Ebert's review brings up a very good point: "On this island no one seems to live except for those involved in the story." As viewers, we get so wrapped up in the story of Sam and Susie's last childhood adventure that we forget there is a world outside of this one. Although Anderson clearly shows the geographic location of the island, its world is self-contained. Its reminiscent of how a movie or play-goer watches a staged performance (fully knowing that it is fictional) and yet forgets the world outside until the play has ended and they are forced to go about their normal lives. I think that is what Anderson is trying to get at. He sets up a somewhat-fictional location but makes sure to limit the fantasy of its events (the only fantasy lying in Susie's books). "But what happens in a fantasy can be more involving than what happens in life, and thank goodness for that." He uses his made-up, but believable story to immerse the audience while they watch, and then gives them something to think about and apply to the real world they walk back into.
The review also says, "In Anderson's films, there is a sort of resignation to the underlying melancholy of the world; he is the only American director I can think of whose work reflects the Japanese concept mono no aware, which describes a wistfulness about the transience of things." Sam and Susie's transient childhood is definitely portrayed in their marriage scene, when they are blissfully ignorant in thinking that they will never end up like their parents screaming at each other through a megaphone, as the scout commander/priest tries to get them to realize.
No comments:
Post a Comment