"The Darjeeling Limited" is classic Wes Anderson ("Rushmore," "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou") who both directed and co-wrote this film about three estranged brothers who try to reconnect while on a spiritual journe
“The Darjeeling Limited” is classic Wes Anderson (“Rushmore,” “The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou”) who both directed and co-wrote this film about three estranged brothers who try to reconnect while on a spiritual journey across India.
By “classic Anderson,” I mean that the film is full of quirky characters; surreal situations; dialogue, dialogue, dialogue; and leaves you wondering exactly what HAPPENED in the movie.
The plot, such as it is, involves brothers Francis (Owen Wilson), Peter (Adrien Brody) and Jack Whitman (Jason Schwartzman), who haven’t spoken in a year, not since their father’s funeral. So Francis organizes a “spiritual journey” for them in India, complete with a laminated itinerary. They meet up on The Darjeeling Limited train and embark on their quest for enlightenment and the chance to be brothers “like we used to be.”
From the first, it is easy to see that these three irritate the heck out of each other, and it’s not going to be an easy journey. As one of them ponders one evening: “Do you think we’d be friends as real people? You know, if we weren’t brothers?” No — in fact, no way in hell would that trio ever have been friends if not forced into it.
The journey itself is fraught with problems and veers drastically off-course. It is at this point that the film also veers drastically off-course, changing from a mildly amusing quirkfest about squabbling siblings to a deep drama. And the plot point that steers the movie in this direction (I don’t want to give it away) is not too believable.
Wilson, Brody and Schwartzman are believable as the bickering brothers, but I came away from the screening asking myself why this film even needed to be made. What “message” did it deliver? I really couldn’t tell you. It all seemed rather unnecessary.
But, then, much of what Anderson does with the film seems unnecessary. For example, unnamed characters played by Bill Murray and Natalie Portman are thrown in at the beginning and the end of the film for a few seconds of screen time each. Portman never says a word. It’s as if Anderson used them gratuitously just so he could say, “Look! Bill Murray and Natalie Portman are in my film!”
And Anderson and his co-writers Roman Coppola and Schwartzman beat the audience over the head with symbolism. An example: Among the three of them, the brothers are traveling with 11 pieces of luggage. At the end, they start discarding baggage as they race to catch their next train. Subtle much?
All in all, I can’t say I liked or disliked this film. I just think I didn’t really need to see it.
Reach Vicki S. Reynolds at 473-7322 or vreynolds@journalstar.com.
Posted in Movies on Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:00 pm Updated: 2:53 pm.