The Phoenician Scheme
Wes Anderson’s best film in a decade.
I was discussing with my friend on the way to see Phoenician Scheme that the past few Wes Anderson films were “played out” and light on plot. After 12 films can you blame anybody for running out of ideas? The best directors in history made 5 or 6 perhaps. I was pleasantly shocked to find after the first 5 minutes that Phoenician Scheme is special.
PHOTOGRAPHY
Obviously Wes Anderson has carved out an incredibly unique and personalized cinematography style based on 2D ultra-saturated Easter tones and maquette style images. For the past 5 or so films it has felt like a paper cutout exercise with the images and sets taking more time and focus than the plot or acting. On first glance, and certainly from the trailer alone, Phoenician Scheme appears to be more of the same. However, there are some key differences that have crept in or, perhaps more fittingly, gelled after so many previous attempts. The first is that the props are slightly less “hand drawn” and in some way have less overt 1950s kitsch. They now seem like they exist in their own skin within this movie as integral parts, not in-jokes from Wes.
In that way, there is less jarring realization as your eye previously would dart around and try to read everything. The 2D imagery finally effectively supports the story and not the other way around. It’s only a degree of 20% better than before but it’s enough to transform the effect into being holistic. In addition to the usual excellent colour and geometric balance, there is a more nuanced and organic integration of all the shots. Whether there is a new hand helping with framing or whether they have just got 20% better as well, it doesn’t matter, the movie is brilliantly shot and beautiful in every regard. Of particular note are the black and white high contrast segments which are on par with Ingmar Bergman’s classic Seventh Seal. Truly wonderful. Many of the colour shots have similar up-close head shot silhouttes which really help establish the emotional expressions of the characters and lend a much needed depth compared to his recent films. There are real shades of Kurosawa as well. The less-than-letterbox ratio goes a long way to focusing and tightening upon the actors as well. It is an excellent choice for this script. Other than Darjeeling, this is his best shot film.
ACTING
I consider Wes Anderson’s early movies to have the best acting. The later period feels like puppets in a miniature playhouse more than a movie, and combined with weaker plots, otherwise excellent actors seemed shoe-horned into cardboard performances. Phoenician is again different. The vast majority of the actors are able to flesh out their characters and the aforementioned closeups allow us to connect to each of their many expressions to build a meaningful empathy with all of them including the villains. The actors are on the whole seasoned professionals and are all very well cast. In particular Benicio del Toro as the main character is perfection.
Of note however are the bad performances, to show the gap between previous stylism and what is possible in this current movie. Tom Hanks, Bryan Cranston, and Scarlett Johansson are weak and wooden, although they do have limited parts so for better or worse they don’t detract badly from the rest of the movie.
Also exceptional is Benedict Cumberbatch whose makeup and physical movements animate and provide real depth to a briefly seen main villain. In particular the fight with Benicio is engrossing and manages to be both funny and suspenseful in a way that the past films seemed mechanical and bland. While his performance is short, to me this is what Oscar awards are for. It’s pure acting genius.
STORY
The story uses a chase / travel format extremely effectively with the plot revolving around a business deal in the mythical Middle East. There are a plethora of lightly touched upon stereotypes with the usual intrigue, deception and double-crossing. Critically the pacing is fast, so it doesn’t become laborious and Wes effectively builds Benicio’s character through each subsequent use of the same tricks and pitfalls. We begin to see great depth and history to the characters through their actions. It’s very effective. The simple but unique-to-each character dialogue is on a Tarantino level but obviously in the Anderson style. It’s masterful and each character, regardless of screen time, is developed successfully so that they are consequential to the plot. The energy builds and reaches a good dramatic peak and the use of a coda puts the finishing touches on the humanity of the characters, giving us a chance to catch our breath and internalize the previous action. There is much to delve into - fatherhood, estrangement, capitalist politics, machiavellian power plays, the growth from challenge (evading death), losing in order to win, sacrifice.
SOUND & MUSIC
Being a sound and music nut I have to make special note of both in this film. While past films have had excellent soundtracks and moments of pristine audio, it often verged into camp and effect. Again tying Darjeeling for top marks, the selection of music and the timing of its use is perfect in Phoenician. Special note goes to the use of Pictures At An Exhibition for both location context and also for the dramatic suspenseful emotion it gives to the action. Small effects such as the music being muted when the action leaves one room to the lobby shows incredible attention to detail but also superb fidelity to how it sounds in real life. The whole movie has restrained and incredibly natural “stereo” imaging with no stupid whizzing or surround effects. It is by far the best sounding and sound-designed movie I’ve heard in the last 10 years. It deserves an Oscar for sound. It focuses your attention on the action and greatly pulls you into the film. I think this is one reason why the 2D effect is so much less effective in past films. It feels like a dead mini puppet show. Here is feels like a stage set where you can hear the ambiance of the stage.
CONCLUSION
The idea of a stage seques to the conclusion of this review. Essentially, Wes Anderson has graduated to his 3rd phase of film making. The first was straight nostalgia with live acting - traditional movie making. The second was the puppet years which were intensely childish and 2D but somewhat wooden and opaque. In the 3rd phase he has effectively transposed the best live stage plays into the film media, not by filming a stage play, but by chopping up each element - sound, 2D sets and finally facial focus and emotion - and recombining them in-camera. I would guess this is what he was trying to go for all along but didn’t figure out how to do until getting his 10,000 hours in. In any case, ignore the terrible trailer, reviews and commentary online. If you’re a thinking person and you still have some ability to concentrate you will be rewarded with a wonderfully humanistic story and beautiful visual experience. Probably his “deepest” film in terms of philosophy and morals, and only slightly below Tenenbaums or Darjeeling in plot development. While it doesn’t best either of them in their style, it is an entirely different animal and stands alone as the best of his late career.
AVAILABILITY
THE RATING
8/10 Absolute
10/10 Relative
Your donation helps keep the reviews coming!