Asteroid City Explained | What the Alien Really Means
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- Asteroid City explained how art can help us with the grieving process. When the alien takes the arid plains meteorite, the convention attendees are left in a state of shock and distress. Suddenly, they must confront the abrupt absence of a beloved object that has been a constant throughout their lives. Without the asteroid, the site loses its meaning, all that’s left is an empty crater. Therefore, the alien, as the taker of the asteroid, can be thought of as a metaphor for death; an unstoppable force that deprives us of our loved ones and leaves us with a heart-wrenching reminder of their absence. The characters' reactions to this symbolic event help them to overcome their grief, a journey shared by the actors playing them.
//Follow me//
Twitter: / jake_bishop_
Instagram: / jake_bishop
Blog/Website: www.jakebishop...
//Contact me//
Business enquiries: jake@jakebishop.net
This movie has been stuck in my head since I first watched it. At first I thought it was deep, something lay there beyond my awareness that resonated, but I wasn't sure why. This is an incredible interpretation, I gotta go rewatch that movie lol
The part that really stuck with me was "Am I doing this right?" as a sort of eternal question in life. There's this pervasive anxiety to modern existence that it all seems to be a performance, but we don't really know if we're doing well or badly or what we ought to be doing instead. I say "modern" existence because I think it's a phenomenon of mass media and advertising, we're bombarded with messaging that says "do this and be happy" but there are so many of these messages that we cannot possibly obey them all and we're aware that they can't all be true. But is the message wrong, or have we just done it wrong, or chosen the wrong ones to reject? Are we doing this right?
An interpretation that I took from this film is how much time we waste on the what ifs instead of focusing on present issues we face.
Everyone was so focused on this potential dangers of this alien (even though he was a seemingly peaceful little guy) rather than the actual present dangers ignored throughout the movie, such as the multiple atomic bomb tests or police shootouts.
While they are clearly tangible threats to peace, the town has become numb to them as a result of their often occurrence. Rather than focus on those threats, it’s much more interesting to pay attention on some wacky alien.
It’s much easier to focus on the bright and shiny distractions in our lives rather than to take a step back and look at whats really impacting us.
Clifford voice: "you dare me?" 😂
I think this is a really good analysis and I think one that Anderson intended. It seems to me that the movie is extremely self-referential because that's the substance of his films - characters ignoring the pain and reality of their problems in favor of temporary, "shiny" pursuits.
Very good making sense of the work, and explaining it. I was in awe of Anderson before learning what you taught. Now - I just can't fathom what it would be like to be able to talk about grief so creatively as Anderson.
I think what this movie is about is summed up in the phrase, "You can't wake up, if you don't fall asleep". The "you" is consciousness -- the part of universal consciousness that is currently experiencing this reality (or this play). "Waking up", of course, is becoming aware, or enlightened. Transcending this reality. The "if you don't fall asleep" part is the idea that when we (consciousness) enter this reality we must do so with total amnesia and no memory of where we come from. We must be totally immersed in the reality (or this play) or our experiences will lack honesty. Thus, we must "fall asleep". Falling asleep or becoming totally immersed in this reality is the only way consciousness (we) are going to grow and become "aware" (or wake-up). This is what I think this movie is all about.
Clifford voice: "you dare me?" 😂😂
I bought a DVD of Asteroid City. As a retired Newspaper cartoonist in Utah I appreciate Wes Anderson’s take on the culture of the period.
Grew up in St. George, Utah area in the 80's. Two memories recalled while I watched the movie. 1) St. George was typically in the 'fallout zone' from Nuclear Testing in the Nevada Desert. My 7th grade English teacher relayed that his finger and hand went numb after writing something into the dust on his parents car trunk when he was a kid. 2) My Grand Father raised his family, fathers side, in Las Vegas. Grandpa always did a bit of investing in property, and happened to buy some property in Rachel, NV, near Area 51 during the alien/Roswell/UFO hype period. When my grandparents passed, early 2000's, someone got the Rachel NV property in the will, and I was told property tax was around $2 a year.
I think trying to figure out the plot of the play within the movie is kind of missing the point, and I really don't think the alien as a metaphor for death is the strongest read of death in the story. You can definitely read it that way, but there's much more fundamental to the structure that speaks to death and our experience of loss, and you do get into some of that in the back half, but it's odd to me that you started with what I think is your weakest point.
Augie burns his hand on the griddle, and the actor playing him (Jones Hall) doesn't understand why. He steps out of the play, breaking character to speak to the director. The director basically tells him that he also doesn't know why Augie does it, but to go back to performing his part knowing that regardless, he has a part to play in the story, and that it's not that Jones has become Augie, but that Augie has become Jones. Jones Hall then goes out to a balcony and speaks to a woman who was supposed to be cast as Augie's wife but no longer exists in the play, who reminds him of the conversation they would have had about their kids growing up, and how Augie would have received permission to move on and find love again. Hall then goes back to the performance and finishes out the play with that new context.
In theory, all the stuff outside the play shouldn't affect the text of what happens, but Hall brings those experiences and conversations into the performance. My interpretation of these scenes, and the rest of the movie around it, is centered on viewing these scenes as a metaphor where the play is life itself, and what happens on stage are the true events with the real people, but our internal selves are akin to the actors on stage. Jones Hall steps back from being Augie Steenbeck to question his own purpose and motivations, and goes to question the director of the play, whose objective view stands outside the play itself. You might say the director is God or the cosmos or whatever, but the point I'm making is that Jones, as Augie's inner self, is questioning his own place in the cosmos and realizing that there really is very little distinction between the character and the actor: they are both true reflections of Augie Steenbeck, the person on stage. Augie needs to realize that he doesn't need to understand why the world does what it does, why he needs to burn his hand, in order to live out his life. He and Midge even recognize that they always have plans for what to do next instead of spending time in the present living the lives and being the parents that they want to be.
His conversation with the woman who played Augie's wife is then, by my interpretation, is Augie's hypothetical conversation that he wishes he could have had, but unfortunately for him never happened on stage. She was cut from the cast of his life, and therefore any conversation that he would have had with her never happened. All that said, nothing she would have said are any less true than if she had actually said them on stage. All of that is also true of Hall's loss of Earp, like you said, which dovetails with you said in the video.
When I started your video, I thought I would disagree more with your interpretation, from the alien thing, but honestly I think our interpretations still work together.
I had a similar takeaway from this movie, specifically this scene. Life can feel like Astroid City; it can have order yet be full of chaos. Sometimes we can get so lost in routine in the mundane that we don’t even notice the chaos; it becomes normal, almost apart of us. But at other times we notice it and when we try to make sense of the unexpected everything makes even less sense. We ask ourselves if we’re acting our play of life right, wondering if we've made mistakes, if what were doing is worth it, if anything is worth it because hopefully it's worth it for, for what? Do we just keep playing our role? Do we keep telling our story?
YES. We do it without knowing anything, without knowing if there is a meaning to life, a meaning to our play because we're playing ourselves just right. No one else can play us, no one else can be you because no one else is you so stop worrying about if your doing right or wrong because you can't be. Stop trying to decipher the meaning of chaos because it is a waste of time, it takes away from the play; it is all inherently meaningless. Instead, continue the play because living, being yourself, placing value on what you choose to spend time on and spend time with is how you materialize meaning. We may only understand life in fleeting moments and for these moments in time when we think things make sense, we should cherish everything because one day we will die, and the play will continue on.
Mostly really good, but I'd quibble a bit with "stop trying to decipher..." because I think that it too is part of the life process. It's pretty much inevitable that at least some of us sometime will try to do that. That's just as inevitable as anything else in life. Best you can do is be creative, perhaps participate in a silly play, or film, or write something, perhaps even on the struggle to find meaning. In a way, the message isn't about stopping, or NOT doing anything, well, maybe short of attempting suicide. After all, this film got made, and the documentary of the play within the film, etc. It's as if there's no end to the questioning by of meaning, even if we just barely struggle through it.
@@squirlmy fair enough. I understand topics best through deconstruction which does rely on trying to decipher it's meaning, but I need to be better about balancing my want for understanding with just sitting back and enjoying/experiencing things, so maybe I'm just putting my personal bias out into the world.
I would pretty much say what you explained, less adequately, and only wish to can the whole thing as being Meta...as it was and what they were going through, via Wes ANdersons clearly stated acts and scenes. The time period had everyone almost on the same page, if you will, 3 Broadcast TV Channels, everyone watched the same shows and movies, Microwave were BRAND NEW and cooked potatoes in minutes (multiple people from that era have relayed that potato bit to me), the moon landing was fresh, nukes were LITERALLY being tested regularly, every boy wanted to be a scientist, Chemistry sets were a very popular christmas gift, John Wayne was EVERYONEs man's man, pre-Vietnam SUPER PRIDE in the Military, the Nations INTERSTATE FREEWAYS were being built (route 66 and the towns that grew up on that route would see a decline as a result) and highways were still the way to MAJOR WAY to get around, women were starting to feel the noose of ALWAYS being at home and being ONLY home makers were taking barbiturates to deal with anxiety (nicknamed 'mothers little helper')...anyway
UFO's and all the advancements to science were VERY disruptive to the statues quo of that time...the 60's were just around the corner...People's surrounding were dramatically changing...god and ufo's didn't fit very well with theological thinking at the time. Everything was new and different...and didn't have the canned religious answers ready yet.
It's also interesting that we do not see any of the little kids "behind the stage".
I thought it was because kids still don't have that emotional complexity that adults have, and their interpretation of traumatic events are less catastrophic and more natural and healthy. They also don't have to fake themselves to go through life. So there is no conflict or distinction between the actors and the characters so it's like they are still dreaming without waking up.
This movie reminded me so much of Kurt Vonnegut’s work
Wes Anderson was making amazing movies 20+ years ago, and he keeps getting better. Imagine what he’ll be able to produce in another 10-20 years. Directors tend to get better over time as they gain more experience. I thank my lucky stars Wes is here on Earth, doing what he does best.
Damn! The five stages of grief part and the alien metaphor is really outstanding. 😮 Well said!
amazing essay! i just watched asteroid city for the first time and picked up on a lot of the same details you did, but you expounded on them even more. thank you for this video, i grow to love this movie the more i think about it
I think the fact that everybody is looking for a metaphor in the alien instead of just admitting there was an alien is the point and mirrors the characters in the play. Aliens are real and we're in denial.
Clifford voice: "you dare me?"
Also human relationships are a big theme in the movie and this alien is something they have too
There's things people don't like to admit to be there and look for meaning in them always
We appreciate your dedication and hard work. Keep it up as always.
The alien is not a metaphor for death. It's clear when the two photographs of the movie star and the alien are side by side that the alien is a metaphor for contact.
Could you build on that?
Maybe the meteor represents the first wife and the alien the movie star?
The alien is a geologist
Very nice, and beautiful. Thank you.
thank you!! i never understood asteroid city, but now i finally understand. i was waiting for this essay
I think it’s mentioned in the movie that the alien inventories the asteroid (the asteroid being a trauma which leaves a scar on the land, similar to how the main character has a scar on his head). I believe that this is another way of saying that the asteroid has been processed. Just like the main character is constantly processing his pictures, he must also process his trauma. The actress therefore has a parallel to the alien in that she is the vehicle by which processing happens. This is also shown when she is in a similar pose in a picture as the alien.
There are so many metaphors in this movie. I loved it.
Just a fantastic essay
Best explaination i’ve seen 🙏
Clifford voice: "you dare me?" 😂
I really needed this explanation. While I was watching the film I was aware that I was missing the point, the meaning eluded me. But after watching your analysis, I can appreciate the genius of this film in full understanding.
I recently heard: "World War I was fought by young men who DIDN'T know each other in service of old men who DID."
Thanks for this, really helped me understand the movie, or at least one interpretation of it
My experience added another meta level. I had to fight to stay awake! Im not saying that meaning that it was boring...I made the mistake of watching it too late after a long day...coming in and out of dozing and hearing the references to being confused about the plot, the people falling asleep and "you can't wake up if you don’t fall asleep ".
Was that part of the intended effect?!
Now I need to re-watch this during the day!
Quite an interesting and provocative explanation of the film. Well thought out.
I just see the movie as a sort of parody of modern franchise blockbusters, whose greatest minds all grew up in the age of nuclear anxiety (Spielberg, Lucas, Cameron), or were spun from material forged in the age of nuclear anxiety (Marvel Comics and all the radiation origin stories of its heroes). These kids invent stuff way beyond their time, and then their town gets "threatened" by the military overreacting to an "alien" crisis. Could have become a superhero film if these kids use their inventions to save the town, but instead they're too busy thinking of pubescent hijinks to do so. Wes Anderson is really trying to tribute franchise blockbusters, but indirectly.
LOVED this interpretation. you made me gasp out loud a few times! definitely connected a few dots for me loved it
very nice interpretation though I think It can even have the exact opposite meaning philosophically reading the aliens as eternal form of humans which is maybe the same as you think but instead of abscence it could be readed as eternal presence don't blame me I'm an episcopalian .
This movie was hard to follow. I had to replay parts repeatedly it was like reading a book and getting stuck on a paragraph for an hour
Thank you
Incredible
The stage play might be able to be interpreted as our world, the mortal world, where the real world in the film is kind of like a heaven where beings that we believe can control our world (the stage play in the film) are living in, such as the director and writer are to the stage play. The real world in the film is also the only place where Schwartzman's character got to meet his deceased wife, in heaven, and can talk to her for one last time to find his closure. It is also when Schwartzman talk to the director of the show, Brody's character, about the meaning of life and that Brody's character kneel down, similar to when we try to communicate to the god-like beings, that he also has no idea.
The photographer burns his hand to wake up. He needed the “sleep” made up of this wilderness of events during his stagnation and grief or else he would never have burned his hand. Now because of burning himself on purpose, unexpectedly and un-premeditated, he is thus free of his belief in determinism. Romance doesn’t free him like in a Hollywood payoff scene. Pain is how he seeks freedom.
I really would love a more in depth answer relating to the death of a narcissist and circle of wagons on each respective side.
This is a movie in search for meaning. When that wasn't found the movie was made anyhow.
You should do a video of the movie Armageddon Time.
Yes, this is all well and good, but WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE SONG THAT PLAYS AT THE END OF THIS VIDEO?!?!
It's a comedy. It will offend many, tho. But that's what movies do sometimes. Wes Anderson makes very original funny movies. Highly entertaining. 🙂
What in this movie would offend anyone?
dude you were making absolutely cerebral level connections, like functioning on a higher cognitive level
Too clever by half. Pretentious, but they seemed to be enjoying themselves.
Ok, but it's still boring as hell
Sorry but I found this film beautiful to look at and frustrating to watch. It attempts to be too smart for its own good, like Andy Kauffman pushing a joke beyond all limits for his own satisfaction but not the audience. Then you get members of Kauffman's audience, like some who watched this film, attempting to justify the nonsense and their own intelligence with a host of analysis and theory.
I have enjoyed most of Wes Anderson's work but this one fell flat for me.
Hmm, still a very poor movie. The worst Wes Anderson movie I have seen. The coloured scenes are reasonable with the song & dance being particularly enjoyable... the black & white documentary parts I found to be extremely self-indulgent to the point that I wanted a refund. I will be approaching Anderson's next film with a good deal of caution.
I love Wes Anderson. I could not enjoy this film.
This explanation is as confusing and meandering as the film. DOUBLE FAIL
Smoke a joint then rewatch it.
Hey, I'm not looking for permanent brain damage. Not me!
@@jimmerhardy According to US Patent #6630507B1, Cannabis is a government recognized neuroprotectant, meaning it protects the brain and central nervous system. Also, according to the January 11, 2012 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, Cannabis also protects the lungs as well, due to a 20+ year study that was commissioned by the American Lung Association. It's time you stopped believing the lies of the government's anti Cannabis propaganda.
@@DeWin157 That should be in the trailer as a warning.
Saw this on a plane 2 days ago, TRASH!!!!!!
Heathen
The alien is a methaphor for every character being different from one another. You 1st see thr alien when you see the 3 dots. The 4th green dot appears and then the alien appears. The 4th coming of christ. I dont know what im saying, this movie sucked. Lol
What a film btw !
Thank you for this intelligent and enriching analysis! Without this knowledge it’s a beautiful film. But with it, there’s even more appreciation for the writing - even more substance behind the art. Thank you!
This channel deserves to be seen more
Scarlett Johansson was nude. That has been in my head for a while now. Sometimes I just wonder about the cosmos but deny aliens, and think back to the few seconds that Scarlett Johansson was nude.
So goes life
Ever wonder how often people have seen you nude? And anyhow we go about our lifes trying to figure why's there so many things we can't understand, problems we can't solve emotions we can't explain
How often we remember we're nude out there?
@@mattdragon333 I've been compared to A chiseled veiny statue in Black flesh, with a bit of paranormal activity in my thoughts. Though I'm a red pilled man, who has an affection for women, have the least amount of long term commitment towards them because of their underlying desire to be fully taken care of especially when they have been applied by other men. Therefore sir, seeing Scarlett nude isn't quite new to me, though you defend her grandeur with such steadfastness, as if you're akin to her angelic behavior that she wouldn't do this if not monetarily, is quite baffling to me, dear Matt. Tsk,tsk.
@@thebraveone5095 aren't you nude at tye gym? Mostly nude at the beach and the pool?
Women have seen you nude through intimate and common situations
Yet you don't wonder
How can the world just go about in madness and you were nude but a moment ago
💚 so good 🍓milk please
Seeing ScarJo nekkid made this crap movie worth the wasted time. If I didn't see those tah-tah's and bush there'd literally be no reason to watch this
😂This is the funnies comment in the thread! Ha! Lol
I never thought Id hear of someone watching a Wes Anderson film for nudity lol. Ur descriptive use of slang terms for body parts has to b the gravy on top of this already hilarious point. 🤣
Thanks!!
@@friedricengravy6646 haha thank you 🙂
For anyone interested in a real analysis of the film, check out Thomas Flight's video essay on the topic. I wouldn't waste your time with this channel. Jake doesn't even scratch the surface of any major concept in the film and rather lazily just attributes the meaning to "nihilism." I really don't understand how a self-proclaimed critic can do such a horrible job with such a concise and brilliant piece of art. Shame on you, Jake. Try a bit harder next time.
Clifford voice: "you dare me?" 😂
Perhaps they haven't read sartre yet, and nihilism is something everyone struggles with
I rather think both these views are very complementary