Comments on: DVD Spotlight: The Darjeeling Limited

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:17:58 +0000

Maybe … but you know, Anderson’s not to everyone’s taste. He’s the model of a post-modern ironist combined with a strange subtext of sadness (or as I put it in the review, melancholy). Like if the Coens were touched with real emotion or humanity. Of course, he isn’t as extravagantly talented as they are, but he does have that soft spot that I find appealing.

By: Nayana Anthony

Nayana Anthony — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:55:06 +0000

I think I had the opposite problem than you, Rick… I was expecting way too much, and was underwhelmed. Maybe if I watched it again, with expectations adjusted to a more appropriate level, I might like it better. Still… meh.

By: Jonathan Lapper

Jonathan Lapper — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:25:20 +0000

The first time I ever encountered this was with the miniseries ‘Masada’ in 1981. Both Time and The New York Times gave it negative reviews and I read both beforehand. Time had called it a “monumental bore” and that you could tell they wanted it to be a “magnificent epic” but had failed and The New York Times said that it was (I can’t remember exactly) something along the lines of cornpone “served up on a grand scale.”

Anyway about two days I started seeing commercials for it’s upcoming premiere and there in the commercials was “‘Monumental’ ‘A magnificent epic’ - Time Magazine. Masada is ’served up on a grand scale’ says The New York Times.” In fact, the New York Times blurb is on the VHS cover box.

Actually, I didn’t think it was that bad myself but I thought using excerpts from negative reviews was quite crafty.

By: Rick

Rick — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 06:38:32 +0000

Gee, Jonathan … you must work for the movie advertising industry. Sounds like you’re constructing quote blurbs for the A&E page ads(I know there’s a name for those things, but for the life of me at 1:30 AM I can’t think of it).

You know, the ones where Ebert says “This movie sucks, it has no redeeming value” and the ad says:
“Redeeming Value!!!” (Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times).

By: Jonathan Lapper

Jonathan Lapper — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 01:34:36 +0000

“the flick is another ‘Citizen Kane’”

Wow! Now I definitely have to see it. I’m telling everyone who’ll listen, “Rick said it’s another ‘Citizen Kane!’”

Okay, no I won’t actually do that. Like you I found the early work much more appealing which is why I skipped this one in the theatre and haven’t yet worked up any desire to catch it on DVD but after reading this I may give it a look soon.

By: Rick

Rick — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 06:01:05 +0000

Daniel, thanks for the comment. I’m not saying the flick is another “Citizen Kane,” just that I think it was a little under-appreciated.

Thanks for the visit!

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 02:42:43 +0000

Nice review. I’ve seen Darjeeling get a lot of treatment as it makes the DVD rounds the last few weeks, and most people like it more than I did. Your review hits a little closer to home for me, but you’ve also made me think about it a little differently, so well’s well.