[yasr_overall_rating]
Set in Japan, “Isle of Dogs” follows a boy’s odyssey in search of his lost dog.
WARNING: I’m going to get all technical and stuff. If you want to just read the TL, DR skip to the last paragraph.
It’s tough to critique Wes Anderson’s movies without entering a critique of his aesthetic as a whole, which is assiduously defended by all kinds of people. My main pick is that people tend to list Wes Anderson movies as their singular bona fids of cinephilia as if declaring yourself an avowed Wes Anderson fan is the high water mark of taste and screw you if you don’t. I’ve met Wes Anderson fans who REALLY don’t like disagreement.
I think Anderson has done something incredible by identifying his unique aesthetic (the still framing, muted performances, and elaborate set pieces) and grafting stories on to his canvas. I think it holds him back in some ways, but gives him room to succeed. “Isle of Dogs” is a perfect example of the limits of Wes Anderson’s aesthetics.
“Isle of Dogs” features Wes Anderson’s second foray into stop-motion animation, his first being “The Fantastic Mr. Fox.” In “Isle of Dogs,” the Mayor of Megasaki banishes all dogs to an island of trash due to their growing numbers, increasing spread of dog flu, and some ancient mythical Dogs vs. Man battle. Atari Kobayashi, the Mayor’s ward, flies to trash island to search for his lost guard dog Spots. While there five dogs take up Atari’s cause, helping him search the island. Back in Megasaki, the Mayor orchestrates malevolent political devices to kill all dogs. A foreign exchange student (played by Greta Gerwig) investigates Kobayashi’s crimes while Atari hunts for his dog. There’s like a whole LOT of stuff that happens.
Anderson’s latest film makes full use of the stop-motion form to deliver both setup and punchline. Anderson, as a filmmaker, tends to take deadpan comedy to its fullest extent. There’s a risk though. Its cutesy aesthetic removes us from the emotional grittiness of dark scenes. Make no mistake, there are some scenes in this movie I found dark or disturbing. Early on we witness a dog dying when it couldn’t escape its cage. There’s a scene where a pack of dogs emotionally confess to eating one of their own members (who was sick and ailing) to survive. Truly tear-worthy moments amplified by the idea that sweet, innocent dogs have to experience them and the audience just started laughing.
Often times the aesthetic renders these moments emotionally inert, playing the deadpan for laughs almost. I don’t think that’s Wes Anderson’s intention either. He’s clearly going for the gut punch, but the audience I watched this movie with thought almost everything that wasn’t positive or endearing was just funny or cute. (Look! A stop-motion dog is crying human tears! How cute!) But that’s kind of Wes Anderson’s problem as a whole, but I digress…
Ultimately, “Isle of Dogs” suffers from its enormous cast and hefty plotting. The times the movie truly shines are when it delivers on some one-on-one boy-dog bonding or Dog-on-dog sharing. With a hefty cast list of Big Timers (Bryan Cranston, Ken Watanabe, Jeff Goldblum, Bill Murray, Bob Balaban, Edward Norton, Frances McDormand, Greta Gerwig, Yoko Ono, Harvey Keitel, Scarlett Johansson, and that’s just the American actors I recognize), there’s a lot of unnecessary characters. So few of them serve an emotional throughline, but prop up certain jokes (the ‘Did you guys hear the rumor…’ joke’s great but that’s kind of all Jeff Goldblum does…). Arguably, lots of characters can be cut from the piece and we’d still find it endearing, and sweet.
Anderson excels in the format: bright set pieces, inventive animation transitions, and imaginative practical effects. A fight between dogs is a ball of cotton spun around a whole lot. His music choices reflect a mix between his appreciation for Japanese culture and his stripped-down-indie-band feel he often mixes in all his films. Stylistically, he evokes a complex mood (one littered with deadpan, perfect framing, and impressive set design) but thematically his story spirals out. We get glimpses at all these relationships the movie explores (Spots and Atari, Chief and Nutmeg, Chief to the other four dogs in the pack, etc.) but there are so many relationships that most of these are surface level. Enough that some of the plotlines felt poorly explored.
Look, I don’t want to knock on Wes Anderson too much. I love “Moonrise Kingdom“ and “Life Aquatic.” He’s an Austinite and his movie “Bottle Rocket” was shot in my hometown of Dallas so I like to cling to that, but the “polite or endearing” mood tends to curb my enjoyment of some of his movies. I actually think he’s been including darker material in his movies (“Grand Budapest Hotel” is actually a very violent film) but audiences fail to recognize this because of his deadpan tone.
Culturally? It feels to me that Wes Anderson made a love letter to Japanese culture, albeit one maybe a little fetishistic? Between his incorporation of sushi, untranslated Japanese dialogue, Seven Samurai theme music, and short sumo-wrestling bits it seems like he did some research. It feels a little surface level in terms of research as well. I can’t speak to the cultural fidelity though since I know next to nothing about Japanese culture. I’ll defer to experts on that one.
Would I recommend this movie? Sure. I’d think twice about taking my kid though. It gets dark. I’d say, out of his oeuvre, this one falls low on my list. Check it out in theaters if you want, but you can just as easily wait until the On Demand release and rent it for a night. Not going on my Blu-ray shelf. Sorry.
In select theaters Wednesday, March 28th
