We can also consider the director character being overall absent from the production, choosing to sleep in his improvised stage apartment. This could be saying how the work is alive and well without the director, almost as if the work grows legs and lives on its own. This could be how Anderson feels about his success?
"The tragedy of the storyteller: you tell stories about your life until telling stories is your life, and then the only emotionally truthful stories you can tell are about telling stories." A really amazing summary of a phenomenon which you see so often, particularly in the most successful filmmakers/writers. I think it's a really good argument for an artist branching out from their art and spending time in the rest of the world, completely separate from art - because you need impetus from something else to avoid your art becoming self-referential to the point of, well, not being as good as it once was. Great video!
Right, I think part of why film might even be losing its relevance as an art form is that more and more filmmakers only know a lot about film but not enough about life and humanity so their works only resonate with fewer and fewer people.
Other than this being a story about storytelling and acting, as well as an existential allegory, I also see themes of grief and the processing of it. “You can’t wake up if you don’t fall asleep” That dream scene was kinda horrifying and I didn’t understand that line at first. Now I think it means basically, you can’t get over something until you go through it. You can’t process a loss until you face it.. or perhaps your own life until it’s over.
This was what I got the most out of my viewing: the grief and the process of moving forward and how even if you can forget what happened (or in the movie, cut the most emotional scene "out of the play") you still come out scarred and unsure of yourself
That is it exactly. (spoiler) The story is actually about the playwright played by Edward Norton and the actor who plays Augie in the play, which the film shows near the start, have a relationship. At the end, the film briefly mentions that the playwright died in a car accident. The actor is in intense grief. And he is playing the part of Augie in a stage play after the death of his lover and the writer who seems to not have been able to completely finishing writing the play, which is why the Asteroid City story feels scattered and all over the place. The actor is trying to find meaning in both his life and the play which he doesn't understand, but it's because both him and Augie don't want to move through the grief, shown by Augie not telling his kids. In the end, the discussion in the planning session for the scene the playwright wanted to set up (the sleep scene), the movie basically tells you you have to allow yourself to feel and process the grief to be abe to continue with life. And then the movie ends, and the song that plays during the end credits literally sums up the message of the film and tells you exactly what it was trying to say. That the only way you can experience new things in life is by dealing with grief. You can't wake up if you don't sleep, sleep is the grief. But while you sleep, you can't experience all the other amazing things there are. Delaying the grieving process only delays your ability to live your life. The fact that this out of the world experience happens in the town is to highlight that for all that was happening that should have been world changing, for Augie's family, the grief prevented them from really appreciating it, because it still came down to the fact they hadn't gotten over the loss of the mom (in the scene at their end where the grandfather was trying to dig up her remains, and the girls were preventing it). The cut scene discussion on the balcony was also to highlight that they didn't want to face the grief.
@@nicogregorits1593 thank you. I've lost both my parents, so for me, the film struck me very deeply. I had a bit of an epiphany thinking about the film... specifically what the balcony scene was trying to say. The Augie actor and the actress that was supposed to play the part of his wife are discussing the cut scene and testing their memory of the lines they had learnt together. The scene would have been Augie travelling to the Alien world and getting an opportunity to talk to his wife. The scene is cut though, and this represents all the stuff that we realize we wanted to say to the people we've lost and have to face the fact that that opportunity will never again present itself. It reminded me of my mom. We used to always have this ritual of watching Star Wars on the first day of every school holiday when i was a kid. I always feel the grief again when I see new Star Wars content and realize I can't share it with her.
This film reminded me of the fact I never fully grieved the loss of my sister in 1995. Cathartic. You need to go through the pain, the shadow, the darkness and wilderness to fully appreciate being alive. This film is Wes Anderson's most pessimistic yet also most life affirming of all his films. I think people will understand how great 'Asteroid City ' is when they have fully digested what it means as a work of cinematic art. The absurdist and existential themes are somehow light and drifting. Beautiful film about storytelling & existence in my opinion.
I just got home back from the theater, and I have to say I am pretty confused. It isn’t the type of confusion that’s frustrating, rather, I’m okay with it. Seeing other interpretations is helping me put the pieces together, but I think the line that stuck with me was when Auggie asked if he was “doing it right”, as he “doesn’t understand the play.” I don’t think any of us really understand a lot of the world around us, but we put our questions aside to be as we are. Nobody will ever understand everything, so rather than dwelling on what we don’t know, we should “fall asleep” and do what we *do* understand. Then, maybe when we fall asleep, we have the chance of “waking up” to experience something unknown.
I love the way in which Wes Anderson playfully mocks the art of storytelling. The lead actor is sleeping with the playwright because of course he is. Scarlett Johansson is an actress playing an actress playing an actress. Fred Armisen as the kooky character actor who pops in toward the end. Margot Robbie could have worn anything on the balcony, but putting her in a dress reminiscent of her role in “Mary Queen of Scotts” is perhaps meta-commentary on how often we retell those stories. And then there’s the play itself. “Asteroid City” is mostly bad but on purpose. It really does read like a Tennessee Williams play. There’s one line where Tilda Swinton’s character says something like “I never had children. I was too busy focusing on my career”. It made me cackle in the theater. It’s so spot on as a Williams-ism to just throw in that one line of too honest self-reflection. Wes Anderson is telling a story about telling stories.
This is a really good breakdown. I saw the movie on opening night. After it was over, me and the only other person there discussed our confusion I thought about it more and more, and I got it. I got the themes of uncertainty and how there is no meaning to life or to anything, but keep living and telling the story. Then I rewatched it, twice. And now I realize how much of the movie feels like Wes Anderson talking to himself. The scene with the dare kid and his father, where his father asks "why do you have to dare all the time?" in which his son describes how he wants to be remembered by the world. When Woodrow expresses how difficult it is to decide what to put on the moon. He wants to make an impact, have a legacy And of course the balcony scene feels like other little snipets, seeming as if wes wants someone to eventually be able to do what he does, because he won't be doing it forever. But his pictures always come out. And because of that, it might be one of my favorite wes films
i felt like there was alot of quiet desperation out loud, which also gave me the "talking to himself" vibe. much of the dialogue in the film was comprised of things we as people think or feel but never say.
I love this explanation. Now it finally makes sense. I watched it last night and I was confused but I totally enjoyed it. It is like life doesn't really make sense and that's the beauty of it.
Interesting and well-put, but I think you miss how Anderson uses artistic expression as an analogue for coming to terms with mortality and the mysteries of life. An actor playing a part without fully understanding the character’s motivations is equated with people continuing to live their lives after confirmation of alien existence, and indeed a widower trying to cope with the void left by the death of the person he loved most. The fact that catharsis comes in the form of an actor describing a dream involving the wife on an alien planet is what ties the whole thing together, cementing the film as a meditation on finding purpose through embracing mystery. The film goes to great pains to show the absurdity of art, hammering home the fact we are watching actors perform a hypothetical reenactment of the production of a non-existent play, yet buying into the construction allows us to find emotional-resonance and meaning. But you can’t wake up if you don’t fall asleep.
I think that quote does a good job of summarizing the metamodern approach to art in general as a response to the postmodern irony spiral. It can feel liberating to be the atheist who debunks all the creationists and stay awake in the _real_ reality all the time, but as humans we do still rely on stories, breaks in reality to make time for imagining a potential world we can come back and attempt to bring to form. If you stay up all night, you'll collapse from exhaustion; you can't wake up if you don't fall asleep.
I feel like I'm alone in interpreting the black and white scenes of the theater being entirely in Augie's subconscious, as what happens in them seems relevant to only him and his emotions. I thought it was a take on people at the time, especially those who had experienced trauma on a battlefield, having trouble allowing themselves to express and feel emotions. He was contrasted by an actress who had a similar problem but was honest with herself about it and knew what it was, while he wasn't able to respond when she stated it. And it culminated in him having a breakdown and leaving the "play" to ask what the meaning of it was, confronting the memory of his wife in the context of an actress to a past play he'll never get to perform in again, except the lines they quoted didn't fit that narrative, revealing the "play" to be fully artificial itself. He then is told he missed is cue and then in the play oversleeps and misses everyone leaving.
Yeah I felt the same way. Like the dream world in his subconscious was the only place he can see his wife’s face not in a photograph. He even told her “you’re the wife who played my actress.” Because his wife is playing the actress in this actual fabricated black and white reality. Hell the beginning of the movie tells you that Asteroid City is a fictitious place, but I think that’s a lie, maybe symbolizing denial as the first stage of grief.
I actually agree with this take. My takeaway is that the events about the play unfurling is less "real" than the play itself. The characters are the one dreaming up the events of storytelling, which is why the movie ends with the play and not the "real" storytelling part.
I think the film is about the 5 stages of the grieving process. Every grieving process starts with a "shock event," followed by 1. denial, 2. anger, 3. bargaining, 4. depression/grief, and 5. acceptance. Asteroid City represents your brain in mourning. The meteor symbolizes the death of his wife. The meteor is literally the shock event that initiated the grieving process/Asteroid City. His children represent denial: he doesn't tell his children about their mother's death for three weeks, as if it never happened. Denial. He only tells them when they arrive in Asteroid City, which triggers the grieving process. And Scarlett Johansson, for example, symbolizes grief. She even says, quite literally, "Put your grief into this scene, otherwise it won't work!" Eventually, they have sex, and one of his children witnesses it. This symbolizes embracing the grief. Only when you do that does the grief disappear in the grieving process. His child (denial) watches and sees them having sex, no longer in denial. Scarlett Johansson is also gone the next day, the grief is gone after the embrace, and they are no longer in quarantine in Asteroid City: they are no longer trapped in mourning. The black and white part is the real world. He speaks to his deceased wife, Margot Robbie, on the balcony, who delivers a monologue and reveals that she has been written out of the play, but now she plays a different role nearby, in the theater next to the one he performs in. She is no longer allowed to play the role of a wife, which they both find regrettable because it was such a beautiful play. She also mentions that the alien is a metaphor. At the end of the film, they leave Asteroid City, but the crater hole is still there.
Adore the thoughts here and definitely fleshed out some feelings I had after watching it. Though I did find myself more emotionally moved by this one than a lot of his previous work. I feel some aspect just hit me in the right way at the right time.
100% the same with me. I just got out of the film and was in-love with it from start-to-finish. Asteroid City has a wonderful charm and whimsical nature to it.
Amidst the fantastic analysis of Anderson’s recent work, and how this film sits within the director’s shift toward a meta-modern framework, I love that you made time to recognise that Asteroid City still brought those classic Wes Anderson gut punch moments with it. Big up the Freight Train song …
I was deeply confused by Asteroid City, even tho i know almost all of Wes Andersons movies. Left with the feeling there was a lot of meta meaning. I was overwhelmed by all the small details and couldn't grasp it. Your analysis helps a lot and i will watch it with very different eyes the next time. Even the missing conclusions for the romances in the movie (not even tragic ones) might not bother me anymore: Wes is not done yet! Hard to believe i struggled with myself whether or not to watch your video, because of the title.
Usually when I see a movie review with a real title like this I know it's probably a decent one usually not just some Joe reviewing the move out of 10 it's more like a project
You know that feeling you have when you think you’ve got a pretty good idea of what’s going on and are about to share, when someone else starts talking about the same thing and you quickly realize that they are on a whole other level, so you just sit there, listen, and keep your mouth shut. That was my experience with this video. Brings back memories of philosophy class in college… bravo to you sir.
Movies like this you watch and get high,that's the only way they're interesting, OR ,just kinda play in the background (muted ) while playing drinking games and music at a party or something
It is refreshing to hear a movie critique that doesn't start with "I really liked this movie" and go down hill from there. I would love to hear your take on Moonrise Kingdom as it is one of my favorite Wes Anderson films as well as one of my overall favorites.
I thought there was a connection to how art and movies are described as a dream but they shout repeatedly that "you can't wake up if you don't fall asleep" like for an artist it's not a dream this is how to see the world in this context. Wes Anderson says watching a good play is as engrossing as watching a movie and is continued in the actors when they leave the stage to live their lives. Art that you make is a chunk of you and Art you consume becomes part of you as well
So what did they mean by that line? Nothing? I did end up with a whole interpretation of the movie myself but I didn't know if there was something more
I don't quite get what that mantra was all about because it seems to be that most people are asleep and need to wake up and that message, although backwards, seemed to imply that. "You've been asleep" and some bad shit has happened meanwhile. The American public is asleep while our institutions turn against us.
@@njdotson I took it to mean that to dream you need to sleep, and to sleep you need to allow yourself to fall asleep (which in this context means suspending your disbelief despite all efforts being made by Wes Anderson to remind you that this is a fictional story about a playwright who creates a play called _Asteroid City_ which is then presented on TV as a 1950s framing device in Black & White, only to then have its staging introduced and "enhanced" as the colour cinematic form with nudity which would not be permitted on '50s TV, and then you get Maya Hawke and the song about the spaceman summarising how the First Contact that takes place causes every character to change - e.g. Tom Hanks wants to take his daughter's ashes back to his estate, but eventually relents as he doesn't want to disrupt the grieving process already initiated by the girls who had lost their mother and his claim to her as his daughter was less important than their attachment and he needed to not be selfish), but the First Contact is treated by government as something that has to be denied, and covered up for 100 years, with a huge effort made to gaslight the witnesses during their quarantine into denying what they saw with their own eyes. This fails due to all the efforts of the Brainiac children, and Jason Schwartzman already posting his photo off prior to the lockdown, so any who might have doubted the dream they had now wake up to the reality of what they experienced, and have it have some existential effect on them reframing the scope of their lives against a much larger cosmic backdrop. This causes all of them to snap out of what they were like because of their experience, making it a bit like _Close Encounters, Cocoon_ or _Arrival._ I think there are parallels to _A Midsummer Night's Dream_ with the alien being the faeries who mess with the humans making them fall in love: Jason Schwartzman and his son with Scarlett Johannson and her daughter, respectively. I know a lot of people who would hate the deliberately stilted performances, but I loved all of that, and I'm a sucker for sets so was really enjoying myself, and loved all the jokes they did. After a year of indifferent films, this was excellent and was the best new film I have seen in 2023. 10/10 Again, not for everyone. I have seen people give this a 1/10.
Very well articulated analysis of this film, and Wes' work as a whole. I will only add that I personally found "Asteriod City" in my top favorites of his. I loved it. I loved the questions that it asks, and I love that Wes doesn't answer them. Simply because he doesn't know. What is the meaning of life? "I don't understand the play. Am I doing it right"? The director just says, basically, that he isn't sure, but just keep doing what you're doing. You are doing a good job. Wes is getting older, perhaps he is just indeed trying to figure out (through his art/writing) what life's purpose is, and if he's doing it right. I thought the film brilliant.
Your breakdown of postmodernism and meta modernism as they relate to successive fascist threats/modes over the last century up to now was brilliant. You framed it in a way that made so much sense to me; the concept really clicked in your explanation of it. Really loved this video and these thoughts!
It's funny because just yesterday I saw Asteroid City and that same connection between Asteroid City and Nolan's recent works as being part of a general resurgence of fears of Nuclear War because of the war in Ukraine so it's really nice to see those same thoughts written out in a lot more eloquent way than I managed at 1 am on Letterboxd lmao
@@bb5242yeah but also we are literally entering a new cold war and Russia and NATO are both seriously publicly talking about using nukes in a completely unpredidented way.
Excellent breakdown, Taylor! Love the comparison to Nolan’s recent work. Felt that gut punch you discussed during a Midge Campbell line as well, the one about being catastrophically hurt people who’d rather not talk about it. That too, in a way, felt like Anderson commenting on his career and characters.
I’m ngl I love films that make you think and such. But if I’m watching a movie to watch a movie, something like Asteroid City is too much for me. I guess it’s just who I am but I’m not happy in this confused and lost state.
"He's making the artificial works themselves and asking us to deconstruct and find the humanistic elements within them". Very well put. I like this game of deconstruction and analysis. I will probably grow tired of it when this wave has reaches it's peak, but I'm not done with it yet. Tarantino did it in Once upon a Time in Hollywood, and if he isn't good enough for it, I can do it too.
One thing I'm always expecting in a Wes Anderson movie was that crescendo, but about halfway through I got the feeling I was being told that I wasn't going to get that moment. It was really a trip. I still felt like I was given something new on top of what a Wes Anderson movie usually provides my senses and emotions.
Asteroid City could be viewed as the third in an unofficial “trilogy” by the Coen Brothers, Quentin Tarantino, and Wes Anderson. Arguably the most talented writer-directors of 1990s. Interestingly enough, they all share cast members. 1. Hail, Caesar! (Scar Jo, Swinton, Fischer Stevens) - 2015 2. Once Upon a Time…In Hollywood (Margot Robbie, Maya Hawke) - 2019 3. Asteroid City (Scar Jo, Swinton, Robbie, Hawke, Stevens) -2023
The issue is not with deconstruction, the issue is with seeing deconstruction as an end as opposed to a useful means along a much longer path to meaning. As a stopping point, it's nothing. As a tool toward something further, it's quite useful.
the truest emotional moment in the film seemed to be the alien's arrival, which changed each character's established motivations and shortcomings. It seemed to lift each character out of their rut by giving them a meaning that existed outside of the confines of their material world. In a similar way, the actors within the play express a similar need to find meaning, as does the playwriter himself. Sleep, in that pivotal scene, is the subject of discourse as a physical state of living without conscious perception. It seems as though the sleep is an extension of the character's initial state as well, the mannequin in the nuke town as you aptly put it. And to wake up is to escape the catatonic state of modern society, sucked into the artifice of the digital world. I think the structure of this movie was to remind the audience of artifice, both in storytelling and in their own material world. The world we live in is increasingly artificial, and you need something like governmental confirmation of UFOs to really remind you of the inconsequential nature of our day to day. As you pointed out that a lot of directors are shifting their focus from post-modern to meta modern discourse, so too do I see a shift from personal stories to more societal ones (for example, Jordan Peele shifting to a discussion of aliens in Nope, and even in the world of gaming with Bethesda's Starfield. Even Nolan's latest can be connected to extraterrestrial fears due to the nuclear alarm theory).
I agree that there are connections to be made between “Asteroid City” and “Nope”; they somehow felt similar to me, and left me with a sense of bewilderment and meaning-almost-grasped. But they are also opposites, at least superficially: surrealist horror vs. surrealist existentialism, aliens as predatory animals vs. aliens as punchlines, Black vs. white sensibility. Although these might not be superficial actually.
so true. He really stands out in his analysis... most of the ones I've seen on UA-cam are slowly meshing into a singular blob parroting the same talking points
im surprised people found this movie so challenging and confusing. I saw it twice yesterday and both times found it engrossing, fascinating, and excellent.
man, you really thought about this!!! I was thinking something along the lines of - trying to find meaning in life, trying to find meaning in really lovely works of art, can be as elusive as searching for the truth of the stars. Sometimes you don’t really know what truth or meaning may be, but you have gut feelings, and following those might get you to the same place.
also I firmly believe this might be top 3 for Anderson. The joke per minute ratio was extremely high, and it really did feel like he leaned fully into his style in a way that only he could do.
I loved this movie. I think u might be right in saying that the lack of depth, was the depth. very good analysis, just frum this video i can tell ur a smart ass dude.
Freight train has been stuck in my head the last couple days lol. Also, I found this movie really funny throughout. Kinda felt that way with French dispatch too, I felt like a nerdy artist for appreciating the humor lol. ALSO one scene that confused me was when Jason schwartzman takes his pants off and kisses the writer? I’m sure it’s symbolic but kind of random.
I was wondering about this scene as well. My thoughts were it was the writer and his character and symbolic of the intimacy a writer has with the characters he creates. They live in the writer's head who becomes quite fond of them.
i understand this movie mostly as an exercise in being "post-good." its so removed from the values of traditional storytelling, choosing instead to point the camera at the process itself. does the moment at the end with the repeated line work? the scene is framed with the tv players playing what seem to be other characters, a dual role moment common in small theatre company productions in the center of the frame, the climax of the movie as a zoom screenshare pointed at itself. the movie cant be good, it can only be Satisfying.
also the closest a lib like wes can get to marxist content, bless his little texan heart. my fav bit of that was the apology algorithm joke wish i knew more about the cultural impact of the Korean war but they kinda make that pretty hard for americans as its fairly excised from our histories. bing-bong!
That is a lot to unravel but refreshingly more profound an explanation that I have heard up to this point regarding this film. A unique perspective on where Anderson is in his artistic process. I understand that many film makers or artists create from a kind of catharsis which I believe I picked up from your references to Wes feeling conflicted about his work and where can he go to take it further. I'm more preoccupied with AI and how it affects me in work as an Application Developer but I have been aware of the anxiety from artists.
Can you do a video on why all filmmaker wannabees turn UA-cam critics and why 99% of all filmmaker wannabees are narcissistic Athiests either physically skinny or shlubby, balding or bearded. And despite all their intellectual Analysis can’t seem to write or direct a film to improve upon the cinematic world themselves despite their supposed vast knowledge of the craft?
This is the most convincing piece of info about the movie I've seen yet, yet it doesn't really deconstruct the themes going on in the movie itself. if the whole logical digestion of the movie is from the topics surrounding it then it's hard to take anything from the movie itself other than the classic aesthetics. That seems like the definition of an artist making art for himself, I just couldn't really get into it or relate to it. great analysis though, seems very accurate :)
I think we've already got enough videos already deconstructing the literal layer of what's going on this one's bigger picture the more core layer of the allegory so to say. Not many in crazy detail yet though but I feel like you should figure it out and make these connections yourself watching it a second time instead of really spoiling it and pulling it apart in detail too much but idk that's just my opinion
@@brucekendall9873 Really? I haven't found a video yet that really deconstructs the literal layer into the allegory that was going through Wes's mind. If the movie is "lying to my face" by creating motifs and then stripping them away from their weight, is there any meaning to a single motif? I still haven't found a single person who coherently analyzes the allegory. Maybe the movie is about the concept that the artist is the only one who truly understands his product and the idea it's trying to convey. While watching the movie, I felt like everyone was united in confusion from the beginning (Same as the characters and when the alien arrived). Now that I think about it, It's like the ending of Beau Is Afraid when everyone is leaving at the end (like in the movie).
I just realised how this has been part of his movies from all the way back in The Darjeeling Limited (2008) with Jack Whitman, who kept insisting (fooling no one but himself) that the characters he wrote about were purely fictional.
I thought the film was kind of middling but this did give me more of an appreciation for it, even though my feeling on it hasnt changed much. Thanks chief
"parallel between the post-war-unease and the state of his career Anderson is operating in which itself, is so much the subject of his recent film as well as the parallel between the rise of post modernism in the wake of world war 2 and the recent trend of Anderson film becoming more and more determined to deconstruct themselves since Grand Budapest The timing of his career stage coinciding with real world art movements comparable to the rise of post modernism" beautiful
The film felt like a bookend to his style as we have come to know it. The self awareness is expected in a post-covid, post-george floyd world of unprecedented cognizance. He likely personally feels the rug has been pulled from under him. How can a man in his 50's continue to live in idealism. It's time to put away the dollhouse. So he gave us the absolute zenith of his visions and in the same breath blew out the candle.
A mind blowing fun time Taylor! I really enjoyed this. I've been a huge Wes Anderson fan for my whole life thanks to my parents. This was a very touching take on his whole filmography. I also really loved Asteroid City by the way, just saw it two days ago.
I see this film as proof that Wes Anderson actually likes modern franchise blockbusters on a conceptual level and is paying tribute to them indirectly. The greatest minds behind franchise films like Lucas, Spielberg and Cameron, and the basis of the material of modern franchise films (Marvel) are products of the age of nuclear anxiety (think of all the radiation based origin stories) and the vibrant sci-fi and theatre scene of that era.
I'm really glad I watched this video. When I first watched Asteroid City, it scared me, and not just because the scene where everyone is chanting was terrifying. But because I was scared I was starting to not get Wes Anderson like I used to. Which is a terrifying thought because Grand Budapest Hotel is the movie that really inspired me into wanting to create films and to write stories. So when I finished watching Asteroid City, and all I could think of was "huh", I was horrified. But after taking some time to chew on and think about the movie, the more I understood. And this video really helped, and seeing comments of other people who didn't understand, and were also terrified of the scene where the bug eyed alien walks toward the camera, made me feel better.
11:38 for the record, Grand Budapest was presented on 2.35:1 screens theatrically, with the 1.85:1 and 4:3 scenes pillarboxed to maximize their vertical height like Asteroid City. The home releases have the 4:3 scenes pillarboxed, the 2.35:1 scenes letterboxed, and the 1.85:1 scenes both pillar-AND-letterboxed. (I didn’t see French Dispatch in theatres but assume it did similar.) I’d wager Asteroid City will likely take a similar approach, expanding the 4:3 scenes to the full height of an HDTV.
Well explained and this anaylsis brought me insight. Overall I though the film was beautiful but I was annoyed at the lack of character development and storyline.
Wow I’ve never seen your channel dude, but after that analysis, I’m definitely a fan. You know, something I’ve been thinking about in recent years is how the written word in the form of articles, blogs, or zines, etc. is just not the best way to reach an audience anymore. Real artistic dialogue and criticism with normal people is happening through other formats like UA-cam. Thinking of Anthony Fantano totally eclipsing music publications like Pitchfork. And as I listened to you talk, I couldn’t help but think that you were delivering me a really thoughtful analysis that would have been a blog in a bygone era. Really cool to see you doing it on UA-cam and apparently having great success. Awesome video man!!
Thank you for being one of the very few film creators on YT that actually bothered to engage on the movie on its own terms and not just go "this isn't like his other stuff I hate it!!!!"
Simply excellent video & explanation…some great points to dwell on. I also think the lyrics of the song ‘Freight Train’ sum up this movie, and the position Wes finds himself in, in his career. Like you said the storyteller uses his life experiences for his stories, and now after having potentially run out of experiences he turns in on himself as the storyteller… Freight train, freight train, goin so fast Freight train, freight train, goin so fast I don't know what train he's on Won't you tell me where he's gone
Such wonderful comments. The analysis by Taylor J. Williams is a friendly gut punch. Just saw this an hour ago and have the feeling I am waking up in a new world that has changed while I was sleeping. This is some futuristic drama going on here, a bit scary to embrace because it is so powerful while it is so compelling. An invite to sit at the adult table. Everyone move to the bigger table, it won't always be so scary I hope. We can always find relief in our dreams of when we were kids and played with our pets. Now we may have aliens and ourselves to learn to understand, I know we are up to it. I think the dreams of our past were shown in the little dancing Roadrunner at the end, the simple dance to the songs of invitation, sweet and uncomplicated.
"A storyteller tells stories about their life until telling stories is their life, at which point the only story they can tell is about telling stories." Thank you; this exactly expresses and explains what bothered me so much about this film. It wasn't the story-within-a-story meta commentary, but the lack of a point or purpose to the film.
I saw this review before watching the film, and the first quote was what i was expecting would be my issue with it-that one's meta exploration of storytelling believes it is substantial but in actuality is less so than just a normal story with heart, that the writer is actually lacking in the life experience to make a story worthy at this point. But i left not feeling that way at all. It made me feel like there was actually plenty of heart in that endeavor, maybe even more than his other films. I actually liked a story about stuckness and not knowing how to move on I could easily see someone not liking it for a multitude of reasons and wouldnt blame anyone for feeling that way, from expecting richer more impactful interactions from the characters who ended up serving more as surface level motifs, to the fact that i dont think the movie and specifically the ending's aim is to try to inspire awe in the viewer as most creators tend to want the movie they make to do. But to me it felt like a beautiful experience overall, i loved the deconstructionist elements, i love the themes of questioning whether or not moving through life everyday is worth it and how that was actually posed in a way that didnt feel cliche and actually made me think about it. Even though theyre meant to be sort of surface level and devoid of big emotional depth i still loved the characters, i loved the visuals (thats coming from someone who doesnt always stylistically love wes anderson and has hated a lot of his previous work and aesthetics tbh) - and i loved the note the movie ended on- the lyrics to freight train before the credits hit were something like "we got no hope, no future, just road". And that summed it up perfectly. And i loved little details like the abrupt cut after the first wave of credits
@@EvWuzhere Okay, thanks for explaining that. Your description of the film just helped me realize why the film bothered me so much. I am a Christian, and thus believe that there is both a point and purpose for living each and every day. So the fact that the movie's characters (and the movie itself) questions whether or not life is worth living without coming to a definitive "YES!" is problematic for me (among other things). However, I loved the visuals.
@@domesticcat1725 Whether it has a point or not, it's an incredibly self-indulgent movie that is utterly meaningless on its own, outside the context of other Wes Anderson movies and his career as a whole. Neither of these things make it an inherently bad movie, but I don't think I need to watch it again. Blah blah being a genius is hard. Blah blah every story has been told before. Come on, Wes. We like you because Rushmore was really good. Don't overthink it.
I will start by saying that the YT Algorithm just recommended your channel to me and for that I am grateful. I was riveted to your assessment of the film which, after seeing it I probably needed to hear because I was left confused and unfulfilled which being an avid Wes Anderson fan left me disconcerted. I guess I was focusing on the technical aspects of the film and not enough on the deeper threads running through the stories. Also, because the shear volume of characters made it difficult to attach my sympathies to any one for any length of time. Your critique of the film was the lens that I needed to understand the film better. Thank you!
all i can say he is breathe of fresh air the old way of doing films and the cast he uses. to tell the story cant wait to see it. great video thank u thanmk heavens for MR ANDERSON.
by 6;00 i was dizzy then crushed from the pretentious word avalanche "a cry to be heard,....... blah blah blah blah blazzing saddles batman this cat dug deep!!!!! But right on. kudos. subbed.
I'm not a Wes Anderson fan and I totally understand why anyone wouldn't like this movie but Jesus Christ! This movie is stunning. And it's worth watching for cinematography alone.
The lack of depth is the depth. He forces you to approach every level at the same time. Using the playwright framing device allows you to completely demystify the fantastical elements and approach it separately from the sci fi settingm
Very interesting analysis. I found Asteroid and French D. perfunctory and vague, only mildly amusing. Riveting to look at but that’s not enough. I used to be a huge aficionado.
Haven't seen your content before but I enjoyed this a lot. Definitely helped sort out some of my thoughts after seeing the film. That bring said, the last couple of minutes of material felt little it deserved more elaboration - I'm having a lot of trouble following your points regarding AI. Look forward to seeing more from you!
Very well said !! At first watch I love this movie. And I mostly agree with you, except I didn’t feel the vignette mini stories or arcs within the okay were all that small; particularly Scarlett Johanssons role. It was really intriguing and layered
watching this and reading the comments makes me think perhaps it is ovestuffed as a movie because that is how life feels - overstuffed- what shoudl we pay attention to? We want mystery and a plot at the same time. Theres the whole religious thread too about being Episocopalian. and the Alien as a G-d figure, the director as a G-d figure (jsut keep acting, even if you don't understand). So maybe Wes ist rying to give us an experience of both life aiming for a plot and not having one.
By far the best analysis of the movie I've seen. So many reviewers are scared to analyze it because it kind of makes no sense, but perhaps that is the point? Anyway, job well done my friend!
To truly understand this film ,you need to watch the "reviews" presented by the clueless individuals that this film kind of mocks. This is a very good example of a movie critique ,by someone who really understands the craft of film making. You know those people that look at some abstract art and say " my 2 year old daughter can "draw" better than that " ? I haven't seen the French Dispatch ,but the fact that my annoyance with idiots has been addressed by Wes Anderson is very heartwarming. I learned that Picasso could paint life like "traditional" art at a young age and it stayed with me.
I think Augie was in a very difficult time of his life, having recently lost his lover while still partaking in his creation, and what we're observing in this movie is Augie embellishing this fictional creation, since it's all he has of his lover left, and dissociating from reality, as it is too much to bear. This is represented by the play "Asteroid City" seeming entirely realistic-there is a sprawling desert, remarkable events, and no apparent set pieces. Likewise, reality, the black and white portions of the movie we see that occur mostly behind the scenes, mostly look like they could occur on a stage, and are even narrated by Bryan Cranston's character as if it is, despite being reality. This would also explain how the narrator somehow ends up in the play briefly towards the end, despite being two layers removed from that fiction- because both our perceived events of the play and the narrator telling the story of the play's production are part of the same fiction produced by Augie, until he can come to terms with reality.
There is an epiphany to be gained. Take your curiosity seriously. Put it towards acts of creation. Find meaning in doing that despite the existential crisis of being. Watch it again juxtaposing the way the children confront the dramas of the film with the adult's reaction; making art vs "I understand"
I vaguely agree with the first half, can't say I track at all the inclusion of AI in the discourse. I think its much much simpler. I've seen people trying to figure out the underlying theme of the film, my interpretation of the actor kissing the writer was, that they were in love. Then, near the end of the film it's revealed the writer died in a car crash before the show opened, so all of the shots of the play would have been after his death, therefore we are seeing the actor playing a character that is racked by grief, in real life, and in the show about his dead wife. So throughout the film we are seeing the actor come to terms with this, whilst also trying to understand the motivation on the play that his lover, the writer, had written. Ultimately, I feel, the film was about feeling out of place and also suffering from grief. And by the end of the film, the actor who was in love with the writer eventually moves on, as the writer intended the character to. Am I the only one who thought this?
I have literally been searching for any comment or review with a similar interpretation to me, and you are pretty much the first one. I think the scene setting up their relationship is brief and kind of comedic, so maybe people missed it or just don't think it's important, but I feel so confused why no one is mentioning it! I guess this aspect of the film is not necessarily the main focus of the plot, but the fact that the movie shows an actor working through grief and searching for meaning while playing a character doing the same really sums up its themes I think.
Yes - *Asteroid City* is a *story* - and we *know* it's a story. It is a vanilla slice of stories. Real life - the base The play - the cream The play about the play - the caramel topping.
I dig it. I just think that The movie "Synecdoche, New York" and the director Charlie Kaufman, is really the analogue to the movie "Asteroid City" and the director Wes Anderson. In music Alexander Desplot wrote music an awful lot like Jon Brion in this movie. In topics In "point of view" and how that is used to deliberately distort the world we are shown in every way. And, most of all in their reverence for, and mockery of pretentiousness.
![First 3 Hours Of Writing A Story (Starting From Nothing) - Jeff Kitchen [FULL INTERVIEW]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/b2RlPZmz9nc/mqdefault.jpg)
We can also consider the director character being overall absent from the production, choosing to sleep in his improvised stage apartment. This could be saying how the work is alive and well without the director, almost as if the work grows legs and lives on its own. This could be how Anderson feels about his success?
Also theatrical directors do a lot less once a play has started it’s run
Damn. Spot on. Like he's no longer in control of his narrative. Going deeper and deeper into his Wes anderson-ness, wondering what that means anymore.
@@HighFive212 like the references even if intentional or not
In the film a character does state that even while asleep the body still lives. As in even without conscious awareness of it's life it still exists.
The fact we as an audience need to nitpick parts of the movie to try and find any meaning in it is utterly ridiculous.
"The tragedy of the storyteller: you tell stories about your life until telling stories is your life, and then the only emotionally truthful stories you can tell are about telling stories." A really amazing summary of a phenomenon which you see so often, particularly in the most successful filmmakers/writers. I think it's a really good argument for an artist branching out from their art and spending time in the rest of the world, completely separate from art - because you need impetus from something else to avoid your art becoming self-referential to the point of, well, not being as good as it once was. Great video!
Right, I think part of why film might even be losing its relevance as an art form is that more and more filmmakers only know a lot about film but not enough about life and humanity so their works only resonate with fewer and fewer people.
Other than this being a story about storytelling and acting, as well as an existential allegory, I also see themes of grief and the processing of it. “You can’t wake up if you don’t fall asleep”
That dream scene was kinda horrifying and I didn’t understand that line at first. Now I think it means basically, you can’t get over something until you go through it. You can’t process a loss until you face it.. or perhaps your own life until it’s over.
This was what I got the most out of my viewing: the grief and the process of moving forward and how even if you can forget what happened (or in the movie, cut the most emotional scene "out of the play") you still come out scarred and unsure of yourself
That is it exactly. (spoiler) The story is actually about the playwright played by Edward Norton and the actor who plays Augie in the play, which the film shows near the start, have a relationship. At the end, the film briefly mentions that the playwright died in a car accident. The actor is in intense grief. And he is playing the part of Augie in a stage play after the death of his lover and the writer who seems to not have been able to completely finishing writing the play, which is why the Asteroid City story feels scattered and all over the place. The actor is trying to find meaning in both his life and the play which he doesn't understand, but it's because both him and Augie don't want to move through the grief, shown by Augie not telling his kids. In the end, the discussion in the planning session for the scene the playwright wanted to set up (the sleep scene), the movie basically tells you you have to allow yourself to feel and process the grief to be abe to continue with life. And then the movie ends, and the song that plays during the end credits literally sums up the message of the film and tells you exactly what it was trying to say. That the only way you can experience new things in life is by dealing with grief. You can't wake up if you don't sleep, sleep is the grief. But while you sleep, you can't experience all the other amazing things there are. Delaying the grieving process only delays your ability to live your life. The fact that this out of the world experience happens in the town is to highlight that for all that was happening that should have been world changing, for Augie's family, the grief prevented them from really appreciating it, because it still came down to the fact they hadn't gotten over the loss of the mom (in the scene at their end where the grandfather was trying to dig up her remains, and the girls were preventing it). The cut scene discussion on the balcony was also to highlight that they didn't want to face the grief.
@@neosmagus this is the best read of it ive seen commented, and gave the meta-ness that this video explains some more soul…at least
@@nicogregorits1593 thank you. I've lost both my parents, so for me, the film struck me very deeply. I had a bit of an epiphany thinking about the film... specifically what the balcony scene was trying to say. The Augie actor and the actress that was supposed to play the part of his wife are discussing the cut scene and testing their memory of the lines they had learnt together. The scene would have been Augie travelling to the Alien world and getting an opportunity to talk to his wife. The scene is cut though, and this represents all the stuff that we realize we wanted to say to the people we've lost and have to face the fact that that opportunity will never again present itself. It reminded me of my mom. We used to always have this ritual of watching Star Wars on the first day of every school holiday when i was a kid. I always feel the grief again when I see new Star Wars content and realize I can't share it with her.
This film reminded me of the fact I never fully grieved the loss of my sister in 1995. Cathartic.
You need to go through the pain, the shadow, the darkness and wilderness to fully appreciate being alive. This film is Wes Anderson's most pessimistic yet also most life affirming of all his films. I think people will understand how great 'Asteroid City ' is when they have fully digested what it means as a work of cinematic art. The absurdist and existential themes are somehow light and drifting. Beautiful film about storytelling & existence in my opinion.
I just got home back from the theater, and I have to say I am pretty confused. It isn’t the type of confusion that’s frustrating, rather, I’m okay with it. Seeing other interpretations is helping me put the pieces together, but I think the line that stuck with me was when Auggie asked if he was “doing it right”, as he “doesn’t understand the play.” I don’t think any of us really understand a lot of the world around us, but we put our questions aside to be as we are. Nobody will ever understand everything, so rather than dwelling on what we don’t know, we should “fall asleep” and do what we *do* understand. Then, maybe when we fall asleep, we have the chance of “waking up” to experience something unknown.
Just like the characters pondering the significance of the alien visit, and then it being revealed that it wasn’t of higher meaning at all ..🛸
I love the way in which Wes Anderson playfully mocks the art of storytelling. The lead actor is sleeping with the playwright because of course he is. Scarlett Johansson is an actress playing an actress playing an actress. Fred Armisen as the kooky character actor who pops in toward the end. Margot Robbie could have worn anything on the balcony, but putting her in a dress reminiscent of her role in “Mary Queen of Scotts” is perhaps meta-commentary on how often we retell those stories.
And then there’s the play itself. “Asteroid City” is mostly bad but on purpose. It really does read like a Tennessee Williams play. There’s one line where Tilda Swinton’s character says something like “I never had children. I was too busy focusing on my career”. It made me cackle in the theater. It’s so spot on as a Williams-ism to just throw in that one line of too honest self-reflection.
Wes Anderson is telling a story about telling stories.
Fred Armisen? Are you sure he was in the movie?
Swinton said something along, "I never had children, but this is making me wish I did"
@@fvtown no i saw it today it was "I never wanted children, sometimes i think I should have wished I did"
@@lightning860 This is the correct dialogue, made me laugh out loud!
@@lightning860he was too real there LOL
This is a really good breakdown.
I saw the movie on opening night. After it was over, me and the only other person there discussed our confusion
I thought about it more and more, and I got it. I got the themes of uncertainty and how there is no meaning to life or to anything, but keep living and telling the story.
Then I rewatched it, twice. And now I realize how much of the movie feels like Wes Anderson talking to himself.
The scene with the dare kid and his father, where his father asks "why do you have to dare all the time?" in which his son describes how he wants to be remembered by the world.
When Woodrow expresses how difficult it is to decide what to put on the moon. He wants to make an impact, have a legacy
And of course the balcony scene feels like other little snipets, seeming as if wes wants someone to eventually be able to do what he does, because he won't be doing it forever.
But his pictures always come out.
And because of that, it might be one of my favorite wes films
i felt like there was alot of quiet desperation out loud, which also gave me the "talking to himself" vibe. much of the dialogue in the film was comprised of things we as people think or feel but never say.
I love this explanation. Now it finally makes sense. I watched it last night and I was confused but I totally enjoyed it. It is like life doesn't really make sense and that's the beauty of it.
Nah, it was a pretty and mediocre film
@@Cody-l7qgreat analysis 🙄
Damn, i gotta watch the movie again with this entire comment in mind
Interesting and well-put, but I think you miss how Anderson uses artistic expression as an analogue for coming to terms with mortality and the mysteries of life. An actor playing a part without fully understanding the character’s motivations is equated with people continuing to live their lives after confirmation of alien existence, and indeed a widower trying to cope with the void left by the death of the person he loved most.
The fact that catharsis comes in the form of an actor describing a dream involving the wife on an alien planet is what ties the whole thing together, cementing the film as a meditation on finding purpose through embracing mystery. The film goes to great pains to show the absurdity of art, hammering home the fact we are watching actors perform a hypothetical reenactment of the production of a non-existent play, yet buying into the construction allows us to find emotional-resonance and meaning. But you can’t wake up if you don’t fall asleep.
That is a great summery. Thank You!
I think that quote does a good job of summarizing the metamodern approach to art in general as a response to the postmodern irony spiral. It can feel liberating to be the atheist who debunks all the creationists and stay awake in the _real_ reality all the time, but as humans we do still rely on stories, breaks in reality to make time for imagining a potential world we can come back and attempt to bring to form. If you stay up all night, you'll collapse from exhaustion; you can't wake up if you don't fall asleep.
"Accept the mystery." I found it oddly parallel to the Coen's A Serious Man in tone and themes.
I watched this on 4-PrO-DMT (2x stronger than synthetic shrooms) and understood it right away 😂 it was perfect for a trip
It also works as Anderson's response to the 'style over substance' criticism.
I feel like I'm alone in interpreting the black and white scenes of the theater being entirely in Augie's subconscious, as what happens in them seems relevant to only him and his emotions.
I thought it was a take on people at the time, especially those who had experienced trauma on a battlefield, having trouble allowing themselves to express and feel emotions. He was contrasted by an actress who had a similar problem but was honest with herself about it and knew what it was, while he wasn't able to respond when she stated it.
And it culminated in him having a breakdown and leaving the "play" to ask what the meaning of it was, confronting the memory of his wife in the context of an actress to a past play he'll never get to perform in again, except the lines they quoted didn't fit that narrative, revealing the "play" to be fully artificial itself. He then is told he missed is cue and then in the play oversleeps and misses everyone leaving.
ooh i really like this analysis, it could definitely work this way as well
“You can’t wake up if you don’t fall asleep”
Interesting take.
Yeah I felt the same way. Like the dream world in his subconscious was the only place he can see his wife’s face not in a photograph. He even told her “you’re the wife who played my actress.” Because his wife is playing the actress in this actual fabricated black and white reality. Hell the beginning of the movie tells you that Asteroid City is a fictitious place, but I think that’s a lie, maybe symbolizing denial as the first stage of grief.
I actually agree with this take. My takeaway is that the events about the play unfurling is less "real" than the play itself. The characters are the one dreaming up the events of storytelling, which is why the movie ends with the play and not the "real" storytelling part.
I think the film is about the 5 stages of the grieving process. Every grieving process starts with a "shock event," followed by 1. denial, 2. anger, 3. bargaining, 4. depression/grief, and 5. acceptance.
Asteroid City represents your brain in mourning. The meteor symbolizes the death of his wife. The meteor is literally the shock event that initiated the grieving process/Asteroid City. His children represent denial: he doesn't tell his children about their mother's death for three weeks, as if it never happened. Denial. He only tells them when they arrive in Asteroid City, which triggers the grieving process.
And Scarlett Johansson, for example, symbolizes grief. She even says, quite literally, "Put your grief into this scene, otherwise it won't work!" Eventually, they have sex, and one of his children witnesses it. This symbolizes embracing the grief. Only when you do that does the grief disappear in the grieving process. His child (denial) watches and sees them having sex, no longer in denial. Scarlett Johansson is also gone the next day, the grief is gone after the embrace, and they are no longer in quarantine in Asteroid City: they are no longer trapped in mourning.
The black and white part is the real world. He speaks to his deceased wife, Margot Robbie, on the balcony, who delivers a monologue and reveals that she has been written out of the play, but now she plays a different role nearby, in the theater next to the one he performs in. She is no longer allowed to play the role of a wife, which they both find regrettable because it was such a beautiful play. She also mentions that the alien is a metaphor. At the end of the film, they leave Asteroid City, but the crater hole is still there.
It’s her child not the dads
Impressive analysis!
Adore the thoughts here and definitely fleshed out some feelings I had after watching it. Though I did find myself more emotionally moved by this one than a lot of his previous work. I feel some aspect just hit me in the right way at the right time.
100% the same with me. I just got out of the film and was in-love with it from start-to-finish. Asteroid City has a wonderful charm and whimsical nature to it.
Amidst the fantastic analysis of Anderson’s recent work, and how this film sits within the director’s shift toward a meta-modern framework, I love that you made time to recognise that Asteroid City still brought those classic Wes Anderson gut punch moments with it. Big up the Freight Train song …
I was deeply confused by Asteroid City, even tho i know almost all of Wes Andersons movies. Left with the feeling there was a lot of meta meaning. I was overwhelmed by all the small details and couldn't grasp it.
Your analysis helps a lot and i will watch it with very different eyes the next time. Even the missing conclusions for the romances in the movie (not even tragic ones) might not bother me anymore: Wes is not done yet!
Hard to believe i struggled with myself whether or not to watch your video, because of the title.
Usually when I see a movie review with a real title like this I know it's probably a decent one usually not just some Joe reviewing the move out of 10 it's more like a project
One of the best movies I have ever seen. Every scene a painting, every dialogue is poetry. I love it.
You know that feeling you have when you think you’ve got a pretty good idea of what’s going on and are about to share, when someone else starts talking about the same thing and you quickly realize that they are on a whole other level, so you just sit there, listen, and keep your mouth shut. That was my experience with this video. Brings back memories of philosophy class in college… bravo to you sir.
Movies like this you watch and get high,that's the only way they're interesting, OR ,just kinda play in the background (muted ) while playing drinking games and music at a party or something
It is refreshing to hear a movie critique that doesn't start with "I really liked this movie" and go down hill from there. I would love to hear your take on Moonrise Kingdom as it is one of my favorite Wes Anderson films as well as one of my overall favorites.
Lol
I thought there was a connection to how art and movies are described as a dream but they shout repeatedly that "you can't wake up if you don't fall asleep" like for an artist it's not a dream this is how to see the world in this context. Wes Anderson says watching a good play is as engrossing as watching a movie and is continued in the actors when they leave the stage to live their lives. Art that you make is a chunk of you and Art you consume becomes part of you as well
Also I just like that there was also a play going on at the same time called death of a narcissist
So what did they mean by that line? Nothing? I did end up with a whole interpretation of the movie myself but I didn't know if there was something more
I don't quite get what that mantra was all about because it seems to be that most people are asleep and need to wake up and that message, although backwards, seemed to imply that. "You've been asleep" and some bad shit has happened meanwhile. The American public is asleep while our institutions turn
against us.
@njdotson the movie is very clear about it being fiction. But it's also not a dream there is no waking up from this non reality.
@@njdotson I took it to mean that to dream you need to sleep, and to sleep you need to allow yourself to fall asleep (which in this context means suspending your disbelief despite all efforts being made by Wes Anderson to remind you that this is a fictional story about a playwright who creates a play called _Asteroid City_ which is then presented on TV as a 1950s framing device in Black & White, only to then have its staging introduced and "enhanced" as the colour cinematic form with nudity which would not be permitted on '50s TV, and then you get Maya Hawke and the song about the spaceman summarising how the First Contact that takes place causes every character to change - e.g. Tom Hanks wants to take his daughter's ashes back to his estate, but eventually relents as he doesn't want to disrupt the grieving process already initiated by the girls who had lost their mother and his claim to her as his daughter was less important than their attachment and he needed to not be selfish), but the First Contact is treated by government as something that has to be denied, and covered up for 100 years, with a huge effort made to gaslight the witnesses during their quarantine into denying what they saw with their own eyes. This fails due to all the efforts of the Brainiac children, and Jason Schwartzman already posting his photo off prior to the lockdown, so any who might have doubted the dream they had now wake up to the reality of what they experienced, and have it have some existential effect on them reframing the scope of their lives against a much larger cosmic backdrop. This causes all of them to snap out of what they were like because of their experience, making it a bit like _Close Encounters, Cocoon_ or _Arrival._
I think there are parallels to _A Midsummer Night's Dream_ with the alien being the faeries who mess with the humans making them fall in love: Jason Schwartzman and his son with Scarlett Johannson and her daughter, respectively. I know a lot of people who would hate the deliberately stilted performances, but I loved all of that, and I'm a sucker for sets so was really enjoying myself, and loved all the jokes they did. After a year of indifferent films, this was excellent and was the best new film I have seen in 2023.
10/10
Again, not for everyone. I have seen people give this a 1/10.
Very well articulated analysis of this film, and Wes' work as a whole.
I will only add that I personally found "Asteriod City" in my top favorites of his. I loved it. I loved the questions that it asks, and I love that Wes doesn't answer them. Simply because he doesn't know.
What is the meaning of life?
"I don't understand the play. Am I doing it right"?
The director just says, basically, that he isn't sure, but just keep doing what you're doing. You are doing a good job.
Wes is getting older, perhaps he is just indeed trying to figure out (through his art/writing) what life's purpose is, and if he's doing it right.
I thought the film brilliant.
Your breakdown of postmodernism and meta modernism as they relate to successive fascist threats/modes over the last century up to now was brilliant. You framed it in a way that made so much sense to me; the concept really clicked in your explanation of it. Really loved this video and these thoughts!
This might be the most pretentious paragraph I have ever read
@@guyfieri791That’s not very dynamite of you, Guy. You’ve changed
did this guy just orange man bad the video
@@SeanHH1986lol🤣
It's funny because just yesterday I saw Asteroid City and that same connection between Asteroid City and Nolan's recent works as being part of a general resurgence of fears of Nuclear War because of the war in Ukraine so it's really nice to see those same thoughts written out in a lot more eloquent way than I managed at 1 am on Letterboxd lmao
It's not just because of Ukraine, it is because the general competence of elected leaders and bureaucrats is abysmal.
@@bb5242yeah but also we are literally entering a new cold war and Russia and NATO are both seriously publicly talking about using nukes in a completely unpredidented way.
These scripts precede the war.
Excellent breakdown, Taylor! Love the comparison to Nolan’s recent work. Felt that gut punch you discussed during a Midge Campbell line as well, the one about being catastrophically hurt people who’d rather not talk about it. That too, in a way, felt like Anderson commenting on his career and characters.
I hated this movie. It felt like I watched 2 hours of wes anderson smelling his own farts telling himself how great he is.
He's fucking good though.
Fantastic work! Tired of essays saying essentially nothing, this is great and enlightening.
The Nolan comparisons were truly unwarranted and contrived.
I’m ngl I love films that make you think and such. But if I’m watching a movie to watch a movie, something like Asteroid City is too much for me. I guess it’s just who I am but I’m not happy in this confused and lost state.
"He's making the artificial works themselves and asking us to deconstruct and find the humanistic elements within them". Very well put. I like this game of deconstruction and analysis. I will probably grow tired of it when this wave has reaches it's peak, but I'm not done with it yet. Tarantino did it in Once upon a Time in Hollywood, and if he isn't good enough for it, I can do it too.
One thing I'm always expecting in a Wes Anderson movie was that crescendo, but about halfway through I got the feeling I was being told that I wasn't going to get that moment. It was really a trip. I still felt like I was given something new on top of what a Wes Anderson movie usually provides my senses and emotions.
Asteroid City could be viewed as the third in an unofficial “trilogy” by the Coen Brothers, Quentin Tarantino, and Wes Anderson. Arguably the most talented writer-directors of 1990s. Interestingly enough, they all share cast members.
1. Hail, Caesar! (Scar Jo, Swinton, Fischer Stevens) - 2015
2. Once Upon a Time…In Hollywood (Margot Robbie, Maya Hawke) - 2019
3. Asteroid City (Scar Jo, Swinton, Robbie, Hawke, Stevens) -2023
The issue is not with deconstruction, the issue is with seeing deconstruction as an end as opposed to a useful means along a much longer path to meaning. As a stopping point, it's nothing. As a tool toward something further, it's quite useful.
the truest emotional moment in the film seemed to be the alien's arrival, which changed each character's established motivations and shortcomings. It seemed to lift each character out of their rut by giving them a meaning that existed outside of the confines of their material world.
In a similar way, the actors within the play express a similar need to find meaning, as does the playwriter himself.
Sleep, in that pivotal scene, is the subject of discourse as a physical state of living without conscious perception. It seems as though the sleep is an extension of the character's initial state as well, the mannequin in the nuke town as you aptly put it. And to wake up is to escape the catatonic state of modern society, sucked into the artifice of the digital world.
I think the structure of this movie was to remind the audience of artifice, both in storytelling and in their own material world. The world we live in is increasingly artificial, and you need something like governmental confirmation of UFOs to really remind you of the inconsequential nature of our day to day.
As you pointed out that a lot of directors are shifting their focus from post-modern to meta modern discourse, so too do I see a shift from personal stories to more societal ones (for example, Jordan Peele shifting to a discussion of aliens in Nope, and even in the world of gaming with Bethesda's Starfield. Even Nolan's latest can be connected to extraterrestrial fears due to the nuclear alarm theory).
I agree that there are connections to be made between “Asteroid City” and “Nope”; they somehow felt similar to me, and left me with a sense of bewilderment and meaning-almost-grasped. But they are also opposites, at least superficially: surrealist horror vs. surrealist existentialism, aliens as predatory animals vs. aliens as punchlines, Black vs. white sensibility. Although these might not be superficial actually.
Idk, I laughed the entire time the Alien was on-screen during first contact.
Taylor out here staying the best film creator on yt
so true. He really stands out in his analysis... most of the ones I've seen on UA-cam are slowly meshing into a singular blob parroting the same talking points
Facts on facts
Being the simple man that I would argue that RLM blows this guy out of the water. I'm not smart enough for this pretentious art hipster stuff.
@@jgcobb79 Im with you on this one...👍
I like your funny words magic man
Insane how well this was put together considering asteroid city has came out so recently
im surprised people found this movie so challenging and confusing. I saw it twice yesterday and both times found it engrossing, fascinating, and excellent.
man, you really thought about this!!! I was thinking something along the lines of - trying to find meaning in life, trying to find meaning in really lovely works of art, can be as elusive as searching for the truth of the stars. Sometimes you don’t really know what truth or meaning may be, but you have gut feelings, and following those might get you to the same place.
also I firmly believe this might be top 3 for Anderson. The joke per minute ratio was extremely high, and it really did feel like he leaned fully into his style in a way that only he could do.
What the hell was Asteroid City? Who is this smart sounding dude with 100 K subs? I am typing, it is late. I love both of them.
I love the meta commentary on theater, filmmaking, and documentary. I also liked the main plot too. It felt like a Roadtrip.
Must be a hard living to go so deeply into such bilge.
Precisely.
lol
Wasn’t a massive fan of the movie, but gained a whole new appreciation for it after watching this :)). Great work, one of GOATs
I loved this movie. I think u might be right in saying that the lack of depth, was the depth. very good analysis, just frum this video i can tell ur a smart ass dude.
Freight train has been stuck in my head the last couple days lol. Also, I found this movie really funny throughout. Kinda felt that way with French dispatch too, I felt like a nerdy artist for appreciating the humor lol.
ALSO one scene that confused me was when Jason schwartzman takes his pants off and kisses the writer? I’m sure it’s symbolic but kind of random.
I was wondering about this scene as well. My thoughts were it was the writer and his character and symbolic of the intimacy a writer has with the characters he creates. They live in the writer's head who becomes quite fond of them.
Sir, you deserve a medal for this presentation!
Eloquently put!
This guy adds words when they don’t need to be added, also uses metaphors in metaphors. Solid video tho.
What an incedible work of art! Such extensive and thoughtful discourse provides the comfort that Wes challeneged me the most upon viewing.
i understand this movie mostly as an exercise in being "post-good." its so removed from the values of traditional storytelling, choosing instead to point the camera at the process itself. does the moment at the end with the repeated line work? the scene is framed with the tv players playing what seem to be other characters, a dual role moment common in small theatre company productions in the center of the frame, the climax of the movie as a zoom screenshare pointed at itself. the movie cant be good, it can only be Satisfying.
also the closest a lib like wes can get to marxist content, bless his little texan heart. my fav bit of that was the apology algorithm joke
wish i knew more about the cultural impact of the Korean war but they kinda make that pretty hard for americans as its fairly excised from our histories. bing-bong!
That is a lot to unravel but refreshingly more profound an explanation that I have heard up to this point regarding this film. A unique perspective on where Anderson is in his artistic process. I understand that many film makers or artists create from a kind of catharsis which I believe I picked up from your references to Wes feeling conflicted about his work and where can he go to take it further. I'm more preoccupied with AI and how it affects me in work as an Application Developer but I have been aware of the anxiety from artists.
Can you do a video on why all filmmaker wannabees turn UA-cam critics and why 99% of all filmmaker wannabees are narcissistic Athiests either physically skinny or shlubby, balding or bearded. And despite all their intellectual Analysis can’t seem to write or direct a film to improve upon the cinematic world themselves despite their supposed vast knowledge of the craft?
This is the most convincing piece of info about the movie I've seen yet, yet it doesn't really deconstruct the themes going on in the movie itself. if the whole logical digestion of the movie is from the topics surrounding it then it's hard to take anything from the movie itself other than the classic aesthetics. That seems like the definition of an artist making art for himself, I just couldn't really get into it or relate to it. great analysis though, seems very accurate :)
I think we've already got enough videos already deconstructing the literal layer of what's going on this one's bigger picture the more core layer of the allegory so to say. Not many in crazy detail yet though but I feel like you should figure it out and make these connections yourself watching it a second time instead of really spoiling it and pulling it apart in detail too much but idk that's just my opinion
@@brucekendall9873 Really? I haven't found a video yet that really deconstructs the literal layer into the allegory that was going through Wes's mind. If the movie is "lying to my face" by creating motifs and then stripping them away from their weight, is there any meaning to a single motif? I still haven't found a single person who coherently analyzes the allegory.
Maybe the movie is about the concept that the artist is the only one who truly understands his product and the idea it's trying to convey. While watching the movie, I felt like everyone was united in confusion from the beginning (Same as the characters and when the alien arrived). Now that I think about it, It's like the ending of Beau Is Afraid when everyone is leaving at the end (like in the movie).
@@matanmelamed4341 I rly regret not watching that in theatres w my friend had to watch it at home
I just realised how this has been part of his movies from all the way back in The Darjeeling Limited (2008) with Jack Whitman, who kept insisting (fooling no one but himself) that the characters he wrote about were purely fictional.
I thought the film was kind of middling but this did give me more of an appreciation for it, even though my feeling on it hasnt changed much. Thanks chief
"parallel between the post-war-unease and the state of his career Anderson is operating in
which itself, is so much the subject of his recent film
as well as the parallel between the rise of post modernism in the wake of world war 2
and the recent trend of Anderson film becoming more and more determined to deconstruct themselves since Grand Budapest
The timing of his career stage coinciding with real world art movements comparable to the rise of post modernism" beautiful
The film felt like a bookend to his style as we have come to know it. The self awareness is expected in a post-covid, post-george floyd world of unprecedented cognizance. He likely personally feels the rug has been pulled from under him. How can a man in his 50's continue to live in idealism. It's time to put away the dollhouse. So he gave us the absolute zenith of his visions and in the same breath blew out the candle.
A mind blowing fun time Taylor! I really enjoyed this. I've been a huge Wes Anderson fan for my whole life thanks to my parents. This was a very touching take on his whole filmography. I also really loved Asteroid City by the way, just saw it two days ago.
I see this film as proof that Wes Anderson actually likes modern franchise blockbusters on a conceptual level and is paying tribute to them indirectly. The greatest minds behind franchise films like Lucas, Spielberg and Cameron, and the basis of the material of modern franchise films (Marvel) are products of the age of nuclear anxiety (think of all the radiation based origin stories) and the vibrant sci-fi and theatre scene of that era.
I'm really glad I watched this video. When I first watched Asteroid City, it scared me, and not just because the scene where everyone is chanting was terrifying. But because I was scared I was starting to not get Wes Anderson like I used to. Which is a terrifying thought because Grand Budapest Hotel is the movie that really inspired me into wanting to create films and to write stories. So when I finished watching Asteroid City, and all I could think of was "huh", I was horrified. But after taking some time to chew on and think about the movie, the more I understood. And this video really helped, and seeing comments of other people who didn't understand, and were also terrified of the scene where the bug eyed alien walks toward the camera, made me feel better.
11:38 for the record, Grand Budapest was presented on 2.35:1 screens theatrically, with the 1.85:1 and 4:3 scenes pillarboxed to maximize their vertical height like Asteroid City. The home releases have the 4:3 scenes pillarboxed, the 2.35:1 scenes letterboxed, and the 1.85:1 scenes both pillar-AND-letterboxed. (I didn’t see French Dispatch in theatres but assume it did similar.) I’d wager Asteroid City will likely take a similar approach, expanding the 4:3 scenes to the full height of an HDTV.
Well explained and this anaylsis brought me insight. Overall I though the film was beautiful but I was annoyed at the lack of character development and storyline.
A lack of story.
All style and no substance.
Wow I’ve never seen your channel dude, but after that analysis, I’m definitely a fan. You know, something I’ve been thinking about in recent years is how the written word in the form of articles, blogs, or zines, etc. is just not the best way to reach an audience anymore. Real artistic dialogue and criticism with normal people is happening through other formats like UA-cam. Thinking of Anthony Fantano totally eclipsing music publications like Pitchfork. And as I listened to you talk, I couldn’t help but think that you were delivering me a really thoughtful analysis that would have been a blog in a bygone era. Really cool to see you doing it on UA-cam and apparently having great success. Awesome video man!!
I hadn't seen any Wes Anderson before and was delighted at the meta aspects and it questioning itself tbh
Thank you for being one of the very few film creators on YT that actually bothered to engage on the movie on its own terms and not just go "this isn't like his other stuff I hate it!!!!"
Simply excellent video & explanation…some great points to dwell on. I also think the lyrics of the song ‘Freight Train’ sum up this movie, and the position Wes finds himself in, in his career.
Like you said the storyteller uses his life experiences for his stories, and now after having potentially run out of experiences he turns in on himself as the storyteller…
Freight train, freight train, goin so fast
Freight train, freight train, goin so fast
I don't know what train he's on
Won't you tell me where he's gone
Whoa. . . . . deep. . . . . dude.
Thanks for mentioning Nolan and Anderson in the same line,a i've been thinking about It for months
4:00 - Very much what this YT video maker does. LOL XD
Such wonderful comments. The analysis by Taylor J. Williams is a friendly gut punch. Just saw this an hour ago and have the feeling I am waking up in a new world that has changed while I was sleeping. This is some futuristic drama going on here, a bit scary to embrace because it is so powerful while it is so compelling. An invite to sit at the adult table. Everyone move to the bigger table, it won't always be so scary I hope. We can always find relief in our dreams of when we were kids and played with our pets. Now we may have aliens and ourselves to learn to understand, I know we are up to it. I think the dreams of our past were shown in the little dancing Roadrunner at the end, the simple dance to the songs of invitation, sweet and uncomplicated.
"A storyteller tells stories about their life until telling stories is their life, at which point the only story they can tell is about telling stories." Thank you; this exactly expresses and explains what bothered me so much about this film. It wasn't the story-within-a-story meta commentary, but the lack of a point or purpose to the film.
If you actually believed it lacked a point or a purpose, you should really consider rewatching it
which is the point.
I saw this review before watching the film, and the first quote was what i was expecting would be my issue with it-that one's meta exploration of storytelling believes it is substantial but in actuality is less so than just a normal story with heart, that the writer is actually lacking in the life experience to make a story worthy at this point. But i left not feeling that way at all. It made me feel like there was actually plenty of heart in that endeavor, maybe even more than his other films. I actually liked a story about stuckness and not knowing how to move on
I could easily see someone not liking it for a multitude of reasons and wouldnt blame anyone for feeling that way, from expecting richer more impactful interactions from the characters who ended up serving more as surface level motifs, to the fact that i dont think the movie and specifically the ending's aim is to try to inspire awe in the viewer as most creators tend to want the movie they make to do. But to me it felt like a beautiful experience overall, i loved the deconstructionist elements, i love the themes of questioning whether or not moving through life everyday is worth it and how that was actually posed in a way that didnt feel cliche and actually made me think about it. Even though theyre meant to be sort of surface level and devoid of big emotional depth i still loved the characters, i loved the visuals (thats coming from someone who doesnt always stylistically love wes anderson and has hated a lot of his previous work and aesthetics tbh)
- and i loved the note the movie ended on- the lyrics to freight train before the credits hit were something like "we got no hope, no future, just road". And that summed it up perfectly. And i loved little details like the abrupt cut after the first wave of credits
@@EvWuzhere Okay, thanks for explaining that. Your description of the film just helped me realize why the film bothered me so much. I am a Christian, and thus believe that there is both a point and purpose for living each and every day. So the fact that the movie's characters (and the movie itself) questions whether or not life is worth living without coming to a definitive "YES!" is problematic for me (among other things). However, I loved the visuals.
@@domesticcat1725 Whether it has a point or not, it's an incredibly self-indulgent movie that is utterly meaningless on its own, outside the context of other Wes Anderson movies and his career as a whole.
Neither of these things make it an inherently bad movie, but I don't think I need to watch it again. Blah blah being a genius is hard. Blah blah every story has been told before.
Come on, Wes. We like you because Rushmore was really good. Don't overthink it.
I will start by saying that the YT Algorithm just recommended your channel to me and for that I am grateful. I was riveted to your assessment of the film which, after seeing it I probably needed to hear because I was left confused and unfulfilled which being an avid Wes Anderson fan left me disconcerted. I guess I was focusing on the technical aspects of the film and not enough on the deeper threads running through the stories. Also, because the shear volume of characters made it difficult to attach my sympathies to any one for any length of time. Your critique of the film was the lens that I needed to understand the film better. Thank you!
The only good video essayist left!
all i can say he is breathe of fresh air the old way of doing films and the cast he uses. to tell the story cant wait to see it. great video thank u
thanmk heavens for MR ANDERSON.
Feels like Wes is giving some of us a chance to move forward.
i felt Willem Defoe’s character was out of place among the others but that could just be me lol
by 6;00 i was dizzy then crushed from the pretentious word avalanche "a cry to be heard,....... blah blah blah blah blazzing saddles batman this cat dug deep!!!!! But right on. kudos. subbed.
Nice art school word salad.
Tldr: "It's impressive how boring this movie is, because his other movies are more interesting. Therefore, this is art"
I'm not a Wes Anderson fan and I totally understand why anyone wouldn't like this movie but Jesus Christ!
This movie is stunning. And it's worth watching for cinematography alone.
Totally agree. Just watched this and i feel like he has NOTHING to say. It's 4 layers of nothing...
The lack of depth is the depth. He forces you to approach every level at the same time. Using the playwright framing device allows you to completely demystify the fantastical elements and approach it separately from the sci fi settingm
Very interesting analysis. I found Asteroid and French D. perfunctory and vague, only mildly amusing. Riveting to look at but that’s not enough. I used to be a huge aficionado.
My favorite part of this video is the can of bussy right next to you. Good review too!
Absolutely beautifully said throughout the video. I agree with most of your points.
Haven't seen your content before but I enjoyed this a lot. Definitely helped sort out some of my thoughts after seeing the film. That bring said, the last couple of minutes of material felt little it deserved more elaboration - I'm having a lot of trouble following your points regarding AI.
Look forward to seeing more from you!
Very well said !! At first watch I love this movie. And I mostly agree with you, except I didn’t feel the vignette mini stories or arcs within the okay were all that small; particularly Scarlett Johanssons role. It was really intriguing and layered
A by-the-numbers how-to of viewing everything through Foucault's mirrored sunglasses... Your jargon is jargoning.
watching this and reading the comments makes me think perhaps it is ovestuffed as a movie because that is how life feels - overstuffed- what shoudl we pay attention to? We want mystery and a plot at the same time. Theres the whole religious thread too about being Episocopalian. and the Alien as a G-d figure, the director as a G-d figure (jsut keep acting, even if you don't understand). So maybe Wes ist rying to give us an experience of both life aiming for a plot and not having one.
This felt so experimental and meta. The end sequence reached some weird psychological level, which feels like it goes past being thought provoking.
,,,,,, Jealousy is an ugly beast ..... you can't wake up if you don't fall asleep......
By far the best analysis of the movie I've seen. So many reviewers are scared to analyze it because it kind of makes no sense, but perhaps that is the point? Anyway, job well done my friend!
"Alright...alright....oh, a Missy Elliott reference? Subscribed.
That is the best coffee and I appreciate its cameo
To truly understand this film ,you need to watch the "reviews" presented by the clueless individuals that this film kind of mocks. This is a very good example of a movie critique ,by someone who really understands the craft of film making.
You know those people that look at some abstract art and say " my 2 year old daughter can "draw" better than that " ? I haven't seen the French Dispatch ,but the fact that my annoyance with idiots has been addressed by Wes Anderson is very heartwarming. I learned that Picasso could paint life like "traditional" art at a young age and it stayed with me.
Great essay!
I think Augie was in a very difficult time of his life, having recently lost his lover while still partaking in his creation, and what we're observing in this movie is Augie embellishing this fictional creation, since it's all he has of his lover left, and dissociating from reality, as it is too much to bear. This is represented by the play "Asteroid City" seeming entirely realistic-there is a sprawling desert, remarkable events, and no apparent set pieces. Likewise, reality, the black and white portions of the movie we see that occur mostly behind the scenes, mostly look like they could occur on a stage, and are even narrated by Bryan Cranston's character as if it is, despite being reality. This would also explain how the narrator somehow ends up in the play briefly towards the end, despite being two layers removed from that fiction- because both our perceived events of the play and the narrator telling the story of the play's production are part of the same fiction produced by Augie, until he can come to terms with reality.
There is an epiphany to be gained. Take your curiosity seriously. Put it towards acts of creation. Find meaning in doing that despite the existential crisis of being. Watch it again juxtaposing the way the children confront the dramas of the film with the adult's reaction; making art vs "I understand"
Nerd watches an amusing movie.
WOWWWW this is a great video essay
I vaguely agree with the first half, can't say I track at all the inclusion of AI in the discourse. I think its much much simpler.
I've seen people trying to figure out the underlying theme of the film, my interpretation of the actor kissing the writer was, that they were in love.
Then, near the end of the film it's revealed the writer died in a car crash before the show opened, so all of the shots of the play would have been after his death, therefore we are seeing the actor playing a character that is racked by grief, in real life, and in the show about his dead wife.
So throughout the film we are seeing the actor come to terms with this, whilst also trying to understand the motivation on the play that his lover, the writer, had written.
Ultimately, I feel, the film was about feeling out of place and also suffering from grief. And by the end of the film, the actor who was in love with the writer eventually moves on, as the writer intended the character to.
Am I the only one who thought this?
I have literally been searching for any comment or review with a similar interpretation to me, and you are pretty much the first one. I think the scene setting up their relationship is brief and kind of comedic, so maybe people missed it or just don't think it's important, but I feel so confused why no one is mentioning it! I guess this aspect of the film is not necessarily the main focus of the plot, but the fact that the movie shows an actor working through grief and searching for meaning while playing a character doing the same really sums up its themes I think.
Yes - *Asteroid City* is a *story* - and we *know* it's a story. It is a vanilla slice of stories.
Real life - the base
The play - the cream
The play about the play - the caramel topping.
Loved your ending!
I appreciate your comment at 10:09. Well put.
Love this video! You've got a knack for this dude
I dig it.
I just think that The movie "Synecdoche, New York" and the director Charlie Kaufman, is really the analogue to the movie "Asteroid City" and the director Wes Anderson.
In music Alexander Desplot wrote music an awful lot like Jon Brion in this movie. In topics In "point of view" and how that is used to deliberately distort the world we are shown in every way. And, most of all in their reverence for, and mockery of pretentiousness.