Tuesday 11 September 2012

Moonrise Kingdom

 
I hate the word "indie". To me, it doesn't really mean anything and it associates itself with people who think they have better taste because they like things that are slightly more obscure than mainstream. To me it is a derrogative term, so I won't call this film indie. Instead I will say it is original. Well, only if you haven't seen a Wes Anderson film before. I didn't really know how else to start this one. I could talk about the director, but I already did that in my Bernie and Trishna reviews, and I do so hate repetition. Also, in talking about Anderson's other works I'll just end up comparing this one to them, which every other reviewer is doing and I hate cliches as well.  Well, I could go straight into the plot, but then that would break up the loose structure that I normally use. Naming the film, and the director, seems a little redundant now, since if you've read this far then you know those facts already. If you know anything about the film then you probably know the basic plot already, but I will go on with a brief synopsis in the next paragraph, as I think this shameful introduction has run its course.


12 year-olds Sam Shakusky (Jared Gilman) and Suzy Bishop (Kara Hayward) are two outcasts living on the (fictional) island New Penzance, off the coast of New England. Over the course of a year, they correspond secretly and run away together during summer, much to the concern of Suzy's lawyer parents Walt (Bill Murray) and Laura (Frances McDormand) and Sam's scoutmaster Ward (Edward Norton). The two kids enjoy a couple of days of complete bliss away from the adults that run their world, while the Bishop's, Ward and the island's policeman, Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis), are desperately trying to find them. What plays out is a story about finding love and a place where you're happy as seen through the eyes of two children, an exaggerated truth about chilhood during a time when parents were finding it hard to connect with their children.


So, I have a problem with this film, and I don't really know how to talk about it (you might've guessed that from the introduction). Partly, I think it's just writers block, but I really don't know what to say about this film. Which is odd, because I really liked it. I liked it so much that I am seriously considering putting it on my end of year best of list (yes, that will be done). It is a really good movie, and one of Anderson's best. But, again, I can't find the words to describe it. I suppose I shal have to be boring and just say why I liked the film instead of giving a semi-deep analytical view. Well, I do like the premise. Two twelve year-olds who fall in love like adults, it is very different and one of the best premises I've heard since Harold and Maude. I like the way the adults of the film are portrayed like kids, particularly Edward Norton' Scoutmaster Ward, who seems to lead an unfulfilling adult life, so he spends his free time being an almost dictatorial leader for a group of kids, and instead lives his life to a strict regime with needed to be broken up by the main characters escape. If you hadn't guessed, Ward is my favourite character.

The other adult characters all have something missing in their life, and while some of them aren't neatly fixed by the end, you do get the idea that they will try to do better with their lives after this event. So, what else did I like? The trademark Wes Anderson panning shots are always refreshing to watch, and I am once again aware at how well timed they all are. And of course the minutest detail is carefully planned out. I particularly love all the books that Suzy reads out, with each cover designed by a different illustrator. I also like the way it's directed, with both children showing dead-pan emotion most of the time, while the adults run around almost hysterical at their absence. Of course, my heart is warmed by the scout boys who come to Suzy and Sam's rescue, even though before Sam was incredibly unpopular and didn't get along with the rest of the boys. I suppose it just shows that some things, like outcasts and bullying, are always going to be around, hence why we get so many coming-of-age stories.


The acting is excellent, with very underrated performances from the kids, and the adults nearly overacting. I have to highlight Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward as Suzy and Sam, who really excel and I can't wait to see them in something else. I already said that I liked Edward Norton (like is too weka word, madly in love is more appropriate), and Tilda Swinton as Child Services is also quite fantastic given the little that she does. But I think the best is definitely Bruce Willis, playing against his "die hard" action star character. If you've seen Death Becomes Her, then you may guess what he may be like. I also really like the colours of the world that Anderson creates. His palette is very much based on muted primary colours, again enhancing that child-like quality.

Well, I've managed to write about something. I suppose I'd better say what I got from the film, and maybe that will uncover why I find this film so hard to write about. Well, the main thing I got out of the film was a sense of longing for the past. Let me explain. For a few short day, Sam and Suzy spend time together being able to be whoever they want without judgement, and from that a love grows. After such a short amount of time, they are dragged back to reality, and both of them seem to know that while things will never be the same, they will never have the time they had during this one summer ever again. And at the end of the movie, you feel that there is overwhelming sadness between the two kids that they will never live those days again. It makes this film sad, and to add to the sadness the mournful music of Benjamin Britten, whose compositions for children litter the film and add a personal touch from Anderson, who grew up with that music.


So, why did I find this film so hard to write about? Well, if you recall, I said I had a problem with it, and that is that while it is incredibly entertaining to watch while you're watching, it doesn't leave as great an impact when you leave the cinema. It's hard to explain why, and it's not as if it leaves you with nothing to think about, but it leaves you wanting something that it didn't give you. And with a rather sad ending to boot, this falls a little in my love for it. I still think this is an exceptional film, and one that really should be seen. I am sorry if this review turned out to be a little existential, but writers block is a terrible burden to bear. Also, I don't want to spoil for those of you who haven't seen it yet, so I kinda mentally blocked some things while writing. So, yeah. Nothing more to say, really. Until next time, readers.

No comments:

Post a Comment