The Phoenician Scheme (2025)

Director: Wes Anderson

Cast: Benicio del Toro, Mia Therapleton, Michael Cera, Riz Ahmed

Have I Seen It Before: Nope. Brand new.

Did I Like It: At it’s basic level, each new Wes Anderson film—at least after he conclusively proved his mettle with The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)—feels like it could be something new. Animation? Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009). An alien invasion story? Asteroid City (2023). A breezy journey through a highbrow magazine? The French Dispatch (2021). So, too, the thought of Anderson bringing his meticulous and distinctive visual style to an espionage story? It suddenly becomes appointment viewing for me.

And unfortunately, I may be of the mind that Anderson is stuck in particular themes and stories, no matter what genre with which a new film might have a tenuous relationship. The style is largely still there, although a few shots towards the end of the film embrace movement that isn’t a tracking shot. Every item—and especially every book—looks to be at least sixty years old (it helps here that the film is meant to take place in 1950). Right angles, quirky line readings, and plaid abound.

I’m not expecting Anderson to abandon everything he holds dear in favor of a new genre, but the themes are the same. A general storybook quality? Check. Awkward love story? Check. Some sort of redemption arc for a distant, larger than life father? Also, check.

I’m not necessarily mad or even disappointed that Anderson gave me exactly what I expected from the film. To the twee, indie film set, he’s as reliable as Michael Bay or McDonalds*. Can we not want more from a filmmaker who made his name initially making surprising choices? Does he not want more from the films he has yet to make?

*Yeah, I get it. That sounds like I’m mad and/or disappointed.

Asteroid City (2023)

Director: Wes Anderson

Cast: Jason Schwartzman, Scarlett Johansson, Tom Hanks, Jeffrey Wright

Have I Seen it Before: Nope.

Did I Like It: Anderson’s movies remain triumphs of immaculate art direction. The juxtaposition between the televised examination of the play we never quite see and the delightful weirdness surrounding the alien which visits them both is a delight. There are plenty of absurd laughs to be had, and he has really tapped into grief in a way that he hasn’t really managed to tap into since The Royal Tenenbaums (2001). So, before I get into the large meat of this interview, please know that I enjoyed the film immensely. It’s worth catch, and worth catching in the theater, especially as it looks like it will show up on streaming by the time I finish typing this review.

And yet, for every element in his work that is just as strong as it ever was, I wonder if something hasn’t quite been lost over the years. His early films, especially Bottle Rocket (1996), and the aforementioned Tenenbaums had a certain quality about them as if Anderson were convinced the powers that be would take away his ability to make movies. Now there is a serenity to his films which only servers to keep me at an (admittedly negligible distance. The early films had the vibrant energy of a someone not sure if they were going to get away with what they wanted to do. Maybe he is just in a bit of a slump on this front, and I may be having a reaction to this and The French Dispatch (2021). Maybe as Anderson has aged and matured as an artist, it is unreasonable to expect him to hold on to that rebellious spirit.

Maybe he just needs to work with Owen Wilson again. I’m honestly not sure why they don’t write together anymore. And I really don't know why he isn’t in this film at all. Honestly, as I type this, that may be my only real complaint.

Hitchcock/Truffaut (2015)

Director: Kent Jones

Cast: Alfred Hitchcock, François Truffaut, Bob Balaban, Wes Anderson

Have I Seen it Before: Never. Although Hitchcock is certainly in the pantheon of great directors for me, I’m sad to say Truffaut barely registers for me, outside of his appearance in Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977). 

Did I Like It: It’s probably hoary in the extreme to proclaim that I would probably have liked the book better than the film, especially when I… ahem haven’t read the book, but nevertheless, that’s where I land on the subject. I picked this up from the local library, and the pull quote “This changed the way I see cinema”* certainly appealed to me, but I can’t help but wonder if that critic was also speaking about the book, too.

The documentary-as-literary-adaptation is a tricky needle to thread. I can’t readily think of an example of the form that accomplished anything more than being an afterthought. The whole prospect eschews the more interesting artistic aspects of the adaptation process, and leaves one going beyond the aforementioned tired cliche. It isn’t merely enough that the book feels like it would be a more fulfilling experience than the film. I’m not getting anything out of the film—in a truncated form, no less—that I couldn’t have gotten out of the book. Shouldn’t we all be wondering if reducing the documentary to televised Cliff’s Notes diminishes the form and the material?

Still, I do wonder what either Hitchcock or Truffaut might have said on the subject, so at least that’s something. If only there were a book I could obtain that would further illuminate their thoughts on the finer points of cinema…

*I don’t remember who said the quote. Indeed, who can ever remember the source of a pull-quote, aside from a stray “Two Thumbs Up” in the 90s…?

The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)

Director: Wes Anderson

Cast: Danny Glover, Gene Hackman, Anjelica Huston, Bill Murray

Have I Seen It Before?: Any time I talk about one of my books, I inevitably say something with the syntax of, “Everyone knows (blank) did (blank). What this book presupposes is: Maybe he didn’t?” There were a number of years where I wanted to make films like Wes Anderson makes them.

Yeah, I saw this one on opening weekend.

Did I like it?: Clearly yes. I’ve probably seen the movie a dozen times over the last twenty years, and each time I’m floored by those opposing paintings of a gang of maniacs on dirt bikes. It’s that funny. The rest of the movie is, too.

On this viewing, however, I dug a little deeper. I actually had the screenplay open in front of me, and read along with what played out on the screen. I don’t really recommend doing that, especially if this would be your first viewing of the film. But it was an illuminating way to see it. For all of his well-earned reputation as a visual stylist, Wes Anderson (still working here with Owen Wilson, who really should be writing more, if these early Anderson films were any indication) is also an immaculate writer. It’s hard to conceive of a film where Bill Murray’s improvisational skills don’t make up the lion’s share of his screen time, but I can attest that Raleigh St. Clair appears almost entirely as he does on the page.

The story is pristine as well. There are few movies that truck with voice over narration as much as this one does and still feels like a movie and not an audio book. I was struck by how my memory seemed to think that Alec Baldwin’s narration was spread throughout the film, but really only appears in the first half an hour and then in the last few minutes. The screenplay makes the case for its characters so cogently, that even if I wasn’t giggling throughout, it would have been a film that stuck with me.

Anderson may be the only kind of director who can get away with that.