by Brandon Engel
Wes Anderson is the darling of contemporary populist filmmaking. Most people love him, and everyone is familiar with him. The scripts for his films are well written. His music choices are distinctive and usually fit the tone of his films nicely. His characters are well-constructed and relatable. One of the things that makes his work so endearing to fans is that he manages to integrate elements of nostalgic sentimentality without his films feeling overwrought — a little too cutesy at times, maybe, but he usually manages to temper this.
Wes Anderson is the darling of contemporary populist filmmaking. Most people love him, and everyone is familiar with him. The scripts for his films are well written. His music choices are distinctive and usually fit the tone of his films nicely. His characters are well-constructed and relatable. One of the things that makes his work so endearing to fans is that he manages to integrate elements of nostalgic sentimentality without his films feeling overwrought — a little too cutesy at times, maybe, but he usually manages to temper this.
Whatever your personal feelings are about the
man and his work, Anderson is one of the most distinguished contemporary
filmmakers. Obviously though, as with any sort of artmaking, nothing is born
from nothing — which is another way of saying that everything is informed by
something. Anderson owes much of his trademark aesthetic sensibility to the
directors who influenced him, and perhaps none more so than Hal Ashby. Hearken
back a few decades to Ashby’s cult comedy Harold and Maude (1971), and
you can see that the film essentially sets the template for virtually every
film that Anderson has ever made — if not thematically, than at least in terms
of style.


2





