2/23/18. A somewhat silly parody to pay homage to Jacques-Yves Cousteau (those red hats and speedos). Great ocean cinematography but the story line is totally silly. Decent cast for fans (Murray, Wilson, Blanchett and Huston).

My first experience with Wes Anderson was "The Royal Tennebaums", I didn't finish it but I don't think I was watching it with the right person, let's just put it that way: my buddy and me were staring at the screen exactly like Wes Anderson's usual characters, which isn't a good thing. And I guess I wasn't in much a demand for sophisticated humor at that particular phase of my life. I still have to watch the film though. My second experience was "Grand Budapest Hotel", I didn't like it the first time. I loved it the second. All it took was to understand Wes Anderson's personal approach to film-making and the way he took style rather as an end than a mean, somewhat reaching more genuine truths than conventional dramas or just making fabulously entertaining movies. I took it that it took a special gourmet taste to savor his films and the next two discoveries didn't break the streak of enjoyment.So I loved "Fantastic Mr. Fox" and I loved "Moonrise Kingdom". And I kept waiting for the one movie where Bill Murray would finally have a leading role. The film was "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou", whose poster looked like a very promising take on classic documentary "The World of Silence" with Commandant Cousteau (Zissou wears the same trademark red cap). I expected a lot of beautiful shots, a lot of laughs no matter the facial expression on Bill Murray's face, I expected a lot of good things. "Moonrise Kingdom" had alerted me that Anderson, like Harold Ramis and Sofia Coppola was the kind of privileged director who'd "understood" Bill Murray, but not at the expenses of our understanding.Indeed, for some reason, and despite a terrific set-up, I had a déjà vu with this film. It felt like my first experience with "Tennenbaum" (and now, you know why I had to write with this lengthy introduction). Unless I was mislead about the film, I thought there would be something passionate about Zissou, or at least, in his Melvillian relationship with the jaguar-shark who ate (even chewed) his first mate Esteban. I know, Bill Murray, tongue-in-cheek, snarky, deadpan humor and so on… No problem with that, but it seemed like there was no moment whatsoever where Zissou could actually be seen enjoying anything.There were some outbursts of violence and emotions and I was waiting for genuine reactions like his fatherly anger when his supposed son gets punched in the face by a group of hijackers, but overall, the film played like a series of set-ups for hilarious situations with downer conclusions. It's a comedy drama but I wonder why Anderson ever invested in the comedic element since he never really bring much fun to the screen except for a few chuckles in the middle of some existential contemplation.The film had them all, Bill Murray could have played the role of a lifetime just one year after his great performance in "Lost in Translation" but in Coppola's film, we could identify the roots of Bob's melancholy and his brief moments of happiness provided the little zest without which the film would have felt pretty bland. That "Zissou" story had like ten characters as "lost in translation" as Zissou himself, a malcontent wife played by Anjelica Huston, a frustrated and envious first mate played by Willem Dafoe, a number one fan of Zissou who believe he might be Zissou's son, and played by Owen Wilson.There's also Cate Blanchett who's probably trying to break her 'Elizabeth" image and have a hip comedic role with a trendy director for a change. It would work better with Woody Allen's "Blue Jasmine". And Jeff Goldblum is a pedant, gay and condescending oceanographer named Hennessy, he's supposed to be Zissou's nemesis, he's more like an alter-ego in a film that becomes like an oddball contest, which is fine in a "Grand Budapest Hotel" kind of plot, but not quite this time.The film doesn't even trust the initial premise with the jaguar shark, it involves a series of hijacking, assaults, accidents, but we never really get a clear idea of where this is going anyway.Don't get me wrong, "Life Aquatic" looks great, the script is full of one liners and the actors are all talented, but they don't seem to be really playing their roles as if the story mattered anyway, maybe Owen Wilson is the most emotionally engaging and so is Willem Defoe but the others were too estranged to us to let any specific feeling unfold. And for some reason, with the story of the eaten friend, and the possible father-and-son relationship, there's never a moment where Wes Anderson tries to get conventional a little for the sake of emotions. In fact, Anderson ever seems to despise emotions, a symptom that thankfully didn't affect "Moonrise Kingdom".There's some interesting self-referential approach when Zissou considers the possibility of a relationship subplot in the film because he's got great chemistry with his son, but it's like Anderson was trying to keep this as fake as possible as a defensive move, as if he didn't want to surrender to some corny conventional-ism typical of Hollywood, by doing so, he might have deprived the film from what could have been the emotional core behind the laughs. Just because Murray isn't a man of emotions, doesn't make him emotionless. Anyway, it all comes down to this: I think the story deserves a 6 for the wasted potential, but I can't get past how beautiful some shots look, so I'll give it a 7. Not that the rating matters anyway.

Bill Murray, bearded in a red knit beanie, plays a low-keyed, yet fiercely determined oceanographer--a sort of second-runner to Jacques Cousteau--who has assembled a motley crew of adventurers to document his vengeful destruction of a Jaguar shark; complicating the scenario is the appearance of a southern airline pilot who believes himself to be the oceanographer's long-lost biological son. Another dry, quirky comedy-drama of odd human attributes from writer-director Wes Anderson; impeccably crafted and produced, but not always so interesting or likable. A great deal of the film's effectiveness rests on Murray's scratchy, irascible presence, yet his Steve Zissou often acts like a jerk, which undermines the proceedings with a sour tone that I'm not sure is entirely unintentional. Anderson's strengths as a filmmaker are apparent: he has an artist's eye, a talent for visceral detail which sometimes takes the viewer's breath away. However, his desire to punch up the character-driven material with mechanical action backfires (one may initially presume the hijackers episode is a fantasy of Zissou's), as does the mercurial but underwritten relationships between the men and women in the movie. The eclectic soundtrack--an Anderson staple--is lovingly filled with David Bowie songs (originals and those interpreted in Portuguese by Seu Jorge), while the look of the picture is both theatrical and vivid. Overall, "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" is about as unwieldy as its title--which surely hurt the film at the box-office--and not one of Anderson's watermark films, yet it features moments of beauty and emotion which make it worth-seeing for the filmmaker's admirers. ** from ****

If you're over 30 or 40 you've probably seen the older documentaries. My parents are big fans of Cousteau stuff, which is really dated by today's standards. This film is a quirky, very funny parody of a ocean explorer who is well past his prime. His old films are the over the top, contrived but supposedly spontaneous majestic ocean nature documentaries. And if you've seen them, it's funny. It's more of a character study of a team that is doing what it can to placate a legend in the field of oceanography and also can be a bunch of stooges, since the captain is focused on a senseless revenge mission.This is a totally hit or miss film. Like it or hate it. Get it or you don't get it. So I get the high ratings and think it's hilarious. The joy isn't in the plot itself as to what specifically happens but the funny journey along the way towards the unknown confrontation with an old enemy. There are some subplots, such as the "is he or isn't he" the abandoned son of the captain along with the love interest that is somewhat in between the Zissous.What I like about this film is that at least it is an original effort and not yet another rehash of something else. It's humorous, not intended to be taken seriously at all and completely an exaggeration and satire of a time that is long gone and probably relates far more to an older generation. This is why you'll see many ratings from younger people who just hate the film, not getting the joke that this is a Cousteau parody, something they have never seen or a time which they experienced.