Today's office debate: Wes Anderson films.

[pstall]

It's rarely any humor at all. It's almost condescending, like "If you don't find this amusing, you are a boorish oaf". That's why he doesn't do anything at the box office. Too eccentric.

Mike Judge, on the other hand, makes funny movies that have a lot to do with what we consider modern pop culture, yet he's not on the same level, critically, as Anderson.

Apples and oranges. Both effecitvely do what they do.

Judge does a better job at hitting the masses where Anderson as we noted goes more selective.

I don't know if it's condescending. In fact I would counter that he assumes his audiences are smart and clever enough to get it. Therefore he is giving the viewer alot of credit.

But Anderson is an aquired taste. No doubt.

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

Something about a lot of his movies vaguely irritates me. I mean I'm no stranger to pretentious bullpoo (see avatar), but I can't really put my finger on it. Thoroughly enjoyed Rushmore though.

[Scrumtrilescent]

Rushmore was the only one I liked.

I think Schwartzman gets too annoying too quickly in most of his movies.

[Happy Panther]

love em all

[Sapper]

I think Royal Tennenbaums is a close to a perfect movie as I will ever see. Loved Bottle Rocket and Rushmore as well. Liked Darjeeling Limited and thought Life Aquatic was meh.

Fantastic Mr. Fox was great too.