Dossier: Wes Anderson 02

BELOW The Crayon Ponyfish of The Life Aquatic must reflexively pose the reactionary
with Steve Zissou
question: “Why?”
Thus, we must contemplate the different
results this scene would bring if the creature
in the bag was merely an ordinary seahorse.
In doing this, we can come to ascertain that
this reveal would be missing a major element
that the original scene in the film instills: a
sense of wonder. As writer Devin Orgeron of
Cinema Journal remarks on this moment, “The
gift itself, while glossed within the narrative,
is critically important … Beautifully and
ridiculously artificial, the ‘animal’s’ natural
habitat is clearly within the child’s (or the
childlike) imagination” (52). In being so

“Does This Seem Fake?”: spontaneously presented with such an odd,

never-before-seen sight, we as viewers are left
wide-eyed and curious toward the creatures

Wes Anderson’s Kingdom put before our eyes. It is this emotion that in
turn bolsters the importance and pioneering

5
spirit of Zissou’s exploratory endeavors in the

01
of Visual Absurdity
film, thus leaving the audience considerably
more invested than they otherwise would

.2
have been.
While always bearing a certain artistic
By Matt Herzog td intention, Anderson’s brand of visual
absurdity does not always function in
te t L
this particular way. Whereas the world
KEYWORDS: Wes Anderson, visual absurdity, animation,
bu lec

of artificial, whimsical aesthetics found

in The Life Aquatic serves to bolster the
cartoons wondrous, adventurous spirit of the film
tri l
.
is nte

and its characters, the comic-book visual

FRO M IT S AE ST HE T I C S A LON E , such an effect on us? What message does he exaggerations of Moonrise Kingdom (2012) on
the world Wes Anderson continuously brings intend to send with such moments? To find the other hand are merely reflections of the
td tI

us back to in his films is distinctly his own, the answers to such questions, we must dig energetic, youthful passion of adolescent love
no righ

but simultaneously not very different from deeper into Anderson’s visual rhetoric, strap felt by its two central characters. In other
the world we live in at first glance. We can on our musical scuba gear and search for the words, it is the characters’ spirits that in turn
recognize locations and landscapes from the Jaguar Shark within. seem to stylistically distort the surrounding
D opy

world around us that are blatantly included Of course, absurdity in its true meaning world within the film.
within the settings of his films and observe cannot truly exist unless surrounded by what In a way, Moonrise Kingdom takes a page
that real-world physics seem to uniformly we deem to be the ordinary, thus making from The Life Aquatic’s deceptive strategy
C

apply for the most part as well; but the lush, the contrast apparent. In this sense, it can of suddenly displaying visual absurdity,
o

predominantly yellow color palettes and certainly be said that perhaps no other except only further prolonging the period
symmetrical cinematography indisputably Wes Anderson film so casually embraces before its implementation. The first half
bear Anderson’s proverbial trademark. visual absurdity (which can be defined as of the film, while still distinctly bearing
However, within these on-screen worlds we aesthetic elements blatantly at variance with Wes Anderson’s unmistakable color palette
are initially deceived into believing we are any sense of realism) as a centerpiece as and cinematographic symmetry, features
wholly familiar with, we will find ourselves much as The Life Aquatic (2004). From the no supernatural or out-of-the-ordinary
suddenly confronted at varying lengths of first few minutes of the film, which present sights. However, once the two young main
time into the films with a peculiar, astounding oceanographer Steve Zissou begrudgingly characters Sam and Suzy have fallen in love
sight completely foreign to us. Steve Zissou facing the less-than-favorable reception and make it their mission to defend this love,
will look upon the sand to observe the mating of his newest documentary in an upscale this lack of absurdity is promptly put to an
ritual of colorful, stop motion-animated theatre, the audience is led to assume the end in the film’s latter half. When running
“Sugar Crabs.” A young boy running from story takes place within the world we know. from his scout troop, Sam is struck by
his scout troop will be suddenly struck by However, as Zissou is leaving the premiere, lightning only to quickly recover from being
cartoonish lightning to no serious injury. a young child gives him a bag containing a knocked off his feet, brushing the cartoonish
For any other director, such moments of blatantly unnatural-looking bright, rainbow- black ash off his glasses. The tent of Sam’s
unprecedented visual absurdity within a colored seahorse that Zissou refers to as a scout leader explodes in a comically over-the-
film would not come without significant “Crayon Ponyfish.” It is when confronted top manner that blatantly calls attention to
audience confusion; but with Anderson’s with a graceful close-up of the fantastical, its artificiality. At the juncture of the film at
films, we are made to simply accept them as Claymation-animated animal dancing which the young love between Sam and Suzy
they come. How can Anderson’s work have around before our eyes that the audience is at its most palpable, their surroundings

66 Film Matters Fall 2014

Dossier: Wes Anderson 02 “Does This Seem Fake?”: Wes Anderson’s Kingdom of Visual Absurdity

BELOW Sam is struck by lightning in Moonrise surroundings into how they envision them. MATT HERZOG is a recent graduate of the
Kingdom In making a habit of both crafting and University of North Carolina Wilmington.
including his own unique breed of visual He has had a lifelong passion for film and
absurdism across his filmography, Anderson for years has focused on film from a writing
not only allows his characters and stories angle, having worked as a scriptreader for
more audience sympathy and immersion, but Voltage Pictures in Los Angeles in 2013.
is also allowed to spawn a unique cinematic
universe that can truly be called his own.
As Christopher Borelli of the Chicago Tribune
aptly summarizes:
almost feel rejuvenated with the energy of
their forbidden feelings between one another. The details [of Wes Anderson films]
Thus, the world around them comes to are eccentric, elegant, anachronistic, a
plainly echo elements of fantasy. In Wes tad precious. After almost 20 years and
Anderson’s own words regarding this artistic eight movies, his work has become so
decision: synonymous with an intricately composed,
melancholy storybook aesthetic – the
For somebody that age, when they fall fading, color-coordinated patriarchs of
in love, it can be so powerful, it almost “The Royal Tenenbaums,” the “Peanuts”-
becomes like some kind of fantasy – the like whimsy of “Moonrise Kingdom,” the

5
whole world is altered. I kind of relate alternately manic and lonesome shoe-box

01
it to the way, when you’re that age and world of “Rushmore.” (Borelli)
you find a book that is going to be one of

.2
those ones that you will always love and – No matter the story he tells or the location
particularly if it’s a fantasy kind of story – he tells it in, his recognizable visionary
you want the fantasy to be reality so much
that you start to kind of imagine that it td
aesthetic remains consistently rooted within
all his films, just as much as his own brand
te t L
is. There’s something about children and of quirky characters almost too comical to
bu lec

their desire for fantasy to be real that’s part exist within the world we know. He has made
of […] what the movie’s about. (Pinkerton) it his craft to take moments and images of
the real world and turn them into a creation
tri l
.
is nte

Even though it is the characters’ spirits that of his own, just as Steve Zissou crafted the
are reflected in the absurd nature of their below-deck observation bubble of his ship
surroundings and not the other way around, that he “thought up in a dream, actually.” In
td tI

the effect on the audience is still very much the affirming words of Bottle Rocket’s (1996)
no righ

similar. The moments of visual absurdity Mr. Henry, “The world needs dreamers.” It is
accentuate the mutual passion felt between hard to imagine a more fitting artistic credo
Sam and Suzy, allowing the audience to for Anderson.
D opy

more thoroughly connect with their feelings /END/

of desire. Surely, there are other ways of
expressing the protagonists’ emotions that
C

do not consult the absurd, but without the Works Cited

o

childlike awe meant to be roused within us

in response to imagery so blatantly make- Borelli, Christopher. “Inside Wes Anderson’s
believe, could we truly be able to attain the eccentric aesthetic.” chicagotribune.com. Chicago
same feeling? Tribune, 12 March 2014. Web. 30 April 2014.
Still, why continually rely on the absurd <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-
to provoke such reactions to the audience? 03-12/entertainment/ct-wes-anderson-
Judging by the widespread acclaim and interview-20140312_1_grand-budapest-hotel-wes-
impact of Anderson’s films and filmmaking anderson-tony-revolori>.
style, it is hard to deny that his strategy \
is effective. However, for a filmmaker to Orgeron, Devin. “La Camera-Crayola: Authorship
consistently employ such a specific technique Comes of Age in the Cinema of Wes Anderson.”
to the point where it becomes an expected Cinema Journal 46. 2 (2007). 40–65. Print.
characteristic is not without a form of \
particular creative ethos. From Rushmore’s Pinkerton, Nick. “An Island of His Own.” Sight &
(1998) Max to The Royal Tenenbaums’s (2001) Sound 22.6 (2012). 16–19. Film & Television Literature
Royal to The Life Aquatic’s Steve Zissou, it can Index with Full Text. Web. 30 April 2014.
indeed be seen as no coincidence that there \
is a trend of Anderson’s central characters
being narcissistic auteurs or paternal figures
determined to mold their situations or

67 Film Matters Fall 2014 ➜