Wes Anderson and the Follies of Modern Orientalism

Hello! Just wanted to address this: Renegade Cut made a very similar video about this topic a couple years ago, and in our analyses we both cite an article by Jonah Weiner, which informed many of our criticisms (much of the literature surrounding Wes Anderson + race echo a lot of the same sentiments)! It was never my intention to copy Renegade Cut - he had this take first, and I really admire his work. But I do recognize our points about Darjeeling have a significant amount of overlap. Here is his video (you should check out the rest of his channel too, he's amazing): krplus.net/bidio/Xa-taYCpd4K4cqg

At first I thought that the no subtitles was really clever because it was like we were watching from the perspective of a dog who wouldnt understand human language. And then the white character shows up and is inexplicably perfectly intelligible lmao.

I would also like to add that some of the Japanese spoken in Isle of Dogs is not comprehensible to Japanese people/speakers. I don't remember specifics but I remember there were several instances in which English words were simply spoken with a Japanese "accent". While there are 外来語(words "borrowed" from other languages and incorporated into Japanese) Anderson had Japanese characters speak in ways that a real native Japanese speaker/Japanese person would never do. Maybe it's because as a Japanese person I'm always hyper aware/sensitive at how Western media portrays Japanese culture, but that aspect just felt extra icky for me. I wish I could've enjoyed it because I do love the storyline and the dogs and the animation but the use of Japanese culture felt incredibly shallow and fetishistic at points :(

This is so interesting. I am half Japanese, and I speak Japanese, so my Japanese mother and I did not feel the distinct language barrier that other people might have while watching this film. We naturally would not "other" the Japanese elements or people in the film, and we both enjoyed the film quite a bit as a moment of representation of our culture in Hollywood, and we of course have already reflexively learned to give Westerners a pass on cultural accuracy or nuance since we rarely see it (sad but true). However, unpacking this for a non-Japanese audience who might have accidentally diminished the Japanese characters to a backdrop is a very interesting exercise. Thanks for sharing your analysis! There's so much to think about here.

Wes Anderson's non white characters always feel more like props or quirky accessories to white characters rather than actual people

As a Japanese speaker, the Japanese spoken in this movie is really off. Like, I can understand what characters like Atari and who else are saying, it seems artificial. Like how Japanese companies use English on their products that make no sense linguistically.

I think that the artificial aesthetic of wes anderson films also contributes to this detachment of the culture. He's a fan of old movies and uses the stereotypes and cliches of them on most of his movies, so when portraying a different culture this approach results insensitive.
Love your video, I wouldn't stop to think about this if not for it.

I always felt uncomfortable with Isle of dogs but couldn't really explain why until now. This video's great!!

Saw this trailer with my husband at the theater and we both let out an audible "Yikes" at the mushroom cloud scene. One of the most culturally traumatic events of Japan having its' imagery presented for a film by a quirky western filmmaker just never sat well with us.

My Asian & African Studies Bachelor soul is so happy you made this video. Have always noticed the same thing

Why does orientalism persist? A year ago my graduate class read Orientalism. None of the white PhD students understood what Said was talking about but all of them were critical of his argument and didnt see how it applied to our scholarship or literature. I facepalmed through our entire discussion of the text that night

I find it intriguing that every video essay that I’ve seen discussing colonialism has a bevy of people in the comments who either dismiss it or excuse it- moreso than any other topic. You can’t just divorce films of this type from their historical context. Yes, Anderson may have intentionally limited the audience’s understanding of the other culture to mirror the characters’ alienation from that culture. So what? There are plenty of movies that have been made showing alienation from society without shamelessly borrowing the aesthetics of other cultures- Fight Club and Priscilla Queen of the Desert come to mind. Hell, Anderson could just have easily as set these films in rural America or England and the same “fish out of water” element would have applied with a trio of elitist, snobby upper class Americans in a very poor area. Instead, he chose to borrow the aesthetics of another place and literally nothing else. (This also lessens the scope of the film, and restricts its appeal to Western audiences.)

I'm an MA Japanese Studies Student and have been studying Orientalism and Occidentalism in university for quite some time now. I think you did a really great job of explaining this complex topic. I'm glad more people get to learn about it. Sometimes I get so frustrated with stuff like this even (or actually especially) in daily life. People get real mad when non-Japanese people try on Kimonos in a museum but depictions like this in movies are just accepted as edgy and cool. Clearly some priorities off here, haha.
(Just to clarify: if you respectfully wear a kimono Japanese people love it! It's wonderful to participate in other cultures, but it's not cool to disrespect/ridicule/fetishize other humans for your enjoyment.)

I feel like I've not seen the same Darjeeling Limited. I found that the three main characters were shown as selfish, stupid, typical white male. And I did not feel pity at the beginning or joy for them at the end.
I understood the film as a critic of spiritual tourism and the use of other culture as a way to escape ours by just "miming" and not trying to actually understand them. When they help the boys in the river, one of the character says something like that : he was disappointed "I could'nt save mine", as if he failed in his quest, but the boy's death isn't important.
But now knowing Wes Anderson's filmography, I find it unlikely that he focused on criticizing spiritual tourism instead of telling the usual story of white broken characters. I think this shows how much of orientalism there is in the Darjeeling Limited. What I saw as a (quite smart because not to obvious) critic was just him being quite insensitive and applying usual orientalism without thinking twice.
Isle of Dog is an incredible film for the many reason, but yes, Japan is just used as decorative and foreign. The movie wouldn't have been different regarding the story if it was set in India, or in Mexico. When Coco actually tries to speak about the mexican culture seen by mexicans, Anderson simply use it for its imagery. At least his not mocking them!
NB: Sorry if my english isn't that great, but I hope I can still be understood

as an indian i appreciated this essay so much! yeah american media has a lot of issues in portraying asia lmao. love that it was explored here with care 💓💕

Hi - thank you for making this video and pointing out this quality in W.A. movies.
However, I must dispute one fact (4:12). While I understand the point that you were making - outright colonialism has not ended! Puerto Rico and Guam are still colonies! I'm not sure if you are from the U.S., but if you are, it is especially important that you not disregard or ignore that fact.

as an Indian, I felt so indescribably uncomfortable whilst watching the trailer of “The Darjeeling Limited” (yes, just the trailer). I couldn’t explain my apprehension before but this video does an incredible job. 💖 Thank you

It always made me feel uncomfortable in Darjeeling Limited when Adrian Brody says "I didn't save mine" while still holding a dead child in his arms. It feels completely dehumanizing, like trying to save these children was a game for them .

Your concluding statement is absolutely perfect. Modern media in general has a huge problem with Orientalism and racism, specifically masking them behind progressive ideals (the rebooted Tomb Raider games are a great example of this), and to hear someone discuss this problem so openly is wonderful. Excellent work.

While this doesn't detract from the overall point, it's a bit ironic to illustrate the claim that "eastern men tend to be emasculated in [orientalist views]" with a snapshot from Lawrence of Arabia, which actually portrays Arabian men as more "authentically" viril and masculine than the "effeminate" and "decadent" British officers - a problematic trope with a long history in its own right for sure, but not very representative of the point being made here.

The flute playing tal-se tal mila! in the background is a very nice touch!

I think the Isle of Dogs is more nuanced than you give it credit for. The New Yorker published a review by Moeko Fujii that made me paused. Fujii, a native Japanese speaker, explained WHAT the Japanese people were saying. And a lot of it was put downs or criticism of the white characters for being out of touch or ineffective. There were also a number of things in the movie that were clearly done with an eye for Japanese viewers: Fujii points to the use and subversion of Japanese archetypes and references.
Fujii points to the theme of translation in the film, calling it “the beating heart of the film: there is no such thing as “true” translation. Everything is interpreted. Translation is malleable and implicated, always, by systems of power.” And, importantly, that power is not automatically given to the white characters (or, for that matter, the audience). “in the world of Megasaki City, the Japanese can speak and understand English but choose to speak in their native tongue. They demand fluency on their own terms.”
Further, Fujii points out a problem with applying orientalist lens towards Japan. Japan was an imperial power. While the Japanese were indeed caricatured in the west, it didn’t serve the same purpose as in South Asia or the Middle East. Japanese caricature never came with the kind of domination that other Asian nations experienced. While Japan was being exoticized, it was colonizing Korea and invading Manchuria.

I think Wes Anderson sees other countries only for their stereotypical aesthetics and wants to employ them, but realizes the only appropriate way to incorporate them is to set the movie in said country and then forces himself into a corner where he must write a movie set in a country he actually cares very little about culturally. Like in The Isle of Dogs, I think he fell in love with Japanese symbols and the Japanese aesthetic, but then was faced with creating a non- stereotypical world and just couldn’t live up to the task.

I really appreciate the lack of hyperbole in your videos. Not to name names, but I have seen a video on how Wes Anderson writes non-white characters before, and it felt like a blanket condemnation of anyone who enjoyed Darjeeling Limited and Isle of Dogs, regardless of their reasoning. Your videos always feel much more like they’re trying to start a conversation than to end a debate, and even if I don’t agree with every word, they always make me think. Thanks for your great content.

That's interesting, because when I watched this movie as a Slovenian, I heard two foreign languages. One that I understood (English) and one that I did not (Japanese). The lack of subtitles did not make my mind automatically jump to orientalism. I simply assumed that the parts of the movie that were in Japanese were not meant to be understood fully by me or by English speakers, but by a Japanese audience. I also felt that me not understanding exactly what the people were saying was a clever way to help the viewer experience what it must feel like to be a dog living in a world dominated by humans.

I always thought that Adrian Brody’s line “I didn’t save mine” was really dark. Even in this boy’s death, Brody’s character saw him as almost like a coin he had to pick up in a video game. Like Brody’s failure to save him was a huge buzzkill to the brother’s heroics and that’s all it was.

I had always thought of Isle of Dogs as a peculiar blend of “old fashioned” exoticising orientalism and more “modern” orientalist narratives seen in the cyberpunk genre especially, following Japan and Taiwan’s tech booms in the 80s. Thank you for putting this into better words and theoretical context than I could, this definitely helped me organise my own thoughts on why, much like you noted, the movie rubbed me the wrong way. I can’t wait to watch more of your videos!

Honestly as an Asian, I think aestheticising other cultures is also common in film of non-Western countries, often to the same degree of using other cultures as set dressing like Wes does. It's just different because of the traditional power dynamics and complex geopolitics between Western and Eastern countries. I'm not going to stop liking his movies tbh, because I think his motives aren't as malicious as some people in the comments are painting it to be, I'm sure Wes could do better and make better representation, but I truly don't care if Western movie makers fail to represent my culture accurately or not (unless its an intentional racist caricature since that's something else), and I don't understand why I should care. I think a lot of people who talk about these issues are mostly Asians who grew up in Western countries.

Wes Anderson is very Wesian Andersonian, and I have noticed this in many of his films. The inability to see his stories in the eye of minorities. It's a serious crutch that I don't think he will ever overcome and as you've said, yes it is taking advantage of different cultures to a horrible extent. I used to excuse his work by saying it's over stylised and focused heavily on the mindset of the protagonist. And therefore the rich white protagonist usually wouldn't engage with minorities or other cultures and Anderson presents them that way. But as a director and writer, he has to give proper respect and attention to the cultures and groups he constantly uses in his films. The fact that he doesn't means that they really are just decorative pieces for his storytelling and that's horrible. The Japanese culture here then becomes like the walls of the Budapest Hotel, and not anything he treats with true meaning. This was a great review!!

I am late to this vid, but let me recommend:
Reel Asian Film Festival.
This is a Film Fest in Toronto that includes and highlights creators of Asian backgrounds (yes, all of Asia).
Being near Toronto, I had known of it growing up, but because of Covid forcing it online, I could finally attend.
I had never felt so included. There were no asterisks - no 'but not that kind of Asian' and other similar barriers. It was also amazing to experience something highlighting my culture that was not made for a white audience (and had sliding-scale pricing, acknowledgment of our place on settler lands, and admonishment of anti-blackness - things I'm always nervous about bringing up amongst the diaspora in Canada).
I just wanted to recommend it as I assume people on this vid would be interested in it, and I don't have friends that I could recommend it to, and so have been itching to express it.

Wes Anderson has always been one of my favorite directors, and Isle of Dogs was one was my favorite movies of that year, so naturally I instinctively felt a bit resistant to this video's thesis when I saw it pop up in my feed, but I think you make a really compelling case.
I never stopped to think about it, but you are definitely right that virtually all of Anderson's protagonists are white, and even when other culture's are explored they're explored from a distinctly American perspective and rarely as anything much deeper than set dressing.
I really appreciate these types of BreadTube videos - those that challenge things I had previously taken for granted.
All that to say: this is a really great video!

I hadn't considered that this might be why Darjeerling and Isle of Dogs didn't really work for me.
One thing that did consciously bug me about Isle of Dogs was the passivity of the female characters. Women tend to be very passive in Anderson's films, but he usually finds an in universe 'reason' for it to be that way. Whether that is by placing his narratives in the past, focussing on a mentor-mentee narrative, or on traditionally male exclusive societies (boy scouts, sailor scientists). Now this doesn't excuse the absence of active female characters in his oeuvre, but it does provide an explanation for this absence in the particular films. To me Isle of Dogs doesn't have any of this. Nothing about dogs makes it that they have to be guys, nothing about the setting makes it that the girl can't accomplish anything and has to constantly wait for the boy to take action, unless you want to critique sexism in Japan, which doesn't happen. To me, it was bothersome how useless the female characters were in the plot, how even when they tried to act, their efforts never seemed to matter.

I love your videos, and as a Wes Anderson fan, this one left me with a lot to think about. As a western white guy I guess the perspective I always took on the little boy drowning was never that brown bodies are expendable -- although I'm not rebutting the fact that this is encoded in the film -- but instead it felt like reality ripping in on the Brothers' selfish entitlement as a reminder of what Real Life is and how precious the time they get to spend together is. Granted, writing that out now I realize the death is subservient to their personal journey but I guess I just wanted to point out how heartbreaking I always found that scene. Thank you for the perspective from your eyes, I know I have much more to learn.

I had such an interesting perspective on this because I went to the cinema to see Isle of Dogs with my Japanese mother and my British father's mother. I was young at the time but I still felt like the film really disregarded cultural respect for the sake of aesthetics. The dissonance between the three of us when we were talking about the movie on our way home was fascinating to me, and this video goes into so much detail so, even though it wade three years ago I wanted to say thank you and this video is incredible!

this is so well-researched and highly engaging, thank you! 💗💚

So this is arguably a small mistake, but I believe it is an important one in the context of a video essay on orientalism. I noticed that the flute cover that you use in your video is actually a cover of the song "Taal Se Taal" from the movie Taal not of "Silsila Ye Chaahat Ka" from Devdas as cited in the description. By conflating these two songs, it reduces the complexity of Indian music by defining it solely by the "exotic" sounding wooden flute, rather than the nuance and context of the songs themselves. These are two different songs from two different movies by two different composers. Bollywood music especially is often reduced to gaudy dance numbers by Western media, rather than the often vital vessels for story and character they are. I think that if you were to use Bollywood music in a video like this, then as you said it shouldn't be used as a "curious backdrop". All that is to say, I found your analysis extremely valuable if slightly undermined by your incorrect citation.

Amazing analysis! I remember seeing Isle of Dogs when it came out and leaving the theatre feeling that something wasn't right. Since then I've managed to understand what was it, but this is the first time I see someone articulate it so well!!!
This is a larger problem that can be found whenever someone tries to write a story about "the other" and shows us how it is very important that people with a diverse background start to tell their own stories.

Thank you for breaking this down so meticulously. I haven't watched "Darjeeling Express" but I enjoyed "Isle of Dogs" a lot, as a person who knows Japan and Japanese films fairly well. I don't intend to contradict your arguments (they are all valid) but my perspective was that I could appreciate the film as an homage to Japanese cinema and not for a minute believe it to be an attempt at portraying Japanese society or culture as it really is. Because the strongest impression that I got was that Anderson is in love with Japanese movies and was simply longing to make one himself by taking what he could gleam from the golden era of Japanese cinema and pack it all together in his artificial, puppet version of Japan. I could accept his version of Japan and the Japanese because, after all, it is a cartoonish puppet version of the country, the artificiality already a self-reflective part of it, full of delightful cinema references and inside jokes. Plus, since the film is dog-centric, I perceived the human characters, including that American schoolgirl, to necessarily end up as caricatures. I might have a different opinion if I rewatch the movie (I'm talking from memory here), but my argument is to first and foremost understand the movie as a Tarantinoesque reflection on cinema history. I'm trying to remember if the film had something keen to say on current real-world issues (like the existence of trash islands and consumerism) but it's been too long ago.
Perhaps the most ironic part of it all is that since Japanese people and media today are so obsessed with what is being pushed as Japanese culture's uniqueness and superiority I can imagine that there were people who could find Anderson's portrayal quite agreeable, because nothing is more appreciated there than a foreigner who tells Japanese how strangely unique they are compared to the rest of the world.

To add onto this - - I felt like Lost in translation [The one movie with Bill Murray and Scarlet Johansson] also did the exact same thing. I never finished it cause I ended up feeling so bored throughout it, because I really wanted to see how they used the Japanese setting, but that just never happened.

The Isle of Dogs scene where all the name tags of the dogs are shown is really strange. They’re all in English.

I like Wes Anderson when he is making a movie that's not about non-white people. Or just not about humans in general.
And btw, Grand Budapest Hotel is a mish-mash of Austria-Hungarian and Balkan cultures. Making a broad generalization of foreign culture again.

Thanks for this. Darjeeling Limited is one of my favorite films and I always appreciate knowing every side of a film I enjoy from the good to the problematic. There is so much to think about here and it’s good to know for the future so we can have higher expectations for our favorite filmmakers.

Just found your channel and it's a breath of fresh air in this cesspit of content. Can't wait to binge on your videos for the next week. Thanks for all this amazing content.

I am a Japanese Wes Anderson fan. Combining the two sounded like heaven for me. The reality was me angrily yelling at the TV how the boy's Japanese sounded stupid sdjkfskfj

If it wasn't for the english speaking characters I thought the point of omitting the subtitles was to try and make the narrative from the dog's perspective

Absolutely spot on that the East is being used as a backdrop but that Anderson is telling his story, maybe he'd rather not write any characters of color at all than write poor ones.
As an Indian, I felt way more offended at the Slumdog Millionaire than The Darjeeling limited. Its tough for Anderson to whip up an authentic foreign character because he doesn't feel comfortable that he can do justice to them. He could easily hire a consultant but is there really a need for one in his story?
He doesn't need to have strong foreign characters just because he is using foreign backdrop. Anyone watching his films should not expect an anthropological insight into any culture. Why is this burden placed on him? Just because he's using the landscape? Doesn't add up really.
If you really want authentic Indian characters, watch Indian cinema. Watch Studio Ghibli if you want to watch authentic Japanese characters. Or if you want to understand amd empathise with foreign cultures, read books!
Art is a form of self expression and Anderson is well within his rights to freely express his geographical backdrop as mysterious. It works as a contrasting device and brings about a sense of disorientation which can be really interesting.
For ex in the Darjeeling ltd, we are watching India through the eyes of 3 self absorbed white dudes, it makes sense that they don't care about the backdrop. Its an artistic statement that despite being in such a beautiful landscape with mysterious people, they still can't ignore their own issues.

this video is so important! as a white latin american i hadn't even thought of this as such a deep problem, i was just like "ok wes anderson is a director for white/western people and his movies are very White (even when they're in Asia?) and that's that" like i only noticed it on the surface, but now i the much deeper issue is clear.
Thank you so much for this!

I feel like Anderson is so obsessed with capturing the aesthetics of colonialist-era artwork and literature, that he keeps imitating their orientalism and casual racism too. How could one possibly adapt Robinson Crusoe or Gulliver's Travels in a way that's acceptable today, while still being authentic to the period it was made in? You can't. But I don't think Anderson got the memo.

This talk reminded me of Western depictions of Russia. Females are oversexualised, males are depicted as violent and barbaric. While India is needed for the main characters to go through a spiritual journey, Russia is needed for a test of strength and wits. It is a place where a western hero has to fight off evil Ivans, endure heavy siberian snowfalls or sabotage some sinister commie plan. Many of the good Russian guys and gals that exist in media are people who immigrated to USA (Black Widow, Colossus), so in order for a character to be positive, he or she has to be americanized.

Wow this video is actually exciting me for my upcoming class on Geography and Politics of the Asia Rim?? Also I really like the Isle of Dogs, and as someone studying Japanese I thought it was fun to see Japanese spoken without subtitles in an English spoken film. But I never thought of the implications of how not understanding the Japanese characters dehumanizes them more than the dogs. I guess I didn’t have the cultural sensitivity to realize how he told this story through a Western, “othering” lense. Thank you.

I just discovered your channel. Excellent essay! Super nuanced- I hadn't noticed this reduction of Eastern cultures in Wes Anderson films before. Thanks so much xx

I just found your channel and I've been loving all your videos! It's so good to hear someone speaking so honestly and in a non-pretentious way about this topic. Thank you! Hope to see more :)

I actually find this interesting because I felt like I could understand the essence of what the Japanese characters were saying or expressing. I feel like Atari connected to me more than Tracy Walker, because although I couldn’t understand everything he said I could understand his determination, his pain, and his tears. But after seeing what you pointed out I definitely see the problem with the film. Thank you.

This is so well made! Thank you so much for this. coming from a person who just learned about orientalism

You are one of the most incredible and insightful film commentators on this platform,,, I have been binging your content all afternoon. Thank u v much.

I just found found your channel. I have been working on broadening my prospects in understanding film and what can be done. So your thoughts and knowledge is wonderful and I look forward to the other essays your create! Thank you!

Thank you for this video - it has collaterally helped me understand why I was so disappointed by Grand Budapest Hotel. As someone from Central Europe I was very excited by the promise of an exploration of this fictional "Zubrowka", which I assumed to reflect some of the more mythical places in Western Ukraine like Lviv or Chernivtsi, or South-Western Poland. But in the end it all only served as a backdrop to a story that didn't offer any experience or insight of what made Central European what it was/is, and a remarkably flat backdrop at that, with the depth of a matte painting. And it turned out the depicted location was not the colourful and intriguing place I was expecting from the heart of Central Europe but Austria or Bavaria with a hint of more Eastern attributes here and there.

Wow, you smashed this. Well done. I felt it too having lived in Japan for seven years, when I came out of Isle of Dogs I was already convinced it was a very troubled film that no amount of stylisation could mask.

I found this video really interesting! It's clear that you put a lot of effort into constructing this. I'm currently studying Said's Orientalism in class and this opened me up to so many more angles to approach the topic :)

broey deschanel i appreciate you greatly and i hope you're having a great day and keeping safe and well during these times

I love Isle of Dogs, it's probably the best stop motion animation there has ever been. But yeah, everything you say here is correct. I think that the film was made with reverence ad huge appreciation of Japanese culture but a lack of understanding of how presenting that culture would fit in to larger history of western representations of foreign peoples.

damn im going to be honest, i never really thought of it that way (i guess that may be because it doesn't directly affect my culture and people) but I'm glad that I watched this video and that these issues have had some light shed on them (especially since i was an oblivious outsider; again pointing to the problem. i never questioned his approach because i was comfortable and familiar with his lens) again, thanks for this video :) i learned something today

Thank you for articulating this so well! You’re amazing 💜

Thank you for this video. I'm currently writing an essay on Wes Anderson's films for my final essay in school, however my analysis does not include the two films mentioned in this video, and so I do not have too much insight on them. You have really expanded my views on the ways Anderson makes his films and uses certain tropes that may be offensive, and help me become more critical of media I consume in the future!

As an Asian I think I can speak for many of us when I say we love when our culture is appreciated/celebrated/shared- especially when it comes to representation in media, but I completely understand what you're saying! I think as long as the culture is not disrespected and people are made aware of its history, cultures should be celebrated

another really great video!! i still think wes anderson is one of the best directors out there, but saying his movies can be a bit insensitive is kind of an understatement. darjeeling limited is wonderfully filmed, but the fact the movie holds so little steem for anyone who isnt the main three characters and their mom (egregious in a director whose filmography has come to be defined by large, complex and interestingly characterized casts), when the characters who most clearly have romantic drama (rita and the train employee) take a backseat and then exit the stage to leave room for schwarzman's anodyne relationship with portman. anderson sort of found his way to have his big nice cast of familiar faces in isle of dogs, by basically casting bit roles with respected japanese figures and doing nothing with them. this is awful, of course, but also kind of makes me want to compare them to his other "non-american" movie, and my favorite of his, grand budapest hotel. i personally really enjoy it, especially how he treats narrative perspective and the passing of time, but theres something that i still find unpleasant about it -of course, not as disgusting as framing a literal child's death as a plot point in three white dudes' narrative development - but in the way this country is made up, made to resemble really any mid-to-eastern european country. that sort of lack of specificity, while it can do wonders to make the environment more ~dreamlike and free to create new aspects of a new culture, also carries with it the weight of its influences. zebrowka, i think this country is called, was invaded by textually-mentioned "fascists". why make up a fake brand of fascists? was using real fascists too close to home? why didnt that stop him from portraying a mushroom cloud in isle of dogs, then? what are the limits, and how on earth does he decide on them? theres his upcoming movie set in france, supposedly comfortable enough for him: by the general aesthetics and chalamet's hair, id say this is the sixties. will he use the algerian war as a backdrop, now? will he tackle the french youth's powerful attachment to communism, as andersons fave director godard was? what is considered acceptable to tackle for him, and how does he write other cultures, issues foreign to him -if apparently he doesnt seem to make any research, nor bother himself with more than background aesthetics?

Fantastic channel! Love your work, I really appreciate how much you put into it. Keep it up!

Thank you for this great, insightful video! I always felt something was off just from the marketing that said he didn't put subtitles to make it more "immersive" or something. You put it to words. Thank you!

Exactly! You nailed it. I like Wes Anderson films, but that doesn't mean I'm not critical of his work, and this issue is frustratingly still relevant.

Absolutely fantastic video! This was recommended to me because I've watched things on Wes Anderson as a fan of his work but, ideally, being a fan means recognizing the flawed aspects of Wes Anderson which boil down to, as you brilliantly put it, "well-intentioned liberalism." It's orientalism so subtle, you get all the western imagined aesthetics with none of the guilt! (sarcasm) It's undeniably an issue that deserves to be wrestled with while watching the movie and called out again and again. I love your approach, fantastic research, and summation.

I love poignant diagnostics of the artist's art (or storyteller's story) because it positively highlights their humanity, and I really enjoyed what you've done with this. Imagine that with every film he makes, he gets better at understanding his... lets say, accidental xenophobism. He wants to step beyond his boundaries, like you said. There is a sense of empathy in trying to include other worldly people and cultures in your artistic endeavors. He may not be stepping in the right direction, but when we analyze his contributions to cinema, like you've done with this video, it shows that he does have a sense of self and hopefully that could lead to change. If his flaws are taught back to him by use of criticism, he can always get BETTER, and the idea that a director could learn from his audience is an art in and of itself.

shizzle shakes this channel just continually slaps my donkey brains to bits. i've subscribed and unsubscribed to many yt film theory/critics/reviews/theory over the past several years but this one manages to hold my attention! broey, do you have a letterboxd account? i'd love to read ur blurbs!
plus--i mean, hard yes for WA's positively toasted imagining of the Other in all its alienated forms. what more do you expect from the tidily dressed, Texas-come-NYC, centrist heir of the "liberal" upper-class? heck, i love the royal tennenbaums but this boy has about as much 'down to earth' experience as Chelsea Clinton taking a vacation in Port-au-Prince

Wes anderson films seems like its from the perspective of a tourist. It's hard for a western person to escape that viewpoint.

Having never seen Isle of Dogs (yet, I still wanna watch one day!) some of the aspects in the film really sound....wild. A Japanese kid named....Atari? Ground-breaking.

This is an incredible video!!! I had never been able to accurately pinpoint my unease with wes anderson’s Indian/eastern aesthetic but this just explains everything PERFECTLY. Thank you

Omg i just discovered your channel and your videos ans they are so high quality ! Keep going with that Kind of concept and intuition ! ✨✨

this video was beautifully done. i never thought about isle of dogs this way because i watched it online... and it had subtitles for japanese speaking characters :(( i didn’t even know that people in theaters couldn’t understand 80% of the movie

Great stuff.
If you think of 'the east' as described in the video it shows how much generalization is needed to support that statement.
As an idea think of 'the west' as a big generalization and leave all the variations and cultural differences apart and therefore you could understand how difficult, lazy and sometimes even offending those terms are.
Thanks for sheding light onto that subject!

I just found this channel, your content is so thoughtful!

Thank you for this analysis. Your video essays never let me down.

Thank you for your analysis here Broey. Wes Anderson movies have always been an acquired taste for me. Usually I go in with the mindset and the attention focused on production design and framing and storytelling devices and rarely for empathetic connection. That said, I think it's somewhat a theme of his that his characters are to certain degree detached or insular or self-absorbed or in some kind of isolated emotion torment. I also happen to be Chinese myself. So when I came to watch Isle of Dogs, funny this perspective of "orientalism" never occurred to me. I just think "it's a Wes Anderson" movie." The "White savior" troupe and "eastern exotica" troupe are rampant in so many Hollywood productions. While Isle of Dogs qualifies, as you have some eloquently illustrated in the video, I would say it is not the most egregious of examples--Simply a white filmmaker telling a story in his perspective. I also find the use of the word "orientalism" rather cringey, not to your fault as you didn't come up with the term. But it is like describing an abuse with an abusive word and in turn giving it more light in having to say it some more. To that, I don't know if I have a better alternative. May be #OscarSoWhite or #HollywoodSoWhite speaks to that more directly. Anyway, your points here are well taken. Thanks for the video.

I don't see the problem here. I've seen American movies that insult your intelligence, where the foreigners all speak English and never go beyond acting as generic, stereotypical, cardboard charicatures of said culture (Arab, Russian). Because God forbid empathizing with humans of a different culture, frame of reference (including language) with which your audience is not familiar. Isle of Dogs isn't like that at all. When I watched it, I was caught up in the story, and Atari is quite frankly one of the most humane characters in it. I didn't think much about the Japanese not being subtitled, other than creating a 'dog effect' (they don't understand humans save for a few specific commands). It also creates the experience of being a stranger in a land, having to get by on mostly body language, intonation and context to understand what's going on.
I don't see what's wrong with depicting things like Kabuki, sushi, cherry blossom and sumo either. Every culture has traditions and practices it upholds and to which it ties its identity. All of this is shown in a beautiful stop motion art style which I thoroughly enjoyed. My main takeaway from the film was that the cats and dogs story was a warning about fascism and how shrewd politicians capitalize on it. Which is always a story about us vs them, superiority and shifting blame, a phenomenon that trancends nationalities and borders. The dogs are ousted, rounded up on an island and deemed 'a disease'. Talk about dehumanization. But this gets lost entirely due to OP deciding to make this about ethnicity, arguing and taking offense that the setting of Japan serves as a mere prop. Well done /sarcasm
You know those action movies where the protaganist kills off waves of disposable henchmen and noone gives two shits, but then a main character dies and it's like the whole world is grieving? There is a direct correlation between the time a film devotes to a character's death, his/her importance, and the film's willingness and impetus on you as the viewer to empathize. So tell me how the boy's death in The Darjeeling Limited is of no consequence, when you are taken to the funeral and see the father's intense grief? I'm all too aware of the fact that Western civilization employs a double standard and treats brown lives as less, but you picked the wrong example here.

Beautiful video, your editing is gold!

I only just recently started watching Wes Anderson films and wanted to know what all the criticisms were about, thanks for this video so informative!

I’m so glad someone’s point this out, I finely woven into a lot of his films in many different and coded ways.

I think wes relies on western characters and doesnt feel fit to put himself in the shoes of those native people in settings like India and Japan because it can be perceived as disrespectful to tell a story that isn't his own , and yet he shouldn't write these settings if he can't fully realize this.

Lots of thought-provoking stuff. Thanks for making such a well-constructed and articulate video!

11:20 Silsila Ye Chaahat Ka was on of my favorite songs as a kid 😍💕 thanks for that blast from the past during your well thought out video!

THANK YOU. I voted for this topic and I’m glad you called it out. I’m Japanese and it tends to be too emotionally exhausting for me to put together these types of analyses because it’s too personal, as is the inevitable backlash of people defending problematic works of fiction like these and in the process those attacks “defending fiction” demean our very real existence. Thank you for being an ally. ❤️

Thanks for this video, very rewarding. Isle of Dogs is a strange one because unlike The Darjeeling Limited, the Japanese characters (mostly Atari and Kobayashi) are not fodder in their own land, but have real agency, impact on the story, and character growth. It is mostly the choice to have their direct speech untranslated that distances them from the viewer. However, I feel this choice COULD have been *more* authentic than using English dialogue for Japanese characters - a thing that always bothers me as someone who isn't English or American. This adds a layer of distance and points to the *untranslatable.* While I agree that othering portrayals of non-Western cultures are harmful, there exist real cultural differences and untranslateables that are erased by letting everyone speak English or act in ways English-speaking audiences can easily identify with. The danger is that insisting on portraying the "humanity" of Japanese and Indian people can end up in making them speak English and act "Western" -- in effect confusing humanity with "Westernness". While Orientalism expressly wants to create "tableaus of queerness", a truly authentic depiction of "another culture" or of intercultural interaction will at times inevitably surprise or bewilder the sensibilities of a Western audience anyway. But this is all a moot point for Isle of Dogs: as some comments here say, the Japanese dialogue isn't really Japanese. It is there to *sound* Japanese. So instead of it saying something about the parts of our shared humanity that reach to each other over the gulf of intranslatability, it's just there to give off a Japanese "vibe". Which is Orientalism.
Anyway if you want to see a movie that explicitly addresses these issues in Lawrence of Arabia, you should check out Theeb: a film that treats its Arabian characters as people *without* "westernizing" them. And a great film to boot.

I’m writing an opinion piece for my school paper on orientalism in the cinematic landscape, and the structure of this video essay is extremely helpful. Awesome work 👏👏👏

Hi, I've recently discovered your channel and fell down a hole of binge-watching your video essays on film analysis since they are amazing and light-shedding on so many levels. I've been meaning to ask you if your bachelor was related to this subject because I'm in my senior year and I can't make up my mind on what to study in college, but this kind of analysis and insight on films, aesthetic and social issues manifested in cinematography is exactly what I wanted to do.

I'm genuinely curious if anyone actually thinks either of the Wes Anderson films addressed in this video really caused any sort of real world harm, regardless of intentions, and in what form that harm might be. Personally I don't think any of the "problems" presented in this video (about Wes Anderson's films specifically) really are flaws, but maybe just matters of perspective. Also I'm curious that if you do find considerable issues within these films, what you might think of something like Lost in Translation.

I love your channel so much. Thank you for making these.

you are so articulate and your video essays are so well-researched its honestly astounding!! I'm Japanese British myself and havent seen Isle of Dogs and honestly, I don't really plan to. I went through a Wes Anderson phase a couple years back but in hindsight, his films generally feel entertaining in the moment, but pretty empty by the end.
Also this is only slightly relevant, but have you heard of the singer Beabadoobee? I think she's filipina-british but her bf (who is white) MAJORLY idolises Anderson and it always made me feel a little icky, and I think perhaps it's his idolisation of Wes' aesthetics, and therefore his well-intentioned orientalism, that makes their relationship seem little more than just for like, show? Ykwim? Obvs I understand they do have a loving private relationship outside social media, but (to me) it really comes across as just another white guy who has a thing for asian girls -- anyway thank uu for the video!!

I would like to add something else about this discussion with the film The life aquatic with Steve Zissou. Seu Jorge, Brazilian singer, plays the character Pelé dos Santos and also performs various songs throughout the movie. Since I’m a Brazilian myself and watched it here, I thought the lack of subtitles for his lyrics were due to the fact that he was singing in Portuguese, not English. But after I rewatched it on a foreign streaming service, I noticed that the his songs still lacked subtitles. Jorge participation and performance made the film more “exotic” and “mysterious” even though all the songs were David Bowie’s covers in Portuguese. The translation to Portuguese is not exact; Seu Jorge maintains the melodies and styles, but often varies the lyrics, and Bowie himself recognized how beautiful he made them

There's definitely some interesting questions and discussions in the replies here, so I appreciate this video in getting that discussion going. I appologize if this long ramble is preaching to the choir.
The Orientalism argument I think is fair, because while the execution seems well intentioned, it can always be improved upon. Art in general I think reflects the thinking of its creators in that time/space/moment. And surprise surprise a lot of people in positions of influence do not have deep awarenesses or wide spread concientious views. I can't speak for the Japanese or mixed Japanese viewers, since I am neither, I'm chinese Canadian, I can't really know the general level of offense Japanese audiences take to the film as a whole: all we have here on KRplus are anecdotal accounts. Those anecdotes definitely matter, but they are a small sample, something that we can't really know as representative of the majority. I do know though I did feel some odd discomfort with the movie, but not enough that I could specifically place where. Though I feel like you were getting somewhere with the subtitle thing, I think asian immigrants in particular deal with issues of othering from Western culture a lot, and Isle of Dogs can definitely feel exacerbating to that issue v.s. difusing.
But I think the biggest issues with media start at the drafting table. Bad representation is often best fixed by hiring the right people to represent themselves. And that is a systemic issue imo, one that won't be solved with just criticizing one director or another. And I say this not to defend Wes Anderson or say he or his film is above criticism. Not at all, What I mean is- he is not the only problem- the problem of orientalism ( as you've mentioned) is far reaching, and rooted in popular perceptions and norns as much as racism. It's going to take much more time, work, discussion, and positive & profitable examples until hollywood changes enough to understand. And imo of the issues for hollywood to fix in their own industry? This is not a priority for them, ( not yet in anyways).They have tons of problems, it's only recent years they'd done anything about weinstein for eg., and while that's neither here or there or even the same issue. I feel like it is indicative of just how much public pressure it takes hollywood to even change the most ugly and amoral parts of it. You'd think something like hiring more Japanese people to be part of the writing process in a Japanese heavy film is a much easier thing to fix. And it is imo, north America is a multicultural continent, today's media industry is far reaching, anderson shouldn't have had issues at all in getting to chat with some Japanese immigrants/ mixed or native Japanese.
But what the Weinstein example said to me is that ultimately, Hollywood will not fix it's systemic problems ( in this case, creating a culture of intersectionality in movie production/ writing/ and directing, and stepping away from the strictly autocratic method in the creative process) until there is enough external pressure to do so. As long as something makes a profit, that matters more to hollywood then getting representation right. Which is stupid of them, because we've already seen clear examples of how profitable the right representation is ( i.e. black panther & wonder woman). But I think for directors like Anderson to learn ( and I mean all of the caucasian directors [ looking at u Disney- wtf were u thinking with live action Mulan?]), It's going to take many many MANY more black panther / wonderwoman/ kungfu panda/coco/moana's, before we start seeing more notably good rep from the bad.
TLDR: this vid is great! Orientalism is definitely a thing that Anderson could improve upon, but the roots of the biggest issues of orientalism is far reaching, and it's best fixed by having POC at the writing and directing table. That I feel is a big tenant of the issue, the failings of isle of dog ultimatly is symptomatic of the failings of hollywood as a whole. We gotta keep pushing for the right rep- without it, we'll continue have loud disaster films ( i.e. Avatar live action, Mulan live action) and small ones ( isle of Dog).

Yes finally! Thanks so much for the video :D

Love Said, Love Wes Anderson, Love this video. Thank you for making this

Good discussion. I haven't seen either of the movies focused on here (well, part of Darjeeling), but I agree it's important to look at how Orientalism has sometimes morphed into something tamer or more seemingly benign than it's been in the past.