After writing/directing a slew of successful films including "The Royal Tenenbaums" (2001) and "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" (2004), Wes Anderson's newest endeavor, "The Darjeeling Limited," is another talent-filled film characterized by his unique, inspiring style. The film's loose plotline follows three brothers on a spiritual quest through India on the titular train line. The Daily met with Anderson, co-writer Roman Coppola, and co-star Waris Ahluwalia for a round table discussion about their newest film - as well as Bill Murray's Karl Madden/symbol characteristics.
Question: Mr. Anderson: you, Mr. Coppola and Jason Schwartzman went to India before making the movie in order to live the movie first. Schwartzman's character, Jack, writes stories verbatim from his own life. Did scenes from your travels translate themselves into the movie?
Wes Anderson: They did. In fact, originally Jack wasn't a writer. As we were working, that came into it, and I can't imagine that that didn't happen [beforehand] because we had decided to make this movie very personal. For whatever reason, that appealed to us. We were very conscious about trying to use our experiences as much as we could, and we were asking the question we were always asking ourselves, which is: what happens next? In the course of that, we ended up with this character that was doing what we were doing: taking things from his life and trying to make them into stories and using that process to get to the next point in his life.
Roman Copolla: There was something about short stories as well. "Hotel Chevalier" [the short film featuring Schwartzman's character made to precede "Darjeeling"] was written totally separately. There's something about short stories that related to this. In the beginning, we knew that, even before he was a short story writer.
Anderson: Even before Jack was a writer, we were always referring to short stories. Even though it was a movie, we wanted to connect it to books.
Question: Throughout the movie there's a theme of regimented itinerary vs. the spontaneity of the journey. How spontaneous was the shooting process itself? Did a lot of stuff that you didn't plan on having happen make its way into the movie?
Anderson: I think yes, but the answer is that the shooting process is very regimented and planned. In order to accomplish something that you want to feel spontaneous, you need to have planned it carefully, and that's always the hard part. Part of our goal with this movie was when the detours come and the things we expected to happen suddenly aren't possible - we're going to shoot that. Because that's a part of the way we're going to be able to keep moving forward and experience the place - that's part of the theme of the movie. And [also] to experience India and have India become less the backdrop and more the subject matter.
Question: In your movies, you have a lot of elaborate scenes. Do you enjoy shooting those most, or do you prefer the smaller, more intimate scenes?
Anderson: I think sometimes it's fun to shoot a complicated scene. But most of what's fun on the set on the day that you're actually doing it is when the actors are great, in whatever way that comes about. When the actors are surprising you with their performances, when suddenly there's a mood on the set and you feel like, "Wow, something's really happening here in front of our camera." That's the thing that's exciting.
Question: Waris, you are a jewelry designer. How did you end up in acting and how does it compare to jewelry design?
Waris Ahluwlia: When we met, I was designing Wes' cufflinks. [They both break into laughter.] Honestly, though, they're both creative processes. With the jewelry, I sort of oversee every little detail and in acting, I get to be part of something much bigger ... I get told where to go and what to do and just be part of this larger family, which is really beautiful. In terms of the process, it's creating, it's telling a story, so in my head it's all the same.
Question: Wes; the movie opened with Bill Murray, and he ended up not being in most of the film. What was the nature of his character?
Anderson: There used to be these old American Express commercials that starred Karl Malden in the '70s. Bill Murray's character is modeled on Malden ... We ran into him in New York and we said we're doing this thing in India, and we actually had a part, a cameo ... in fact, it's so little that it's more of a symbol. And he says, "Symbol. Hmmm. Well, I'd like to be a symbol." So then he came to India and brought these different costumes with him that he thought might be good for a symbol. One of them was a yellow linen suit with short pants. I don't know what that was meant to represent, but it signified something. Anyway, we went with the Karl Malden look in the end, but it was great because you get Bill Murray in the movie, at which point the cameo or symbol suddenly becomes a character. And he sticks around for two weeks and you have Bill on your set - you can't ask for more than that.
Question: How do you reconcile the detail-oriented cinema for which you're so well known with keeping "the big picture" in mind?
Anderson: In general, I feel like I would rather have a movie where we fill it with ideas and then somebody says at first they're distracted. Well, see it again! Everybody makes movies in a different way; I'd rather have it be as dense as it can be. The most time on the set goes into the performance of the actors and how we're going to help them bring it to life and how they're going to help us bring the story to life. But I like to embrace the idea of filling the movie up with ideas. In the end, if that means my movies share some similarities or someone can say, "He always does it that way," well, that's okay. I don't mind if my movies fit together as a body of work.
