- Joined
- Mar 3, 2014
- Messages
- 57,511
- Reaction score
- 21,592
The character Gustave was pretentious,
I saw that more as impeccability. Flip-sides of the same coin I suppose.
The character Gustave was pretentious,
Strange to me. Both of you seem to praise the film for its composition, praising it almost as a work of art, but at the same time, dislike it for its content. One of you feels that its pretentious, while the other would characterize it as, dare I say, boooring. I didn't get that feeling, either way, when watching the film. The character Gustave was pretentious, but he liked to keep up the illusion right and I never felt that the story was just "all right." I felt more like the sets and dialogue all fit together in a nice way that ended in the sadness of an old man who's best days were behind him. The ending, if anything, felt real to me. That is what life does to a great many of us. In the end, all we have is memories from an earlier day.
I saw that more as impeccability. Flip-sides of the same coin I suppose.
Gustave is a complex character and I can see that as well, his status as an impeccable concierge. In fact, now that I think about it, being an impeccable concierge is the only way to get into that key secret society, whatever they were called, and all the members were concierges like Gustave from other major hotels.
The Society of the Crossed Keys.
The society consists of the 5 guys above and Gustave, each one of them, like the other. This is probably what @europe1 would label as pretentious, I find it charming. These MF'ers are like the Illuminati of hotel work.
I actually liked the Society of the Crossed Keys. One of my favorite things about the film, actually.
I think, for me, there's just something cool about the idea of being a part of a secret group of dudes who you know got your back no matter what.
I felt more like the sets and dialogue all fit together in a nice way that ended in the sadness of an old man who's best days were behind him. The ending, if anything, felt real to me. That is what life does to a great many of us. In the end, all we have is memories from an earlier day.
What’s interesting to me is that the story is told by an aged writer fondly regaling us a tale of his younger days of him meeting an older gentleman who lays out his life story that mainly concentrates on his own youth, which is then lived vicariously through the writer. But really, this is all being read from the writer’s book by a young lady, which means she is now building a connection based on the writer’s affectionate tale of a man who shares the stories of his glory days. Ugh, my head is spinning.
It seems as long as stories are being written down and then read, immortality can be achieved even after all the good days have passed.
This post reminded me of something:
Apparently there is a fan theory that the story is a fanciful and revisionist tale told by Gustave, not an older Zero. According to this theory, Zero and Agatha were both killed by the death squads and Gustave has created an alternate history in his mind to help him deal with the fact.
But you know how fan theories go. It's probably bullshit.
That's a sound connection. Gilliam and Burton are idiosyncratic directors, just like Anderson. Yorgos Lanthimos would be the extreme version.
Further Burton and Anderson wear their childhood experiences and traumas on their sleeves and often populate their films with super quirky characters surrounding a lone lead who clearly marches to the beat of a different drum. While Anderson is a bit Kubrickian with his commitment to central framing, his and Burton's films still feel like family affairs. People in rooms discussing banal situations with ludicrous perspectives, plus a would-be iconoclast who may or may not suffer sociopathy.
All three express adoration for composition, and often use pastels and pinks in their color palettes. And I daresay the fractured chronology across all three more than suggests similarity.
This post reminded me of something:
Apparently there is a fan theory that the story is a fanciful and revisionist tale told by Gustave, not an older Zero. According to this theory, Zero and Agatha were both killed by the death squads and Gustave has created an alternate history in his mind to help him deal with the fact.
But you know how fan theories go. It's probably bullshit.
Might not be that far off. We know someone was killed right? Either Gustave or Zero was killed and we know Agatha ended up dead as well. To compound the matter we can't tell by looking at Moustafa if he is an older looking Gustave or an older looking Zero. His skin tone is closer to Gustave's but it seems odd that he looks like neither of them.
but at the same time, dislike it for its content
One of you feels that its pretentious,
The society consists of the 5 guys above and Gustave, each one of them, like the other. This is probably what @europe1 would label as pretentious, I find it charming. These MF'ers are like the Illuminati of hotel work.
It seems as long as stories are being written down and then read, immortality can be achieved even after all the good days have passed.
Yeah, I did know that older Zero doesn't look a whole lot like younger Zero. Though, as you say, he looks nothing like Gustave either.
Yeah, I did notice that older Zero doesn't look a whole lot like younger Zero. Though, as you say, he looks nothing like Gustave either.
It's an interesting theory. But I just don't feel like the movie itself gives us any strong reason to take it seriously.
Here is my problem with Moustafa. Anderson goes to great lengths to make sure ever scene is filmed to his vision of perfection, every tiny little detail. Why would he choose an actor that doesn't resemble an aged Zero or Gustave? Seems like something done on purpose.
Mustafa says that all he has to remember Agatha and Gustave by is this old hotel, which causes him great sadness. Maybe Anderson's message is that by immortalizing these events through stories, Mustafa maybe do not have to be alone after all, that the good days live on inside us forever, and so Mustafa's love for Agatha/Gustave lives on... or something
Maybe. I dunno.
Don't discount the possibility of it simply being Anderson going, "We can get F. Murray Abraham?! Fuck yeah! Sign that dude up!"
Abraham is a great performer and has an ethnic look to him so Anderson may have just been like "close enough" because he wanted to work with him.
I can only accept that as a distinct possibility, and yet, Anderson seems like such a perfectionist.
It does send a message about the "changing of the times." The old school concierge's had their own society and performed at the next level of service but then at the end, Zero's Lobby Boy just didn't give a shit. It definitely seemed like the times were already changing, during the telling of the movie, to our more rude, contemporary ways, and maybe Gustave was holding on to that time before which is why Zero said he upheld the illusion quite well. It is like the dying of an age and The Grand Budapest Hotel itself was rundown in disrepair by the end, like it had also died.
So do you actually lean toward there being more to the story than is obvious, or do you merely consider it a possibility?
These kinds of stories always fuck me up a little bit because in a lot of cases I don't think that "progress" is actually a positive thing. Certainly sometimes it is; but certainly in some cases the old ways really are better ways.
Yes, progress often means losing something from the past, its the old ways dying to make way for the new and there can some sense of loss for a lot of people. Even when I look back to the 1980's I'm hit with a profound sense of how different the world was then compared to now.