I resent this cheap shot - I’m not trying to downplay someone else’s opinion as much as that I just feel that we’re not even having an argument, because they seem to lack a certain vocabulary for discussing film. We need to agree on the terms before we can discuss something, and if someone says something like “…which were quite different in style, theme, setting and plot” about two movies that were in fact nearly identical in those things, I have to wonder if we’re not on the same page with the terms and ideas we’re using. I’m not trying to be a dick.
It can still happen, though. No offense, not saying you are or were trying to be.
Anyway, I agree with Menocchio. Royal Tenenbaums and the Life Aquatic are dissimilar, seeing as The Life Aquatic did not have a plot.
Never mind. Not worth getting involved in this one.
Slow, but you finally get there. Thanks; since I’ve never read Salinger’s Glass Family stories, I was unaware of the connection. Obviously, it’s not common knowledge.
Believe me, if I’m ever curious about a film, I’ll consult a reference work rather than waiting for you to make yourself clear.
You’re being snarky, but you’re not all wrong. The Life Aquatic, being a piece about a Cousteau parody who filmed fanciful stop-motion fish was worlds away in tone from the Royal Tennenbaums, who were only slightly removed from real people in Manhattan.
I mean, in one movie the guy went into a blood rage and fought pirates. How could that possibly be said to be like anything in the other movie?
How is that relevant to tone?
It’s been a long time since I saw RT, but wasn’t there a scene where a character went nuts and (among other things) jumped into the family’s house through a closed window?
Why are you being an asshole to me when you’re the one that had never heard of J.D. Salinger’s - one of the most famous and widely-known writers of the past few centuries - most popular work!? It’s not like I’m discussing someone obscure like Yuri Olesha or Yukio Mishima or something and just pretending it’s common knowledge. Salinger is the epitome of common knowledge.
I am really certain his most popular work is not that one.
No personal insults outside the Pit, VCO3. Don’t do this again.
Oh, I didn’t think that was an insult. Do I have to say “why are you being a jerk to me?” “Why are you being rude to me?”
“Why are you being rude to me?” works fine, but name-calling (like “asshole” or “jerk”) doesn’t. And, of course, if someone is being rude to you in Cafe Society, the appropriate response is to hit the REPORT BAD POST button (the little exclamation point ! in the red triangle in the upper right corner of the offending post) and let a moderator handle it.
Hence, while we’re at it: Baldwin, calling someone “slow” is out of place in Cafe Society. And, Mennochio, calling someone “snarky” is ditto. “Your post sounds snarky” is fine; “you are being snarky” is not. The difference is perhaps subtle, but there and clear.
Please review Forum Rules and note Post #3.
All of you have been around long enough to know better. Play nice. It is possible for different people to have different opinions about art/entertainment without any one of them being slow, an asshole, a jerk, or snarky.
Apparently. I checked on IMDb. The actor who played Ashoke was Irfan Khan, and he is indeed in Darjeeling Limited. Good eye. And good actor–I really enjoyed his performance in Namesake.
ETA: I also find Anderson’s movies kind of a downer for the same reason mentioned about Bill Murray. It’s been so long since I’ve seen him in a really upbeat movie. The sad clown thing is getting me down.
Wait, do people think that this movie is going to be great because of Andersen? I really liked his past movies, and after I saw the trailer for Darjeeling, I thought it looked like shit. Is it not possible for him to make a substandard movie? I was under the impression that trailers were supposed to promote movies, or in other words make them look good. I have seen a few films whose trailers have practically done them a disservice, but a flawless Andersen film should be above that right?
There is no winning this argument though. Box office receipts, critical acclaim or disdain, awards or lack thereof, they can all be refuted. Bah.