Finally, the snarky quote from a Hollywood auteur that has people talking isn’t about the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Isn’t it nice to talk about something else, for a change? You might not even think it’s that mean, but Wes Anderson‘s comment about dropping The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar on Netflix, in a recent interview with IndieWire, is still pretty funny.
The short film stars Benedict Cumberbatch, Richard Ayoade, Dev Patel, Ben Kingsley, Ralph Fiennes, as well as Rupert Friend. It’s an adaptation of a Roald Dahl short story and will take less time to watch than an episode of Stranger Things.
“I really couldn’t figure out the approach,” Anderson told IndieWire about adapting the story. “I knew what I liked in the story was the writing of it, Dahl’s words. I couldn’t find the answer, and then suddenly I did. It’s not a feature film. It’s like 37 minutes or something. But by the time I was ready to do it, the Dahl family no longer had the rights at all. They had sold the whole deal to Netflix. Suddenly, in essence, there was nowhere else you could do it since they own it. But beyond it, because it’s a 37-minute movie, it was the perfect place to do it because it’s not really a movie. You know they used to do these BBC things called ‘Play for Today’ directed by people like Steven Frears and John Schlesinger and Alan Clarke. They were one-hour programs or even less. I kind of envisioned something like that.”
Context is key, but a burn is a burn
The added context about “Play for Today” does make the full quote a little kinder. We had programs like this in the United States called Playhouse 90, among others. But still, saying that Netflix is the perfect place for his movie because “it’s not really a movie”?! It’s shade in a nice, informative, some might even say “quirky” Wes Anderson kind of way, but shade nonetheless. The quote tweets on a Variety post about the interview said things like “burn,” “zing,” and “ruthless.”
It’s not like Netflix has not put out quality films. They’ve won awards and everything, but it’s annoying that they get buried on the platform and rarely get a theatrical release. Netflix should be mocked, at least. But he probably didn’t even mean for it to come out like that, you know? At least that’s the vibe I’m getting.
Also, it is *literally* not a movie … it’s several
In fact, in a different interview with The Daily Beast, Anderson spoke on this particular project for Netflix again. He doubled down on it not being a “movie” per se, and he elaborated in a way that I think clarifies some things. “I did some Roald Dahl short story adaptations,” he said to The Daily Beast. “They’re separate from each other; they’re not one thing. But the first one is a longer one, about 36-38 minutes, and so it’s a whole story—it’s The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar. […] It’s kind of an unusual form for the storytelling that we do, because my way into it was that I realized that what I liked were his words. The way the stories are told in Roald Dahl’s words.” That changes things!
So this is more or less a Wes Anderson television series, or anthology series. (The way he describes it actually makes it seem like “anthology series” is far too conventional a definition. That’s really exciting to me. What kind of experimental art is he up to?) This also clears up some questions that I had about the not-really-a-film as a fan of Dahl’s short stories. I wore out my copy of The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar and Six More—which, as you may have guessed, contains seven stories.
If only he’d made that point about Henry Sugar being one of several short story adaptations in both interviews. Then I don’t think his comment would have gone viral. But that’s the internet for you!
(featured image: Samir Hussein/WireImage)
