View Full Version : Moonrise Kingdom

01-14-2012, 08:35 AM
Wes Anderson's next future-masterpiece with a cast of thousands, coming out this spring. Here (http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/focus_features/moonrisekingdom) is the trailer.

01-14-2012, 01:54 PM
That is an awesome trailer. Wes Anderson always create great trailers.

05-21-2012, 10:15 PM

If the movie is any better than this, then we're all in for quite the treat :)

05-22-2012, 06:42 AM
Can't wait. Can't wait. Can't wait.

06-09-2012, 09:07 AM
I saw it on Wednesday without watching a trailer or reading a synopsis. I have to say, I don't recall ever being so surprised or delighted by a film. The story is sweet and funny and the pace of film is fast. Best movie I've seen in awhile.

06-09-2012, 09:35 AM
I need to see this film!

06-16-2012, 12:46 PM
Loved this movie. I'm not a massive Wes Anderson fan (due to not having seen many of his films, rather than not liking them.) Engaging fun, not too soppy, plenty to look at, plenty to laugh at.

06-16-2012, 03:16 PM
I just got back from seeing this and a special screening of Cinema Paradiso (international cut version) and wow... I'll post my full review later today.

And here is the review (http://thevoid99.blogspot.com/2012/06/moonrise-kingdom.html).

09-30-2012, 03:38 PM
What a sweet film that was! Beautiful imagery, lovely music and a story with an almost fairytale quality (enhanced by said imagery and music). A real treat to watch, funny and moving at times, without anything feeling forced. One could object about the overly mature child characters, but I didn't mind at all, for me that was part of the charm. Finally, all the actors are excellent and completely fitting to their roles. One of those films I would happily watch again and again.

09-30-2012, 04:29 PM
I remember sitting through Moonrise Kingdom in a theatre this summer. Middle of the week, a day off. I had looked forward to seeing the film for a while, and as I usually like to do with my favorite directors: I completely avoid reading anything about the film and refuse to watch trailers till I see the movie. I love surprises. Of course, I had seen parts of the trailer, artwork and photos of the sets and characters in websites and magazines. I knew it had kids in scout uniforms, Bill Murray and Edward Norton. Oh, and Bruce fucking Willis... I don't mean that in an awesome way.

Long story short: I've never been more bored and I've never looked at my watch more times during a movie in a theatre as I did with Moonrise Kingdom. This film was as shallow as all the student movies getting made in film schools all over the world right now by Wes Anderson's biggest fans. "Awkward" dialogue, horrible child actors, "hip" soundtrack and completely unengaging characters (Edward Norton reeks of genuine bitterness in everything he does these days and the shitty role he got in this movie pretty much confirms this). I still liked the camera work, the cinematography and the overall look of the movie, but that's pretty much it.

09-30-2012, 05:02 PM
^^ Wow, really? Now I'm curious. You mentioned he's one of your favourite directors. I, on the other hand, wouldn't call him a favourite. I really liked Amazing Mr. Fox, but didn't really get into The Life Aquatic, the Royal Tennenbaums or Darjeeling Limited (not that they were bad). Like you said, I liked the look in all of them and all, but didn't really care for the movies. I would say Moonrise Kingdom is one of his less "weird" films (e.g. less "awkward" dialogue as you put it) and I wouldn't call the soundtrack "hip", it's rather more orchestral and conventional this time. Shallow? I'm not sure what you mean by that and I'm not sure depth is always required anyway. I don't know, I mean what would make it deep for you? I haven't noticed something in his other movies that made them more profound. Anyway, I guess I'm curious because this movie seemed to me like a typical Wes Anderson film in most elements, so I would expect a fan to like it.

09-30-2012, 05:56 PM
By shallow I mean that it didn't manage to pull me in (no matter how good it looked) to root for or care for any of its characters. By shallow I also mean that it feels like he's relying too much on his well known style and proven formulas to cater to his audience. It feels safe.

Maybe it's always been like that with Wes, I know I've heard people saying that about the Royal Tenenbaums for years, but at least his earlier movies felt fresh at the time. I'll agree with you about the soundtrack, yes it was more conventional this time. What I found laughably predictable was the vintage porn of the portable record player. For once I'd like to see Wes direct a movie that doesn't involve nostalgia, vintage porn and perhaps is set in a world with less pastel and picturesque sceneries.

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
09-30-2012, 10:42 PM
So, inre: Wes Anderson movies as being about nostalgia and so forth, go watch other movies, from other directors. Filmmakers tend to have a particular style, even remaining focused on fairly narrow subject matter, with some being more overt than others, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Roy Andersson has a very distinct style, and I look forward to his work because HOLY YES A NEW ROY ANDERSSON PROJECT. The same goes for Terrence Malick and Wong Kar-Wai and a ton of others—of directors. Writers, too: Aaron Sorkin-written flicks are all very distinctly Aaron Sorkin, and are normally full of Sorkin tropes.

If a particular film doesn't work for me, fine, but it's silly to then turn around and demand the director's next project come out with something entirely different, something out of character. It's fair to walk into a Joss Whedon movie expecting something very Joss Whedon-y, is what I'm saying.

My experience from Moonrise was the opposite yours: I felt it was his deepest, most mature picture yet. None of the dialogue rang false, the child actors did a fantastic job, the soundtrack was perfectly suited to the material, and the characters were all very endearing, even the cold semi-villain represented by Social Services. I saw it three times and was no less engaged in either subsequent screening. Ed Norton as reeking of bitterness is you reading into his performance; I detected none of it, nor has anyone else I've talked to about the film.

Keep in mind, hobochic, the movie is set in 1965. So while you may still call various things 'vintage porn', it's important to realize that they were not, in the context of the film, actually at all vintage.