Wes Anderson’s The Wonderful Story Of Henry Sugar Review: A Concentrated Pill of Anderson-isms

Prathyush Parasuraman

Wes Anderson Gives Artifice A Good Reputation

By his barefaced, shameless, relentless insistence upon it, until it produces the effect of being stuffed, of having seen too much and with the rattling pace of deadpan dialogues, having heard too much.

Adapted From Roald Dahl’s Short Story

With his latest short film The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar, — one of four, including The Swan, The Rat Catcher, and Poison —  he pulls this lever of speed, of artifice, so hard, he breaks it.

The Narration Keeps Switching

Which was at first done by Dahl, switches to Sugar, and then, switches again. And again. Till subjectivity, the very question of whose story this is about, sounds silly.

Z.Z. Chatterjee Is Entirely Anderson’s Creation 

With respect to the film’s relation to the text itself, it is not just about Bombay becoming Calcutta, but also, in the fracas around Roald Dahl’s legacy of offensive prose, Anderson has stepped in as conscience bearer.

It was John Cartwright In The Original

Who kept referring to Imdad Khan as the “Indian”. In the film, he is always called by his name, insisting on his personhood — Imdad Khan, not just an “Indian”.