Last week, I decided to hold my own Wes Anderson Film Festival. I had a little time on my hands because I was stuck home with a respiratory bug, so I watched four of his short live action films: The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar (37 minutes), followed by three 17-minute films, The Rat Catcher, The Swan, and Poison.

The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar turned out to be my favorite. Based on a Roald Dahl book of the same name, the movie won an Oscar in 2024. Benedict Cumberbatch plays the title character. Ralph Fiennes, Dev Patel, and Ben Kingsley make appearances in various roles, doctor, policeman, financial advisor, member of a traveling circus.

Henry Sugar is a selfish young man who inherited his wealth from his father. All he cares about is gaining more wealth and has no qualms about cheating to do so. He’s not interested in marrying because he doesn’t want to share his money with a wife. One day he visits an English country estate where his friends are indoors playing games because it is “pelting rain outside.” Bored, Henry wanders into the library, picks up a slim blue volume and reads about a circus performer in India who learns how to see without using his eyes.

Henry practices the man’s technique, which is to stare at your favorite image until your mind is emptied of all thoughts. Not surprisingly, Henry’s favorite image is a picture of his own face. After a few years of staring, Henry can see through solid matter, including through the backs of playing cards. One night he shows up at a casino, uses his newfound skill, then walks out with 30 thousand pounds in winnings. Somehow, he does not find success as thrilling as he’d expected. So, instead of banking the money, Henry stands on the balcony of his tony London apartment and tosses the cash over the railing, causing chaos on the street below. After a police officer chastises him, Henry changes his ways. You’ll have to watch the movie to find out how. I assure you that this is an amusing story with a satisfying ending.

The visual aspects of the movie captivated me. Most frames contained flamboyant color palettes which created an aura of magical realism. I loved the muted oranges and greens in the writer’s cottage and in the jungle scenes at the yogi’s stone hut.

The composition of each scene was symmetrical, usually with the speaker located in the center of the frame. The placement of objects, like trees, buildings, windows, doors, was also symmetrical. These balanced vistas created a feeling of both harmony and nostalgia, a sense that all was well with the world.

Although we view The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar on a screen, the piece seems more like an onstage production. A make-up person glides in to remove a wig, to add a mustache, or help with a costume change. A stage manager, dressed in a cap and overalls, moves the set behind the characters, removes a prop, or helps with a costume change.  The background in each frame looks flat, much like a painted back wall in a play. This portrayal often made me feel as if I were viewing a tableau vivant, a static scene with multiple characters pictured in motion. Of course, Anderson’s characters really are in motion. Watching the film reminded me of Harry Potter books where the portraits hanging on castle walls come to life and chat with people who pass by.

I also watched the other three films. The Swan is gorgeous, profoundly sad, and redemptive in its own way. I admired the acting in The Rat Catcher and Poison, but neither film drew me in as much as The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar, which I highly recommend.

###