Have you every picked up a magazine of some sort, glanced at it and realized immediately that it just held no interest for you whatsoever? That’s how I feel about The French Dispatch, Wes Anderson’s new movie, his love letter to the style and culture of The New Yorker magazine. I’ve seen and enjoyed articles (and cartoons) in The New Yorker from time to time, but its offerings generally aren’t my taste (perhaps to my detriment). So early on I knew I was in trouble with this movie. It bored me silly.
Wes Anderson’s film tries to convince us that readers of “The Liberty, Kansas Evening Sun” did not mind when the publisher’s son traveled to France and stayed there, starting his own ancillary publication, “The French Dispatch,” published in connection with its parent paper. Then we are treated (subjected) to a trio of feature stories appearing in the French edition, concluding with an obituary of the publisher’s son, and the final edition of that publication. The three stories, completely independent from one another, comprise the bulk of the movie.
Wes Anderson began his career with fairly popular, quirky comedies like Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums, but has been becoming increasingly esoteric with his later work. This is his tenth feature film as writer-director, and it is his most insular yet. Despite a cast that boasts six Oscar winners and several other nominees, the story is so picayune and idiosyncratic that those fine actors have collectively almost nothing to do. The stories are ironic (set in Ennui-sur-Blasé, France, how could they not be ironic) but have no payoff, dramatic or comedic. They are intellectual, I guess — not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course. I just found the exercise completely pointless and dull.
The filmmakers certainly try. Fans of Anderson’s animated work, especially Isle of Dogs, will appreciate the animated sequences and transitions. I like how the subtitles are presented, in various parts of the screen, and in various directions (some go up instead of down). Anderson is a creative guy and creativity is certainly present, along with some nudity and occasional odd touches and in-jokes. Much of the film is black-and-white. The presentation is different, and enjoyable. It’s the content that I find fault with, but that may have more to say about me than the filmmakers. If you like Anderson’s work, you may like this. I did not. ☆. 15 March 2022.