The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

[Plain Old Tele]

Discuss.

[CoolioD1]

i had a great time with this. a fun caper and fiennes is absolutely awesome, the main kid isn't as good. feels like he's struggling to keep up sometimes. can't really think of any other problems with it. it looks gorgeous too, as you would expect from anderson.

[RobinHood26]

Jeff Goldblum is in this. 

 

B+

[a2k]

Jeff Goldblum is in this. 

 

B+

 

He is a treasure we just don't see enough of. Always used to hope for a movie with him and Murray. Haven't seen GBH and some how missed seeing Aquatic and will catch up on both. But hope their characters have enough back and forth. Legendary.

Edited March 10, 2014 by a2knet

[CoolioD1]

^bill murray's in this for like, 20 seconds.

[baumer]

Bill Murray was in Djarleeing for about 5 seconds.

[Deep Wang]

Fucking amazing.

[Gopher]

I think Wes Anderson movies have become more meaningful as he's continued making them. Grand Budapest is beautiful and hilarious, but also haunting in surprising, sudden ways that cast the whimsy in a new light. I feel like I need to go back again before I make bold statements, but this could be my favorite Anderson movie (and unseat Fantastic Mr. Fox). 

[Plain Old Tele]

Loved it. Sublime.

[IndustriousAngel]

I loved it, even if it felt at times very detached, putting style over story (in that respect, I liked "Moonrise Kingdom" a bit more).

The visuals are amazing, the interiors like elaborate jewel cases caught with macro lenses; the models; Wes Anderson's trademark pastels ... he's a unique voice in a business where many productions get streamlined and bland. And the cast is simply awesome!

 

One thing that really stands out is his use of screen ratio; with today's possibilities, that's solely a creative decision - and while many young filmmakers will go for the widest possible screen everyday just to give their productions a "grown-up" look, Anderson shows us how much creative potential is lost if you don't think about such basic decisions.

[Charism]

Soo... ratios changing, that's a fact. But how are the time proportions? Like "~65% of movie is in 4:3, 20% in 16:9, etc".

[Plain Old Tele]

The vast majority of the movie is in 4:3.

[Water Bottle]

A-

 

Yeah. I liked it. Big deal.

[RichWS]

The craft is absolutely amazing, Ralph Fiennes is great and it had me chuckling, but it ultimately rang hollow for me. I'm not getting the sadness most seem to have felt at the end. There are so many characters that you never have time to connect to ANY character. Like I said, Fiennes is terrific but who is he? I admire the hell out of it as a well-done farce and achievement of design, but I wouldn't rank it anywhere near the top of the Wes List.

 

Then again, his films almost always benefit from a second viewing. 

[Plain Old Tele]

It's not necessarily a sadness for the specific characters (though I felt more emotional impact with Zero's ultimate story), it's that whole way of life and that area of the world, crushed out of existence by the two jackbooted heels of fascism and totalitarian communism.

[RichWS]

It's not necessarily a sadness for the specific characters (though I felt more emotional impact with Zero's ultimate story), it's that whole way of life and that area of the world, crushed out of existence by the two jackbooted heels of fascism and totalitarian communism.

 

Oh, I know it's about the world; I just didn't feel the weight of it. Older Zero's very last scene didn't hit me much either because I didn't think Agatha (or their relationship) was fleshed out enough. 

[Cmasterclay]

It's certainly style over substance and characters in alot of instances but it was so beautifully composed and styled that it is infinitely watchable. Brilliant feat of beautiful directing. The compositions are absolute fucking art, but never to a full blown pretentious sense like I feel in previous WA films. Also very funny, and very charming, and Fiennes is absolutely great. Enjoyable as all hell, though the dramatic resonance rang hollow a bit for me. Def worth a watch, though. 

[Jake Gittes]

I'm with Rich on this one.

 

Basically, I just wasn't convinced by Anderson's treatment of the pre-war hotel as this paradise lost. He takes so much time to prepare you for it, and then the part of the film set in 1932 is basically a very entertaining, but shallow comedic adventure the pleasures of which are almost entirely superficial. He's trying pretty hard to ground it with the friendship between Gustave and Zero, but I felt the latter was little more than a blank slate, and the former, despite Fiennes' best efforts, kept alternating between feeling like a human being and a walking set of charming quirks. Then there are so many supporting characters that none of them is given the chance to be developed in any way, which made it all even more weightless. (Ronan's Agatha was especially hurt by this).

 

It's an incredibly beautiful film visually (how many times have Robert Yeoman, as well as Anderson's various production designers, been snubbed for Oscar nominations already? It's ridiculous), and I had plenty of fun, but I didn't find it very memorable and have no desire to come back to it. As I saw it, Anderson lost himself in the world he created and in all the little details and quirks and consequently ended up making a film in which very little actually matters. His greatest films, which I consider to be Rushmore, Moonrise Kingdom and Fantastic Mr. Fox, are his best in large part because they avoid that very trap.

[Plain Old Tele]

Interesting. See, I felt it was a frothy farce with a little dramatic heft, whereas it seems you and Rich felt the reverse.

[The Futurist]

Grand Budapest Hotel : Rise of a Hipster Empire.