La merveilleuse histoire d'Henry Sugar

"This is a terrific piece of book-to-film adaptation", I cried. "I read the book in preparation for the film and I can say with utmost certainty that...", I drank a cup of water to catch my breath, "...that almost every piece of dialogue in the film, not counting the name changes, are almost word for word from the book", I stood up from my chair and slowly applauded for the film, "Indubitably Anderson's most loquacious and experimental work to date. The way he plays with the medium of storytelling is admirable at least. Unfortunately this unorthodox storytelling style is not for every sophisticated individual in the planet", I sat down and happily sighed. "I hope to see this marvelous short film again in the future"

I think we can all agree that the format of this 'content' is very different from what we are used to. On the one hand, it has the features of an "audible book". But it most certainly also has features that fit with a stage play. Actually, it seems like a hybrid of the two, which I for certain have never seen before.

And whilst it is different, people tend to start agreeing with extreme ratings: i.e. They either say they like it very well and give it a rating of 10 stars, or they hate it and go for a 1 star rating. And since I do not want my review being tainted by chosing either of the two camps, I simply chose to not give it an IMDb rating. This so that either camp can agree with my review instead of a rating...

That this is some new type of content is obvious. I personally think it is more a natural evolution of (1) reading books, to (2) audiobooks, and now (3) this new format.

I think a term of "cinematic book" may fit with what we see here: a book that is read to an audience by using renowned actors in a format that fits cinema.

With many new things, I was confused at what exactly I was watching when I started this content. And honestly said, it took me several minutes to adjust to it. As an avid bookreader myself, I have enjoyed quite a number of Roald Dahl's books. Not being a fan of audiobooks myself, I never ever listened to his books. But this "cinematic book" is just a different experience. There is so much added richness to it, that I really started to enjoy it. So rich actually, that I had trouble keeping up with the fast-paced storytelling. There is so much to see in each of the different sets that it is pretty difficult to ingest all you hear and see. And I think this will be even a bigger challenge for viewers from non-english speaking countries which need to rely on subtitles. So, I think it may be a recommendation to (1) first "watch" it with a primary focus on listening to the story, and (2) a second time to enjoy the richly detailed scenes.

Concluding, I think we witness here the evolution of how we may "read" books. An evolution that first started with the introduction of audiobooks, which we now see evolve in a content genre that I can describe best as a "cinematic book". And whilst it takes some moments to get used to, I definitely want to see more of it in the future.

This is exactly Wes Anderson style! Same colors, angles, another Wes Anderson film star in a side role.. I enjoyed it and never get bored. The story was unbelievable and quite fluent. Also see Benedict in a Wes Anderson movie just wonderfull. So far, so good but i think the director should try new methods because everything was same. Think like a Grand Budapest Hotel but shorter this time! If even one thing changes, the films will be more distinctive and unique in themselves. Still, that doesn't mean the movie shouldn't be given a chance. If you like Wes Anderson's style, you must give a chance.

'The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar' is the first of four shorts by Wes Anderson. This production is the perfect visualization of a book. The transitions are peculiar and they contributed greatly to make the story flow smoothly. The editing was absolutely phenomenal with a few cuts placed in the right moments. The 1.33:1 aspect ratio immersed me even more in the story. All the trademarks of the director are there: the perfect symmetry of the sets, the actor placed exactly in the right spot and the fairy mood. The plot is engaging and exotic. I like the development and I was genuinely curious to see how everything was going to wrap up. This is how you tell a trivial story in an original and fresh way. The cast is composed of many great actors: with a team such as Benedict Cumberbatch, Ralph Fiennes and Ben Kingsley you know that simply you cannot go wrong. All of them have a very pleasant and clean British accent, which for me is an added value. My final mark is 7.5 stars out of 10.

'The Wonderful Story Of Henry Sugar (2023)' is one of four short film adaptations of lesser-known Roald Dahl stories to be directed by Wes Anderson, who has perhaps finally achieved unabashed twee overload with what can only be described as four near-lethal injections of the purest concentrate of his trademark style, and dumped unceremoniously on Netflix. This piece tells the story of a rich man who one day finds the key to becoming even richer: an account of a man who is able to see without using his eyes and the method needed to achieve this. It's pretty much a word-for-word translation of the source material, with narration that runs constantly and bounces from character to character (who often tell us, the audience, about what they're doing while they're doing it). It's all third person, too, so even Henry Sugar refers to himself as such. This is because the whole thing is actually being read by Dahl himself, who appears intermittently to frame the story as a true account of something he himself was once told. As the tale is spoken to us, the sets deconstruct themselves around the actors in a complex dance that's quite a sight to behold. The whole thing feels like an incredibly complicated stage play, complete with prop-wielding stage hands and just off-screen costume swaps, which is definitely a unique approach to take. The pacing is so fast that the flick often leaves you breathless, primarily because every single character is talking like they're absolutely desperate to get out of there but can't leave until they've finished their part. At the same time, though, it ultimately feels a bit too long for its own good. After all, there's only so much verbal bombardment a person can take, as entertaining as that bombardment may be. Ultimately, this is a refreshingly distinct and expertly crafted short film that kind of represents too much of a good thing. It's enjoyable, but overwhelming.