Letter in HS, I was still rather inexperienced in literature, and the naming of the Dimmesdale character seemed novel and brilliant. Looking back now it seems kind of corny. I recognize it worked back in 1850, and as a historic piece of literature, it's geniusly veiled allusion. Now in Darjeeling, they're taking a "spiritual journey," and they're on a train. Get it? Yes we do. And they've got their father's luggage. Get it? Yes we do. It just comes off as shallow and easy, especially with the weak dialogue, discombobulated plot. I guess I just expected a bit better.

I agree that the plot was definitely a weak point of the film. However, I have to disagree with your points on dialogue and symbolism. I thought the dialogue was fantastic, ESPECIALLY the dialogue in the short film. The symbolism was CONSTANTLY shallow and easy, which made me appreciate it. I don't think the film professes to be complex in its symbolism and the symbols are as shallow as the characters themselves. I agree that they are cheesy ways of symbolizing "spiritual journey" or having baggage, but I think that's the point.

[FezPaul]

I've never seen a Wes Anderson film. Does this make me a bad person?