Isle of Dogs.

Wes Anderson might be the most divisive director making movies in English today, as his fans love his work, and everyone else hears his twee dialogue and heads for the exits. He’s been on a critical roll lately, with The Fantastic Mr. Fox (good, but not very faithful to the wonderful book by Roald Dahl), Moonrise Kingdom, and the Oscar-nominated Grand Budapest Hotel. I had only seen two complete Anderson films, The Fantastic Mr. Fox and Bottle Rocket (somewhat annoying), and turned off Rushmore (insufferable) after about 20 minutes. So when I tell you Isle of Dogs, Anderson’s new, animated film from an original script, is excellent, perhaps it means a little more than when an Anderson fanboy critic says the same. It’s just great, no qualifier needed.

Isle of Dogs gives us an alternate-history Japan, ruled by the Kobayashi clan, which hates dogs based on a centuries-old grievance. The current Mayor of the city of Megasaki, also a Kobayashi, comes up with a scheme to banish all dogs from the city to Trash Island, while scapegoating the dogs for numerous public health problems and overcrowding. Trash Island becomes a concentration camp, looking more like one as the scheme and the film progress, with dogs organizing themselves into packs and fighting over scraps of food.

Atari, the 12-year-old ward of the Mayor, who is his distant uncle, hijacks a tiny plane and flies to Trash Island to find his dog, Spots, the first canine exiled to the island. He lands near one group of five dogs who, despite not understanding Japanese, figure out why he’s there and resolve to help him – especially since he is the only owner who has tried to come rescue his lost pet. This leads them on a quest the length of the island, all the while the Mayor and his henchman Domo try to recapture him and advance their plans to eliminate all of the dogs forever. At the same time, an American exchange student named Tracy Walker, boasting a comically round head of curly blonde hair, leads her Japanese classmates in starting a pro-dog resistance movement, during which she develops a crush on Atari, who has become a folk hero to dog lovers in Japan.

Anderson’s conceit here is to have all of the human characters other than Tracy speak Japanese, with translations appearing in subtitles as needed, while the dogs’ barks are ‘translated’ into English by the voice actors (or magic, I’m not sure which). This lets Anderson set a movie in Japan while using most of his favorite actors, and this one has a whopper of a cast – Bryan Cranston, Frances McDormand, Scarlett Johanssen, Jeff Goldblum (playing himself in dog form), Tilda Swinton (as a pug, which just made me laugh every time she spoke), F. Murray Abraham, Bob Balaban, Yoko Ono, Fisher Stevens, and, as “Mute Poodle,” Anjelica Huston, with narration by Courtney B. Vance. It’s also lighter on the twee-talk than the other Anderson films I’ve seen, perhaps because the script is credited to four writers, and I can only assume someone in the room pointed out, “You know, nobody talks like this in the real world, Wes. This is why everyone thinks you’re a fuckin’ weirdo.”

The story is totally over the top, so if you have problems with absurd plots in animated films – the octopus driving the truck in Finding Dory or the baggage-cart sequence at the end of Toy Story 2 come to mind – you may find suspending your disbelief hard here. Anderson et al compensate by populating the island with so many unique and surprisingly well-defined characters (given how little dialogue some of them get) that I found it easy to just roll with the story, even when Atari and the dogs built a fleet of boats to get themselves back to the mainland for the final confrontation. But there really isn’t any avoiding the fact that Kobayashi and his group are Nazis, the dogs are Jews being rounded up and sent to concentration camps to suffer and die, and oh by the way doesn’t this resemble stuff happening in the United States right now?

Like The Fantastic Mr. Fox, Isle of Dogs — say that out loud, if you haven’t caught the pun — is a stop-motion animated film, and the animation quality here shows a marked improvement from the preceding film. Several sequences are just visually enchanting, like the preparation of a bento box of sushi, or Atari giving the dog Chief a bath. The use of what looks like cotton batting to depict fight scenes is a great touch, and the details on Trash Island, while occasionally a bit gross, are meticulous and often look surprisingly real.

There has been much debate over whether Anderson is appropriating Japanese culture, or doing it well enough to get away with it, in this film, a debate in which I feel unqualified to participate, so I will merely link to film critic Justin Chang’s piece on the topic and walk away. Anderson puts numerous works of Japanese art in the background of the film, including The Great Wave off Kanagawa by Hokusai (several times, with dogs added) and Evening Bell by Hiroshige, both major figures in the Edo period of Japanese art; he based Megasaki city’s design on metabolist architecture from the Japanese architect Tanga; and he makes use of classical Japanese drumming several times as part of the score. (It’s much better than the mumblemopey song “I Won’t Hurt You” that besets the film like a frightened skunk in two different scenes.) There’s a clear affinity for Japanese art and culture, but whether it is done in a sensitive or appropriate manner here is not really for me to say.

I took my daughter, who is nearly 12, to see this, since she loved Mr. Fox and does indeed love dogs (and all animals, as far as I can tell). She thought much of the movie was sad, and had a hard time seeing references to dogs that died off screen. There’s also one death of a human in the film, and a lot of tears from human and dog characters. Her final verdict was that it was good, but she preferred Mr. Fox, which isn’t so graphic and which keeps dark elements in the dialogue rather than in the imagery. It’s animated, but it’s not a kids’ movie. We both laughed quite a bit, although I think I laughed more than she did, perhaps because I caught more of the subtle jokes about dog behavior and a few references she didn’t catch. (Yoko Ono’s character name is one; don’t look it up till you see the film.) With The Incredibles 2 coming out in two months, we might actually have a real fight for the title of best animated film this year.

Comments

  1. Hopefully I’ll get to see this tomorrow. I’ve been looking forward to it since i saw the first trailer.

    As for Anderson films, I guess I have to be considered a fan. Bottle Rocket is the only one of his features I haven’t seen. I basically agree with you about Rushmore, though I did watch all of it. I remember hearing the hype about that when it came out and saying, “Yea, but the kid is such an annoyingly pretentious asshole!” to the point where it took away my enjoying the film. I think he’s been getting stronger, as I really feel that Moonrise Kingdom and The Grand Budapest Hotel are his two best films. So I would recommend those to you.

    I do agree with your assessment that Anderson films certainly exist in a world of their own. I guess I’ve always found the dialogue to be too funny to criticize for being unrealistic. There’s a line towards the end of The Grand Budapest Hotel that, maybe it’s just me, seems to describe Anderson’s universe of films: “To be frank, I think his world had vanished long before he ever entered it. But I will say, he certainly sustained the illusion with a marvelous grace.”

  2. Can’t wait to see this one, thanks for the review!

    I’m no Anderson fanatic, but I can watch The Grand Budapest Hotel countless times (as I did recently on a long flight). Incredibly silly and stylized, it just tickles my funny bone in the right way.

  3. “You know, nobody talks like this in the real world, Wes. This is why everyone thinks you’re a fuckin’ weirdo.”

    Not everyone thinks that, and “Rushmore” was fucking awesome. Just saying.

  4. “But there really isn’t any avoiding the fact that Kobayashi and his group are Nazis, the dogs are Jews being rounded up and sent to concentration camps to suffer and die, and oh by the way doesn’t this resemble stuff happening in the United States right now?”

    No, it doesn’t. Really, really poor here. In a world where over the top language is half the problem, this comment is so disappointing.

  5. Perhaps this is part of the cultural appropriation discussion and maybe it’s separate but I’m trying to understand why white artists make “alternate histories” involving cultures other than their own.

    Would this movie have been different had it been set in America instead of Japan? If not, why set it in Japan?

    I wondered this about some of Tarantino’s recent work: Django and Inglorious Bastards. Those were revenge films, first and foremost. You can tell a million stories about someone punching back at their oppressor. So if you’re going to tell one that is largely made up, why set the non-made up parts in someone else’s history/story?

    I’m not saying this is definitely wrong to do. Just wondering with a story that could seemingly take place anywwhre (because it’s a work of fiction), why set it in these places/times/contexts? Was anything gained?

    • Anderson has said in a few places he wanted to pay homage to Kurosawa, Miyazaki, and other Japanese artists he admired. Japan has a tremendous tradition in film & in animation. Whether that’s enough of a reason is probably for someone else to say.

  6. . But there really isn’t any avoiding the fact that Kobayashi and his group are Nazis, the dogs are Jews being rounded up and sent to concentration camps to suffer and die, and oh by the way doesn’t this resemble stuff happening in the United States right now?

    Comparing efforts concerning illegal immigration to Jews in Nazi Germany? It is was over the top. Come on man, that’s is just plain awful. It is over the top, and you should strive to be better.

    Unless you can find groups being rounded up, sent to concentration camps to suffer and die in current America?

  7. And if I was of the Jewish faith, or had a connection to those crimes, I would be insulted at any comparison to a deportation flight back to a home country- vs hell on wheels to a camp that has “work will set you free” as it’s mantra. You went off the rails here.

    • I never said anything about illegal immigration, deportation, or anything like that. That’s all you. I was referring to the general depiction of populism, xenophobia, and ‘otherism’ in the film, which generally resembles the climate in the U.S. now, and was also evident as Anderson et al. were writing the film.

    • Did you see the film? Because if you didn’t, you can’t fully criticize what Keith said in his review.

  8. Keith- Your sentence starts with Nazism, and concludes with “doesn’t this resemble stuff happening in the United Staes right now”. It is a clear comp, you couldn’t be more more linear.

    I dont agree with a great amount of current policy. But dragging Nazism into any sentence that finishes with America today, is poor form. You put them in the same sentence and connected them. Your opinions are clear, and I agree with a great many of them. But Nazism, and America today have no business being linked in the same sentence.

    • One thing I really love about writing is having readers tell me what I meant, even when I tell them otherwise.

      Have you seen this movie or not?

  9. @PAT- I take issue with linking Nazism to America today. I find it crude, offensive and outside reality. But when you have pictures of people being rounded up in trains, packed in tight- the hell on wheels- and sent to labor camps to be worked to death-work will set you free- then the comp has some legit points.
    What I do see is some work being done I disagree with at a national level. That work facing legal challenges in different courts at different levels in different regions of the country.
    Agree or not, laws that have existed on the books are being enforced. Not recently enacted laws, ones that have been in the books for decades. The ink these laws is dried, and somewhat faded.
    My issue is with the comp, not the film. Comparing America today to any aspect of Nazi Germany shows ignorance of that era- and Keith isn’t guilty of that charge- or just being over the top.

  10. Keith- you are gonna do what you do, and I enjoy your work. I disagree with some of your politics. In this case, I feel you wandered into foul ground with an awful comp. I appreciate the discussion, and the responses. Continued success in your work professionally.

    • I think you’re equating Naziism with the genocide of Jews. This film certainly alludes overtly to that, but also borrows from other aspects of the Nazi era, including how the party came to power (which I talked about in a recent post on the book The Origins of Totalitarianism