Top critical review
One person found this helpful
Oh, spare me your facile ironies... this movie [stinks]!
on December 11, 2002
Ye gods. What a wretchedly bad, bad, bad, bad, tedious, tedious, tedious movie. Why did people like it? (Or... did they??) This flick is such a shamblesome, interminable, wanky waste of time and talent... Whoever ordained director Wes Anderson as an auteur probably regrets it now: the most remarkable thing about him is his immense hubris in baldly recycling all the strained humor of the "wacky" counterculture comedies of the last four decades, and condensing it into one, horribly dull, overlong film. I mean, look, I really do "get" that the whole point of this style of humor lies in its excessiveness; but that doesn't mean that everything the director does is instantly going to be "good"... and this trainwreck of a film is definitely NOT GOOD. Anderson's directorial philosophy seems to be make it funny -- no, wait: even funnier -- by constantly upping the ante... Every single detail of the film has to be odd, quirky, off-center, out there and bizarre. The technique is so mannered and predictable that it's incredibly boring. Couldn't he have worked on the plot, or the premise, or the acting, instead of his own insatiable uber-cleverness? Besides, wasn't this film a disaster before, when they made it as "Hotel New Hampshire?" Perhaps I wouldn't have been so turned off had it not been for all the...packaging on the DVD copy I rented -- I mean, really... a 2-CD set deluxe set complete with an entire extra disc of "bonus" material? And those oh-so-self-congratulatory liner notes? Puh-leeeze! As if anyone could really believe that this lightweight trainwreck of a film is all that important!