The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

Magnificent Story Told Magnificently Well

★★★★★

5 Stars; MPAA Rating: R
Director: Wes Anderson

I scratch my head at times wondering why a movie is nominated for the Academy Best Picture award . . . or maybe not realizing there are socio-political reasons within the Academy beyond artistic merit . . . but I cheered when this one showed up as a nominee. While it didn't take home the Oscar (losing it to Birdman, another superb movie), it was nominated for all the right reasons. Often touted a comedy I found it to be mostly a drama with major comedic elements. The movie starts with a teenage girl entering a cemetery and placing a hotel key onto a grave monument decorated with hundreds of other hotel keys. The grave is that of an author, and the girl is holding his published memoirs about The Grand Budapest Hotel, which she begins reading after decorating his grave marker. The story about the hotel begins, as told through the author’s memoirs she is reading.





The four time periods:

1. The present in 2.35:1 aspect ratio with the author's grave and the teenage girl reading his memoirs.
2. 1985, also 2.35:1 aspect ratio with the author writing his memoirs about a trip he made there 17 years earlier.
3. 1968 in 1.85:1 aspect ratio when the author traveled to the hotel and met Zero Moustafa, the hotel's owner.
4. 1932 in 1.33:1 aspect ratio when Zero first started working at the hotel as a boy.

The first provides a simple framework at the beginning and end within which the rest of the story is told. The movie proper periodically moves between the other three timelines. Unlike some non-linear films, the different time lines in this one are easy to follow with different characters in each, obviously different eras and the different aspect ratios. The hotel is a resort in the fictional Central European Republic of Zubrowka. When the author visits in 1968, it’s a run-down shell of its former glory with few guests. The author befriends the elderly owner, Zero Moustafa, and they agree to meet over dinner. Moustafa begins his tale of how he acquired ownership of the hotel and why he keeps it open. The tale then fades back in time from 1968 to 1932 when Moustafa was taken on as a lobby boy after his town was razed and his parents executed. Zubrowka is on the verge of war with a neighboring country, which has equally fictional symbols, flags and emblems, but all the trappings of being governed by a militaristic, fascist dictatorship.

The hotel’s concierge takes Moustafa under his wing, mentoring him. There is plenty of mystery, adventure and intrigue with a war looming, the mysterious death of the hotel owner and the machinations of the hotel owner’s cruel and evil son. The drama is generously peppered with wry comic relief throughout. Wes Anderson’s touch in the story and the directing is quite evident. Production design is lavish, with the hotel’s interior and exterior inspired by a combination of the Palace Bristol Hotel and Grandhotel Pupp in the Czech Republic, and the Grandhotel Gellért in Hungary.

A grandly executed production, with excellent pacing and unpredictability in the plot making for some suspense and numerous surprises. The non-linear author’s memoirs framework greatly enhances it. It’s a Wes Anderson triumph deserving five stars for a magnificent story told magnificently well.

The Zero Theorem (2013)

Existential Crisis and Collision

★★★★⋆

4½ Stars; MPAA Rating: R
Director: Terry Gilliam

While not his best it's definitely among his much better films, with underlying themes similar to "Brazil" and "12 Monkeys," of which it's the third in a dystopian, Orwellian trilogy. It helps to understand what Zero Theorem is with some discussion about what it is not. There are many misconceptions about this film. Sadly too many of them come from film critics who should know better by now. Some will bash films if they're not high concept realistic narratives, or if they don't conveniently fit completely into an expected genre, or if they break from a director's past style. Finally there are those "haters" that will bash everything from a specific director.

Zero Theorem isn't a comedy, although it has some frequent comedic relief. Likewise, it's not a prima facie narrative reality story. It's surreal with symbolic metaphors and deeper themes. It's also not a high concept "popcorn" film for casual viewing while browsing the Internet on your laptop or texting your BFF on your cell phone. Paying attention captures details that reveal the underlying existential themes. It doesn't fit into the classic characteristics of a specific genre either. If it's not a comedy and it's not really Sci-Fi, then what is it? Most of Gilliam's films are a genre of their own. This one is no exception. Is it that important to have a genre in which it can be binned and cataloged? It's very easy to miss what this film is about if it's approached superficially or with preconceived notions about what it ought to be or is supposed to be. Terry Gilliam's body of films span a range of method, genre and style.

Qhoen Leth (Chrostoph Waltz) is a genius mathematician working on reducing mathematical "entities" to prove a mysterious "Zero Theorem." Socially isolated and reclusive, he anxiously awaits a phone call he knows will eventually be forthcoming to reveal to him the meaning of life and his existence. His angst regarding this with fear he may have missed taking the call gradually build to the very end of the film. Gilliam doesn't bog us down with any details about the Zero Theorem because we don't need them; to do so would only be a distraction from the underlying existential themes. The surreal environment is reminiscent of Gilliam's Brazil. The hazard is assuming it's Brazil reworked or restated, which it's not. Brazil's is depressingly drab and nearly monochromatic. Zero Theorem's is saturated in bold colors. Their similarity is in keeping both from being reality so we can see the underlying themes better. While they may be existential, they're different. Brazil is about pursuing happiness and fulfillment. Zero Theorem is about pursuing the meaning and purpose of one's existence.

The real power of The Zero Theorem is in its underlying themes and the metaphors used to convey them, with some comic relief to keep it from becoming too heavy philosophically. Without spoiling it with further details, look for the Grand Irony between what Qohen desperately seeks personally and the project's goal his thankless, unrewarding and mentally grinding job has him working to achieve. Every element of the story as it unfolds contributes to one, the other, or both of these as Qohen hurtles toward a personal collision of the two. Gilliam uses a surreal fantasy world to distance the audience from a plain narrative reality to better expose the underlying themes, and enhance or amplify them. Christoph Waltz gives a stellar performance; the supporting actors and actress are excellent. Production design is surreal with bold saturated colors in a highly detailed steampunk style.

Keep this in mind when viewing it and you'll understand Zero Theorem. The audience is ultimately left to draw its own conclusions about the two halves of the irony that dramatically collide at the end.

The King of Comedy (1983)

Not the Typical Scorsese, Jerry Lewis, or Robert De Niro Film

★★★★☆

4 Stars; MPAA Rating: PG (see rating note)
Director: Martin Scorsese

If you're expecting the typical Jerry Lewis slapstick comedy, you won't find any of it in this film. Aside from a few lines of talk show host monologue he plays a completely straight non-comedic role and does an excellent job of it. It's blatantly obvious his character, Jerry Langdon, is portraying Johnny Carson and The Tonight Show. For those too young to remember, Johnny Carson, who hosted the show for 30 years, was Jay Leno's predecessor, who was Jimmy Fallon's predecessor (not counting the brief Conan O'Brien debacle).

Robert Pupkin (Robert De Niro) is a stage door autograph hound who is obsessed with becoming a stand-up comedian. He has enormous ambition, but unfortunately zero talent, and even worse, he's utterly oblivious to his lack of talent. Jerry Langford (Jerry Lewis), is a world famous comedian and late night talk show host, whose stage door Pupkin frequently hovers around for autographs. He has a brief "chance" meeting with Langford by interdicting Masha (Sandra Bernhardt), a woman stalker romantically obsessed with Langford who is preventing him from getting into his limo. Pupkin deludes himself into believing from this that has found his "Big Break" as Langford now knows him. An audio tape of his "act" is rejected by Langford's staff and he is repeatedly rebuffed by them at their offices, until Langford does so himself. Pupkin is escorted out of the building by security officers as persona non grata and told never to return. Eventually he conspires with the obsessed stalker Masha in a plot to force his way onto Landon's show as the lead-in act. Nothing goes as planned, but nothing shakes Pupkin's grandiose delusions either. What they do and how it all ends would be too much of a spoiler.

 Jerry Lewis should have received more recognition for his excellent performance. Sandra Bernhardt (Masha) is nearly over the top with her portrayal of a manic obsessive. In my opinion it's deliberate to provide sufficient contrast with Pupkin's delusional obsession. Robert De Niro is completely immersed in his Pupkin role and plays it with his usual mastery throughout. The magnitude of his role compared to the rest of the cast dominates the story, its dialog and its limited action. De Niro's skill as an actor playing the inept, pathetic Pupkin clearly shows and he carries the film.

The very dark comedy and its style is atypical of Scorsese. It's a significant departure from three previous film collaborations with De Niro: Mean Streets, Taxi Driver and Raging Bull. (New York, New York with De Niro and Liza Minnelli is another substantially different departure in a musical.) I found De Niro's character, Rupert Pupkin, painfully embarrassing to watch at times. I wanted to feel some sympathy for his pathetic bumbling life filled with delusions, but it's impossible as he's also an obsessively obnoxious jerk oblivious to how he's continuously humiliating himself without any respite for the entire film. I was left at the end feeling this was deliberate on the part of Scorsese, that he didn't want Pupkin to have anyone's sympathy. The discomfort I felt regarding Pupkin during the first 2/3rds of the film eventually gave way to the absurdity of his self-destructive actions. If "Greatness" wasn't possible he was determined to go down in a blaze of "Glory," which he does quite dramatically. Even then, at the very bitter end, he still cannot give up his lesser obsession with the barmaid he thinks is his girlfriend (a high school acquaintance) and his delusions of grandeur.

Overall an excellent job by Scorsese with excellent performances from Lewis, De Niro, Bernhardt, Diahnne Abbott (plays a barmaid, Rita Keane, who Pupkin thinks is his girlfriend; another delusion) and the other principal supporting actors and actresses. Don't expect the norm though for Scorsese, Lewis or De Niro.

Cinematography Note:
The scenes showing Langon's broadcast TV program are quite soft. This was intentional in the original filming. Scorsese deliberately filmed those scenes using the low fidelity videotaping systems used for studio recording TV programs to make them realistic looking as they would have been seen in analog NTSC TV broadcasts (this film was made fifteen years before HDTV). Might not be evident on the DVD, but is quite evident on the Blu-ray as it undoubtedly was in its theatrical projection.

MPAA Rating Note:
This film was produced and submitted to the MPAA when there were only four ratings prior to the 1984 PG-13 implementation: G, PG, R and X (now NC-17). Its content didn't rate an "R" and therefore it was given a "PG." Today it would undoubtedly be given a PG-13 rating.