540 The Darjeeling Limited

Message

Antoine Doinel · #1 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:43 pm

The Darjeeling Limited

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/release_images/3031/540_box_348x490_w128.jpg[/img] [img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/release_images/3028/540_BD_box_348x490_w128.jpg[/img]

In The Darjeeling Limited, from director Wes Anderson, three estranged American brothers reunite for a meticulously planned, soul-searching train voyage across India, one year after the death of their father. For reasons involving over-the-counter painkillers, Indian cough syrup, and pepper spray, the brothers eventually find themselves stranded alone in the middle of the desert—where a new, unplanned chapter of their journey begins. Featuring a sensational cast, including Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody, Jason Schwartzman, and Anjelica Huston, The Darjeeling Limited is a visually dazzling and hilarious film that takes Anderson’s work to richer, deeper places than ever before.

DIRECTOR APPROVED SPECIAL EDITION FEATURES

- New high-definition digital transfer, supervised and approved by director Wes Anderson (with DTS-HD Master Audio on the Blu-ray edition)
- Anderson’s short film Hotel Chevalier (part one of The Darjeeling Limited), starring Natalie Portman, with commentary by Anderson
- Audio commentary featuring Anderson and cowriters Jason Schwartzman and Roman Coppola
- Behind-the-scenes documentary by Barry Braverman
- Anderson and filmmaker James Ivory discussing the film’s music
- Anderson’s American Express commercial
- On-set footage shot by Coppola and actor Waris Ahluwalia
- Audition footage, deleted and alternate scenes, and stills galleries
- Original theatrical trailer
- PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by critic Richard Brody and original illustrations by Eric Anderson

Available on DVD and Blu-ray.

DVD
Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled
Blu-ray
Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled

********************************************
From Joblo:

Source: CNN by: Jonathan Frey

The following is just a tiny tidbit, a morsel, a hint of what Wes Anderson's project after the upcoming THE FANTASTIC MR. FOX will be. Under most circumstances, such a small mention would not be blown up into full story but since we're talking Wes "I'm one of the best filmmakers working today" Anderson here (he insists people use that nickname at all times), I think we can make an exception. In an interview with CNN, frequent Anderson collaborator Owen Wilson said this: "But I am going to do a movie with my friend Wes [Anderson] in India, and that's not going to be a buddy comedy movie. one of three brothers, and they go on this journey in India. I haven't really spoken to Wes yet in regards to what I can really talk about." Fair enough. Thanks to Steve for the heads up. In the meantime, we can look forward to the stop-motion Roald Dahl adaptation MR. FOX (with animation by the also-awesome Henry Selick)...well, sometime soon, hopefully. It doesn't have a release date yet.

#2 Post by **Jeff** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:36 am

If you haven't seen it yet, Anderson's new American Express commercial is pretty darn enjoyable. It's a not-so-subtle homage to Day For Night and it's very Andersonian. I've seen it play two or three times in the pre-trailer ads in theaters. There was an NPR story on the ad that showed up in print on Slate. Armond White also reviewed it for Slate. Naturally, White promptly went bat-shit insane and declared the ad superior to the Truffaut film.

pianocrash · #3 Post by **pianocrash** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:50 pm

I predict: an amalgam of the apu trilogy & the river, because wessy only knows how to rip off other movies. Frankly, another whore-rendous owen comedy would be more welcome at this point (really).

I bet the soundtrack will be awesome!

#4 Post by **Jeff** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:38 pm

pianocrash wrote:I predict: an amalgam of the apu trilogy & the river, because wessy only knows how to rip off other movies. Frankly, another whore-rendous owen comedy would be more welcome at this point (really).

I bet the soundtrack will be awesome!

Could you go into a little more detail about which movies Anderson has "ripped off" in each of his films? I hear that accusation leveled at different directors all the time, but Anderson is new to me. I've heard him reasonably described as pretentious, twee, and formalist, but never derivative.

Anderson has clearly been influenced by Hal Ashby and FranÃ§ois Truffaut, but I can't think of any director who hasn't been influenced by others. There are nods to The Magificent Ambersons and J.D. Salinger in The Royal Tenenbaums. Anderson also references bits of books, movies, and pop culture from his childhood -- sometimes more often than I would like. I am thinking here of Max's Serpico play in Rushmore, two of the Tenenbaum children hiding out in a museum Frankweiler style, and Steve Zissou's surface similarities to Jacques Cousteau. There are many others, I'm sure.

Most of the things that I can come up with could be classified as asides or references. Thematically, and certainly stylistically, I'm having a hard time figuring out who Anderson is "ripping off." If we do, however, end up with an amalgam of The River and The Apu Trilogy, I shall be first in line. Am I to understand that you would find a sequel to You, Me, and Dupree more interesting and cinematically satisfying?

Antoine Doinel · #5 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:41 pm

Jeff wrote: I am to understand that you would find a sequel to You, Me, and Dupree more interesting and cinematically satisfying?

I've already got the title! You, Me, Dupree and Baby! I wonder what hijinks will ensue!

Zumpano · #6 Post by **Zumpano** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:44 pm

According to Chud.com (and I don't know how accurate this is), the new Anderson film is called "Darjeeling Limited". It will star Owen Wilson and Jason Schwartzman, and was written by Anderson, Schwartzman, and Roman Coppola.

I had always read that Baumbach was working with Anderson again, so should we take this with grain of salt until the official news?

Fletch F. Fletch · #7 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:53 pm

Zumpano wrote:I had always read that Baumbach was working with Anderson again, so should we take this with grain of salt until the official news?

Well, Coming Soon cites Production Weekly as the source:

Wilson & Anderson Reunite for Darjeeling
Source: Production Weekly August 2, 2006

Production Weekly reports that Owen Wilson will reunite with his long-time friend Wes Anderson on the director's next project, The Darjeeling Limited.

In the script, by Anderson, Roman Coppola and Jason Schwartzman, Wilson will play one of three brothers who journey through India.

The project is eyeing a December production start.

Antoine Doinel · #8 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:13 pm

I'm quite intrigued to see Schartzmann and Roman Coppola listed as the writers as well.

I really hope Kumar Pallana returns for this.

I wonder who will be cast as the other two brothers....

flyonthewall2983 · #9 Post by **flyonthewall2983** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:18 pm

I'd bet it would be Luke Wilson and someone else. Maybe even their other brother who had a small part in Rushmore.

scalesojustice · #10 Post by **scalesojustice** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:23 pm

That's futureman.

Antoine Doinel · #11 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:29 pm

Can we go ahead and presume Criterion is already on board for the DVD? If so, I wonder who they'll send to shoot the behind the behind-the-scenes stuff or if they'll get the Maysles to go again.

David Ehrenstein · #12 Post by **David Ehrenstein** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:24 pm

I'll bet it was partially inspired by Merchant-Ivory India films like Heat and Dust, The Guru, Helen -- Queen of the Nautch Girls, Autobiography of a Princess, et al.

pianocrash · #13 Post by **pianocrash** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:19 pm

Could you go into a little more detail about which movies Anderson has "ripped off" in each of his films? I hear that accusation leveled at different directors all the time, but Anderson is new to me. I've heard him reasonably described as pretentious, twee, and formalist, but never derivative.

Anderson is simply the richer brother, cinematically speaking, of Tarantino. Both are kids who are/were obsessed with various touchstones in pop culture during the 1970's, aka the boom at which point objectification had its peak (this is contestable, but for the sake of this arguement, let's just say it is). Their filmmaking is a mirrored reflection of their own collector's fanatasies. Watching rushmore or kill bill is about as exciting as seeing someone redecorate their shrine of Eames' furniture, or their collection of Star Wars memorabilia (and as much as I dislike Kevin Smith, at least he's straight up about his outward masturbatory tendencies). While both Anderson & Tarantino seem unashamed of their habitual borrowing from other sources, the films serve as an end-product to the culture we live in: object-obsessed, quip-worthy, fast & pretty. Any attempts at heart-tugging seem pasted on (zissou), even if you buy into that notion, you're cynically kicked in the teeth the next minute (after you realize you've sat through the preceeding minutes of zissou). As for equations, here goes:
paris, tx + king of marvin gardens = bottle rocket flirting - austrailia = rushmore jacques cousteau odyssey + jules et jim + rich-boy cynicism = zissou.

I hate equations.

That being said, I'll still see his new one, just so I can recognize each and every lift, and then try to wonder why I didn't spend my hour & change making my own film. I plan to greatly rip-off rohmer, just so you know.

Antoine Doinel · #14 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:24 pm

pianocrash wrote:That being said, I'll still see his new one, just so I can recognize each and every lift

And I guess the self-satisfied ego-stroking is a related benefit right?

And if you're the first person I've ever heard call anything Anderson has done "cynical". He's by far one of the least cynical directors working today.

David Ehrenstein · #15 Post by **David Ehrenstein** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:26 pm

jacques cousteau odyssey + jules et jim + rich-boy cynicism = zissou.

There is a very explicit hommage to Lola Montes in The Life Acquatic (the scene where Murray feeds the dolphin.) Moreover Peter Ustinov was supposed to play the agent. When he died Michael Gambon took the role.

pianocrash · #16 Post by **pianocrash** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:31 pm

It's not an ego-lift, I assure you. If anything, it causes me greater distress within my chestal area, seeing a scene from another film copied word for word, composition per composition. I mean, the point of theft is the new context. Wes doesn't even seem to realize that.

For instance, the whole "not this one" scene in zissou between bill murray & willem defoe. There is no difference, aside from cosmetic choices, between that scene in jules et jim & in wes' film. Didn't he learn anything from paul mazursky? Didn't we all learn that copying verbatim is a bad idea? Agh.

There is a very explicit hommage to Lola Montes in The Life Acquatic (the scene where Murray feeds the dolphin.) Moreover Peter Ustinov was supposed to play the agent. When he died Michael Gambon took the role.

See? I guess, my point all along, was that such devices, nee homages, tend to distance any viewer, lest he watch every movie wes anderson has, from the story itself. Without the knowledge of such source materials, the film is even more bland, and on the front of zissou, which I keep pointing out much to my own dismay, smug. But, knowing and uncovering such borrowed motifs by & large results in nothing but, "so & so was from that godard "film", or "those are the same shoes but cort wore in hugo pool". It's a little to "inside". How am I suppose to identify or sympathize with that? With "winking"? High & dry I remain.

Antoine Doinel · #17 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:50 pm

Just so I understand your argument - no filmmaker can make a reference/homage to any other actor/film/filmmaker ever because it will distance you from the film? Your own cinematic knowledge and experience is such that any filmmaker must be 100% completely original or else they cannot be taken seriously?

As for Zissou, the "references" you cite have little to do with the actual story or appreciation of the film. They are little asides for cinephiles or take or leave as they wish.

And if Bud Cort wearing the "same shoes as he did in Hugo Pool" drives you batty, you really need to seriously get out more.

pianocrash · #18 Post by **pianocrash** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:57 pm

As for Zissou, the "references" you cite have little to do with the actual story or appreciation of the film. They are little asides for cinephiles or take or leave as they wish.

You see, every moment of a wes anderson picture feels like this to me. Every single moment. I'm glad someone believes in him, though. If not, where would I be?

And if Bud Cort wearing the "same shoes as he did in Hugo Pool" drives you batty, you really need to seriously get out more.

I love this place.

David Ehrenstein · #19 Post by **David Ehrenstein** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 6:55 pm

I think you'd love Compton more.

Fewer cinematic references doncha know.

rs98762001 · #20 Post by **rs98762001** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:45 pm

pianocrash wrote:Watching rushmore or kill bill is about as exciting as seeing someone redecorate their shrine of Eames' furniture.

Uh, RUSHMORE is a beautiful, soulful movie, about as far from the empty-headed, asinine KILL BILL as possible. I agree that Anderson's 'style' is beginning to wear thin, but there isn't a cynical bone in RUSHMORE's body.

pianocrash · #21 Post by **pianocrash** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:19 am

Is anyone around here an indian/south asian woman?

I didn't think so, but there is a casting call. Maybe you'll meet adrien brody.

Steven H · #22 Post by **Steven H** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:44 am

pianocrash wrote:...the films serve as an end-product to the culture we live in: object-obsessed, quip-worthy, fast & pretty.

This I agree with, but what can a person be except a product of their culture? Is it so wrong in itself to be a part of it? I have my own creative impulses (writing, music, etc) and every time an idea pops into my head I can usually trace it back to something I've seen or heard and it's impossible to escape. Such is the nature of human socialization, I suppose (what kind of animal spends it's whole life "growing up"?)

Anderson seems to have his own ideas, even if it is nostalghia oriented, and is, in many people's eyes, a truly unique filmmaker. I love his films, and for me the "falseness" of the homage style is compensated for by humor, intelligence, and interesting (if caricature) character development.

DrewReiber · #23 Post by **DrewReiber** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 2:06 pm

I will just say that I pity anyone who can only read The Life Aquatic as simple formula and leave at that.

pianocrash · #24 Post by **pianocrash** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:24 pm

I will just say that I pity anyone who can only read The Life Aquatic as simple formula and leave at that.

I pity anyone who would be willing to waste their time (my own old self included) dissecting the innards of a film which prides itself on repeating the work of others, either wholesale, or trying to be clever, or just to please their own whims (this statement itself is contradictory; please refer to all the third & fourth wall "dimensions" in the life aquatic for more of an intellectual gleanings on this particular comment).

I only obliterate anderson in my mind, as I used to love him unconditionally as a film director. The extreme amount of study (or whatever you wish to call it) that I spent on his films (I've watched them all so many times, I can't bear to see them anymore, the same way I feel about surfer rosa) in the past is why I can see through them, or at least move on with my cinematic life (choose your best phrase, one that sounds less inflated would be most preferable). I'm glad someone out there is finding merit in his work, as I guess I'm apparently too jaded or stupid to realize it. Right? Now can we go back to talking about his new film? Isn't that what this thread is called?

Antoine Doinel · #25 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:33 pm

And I pity those who distance themselves from previously loved film and music, in order to embrace some newfound critical superiority. Just because I don't think Stephen Malkmus has done anything interesting lately doesn't mean I can't still listen to Pavement and love it.

I find it sad you're dismissing a director's complete works simply because of one film.