Rushmore (1998)

Well I saw this movie some time ago. It's in the style of Wes Anderson's later movies , "The Royal Tenenbaums" and "Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou". The movie is a bit surrealistic and sour but the humor is deep and when you think back about this movie you can remember lots of it's jokes like how the main character, Marx Fischer used Latin in his latest play. Bill Murray was just as great as in his other Anderson movies. If you're looking for a comedy where you laugh at every scene this is not the movie but as a surrealistic comedy the movie is great. Also I liked some of the music in the film for example Rolling Stones and Cat Stevens. I think that Wes Anderson is a really special director and his style is of that kind that not nearly all of people like his movies.

Mr. Hawkins

Fmovies: Very rarely can a director evoke so much awkwardness and kindness from his/her silent moments in their films. Wes Anderson is one filmmaker who can. His characters are so richly drawn, finely acted and beautifully directed, that even when they're not speaking... we can read their emotions, we feel their pain. Young Jason Swartzman gives a fantastic performance. Even nicer is the surprise turn by Bill Murray, who manages to play a good guy and a villain at the same time. In one scene he is wearing Budweiser boxer shorts on a diving board. He is smoking a cigarette and jumps, doing a cannonball into his sewer-ridden pool. We see him curled up at the bottom of his pool, drowning himself in misery. Is this a connection to his future lover's dead husband? Who knows. But what we do know is that Anderson has crafted his film to star the most unlikely of heroes. They are the oddest of the bunch, but at the same time we know what they are going through. Their oddness aside, what we learn to see more of, is their hearts. It is obvious Anderson has wiped his heart all over this piece, and it pays off more than I'm sure he ever could have imagined.

As I watched this film, I couldn't help but find brief and twisted similarities between Max Fischer's school days and that of Edward Albee of 'Who's Afraid of Virgina Woofe' fame. Before you laugh let me explain:

Max recieved a scholarship for a play written in childhood, showed significant reluctance to follow the curriculum, and rather chose to pursue his own interests, especially play writing.

Edward Albee, in most of his biographical information, comments on his difficulities in school, and dropping out of college after about a year and a half, to focus on his writing. Further, Albee's work became recognized at the early age of thirteen when he wrote 'The Zoo Story'.

Max was not from the wealthy family as Albee was. Although, the greater than $10,000,000, Herman Blume, (dissatisfied with the conventional, insensitive , sterotypical jock, twins of his own) "abopts" Max as a surrogate son.

The father of Max was reminiscent of Thorton Wilder who encouraged Albee to follow his instincts and become a play write.

As we leave Max he has written his successful work 'Heaven & Hell', his stage production of 'Apocalypse Now'. At this point in time, this is Max's theatrical master piece, his 'Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolfe', if you will.

Also, don't forget the name of Miss Cook's deceased Edward Appleby...

Now, for those of you who have never been mistaken in reading the undertone of a movie, cast the first stone. I would welcome the comments. For those of you few that may agree, please let me know, possibly there are more correlations.





.

Rushmore fmovies. There's no real reason to critique this film because it's as close to perfect as any movie can get. Plus, it has been reviewed over 500 times on this site alone.

One important aspect of this film, which is overlooked in practically every online review that I've read, is Wes Anderson's nod to the world of J.D. Salinger. The parallels between Holden Caulfield and Max are numerous, and when considered in light of THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS (with its scenes at the museum and the b.b. gun battles), the canon of Wes Anderson is one that has been greatly colored by the imagination of J.D. Salinger. From Max's red hat to his expulsion, the film touches on many ideas from THE CATCHER IN THE RYE. Thematically, the works are quite similar and share an idiosyncratic mood.

The other great influence on Wes Anderson, which is even more obvious to any student of film, is the work of Hal Ashby. In particular, the symmetry of Hal Ashby's shots in films like HAROLD AND MAUDE and BEING THERE. Watch RUSHMORE followed by HAROLD AND MAUDE followed by ROYAL TENENBAUMS followed by BEING THERE and you'll completely understand this sentiment.

Where will THE LIFE AQUATIC fit into this equation?!?!?

Overextended rather than overlong, this is still, along with A BUG'S LIFE, the best American film of the year. Sadly, this has been an atrocious year for movies, so that isn't saying much (being Europeans, we still haven't seen EYES WIDE SHUT or THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, so there's still hope). There has been no outstanding, awe-inspiring, terrifying, beautiful, blow-everything-out-of-the-water film this year, no PULP FICTION, THE USUAL SUSPECTS or HEAVENLY CREATURES. The main problem with new films is style. Because style has been reduced to empty, showy Lelouchisms, intelligent directors, like Solondz or Labute, have rejected style altogether; and their rather flat, dull compositions can detract from the undoubted brilliance of their content.

RUSHMORE has style in spades. RUSHMORE is (on the surface at least) a very intelligent film. It is the kind of film my spouse would dismiss as 'a young man's film', but then so, apparently, was A BOUT DE SOUFFLE. The comparison is not gratuitous. There is a glorious, gleeful, freewheeling joy in cinema here that carries the film for the first hour, reminiscent of the early Nouvelle Vague, and Richard Lester. It's odd how these old devices - and there are also echoes of Chaplin, Keaton, the Marx Brothers, Tati and Woody Allen in here too - should seem so fresh and new. Has cinema stagnated so far? Most modern US (indie) film is stagy, rigid, overcomposed. This film uses all the old tricks to show life being lived, not an imposed thesis.

As I suggested, the film is probably intelligent. I say probably, because this is not its main interest. It does interesting things with Oedipal conflicts - there are at least five father/son relationships in the film (Max/Bert, Max/Dirk, Max/Hermann, Hermann/sons, Max/Edward Appleby), most of which are put under pressure, if not outright hostile, but resolved in unexpected ways. There is the influence of the dead on the living, unwritten stories intruding on those trying to write their own lives. There is the idea of Rushmore as a conservative, Brideshead-like arcadia, wherein also lies betrayal and death. The whole Ivy League (or whatever second level's called over there) system is debunked: whereas Rushmore will accept any trash as long as they're white, Max's multi-racial public school seems a much more vital place.

What is great about this film is not these things, but its understanding of and sympathy for adolescent experience. The most obvious marker of this is self-dramatisation, and there is strong evidence (the theatre curtains that open each section; Max's facility as a playwright; the repetition of portraits and framings within the film) that this is not an 'objective' story, but Max's highly mediated view of his own life. The film is sprightly, energetic, hilarious and inventive when he is on top of life, sluggish and dour when he is depressed. This actually makes his pain even more moving, and why he can sympathise with Hermann throughout on an emotional level, even when he needs to hate him on a narrative one.

Bill Murray gives the year's outstanding performance, which will hopefully be ignored at the Oscars - there is such depth to his angst, such humour to his self-lacerating millionaire, a self-made man who tragically sees himself as a loser. Few actors today can be so heartbreaking while seeming to do so little. And people still think Meryl Streep is an actress.

It is Jason Schwarzmann, though, who must carry the film,

Max Fischer has a scholarship to exclusive prep school Rushmore, despite the fact that he really isn't as smart as his demeanour would suggest. He relentlessly talks himself up, forms and joins clubs and seems to impress as many people as he annoys – all with a very thin veil of lies to support it. When he falls in love with a teacher (Rosemary Cross) things appear wonderful but it is not long before he has messed it up. His frustrated friend (Herman Blume) tries to help but only succeeds in making things much, much worse and Max risks losing everything that is important to him.

Having recently see The Life Aquatic etc I decided to step back to a film that I feel did Wes Anderson's humour and talent much more of a service and one in which he got the mix just right. To me Rushmore is that film, although this is not to imply that it will appeal to those that just don't like any of his films. The plot is the usual mix of offbeat characters, strange events and deep seated emotions (and usually not happy ones either), it is quirky and humorous but it still works because, unlike Life Aquatic, it has enough heart and plot to balance out the dark quirky humour. To me the story is still a bit strange and difficult to get into but it does the hard work for you and even when I was still getting into it I was interested if not totally involved. The heart of the story is not one I could relate to, but I was able to feel for the characters and got into it quickly as a result – none of them are instantly likable characters or simple ones but they are still well written and delivered. The humour is never really consistently hilarious but to complain about a lack of belly laughs is to miss the point; for me the dark humour was well done and I found the film funny even when it didn't draw laughs from me.

The cast are impressive and work well with the material they are given. Murray has much more meat in this supporting role than he did with Zissou and he does very good work with it throughout while also managing to carry off his deadpan delivery as well as usual. Schwartzman is spot on with a character that we are never able to truly like but have to get behind at the same time – he pitches it just right and shows a great understanding of his character. Williams is beautiful and vulnerable and works well in her role while support is good from Cox and Cassel as well as several others in support roles and cameos. Special mention to Tanaka for being the sweetest redemption I've seen in many a film and pulls off the geeky but wonderful girl of many of our dreams.

Overall this is a good film but not one that will appeal to the majority of viewers or be the one to win over those that just don't like Wes Anderson's films. The plot and characters are interesting throughout and the film succeeds because it manages to mix emotional content with darkly quirky humour rather than doing one at the expense of the other. An enjoyable film and probably my favourite from Anderson thus far.