Pajiba

Loved this book as a child. I think this movie looks great. The voice work seems spot on to me.

Well I for one think it looks awesome. I'll see it. I don't care how anyone chooses to label me for it, either. (Although if anyone called me a douchepancake, I'd probably be tickled.)

Oh, I'm ready! Creep me out, Mr. Anderson! Creep me good! Give me those stop-motion animals with their family dysfunctions and deadpan delivery!

Really, becks? 'Cause I, too, loved this book as a child and this movie seems to take a serious detour from what made it great (to me).

All I can hear is George Clooney, George Clooney, Meryl Streep, George Clooney, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, George Clooney. No Roald Dahl at all.

Yes, really.

Sorry you can't seem to get into it. It's working for me.

These are true hipsters (as opposed to the hipster-lites that sometimes frequent pajiba), TSF: http://www.latfh.com/
They try too hard to be cool by going in the other direction and wearing out of style clothes, listening to really obscure music (if other people have heard of a band, they aren't cool), watch movies that are hyper-stylized and indie, and only really like things "ironically." They are soulless little vermin who care more about what other people think of them than anything else in the world, including things like "personality" and "accomplishments." (I don't like them very much).

**completely unrelated, but I failed to copy the link on my first attempt and instead pasted in this line I pulled from a Slate article this morning: "Jack buggered Captain Bligh in a surgically created false cunt." Best sentence ever
to appear in a semi-respectable webmag.

The book is like 50 pages long. I don`t think there`s anything wrong with Wes Anderson putting his own spin on it. Roald Dahl is quirky. Wes Anderson is quirky. It`s one quirky guy`s take on another (much more talented) quirky guy`s story. It meshes.

WHO THE HELL IS THE TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC FOR THIS??

I'd see it if there were real people.

This just looks ridiculous.

I want to see this movie just to experience how he is attempting to pull off this style. It's time Anderson experimented outside of his normal range of quirky/awkward/indie stylings.

Unfortunately, he was recently added to my boycott list due to his supporting Polanski, so tough shit Wes, for the first time you're not going to make a bundle off of me repeatedly seeing your movie in theaters.

When I saw the first trailer I posted, "This looks like a nightmare." I was being literal. I have had nightmares that look like this. There is no bribe on this plane of existence that could induce me to come within five miles of a theater showing this.

P.S. Could somebody post a link to "that list"?

Get over "the list," people. You have no idea what lurks in the hearts of the celebrities you love. You don't really know them, good or bad. Just because it's out there in print for you to see doesn't make it any worse than what might be really true about anyone else whose name isn't out there for you to read and self-righteously boycott.

stop with the linking latfh.com.

i look every damn time, and then i'm over there all night soaking it in. it's killing me.

ahs one line to deliver, eh, Sofia?

are you drinking?

Given the flipflopping on it's definition, maybe "hipster" is just one of those malleable terms where particular social sets have to agree on one singular meaning, accepting that other social sets may define it differently?

If so, can I propose a Pajiba definition?
Fan: Someone who loves a particular film, artist, song, etc
Hipster: someone who believes (falsely) their love of a said film, artist, song, etc puts them on a higher plane than their fellow human beings

Fan: cool.
Hipster: Fuckwit.
Someone who accuses a fan of being a hipster simply because the accusee is a fan of something the accuser considers hipster: Fuckwit.

Thoughts?

'All hipsters want to live in Portland, on the waterfront, and hopefully find a use for they're liberal arts degree.'

You are so right. PDX is sooo hipster. My crowd isn't, but wow, the douche is strong in some circles.

The animation looks purposely choppy and 70s bad. And every time they open their mouths all I can picture is "Clooney" or "Streep" saying the words.

Sorry, I'll be giving this a pass. Never was an Anderson fan and this doesn't look like it'll change me.

I hate to agree about this. I used to name drop Wes Anderson to people all the time, half hoping they weren't aware of him so I could be the one responsible for getting them into his movies. Half hoping they were aware of his greatness. But this movie looks like bullshit, and it makes me mad.

I'm with you, mainly because I cannot stand this kind of animation. It's just creepy. They all look like they smell. They're one step away from porcelain dolls with beady eyes, the kind that stare at you from behind a curtain until you give up and throw her down the basement steps and then lie to your grandmother about how such an unfortunate accident occurred.

OOH! I'd skip "purposely" in favor of a real word. "Deliberately", perhaps? Look into it, won't you?

"Moon Unit." Posted by: George at October 1, 2009 10:49 PM

Frank Zappa was not a hipster.

OK, s. pisaster, I had to go find that article after that amazing quote. Thanks, very entertaining.

The very notion of this classic Roald Dahl story being raped into a shitty Americanised movie

Alayna,
Why don't you guys spell maximize "maximise"? Seriously, what the fuck?

This may be a double post, I accidentally put do instead of don't the first time.

First of all, any plot taken from a Roald Dahl book is going to make for a good movie. Second of all, this looks hilarious and fun. I usually agree with reviews here, but not on this.

Even if Anderson takes liberties with the film in general, there's still an obvious tongue-in-cheek humor that is in keeping with the solid underlying plot and the general tone of Dahl's work. Have you read any of his work other than his children's books?

Suck it up and enjoy it when it comes out. You know you really secretly liked the preview.

"creepy"
i like creepy.

Er, by "some people I've seen, " I meant on other sites. I haven't seen any Pajibans making that argument.

pissant(heh): Australian English generally follows British English spelling rules. Maximise was 'maximise' before it was ever 'maximize', after all.

(However it seems you will win, I've noticed that most academic writing follows American spelling at least as far as the 'ize' is concerned.)

Also: Dahl stories are awesome, but that does not make film adaptations of them inevitably awesome. They have their own unique humour, universe - and quite a large part of their awesomeness derives from Dahl's narrative voice, which is lost in film, expecially when the story is Americanised.

...another fascinating comment for the enjoyment of all :P

Some problems with the code of this page?

Some problems with the code of this page?

Uhm... I don't really know what to think... but I have a question I'd like to ask you in private, ideally by email. How can I reach you?