300 The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

[Napoleon]

Future Shop is doing this all across Canada. just saw it on their flyer.

CC should have done this as a standard extra-value feature.
Could have been like a magic face-cloth shaped into a booklet.

[Narshty]

Got this Saturday with Burden of Dreams and Hoop Dreams. By far this to me is Anderson on point 100 percent. This movie is what made Anderson stand out in the first place. Such care for the bit characters in the film. I was a little concerned Anderson lost his touch after Tenenbaums, but when he deals more with fantasy and those realms way outside the norm he is definitely special.

See, I respect and believe your opinion 100%, but I still can't actually understand someone reacting to the film in that way. Oh well, such are the aesthetic whims of humanity.

[oldsheperd]

In what way? I just think Anderson does a better job when he doesn't try to have million threads running through his stories.

[dvdane]

If it is fake, then I didn't know it.

I assumed, that the Antonio Monda who conducts the interview is the same Antonio Monda, who is a filmprofessor and who made the audio commentary on "8½", so I assumed the tv-program was a real one.

I know that Antonio Monda also plays a bitpart in the film, but I never connected the dots and thought of this being a fake interview.

However so, it being funny or laughable (depending on how you see it), I saw it as Anderson pulling a "John Ford" here, which is exaggarated by the language barrier, I saw the joke to be from Anderson on a real interview, not as the interview being the joke itself, where Anderson avoids giving an honest answer. And as such, I simply questioned why there wasn't any subtitles.

And even if it is a fake, and as such a joke, the joke is only fully appreciable to those who understand italian, as Monda's questions aren't subtitled. So while its possible to trace some answers back to the questions, its not in others. So again, I question why it wasn't subtitled.

[redbill]

I took it as a joke, like the interview on the Tennenbaum's DVD with the Charlie Rose type guy.

[Fletch F. Fletch]

I finally caught up with this film and have to admit that I was wondering how I would feel about this movie after all the mixed reactions it seems to be receiving. A few observations:

- It was nice to see Wes finally indulge in the water motif that keeps popping up in his movies: Anthony and Inez’s first kiss in a swimming pool in Bottle Rocket or the numerous ones in Rushmore (Max Fischer’s desire to build an aquarium, reading a book by Cousteau, Ms. Cross reading Kidnapped to her class, etc.).

- Life Aquatic also continues Wes' thematic pre-occupation with flawed father figures and their sons. You've got James Caan's veteran criminal in Bottle Rocket whom Dignan looks up to, the burnt out Mr. Blume and Max in Rushmore and Royal and his children in The Royal Tenenbaums. In Life Aquatic, Steve tries to reconnect with Ned and hopes that they will bond while hunting for the Jaguar shark. Like Blume and Royal, the world seems to have forgotten about Steve. He’s washed up and hit rock bottom now that his best friend has been killed, he can't get enough funding to mount another expedition and so on.

- Life Aquatic also continues Wes' structuring of his movies into segments. In Rushmore, the story was broken down into months serving as acts in a play, with Tenenbaums it was chapters like in a book and now with Life Aquatic it is days as Steve’s mission is being filmed for a new documentary. I really enjoy this structure and how it reinforces the magical, almost-fairy tale feeling that Wes creates in every one of his movies by drawing attention to itself as a fanciful tale.

- The increase in scale and scope with this movie has not diminished the amount of fascinating little details that are crammed into each and every frame. As I mentioned above, Wes has not diverted from his thematic pre-occupations or having minor characters often wander in and out of the background of scenes. To me, his movies are magical, existing in their own unique worlds and bursting with ideas that are almost too much to absorb in one sitting. I think that what I like about Wes' movies is what I like about something like Twin Peaks, richly detailed, atmospheric worlds that to lose ourselves in and get to know the characters. Of course, the beauty of DVD is that they allow us to revisit the worlds of his movies any time we want.

Watching Life Aquatic made me think that Wes' career has been building up to this film. Even though he has continued to use name stars and upped the ante in production values and scope, I feel that he has not lost the intimate feeling that all of his movies possess. No matter how ambitious or big the scale, his films have hand-crafted feel to them. One gets the feeling that Anderson cares about every detail and every aspect and it is this personal touch that makes his movies so unique.

[Doctor Sunshine]

I got the cap. And despite the fact that it's a stupid, gimmicky marketing ploy exacerbated by having the full movie title embroidered on the front when it would have been so much classier to have just the Zissou logo or nothing at all, not to mention the fact that it's idiotic to give out a toque this close to summer--it's freakin hot out today, and i'm in Canada!--it makes me happy. I'm going to wear it to work tomorrow all day.

[Oedipax]

So does anyone know why Jacques Cousteau's name is bleeped out on the commentary? I'm only about 5 minutes in and it's really bugging me. I'm wondering if it's some bizarre legal issue or if it's a kind of joke on Anderson's part - in reference to what, I have no idea. But it seems to me there's never been any limitations placed on what one can say in a commentary, what films they can mention, etc., so long as nothing's libelous or whatever, which this certainly is not.

[cdnchris]

I got the cap. And despite the fact that it's a stupid, gimmicky marketing ploy exacerbated by having the full movie title embroidered on the front when it would have been so much classier to have just the Zissou logo or nothing at all, not to mention the fact that it's idiotic to give out a toque this close to summer--it's freakin hot out today, and i'm in Canada!--it makes me happy. I'm going to wear it to work tomorrow all day.

I got it, too. It's cheesy and it did come out the wrong time (it is hot!) but I get a kick out of it. I am disappointed the movie title is so big but I was expecting something like that. At least it doesn't haven't "Future Shop" on it, like all their other giveaways do. Can't wait to look at the DVD but I forgot American Idol and Amazing Race is on TV tonight, so I'm not allowed to have the TV until they're over and my wife goes to bed. And I have to wash dishes. What's the deal with that!?

[cdnchris]

I took a peek at the DVD. I watched the tour of the Belafonte sequence, and the picture was bright and nice but did look a tad on the soft side. Still very nice, though. The supplements look pretty good. I only watched the stuff on the animated creatures and all the stuff on the first disc (except the commentary), but I'm sure everything else will match these in quality.

I was surprised by the deleted scenes, though. I'm curious why the sequences were cut as I can't see them throwing the pacing off too much (though maybe I have to see them with the film) Plus there were some good laughs in there. The extended leach sequence almost drew tears from me. But then maybe Wes was afraid some of the scenes come off too silly.

At any rate, I'm really looking forward to watching the movie again and getting through the DVD.

[colinr0380]

And even if it is a fake, and as such a joke, the joke is only fully appreciable to those who understand italian, as Monda's questions aren't subtitled. So while its possible to trace some answers back to the questions, its not in others. So again, I question why it wasn't subtitled.

I'm not sure - isn't the interview mainly in English? It is more that Anderson and Baumbach cannot understand what Monda is saying when he questions them in Italian and have to get him to repeat the questions in English because their translator must have gone off for a coffee break, leading to much tapping of earpieces and:

"uh. . .Benny?"

then has them saying "well . . . I guess what you might have been asking is how I found writing with a different collaborator" etc.

It just seems an extension of the themes of the film of people coming up against barriers like language in this case or of feeling embarassed, self concious and defensive about their work. Also near the end of their interview Noah Baumbach and Wes Anderson get a little combative (like the interviewees on the Peter Bradley show on Royal Tenenbaums) - I couldn't help but smile at the response to the inane question about their favourite colours of how the colours of the carpet were not particularly good, being bright orange! Perhaps the style of the set is a take-off of an poor style of interviewing, but it makes me wonder about whether it is a comment on the style of Italian interview programmes as well if for example the Mixer programme on the Battle of Algiers disc is representative of actual Italian broadcasts! I'm trying not to think of the electricity bill for all the televisions in the studio for that programme!

But, like the Peter Bradley interview, the Mondo Monda interview does go into the making of the film and there is actual information as well as the interview satire going on - I'm thinking of it being in a similar vein to the more extreme example of Soderbergh interviewing himself on the Schizopolis commentary, there is some information there but a lot of jokiness and self concious parody. I guess it could also be that the interview is a response to most interviews just duplicating the information from a commentary track, so since there is a more serious commentary already on the film it gives licence to play around with the interview.

[Anonymous]

A few things related to different messages in the thread:

- the interview clip is certainly fake -- those looking for confirmation need look no further than the This Is Adventure doc that includes a scene with Wes introducing his "New York friend" Antonio to Bill Murray. Antonio Monda is a writer and director.

- bleeping Cousteau's name on the commentary is probably related to the issues surrounding the family's permission for Wes to use Cousteau as a template for Zissou while simultaneously disclaiming that he is in any way intended to be about Cousteau. Strange, yes, but look at one of the closing credits and you'll see the statement. Perhaps constantly dropping Cousteau's name on the commentary went a step too far...

- another easter egg to go with Antonio's introduction to the extras and the Bill Murray's sneakers clip (mentioned elsewhere): take the cursor to the Mondo Monda icon and click 'left'... some corral is selected and clicking it reveals a short clip of Albert Maysles playing golf

[Michael]

dvdane, I just read your review on dvdbeaver.com and you claimed The Life Aquatic as a part of Anderson's "the great search for the father figure" trilogy. I can't recall this "father figure" theme in Rushmore. Max has a decent father who works as a barber but his mother is dead. The Royal Tenenbaums definitely lacks the "father figure" even though Royal is very much alive and present in his children's lives. But he's too selfish to be a good father - one major bastard who causes his children to become lost or damaged.

Oh one more thing: do you just see those three films as a trilogy of the same theme or is it planned or intended by Anderson the director himself?

By the way, the first time I saw Life Aquatic, I gave it one star out of four stars. After the second time, I gave it four stars! Enormous improvement! Upon the first viewing, I didn't expect it to be this incredibly subtle and also layered. So many things click on repeated viewings.

[javelin]

I think (although I might be wrong) that he was referring to the relationship between Max/Mr. Bloom as a sort of symbiotic son/father relationship. Correct me if I'm wrong.

edit: ok, and reading more closely, I see you're saying that that Max isn't really searching for a father. Mr. Bloom represents the success that Max wants though - his father's just a barber, and Max disguises this with delusions of "grandeur" (e.g. my father's a neuro surgeon.) So Max isn't - even though he doesn't hate his father - exactly taken with his father. Mr. Bloom - initially, at least - represents the sort of idyll Max is after.

[Michael]

javelin, it's possible. But why would Max want to search for a father figure (in Mr. Bloom) if he already has one of his own - an apparently nice dad?

Back to Life Aquatic. What does it mean that "11 1/2 years old" is Steve Zissou's favorite age? Did something happen to him when he was that age? And the "1/2" part could be a homage to 8 1/2? After the screening of Steve's documentary in the beginning, the folks spill out of the theater looking like they stepped out of 8 1/2. The Fellini film instantly came to my mind when I saw the folks - the costumes and all.

Edit: After reading your "edit", javelin, it now makes a lot more sense. Grazie! Lets see what dvdane has in his mind.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

Back to Life Aquatic. What does it mean that "11 1/2 years old" is Steve Zissou's favorite age? Did something happen to him when he was that age? And the "1/2" part could be a homage to 8 1/2? After the screening of Steve's documentary in the beginning, the folks spill out of the theater looking like they stepped out of 8 1/2. The Fellini film instantly came to my mind when I saw the folks - the costumes and all.

I think the 8 1/2 refrence you spotted maybe looknig into I too much. I just think 11 1/2 was the time in his life where everything was rose colored and where anything was possible.

Or maybe I'm looking into too much.

When I saw the movie, Fellini instantly came into to mind too, especially 8 1/2.

[dvdane]

[About] "the great search for the father figure" trilogy. I can't recall this "father figure" theme in Rushmore. Max has a decent father who works as a barber but his mother is dead. The Royal Tenenbaums definitely lacks the "father figure" even though Royal is very much alive and present in his children's lives. But he's too selfish to be a good father - one major bastard who causes his children to become lost or damaged.

Oh one more thing: do you just see those three films as a trilogy of the same theme or is it planned or intended by Anderson the director himself?

When Anderson intended it to be a trilogy I don't know, but Anderson did intended Life Aquatic to be the final in his "The great search for the father figure" trilogy. According to the interview in New York Metro, I would say when he prepared it:

“I finally realized it’s just the opposite of what I really grew up with, and for me there’s something exotic about it,” says the 35-year-old Houston-born filmmaker, who wrote Aquatic with his friend Noah Baumbach. “I’m drawn to those father-figure characters that are larger-than-life people, and I’ve sought out mentors who are like that, so I relate to them. But they’re not my father.”

Source

I think (although I might be wrong) that he was referring to the relationship between Max/Mr. Bloom as a sort of symbiotic son/father relationship.

it's possible. But why would Max want to search for a father figure (in Mr. Bloom) if he already has one of his own - an apparently nice dad?

You are also misunderstanding Andersons significe with "father figure". It is not the same as a father. It is a father figure, either by abscence, by idolisation or by proxy, or as Anderson himself says it, a larger than life figure, which one is drawn to.

Javelin is correct when he points to the symbiotic (actually quiet a astute note) relationship. Bloom is not a father figure at all, only a generic parent. His sons don't appreciate him, in fact they bully him, and his wife doesn't even recognize him. In Rushmore, the central scene for his missing family relations is shown during the party scene, where he ultimately jumps into the pool and stays there. At the same time, Max doesn't acknowledge his father. He makes a phantomparent up, constantly saying his father is dead, or is a brain surgeon and so forth.

What Max and Bloom find in eachother is the missing father and son, and their relationship becomes that of father and son, thru which Bloom becomes adjusted and ultimately courts Rosemary.

And yes, in The Royal Tenenbaums the father figure is missing, as Royal is as non-father as can be, except to Richie. The fall of the Tenenbaums is directly linked to the abscence of the father figure, and them becoming a family again, is directly linked to Royal becoming a father figure again.

[Michael]

Last night, my aunt from across the country paid a surprise call while I was watching The Life Aquatic for the fourth time. I brought up the title to her and she got all excited because her 10 year old son Grant expressed interest in watching this film. She said that the previews looked so funny and how the film looked cartoonish and cute. And also that it was made by Disney. Whoa! I shot her with a big fat warning - don't waste $$$! I told her that Life Aquatic is not for children. It's a deeply melancholy film about a man who gets on the adventure that turns into something else - his search for himself, his awakening, and so on. Then my aunt said that she couldn't understand why the TV promotion for the DVD release screams "the best comedy of the year!". Yeah, the comedy made by a suicidal! After coming across tons of reviews and comments and especially that conversation with my aunt, that got me thinking about the way the film is being marketed for the theater and DVD releases. Unquestionably unfair and misleading, isn't it? Remember how Eye Wide Shut was marketed/promoted. What do you think? Do you think that the way The Life Aquatic is being marketed causes the film to have such a low rating?

[Narshty]

Much of the problem that the film has with audiences and critics seems to stem from, well, the film itself. It's a very contrary film that continually undercuts and/or misses (depending on one's point of view) audience expectations - for example, it's apparently a one-man character study that's masquerading as an ensemble piece, and keeps threatening to be an adventure picture but deliberately drains all tension and excitement out of the action sequences.

[ben d banana]

So it's something of a parody/commentary on these various genres, while at the same time taking its central themes quite seriously?

And why wouldn't a child appreciate it? Growing up I certainly didn't get all of the jokes in Warner Bros cartoons, or references on all of my Kiss records, but that didn't lessen my enjoyment of them. There is plenty of silliness and absurdity in the performances, settings, music, etc that could easily fascinate youngsters. Not all children obvioulsy, but the possibility is surely there. Mostly I'm surprised that you, Michael, would make such a statement considering your young discovery of so many of your favorites, such as Fanny & Alexander and Eraserhead, which most would consider adult films (despite the children in the Bergman movie, I just can't remember any more examples you've given us off the top of my head).

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

When I first saw the Life Aquatic, I remember thinking it went against the advertising. The way the advertising shows it and talk about it, it seems like "the quirky indie comedy of the season." Sure there are moments of comedy, but if anything, it's more of a drama.

But then you have to think about it through the studios point of view. How else are they going to advertise a movie that's so brightly colored, with imaginative characters and call it a "the drama event of the year"?

This brings me back to the Fear and Loathing advertising, showing the movie as the two crazy stoners, on a crazy "trip". It's really something more than that, but audiences don't want to hear that.

[ben d banana]

But so many movies are advertised in a misleading fashion in hopes of increasing revenue that it's hardly worth discussion.

[dvdane]

it's apparently a one-man character study that's masquerading as an ensemble piece,

You could say the same about Molière's "Le Misanthrophe" or Thackery's "Vanity Fair". There is a reason for leads and supporters.

and keeps threatening to be an adventure picture but deliberately drains all tension and excitement out of the action sequences.

Perhaps it's your expectations or prejudgement, which make it appear that way. The protagonists are not action heroes, but selfironic clumpsy "heroes", so perhaps you just fail to read the context. The action is "Life Aquatic" in not really that different from the action in "Bottle Rocket". So why do you read what is a quality in Anderson, as a flaw?

[Michael]

ben, I won't argue with you because you made a great point. It is wrong to underestimate children in general. I didn't make myself clear in the first place. Because of the way the film was promoted, my aunt thought that Life Aquatic was a cute Disney comedy with some animation (like Roger Rabbit, etc). She was concerned about the R rating and asked me about it before deciding to permit her son to watch it. I love my aunt like she's my sister. She is what I would call the hardcore soccer mom who despites films that require any thinking. Sometimes when I recommend a film to her, she would ask with caution or concern: "Is it weird?" or "Is it heavy?" after being familiar with my taste in cinema since I was born. She could never forgive me for recommending Breaking The Waves to her six years ago. She thinks The Day After Tomorrow is among the greatest films. To me, it's the worst film ever made. Her idea of the perfect comedy = Meet the Fockers. I don't know how her son would respond to Life Aquatic but he's really into the mindless, fast-action type of films, like the latest Blade.

If I had a 10 year old son who fell in love with Life Aquatic, then I couldn't be happier.

[Narshty]

So why do you read what is a quality in Anderson, as a flaw?

Because it bored me. Sorry.