Writings

Wes Anderson and His Impact on Stop-Motion Animation

Wes Anderson is known for his idiosyncratic style in directing movies. The quirky nature of Indie wood cinema has been shaped largely from Anderson’s take on the genre.  There is compelling evidence that supports Anderson’s unapologetically unique style. Anderson is an auteur. Many critiques have qualms with this claim, but there lies a truth about his distinctive style. His films provide radically different stories and themes, yet all share some noticeable qualities that, for some reason, the audience can identify the film as one directed by Wes Anderson.  Fantastic Mr. Fox and Isle of Dogs are unique examples in the collection of Anderson movies because they are stop-motion animation.  While stop-motion animation is a stark contrast to live-action filmmaking, Anderson remained true to many of his well-known trademarks. There is an important question that arises from this. How does Wes Anderson adapt his directorial style to animation? 

Fantastic Mr. Fox and Isle of Dogs offer compelling similarities in their visual styles while simultaneously diverging enough from one another to remain separate stories in Anderson’s cinematic repertoire. Wes Anderson’s visual style and narrative are two of his most distinctive qualities. How they align as well as diverge is what will be investigated further. Their differences found in drastically different storylines and color palettes and their similarities found in camera angles and over detailing.   

Fantastic Mr. Fox was a tale about a fox and his unquenchable thirst to steal.  His attitude and careless regard for anyone but himself landed him in trouble.  He had planned one final raid on Bogus, Bunce, and Beans, the three biggest, meanest farmers around. They each produced a good that Mr. Fox wanted to steal.  His family and friends were put aside repeatedly for his selfish desires. Mr. Fox’s antics came to a head when the three farmers join forces, causing all the animals to retreat underground. The farmers destroyed Mr. Fox’s home and would not give up until Mr. Fox gave in. The film ended with Mr. Fox reconciling with his son, saving his nephew, and learning some values of selflessness.  

Isle of Dogs told the story of Japan in the future. The mayor had exiled all dogs to Trash Island because he did not like them. He used propaganda to blame dogs for making humans sick.  A young boy named Atari had a dog named Spot sent away to Trash Island, and the story followed his quest to find him.  Once there, Atari met a pack of five dogs who helped him on his journey. In the end, they found Spot, but more importantly, the head dog of the pack, Chief, found himself. He was a stray, and there was an emphasis on this fact throughout the film. He created a special bond with Atari and ended as his dog. This was all made possible after a foreign exchange student, Traci, helped uncover the lies told to the public about dogs and aided in their return to civilization. 

The term visual style is broad and offers a great deal of flexibility in how it is used across any movie. Wes Anderson, however, has narrowed down some specific visual techniques that remain constant in his filmmaking.  One of his chief techniques in the visual set up of his movies is the camera angles.  Setting the camera straight on to the characters produces a two-dimensional effect. Most films offset the cameras to various angles generally 30-degrees from one another.  

The theme of symmetric is seen across Anderson films. The camera is placed directly in the center, making it is easy to place characters or objects on an imaginary line that runs down the middle of the screen. This practice also makes for breathtaking composition during dialogue. When doing shot-reverse-shot, it is a 180-degree turn from one character’s face to the other. It produces a different effect than when the audience can see both characters in the shot at once. This was used in Fantastic Mr. Fox on multiple occasions. When Mr. Fox talked to Kylie, and when he talked to his wife. It was also an appealing tactic used when the characters were looking directly at the camera. It emphasized emotion and generated a more intimate experience for the audience. Tracy Walker, the foreign exchange student in Isle of Dogs, was seen in this manner multiple times. Whether it was her addressing a group of people or making remarks to herself, it was an effective use of camera placement because her monologues were often critical and required little visual context aside from what she was doing.  

Wide-angle shots are frequent among Anderson films; in his two stop motion films, this was no different. How these shots were reproduced did come with challenges.  Of the multiple sets, each had to be broken down further to accommodate the framing Anderson wanted.  

The straight on, middle of the set, the camera angle was used alternatively as well. A staple of Wes Anderson films is a bird’s eyeshot. Straight on but from above. This provides a unique perspective when varying up the camera and is often used to accentuate detail. This strategy was used both in Fantastic Mr. Fox and Isle of Dogs. In each movie, it allowed mass amounts of information to be on screen. This angle allotted for more information to be obtained visually without explanation through narration. Bird’s eye shooting was used when Mr. Fox is explaining what Bogus eats. The meals were spread on the table and established the vastness of the meal. Similarly, Isle of Dogs used bird’s eye shooting to show a chef preparing sushi. It gave the audience a view of the chef gutting a fish, chopping a tentacle, and arranging the food into an appealing dish. 

Attention to detail is in large part of what makes Wes Anderson different. The amount of information provided in the seemingly unimportant backgrounds or attire often goes undetected. However, after watching the film again, the ability to focus on details missed before making a difference in intention. In an interview with Tim Ledbury, a senior worker on set for Isle of Dogs. He discusses Anderson’s almost obsession with detail. (Robertson 2018) Stop-motion animation already requires a long timeline, but Anderson’s need for detail prolonged the process further. For reference, Fantastic Mr. Fox had about 80 sets, and Isle of Dogs had around three times as many.  In an article from IndieWire Bill Desowitz spoke with two production designers for Isle of Dogs. The article mentioned how Isle of Dogs used 1,000 puppets. There were 500 dogs and 500 humans.  The five main characters took about 16 weeks to make, but that was not the end of it.  The dog’s fur came from repurposed wool used to make teddy bears. Even the ensemble characters were handmade. (Desowitz 2018) Tim Ledbury said that Anderson was very anti CGI. used a great deal more CG for its puppets than Isle of Dogs. (Robertson 2018) 

While attention to detail was seen based on characters and sets, color palettes are an influence on visual style as well. Patterns and consistency of specific colors throughout the film occurred in both stop motion films. They contrasted in the colors used, but the general theme still aligned. In Fantastic Mr. Fox, this pattern was warm tones. Many hues of red, orange, and yellow made up clothing, characters, and background sets. The vibrant tones set a campy feel to the film.  Isle of Dogs contrasted that bright warm palette with seas of silver, greys, whites, and blacks. Hints of reds were dispersed throughout the film, particularly in the city. The cold, harsh color tones that made up most of Isle of Dogs reflected the darker tone of the film. The film was somewhat political, and the humans used dogs as a scapegoat for furthering power over the city’s population. 

David Bordwell wrote an article about Anderson and discussed some potential reasons for the extensive detail in Wes Anderson films. While detail can be part of the visual aesthetic of a film, detail was also an influence on the narratives of Wes Anderson’s films. Bordwell brought up five possible functions of detail. Realism, allurism, density, motifs, and music. Bordwell applied these features to the movie Moonrise Kingdom by Wes Anderson. Some control of these functions were seen in Anderson’s stop motion films. (Bordwell 2015) 

Fantastic Mr. Fox differed from Isle of Dogs as it was a replication of the book by Roald Dahl. A made-up place, during a made-up time, meant Anderson could create an entire world. Attention to detail influences how believable the world is to the audience.  The smallest of background details in Fantastic Mr. Fox gave the audience a sense of depth for the story.  This realism is like density as it aids in creating a world as Bordwell puts it. (Bordwell 2015) Anderson intentionally took time out of the main plotline to explain a sport called “whack bat.” Not only did it show the kids playing the game, but it also laid out the rules and purpose of the game.   The use of motifs was present as well. This was most noticeable in the dynamics of the fox family.  There are repeated conflicts of the family that was meant to weigh on the viewer.  How will things get resolved? It goes deeper than just Mr. Fox’s grand plan to “show the man.” It deals with father-son issues and husband and wife relationships. Family is a key motif in many Anderson films, including The Royal Tenenbaums. 

How Anderson applied detailing in Isle of Dogs is different than in Fantastic Mr. Fox. Japan is real, pushing Anderson to use realism and density in a much more pragmatic way. Being thoughtful and knowledgeable on Japan and its culture and history was key to bringing the audience in. These details came in inclusions of sumo wrestling, drumming, sushi making, and classic Japanese painting styles. These were seamlessly introduced to the story within various scenes. While potentially being construed as unnecessary additions, Anderson used them to add density.   However, there was more flexibility in this film for allurism. Most notably, this came from the dogs and the emphasis on Chief not being anyone’s pet. There was emphasis on the collars the dogs wore at the start of the film. Collars were being used as a symbol for being owned. Chief did not have one as he claimed he never had an owner. This outsider mentality continued through the film. However, Atari and Chiefs relationship started to change this. The constant mention of ownership throughout the film ended up with Chief becoming Atari’s dog. The narrative of this film also served a larger purpose. The motifs seen in Anderson’s other films could be seen in Isle of Dogs, too, mainly, how the main character changed for the better and learned from how they had been stuck in their ways. In Isle of Dogs was visualized in Chief.  For comparison, this motif was reflected in Mr. Fox as well. The plot served a deeper meaning than a dog finding his way in life. It is deeper intentions dealing with politics, and marginalized populations were used as a scapegoat.  This motif was present at the start when discussing how the dogs had been exiled. It continues with propaganda, conspiracy, violence, activism, and, eventually, justice. Mayor Kobayashi used his political influence to induce fear in his people, and that fear leads to all dogs being sent away. The fear-mongering from the media in the film eerily reflects real life. A stop motion film bringing up heavy topics such as this shows just how significant detail can be to a film.  On a fundamental level, an animated film may be entertaining and downright enjoyable. On a deeper level, analyzing the meaning behind the choices made by Anderson can change the entire narrative of the film. 

Fantastic Mr. Fox and Isle of Dogs serve as two remarkable movies directed by Wes Anderson. Not only were they experimental pieces in Anderson’s collection as stop-motion animation films. They were extensions of his already known brand as an auteur. Each film had identifiable features of Anderson’s idiosyncratic style, and yet each film remains unique from the other. Each film relied heavily on visual styling common to other Anderson films. They used symmetry, wide framing, angles, specific color palettes, and detailing. The narrative style of the films relied on realism, allurism, density, and motifs to share a story. Fantastic Mr. Fox and Isle of Dogs have an array of similarities while also remaining separate from one another. Fantastic Mr. Fox reimagined a classic kid’s novel into a beautiful autumn storybook land.  Isle of Dogs told a much more jarring story filled with dull colors mixed with flashes of red. Even though they stand totally separate entities serving a completely different purpose they are still classic Wes Anderson films and are great movies to critically engage with. They serve much deeper purposes than to compare two stop-motion animation films. They reveal just how far-reaching creativity and imagination can be. Anderson’s identity was found in each of these films not just in the credits, but with using a critical lens; his trademark could be seen everywhere in the films.

Bibliography

Bordwell, David. “MOONRISE KINGDOM: Wes in Wonderland.” Observations on Film Art, 20 July 2014, www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2014/07/20/moonrise-kingdom-wes-in-wonderland/.

This article provides a lot of information on Wes Anderson being an Auteur.  It gives various examples in his films that make his style “whimsical” A particular point of interest came from his shooting style.  How he used shot reverse shot, straight on, or sharp angles.  Often using birds’ eye too.  Other important notes came from how the camera moves. He often uses lateral and parallel movement to the action and makes use of panning.

Desowitz, Bill. “’Isle of Dogs’: How Team Wes Anderson Created a Stop-Motion Love Letter to Japanese Cinema.” IndieWire, 23 Mar. 2018, www.indiewire.com/2018/03/isle-of-dogs-wes-anderson-stop-motion-animation-japanese-cinema-1201942149/.

This article provided details surrounding the making of Isle of Dogs. It gave many important facts about the creating of sets and puppets used.

Kornhaber, Donna. Wes Anderson. U. Of Illinois P., 2017.

This book provides details on Wes Anderson and his style. Points of interest were how he used his camera, comedy, and provides details on.

Lina. “The Visual Direction of Wes Anderson.” Control FOREVER, 25 Mar. 2018, controlforever.com/read/visual-direction-wes-anderson/.

An article all about the various visual techniques and styles that Wes Anderson embodies. It gives multiple succicnt examples of where in his films he uses the techniques and some important definitions and features that are useful in understanding his approach to filmmaking.

Macdowell, James. “Quirky:Buzzword or Sensibility.” American Independent Cinema: Indie,Indiewood, and Beyond, edited by Geoff King, Routledge, 2012, pp. 53–64.

A chapter all about Independent films and some of the key features that are typical of American independent cinema.  It also brings the concept of quirky as a defining feature of an indie wood film. It grapples with whether the word is overused in the genre.

Roberston, Barbara. “The Visual Effects of Wes Anderson’s ‘Isle of Dogs’.” Animation World Network, 2018, www.awn.com/vfxworld/visual-effects-wes-andersons-isle-dogs.

This article is an interview with Tim Ledbury the VFX supervisor for Isle of the Dogs. The interview offers a great deal of information on the making of Isle of the Dogs and how it compares to. Other important notes are about Anderson becoming accustom to stop motion and how he went about making the films.