Wes Anderson is back after the colossal disappointment that was The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou. This well-made and interesting film successfully balances his trademark blend of comedy with heart-wrenching drama, and the performances are all excellent. At times it can get a bit too strange and offbeat, but it's generally an incredibly satisfying final product. It's not as great as The Royal Tenenbaums or Rushmore, but I was not disappointed.

B+

BTW, the short film Hotel Chevalier is required viewing before seeing this film.

I have to immediately question the sanity of someone that refers to The Life Aquatic as a "colossal disappointment".

Sorry, man, but Life Aquatic just wasn't a good movie. Not a disappointment to me, though since I had no specific expectations towards it anyway.

The Life Aquatic was horrible.

The Life Aquatic was hysterical, amazing score, and a great homage to the old explorer films. And Bill Murray was great. Sure it didnt have as good drama as Royal Tanenbaums, but colossal disappointment I think not.

Without having seen Rushmore (That's because I want the Criterion, and can't find it anywhere) and Bottle Rocket, The Darjeeling Limited is Anderson's weakest film, but it's still good. I think my basic problem is that while the three main leads are relatable, I had a hard time caring for them throughout the film. By the time the last act came around, I did, but the film takes it's time in getting us to that point. I guess on one hand that could be one of the film's attributes as well.

All around I would say it's a good film, but there's nothing really special about it. It's just kind of there.

B

I did love Bill Murray's cameo though.

I thought The Life Aquatic was decent (loved Bill Murray's performance), but also a letdown. It did not have the warm (if eccentric) heart which, to me, made The Royal Tenenbaums such a special movie.

Fortunately, The Darjeeling Limited did. I thought the three protagonists were relateable and enjoyed following them on their bizarre trip. And the casting was perfect, especially Adrien Brody. This may be his first Wes Anderson film, but he seemed perfectly at home in Wes' twisted land of quirks.

A-

I dunno what to say.

I loved it, India was really the perfect next step for an Anderson film to go. I'm not going to bother trying to rank it with Anderson's other films right now, but the leads are absolutely convincing as brothers, is appropriately colorful, and wisely has a brisk running time of only about an hour and a half. I was a big fan of The Life Aquatic, but it's hard to make an argument that the film wasn't a bit bloated. Wes Anderson does a nice job of shrinking the scale without the film ever seeming slight.

I'd absolutely suggest everyone sees Hotel Chevalier http://hotelchevalier.com/ before watching the film, but I can completely understand why it wouldn't have played in front of the film beforehand.

It played in front of the film when I saw it. It had title cards saying like "Short Film (To be played before feature)" and each film was labeled "Part 1" and "Part 2." It was one of those studio screenings, so that's probably why...but it certainly looked like they really want people to see that short.

Okay, three things:

1. I have never seen The Royal Tenenbaums.

2. I disliked Life Aquatic quite a bit (C/C-)

3. The trailers for this one left me cold

Is there still any chance that I could like it?

Wes Anderson's humor and style is something people either tend to like or dislike, so that should probably answer your question. On the other hand, think Darjeeling Limited was a lot less forced than it's trailer. Not to mention many people disliked Life Aquatic but have loved other Anderson films. That said, I'm reaching a bit here for reaosns you would like it. Being a fan of the actors would probably help as they really make the movie and are in virtually every scene.

It's actually not much like any of his films that I've seen. It's practically a farce...spoof, even. It's like Wes Anderson is saying "Haha, you all loved those movies...lemme see you love this one. Bitch." It genuinely doesn't feel like any film I've ever seen. I never knew what was coming next. I half expected self-referential texts..."These rocks sitting conveniently next to me are the exact size and shape I needed." I'm kinda shocked at how people are responding to it. I don't think any of that's necessarily bad. But either way, it plays out logically, and very funnily, and it's masterfully made and beautiful to look at. So count me in.

What the hell did Scorcese see in Anderson that made him deem him the next Scorcese???

Decent flick, i LOVED the royal tenenbaums (favorite), rushmore was classic, and i loved the life aquatic as well (although first disappointed with repeat viewing after repeat viewing i love it more and more) needless to say Darjeeling left an empty feeling in my stomach...

Beginning was slow
I didn't care for the characters all the time
It had 4 places where I felt it could end
It just sort of felt sloppily put together
Angelica's role = too short

that being said

Great Score
Adrien Brody was excellent
Beautifully shot
Definitely highs and lows in the laugh and drama department

overall: B/B+/A- depending on then cycle of feelings I go through after seeing the movie

Best movie of the year. Love Wes Anderson and all he does. Everyone did a great job.

Look at those assholes.


A

This was something Im kind of mixed on.

After loving Rushmore, Tanenbaums, and Life Aquatic, this is a disappointment for me. Its definitely his weakest in the laugh department, as its very subtle and far between. I think the biggest problem with this movie is that there is no main actor to anchor the film. The three brothers are almost all the same, they have the Wes Anderson traits of depression and quirkinest, but there was no main guy that held it together. Thats the main difference. In Rushmore, Schwartzman commanded, as did Hackman and certainly did Bill Murray in Life Aquatic.

That being said, it has the cool style that Anderson is used to, some chuckles for sure, and there is some examination of human life in there, but where I'd Give his last three films all solid As and recommendations, this one is more of a B-/B range and I would only recommend to Anderson fans.

Just saw it.

It's kind of shit, actually. I'm truly surprised by my reaction to it, because I've always considered myself a pretty big Wes Anderson fan, but I dunno... there was something about this one that just really rubbed me the wrong way. Vaguely racist wealth-porn would be my initial summarization of it, which I suppose you could easily lob at any of Anderson's work, but I think the overly precocious nature of it all just got to me this time. It's like someone wanted to make a Wes Anderson movie and do everything x10.

To preface, I'm no Wes Anderson fan. If I had to make a list of the most overrated directors working today, he might be my number one.

But admittedly, I didn't hate Darjeeling as much as I thought I would. I still didn't like it, per se: The obnoxious deadpan quirks are still there, and it's still not funny. But I did find myself occasionally endeared to the characters, and I liked all the scenes with Angelica Huston. It's also got an awesome color palette.

But again, it's still very Wes Anderson. Which doesn't fly with me.

C+

I would also add that this completely lacks the heart that made The Royal Tenenbaums and Life Aquatic so great. Lazy and, while this may seem redundant when you are talking about Wes Anderson, totally shallow.

Starting two or three weeks ago, they are showing Hotel Chevalier in front of DJL, probably hoping it'll attract more of a crowd than it found at the BO

I thought Chevalier was awful, btw.

While I guess I could see how one might form that opinion, I really, really don't think that it's at all racist. Lost in Translation is probably more offensive. I also think that calling it shallow may be a result of a few too many college film classes. I really liked how after they left the airport their "baggage" was further away from them, and eventually tossed completely at the end of the film. Like you said it's a Wes Anderson film, so I would think you were expecting a story about characters healing wounded relationships more than it being a metaphor of Western culture's effect on Indian culture. One thing that's bugged me about a lot of the bad reviews is that they say it's much too typical Wes Anderson, but I think it's rather unfair to fault a director for having such a distinct style of his own.

fwiw, I don't believe makeshift is a film student, so i'm doubtful he's taken a ''few'' film classes, much less a ''few too many''. Could be totally off base though.