Style2

The Master (2012) Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson



It actually keeps surprising me how much liked and well received Paul Thomas Anderson always are but not because of the reason you might think. It surprises me because his movies are by no means easy to follow and don't always necessarily follow a clear main plot line. He's somewhat of a cross between an art house director and an old fashioned director, who allows the actors and images to tell the story, without constantly having to spell out everything for you. In other words; he's not a mainstream director and his movie's also aren't mainstream ones, by any stretch of the imagination. You could say that the foremost reason why he has a thriving Hollywood career and why studios love to back him up is thanks to the big name actors he attracts and who are always more than willing to work with him and to put their names in the posters, to draw in the crowd. And having said that, I'm glad it works out that way for Paul Thomas Anderson, fore his movies are always a rare, unique treat, that are often both fascinating and captivating to watch.

And whether you are going to fully understand this movie or not (and chances are you not) it will still leave you thinking- or have discussions about it afterward. That can be a great strength of a movie as well and makes it obvious this movie might have a more profound impact on you than you might first think that it did. As a matter of fact, the more you start thinking back about it, the more you'll be able to piece certain things together and make you start to appreciate the movie all the more.

There is not one real definitive meaning or point behind this movie, I believe though. You can take out of it whatever you are able to see and find in it. There is no wrong or right in regard to 'getting' this movie. It really all depends on your own perception of things.

Might sound confusing and terribly unappealing to you; a movie that's not really having a clear narrative in it, with a beginning, a middle and an end. But it's not. It's just storytelling done differently and in some ways more interestingly. If you still want to grab on to some form of more conventional storytelling, try to keep this in mind; characters in Anderson's movies are often first set up, then dissected and completely broken down and after that buildup again, as changed and almost completely new individuals. In that regard there always is still a more clear pattern and way of storytelling to always latch onto, as also is the case with this movie.

And really, there are so many ways you could take this movie, so it's also not like Im going to pretend that my interpretation of it is the ultimate one, or that I actually understood every aspect of the movie. But really, that doesn't change absolutely nothing about the fact that it's an absolutely fascinating and captivating movie to watch.

It basically is about two characters, rather than one, even though you could say they are more or less the same. The same in the sense that they are looking for the same sort of things, even though they are basically in all regards still complete opposites of each others. That's probably also why they are so drawn toward each other, on a more spiritual type of level. The Philip Seymour Hoffman character gives the Joaquin Phoenix character what he wants, which is guidance, in trying to help to let him make sense of things. A sort of father figure even, as starts to become more apparent toward the end of the movie. And the Philip Seymour Hoffman character gets what he wants, which is another loyal cult follower and a sort of pet project to toy around with and try new methods and theories out on, even though he probably knows very well he's a lost cause. But there is more to the whole relationship and both might admire each others lives and personalities, on different levels. Philip Seymour Hoffman is a more calculated and thoughtful person while the Joaquin Phoenix character is more of a loose cannon, doing everything on intuition and without ever holding back. In that way, both men also compliment each other. Whenever the Philip Seymour Hoffman character wants to get mad but has to restrain himself, he allows the Joaquin Phoenix character to go berserk. And whenever the Joaquin Phoenix character goes berserk, he has the Philip Seymour Hoffman character to back him up and help him through with his guidance.

Both are basically crazy but in totally different ways. Both try to have full control over themselves and their lives, by creating a comfort zone. The one by totally creating a world of his own, with a cult following and by controlling- and 'mastering' over others. The other also tries to live in his own world, by drinking a lot, even stuff that isn't alcohol related.

Of course it helps a tremendous lot that the two main characters get portrayed by Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix. Philip Seymour Hoffman is absolutely great in some moments but Joaquin Phoenix is absolutely great all throughout! It really is easily his best role till date and he deserves all the awards and praise he's getting for it. He completely transforms, making him even almost unrecognizable as Joaquin Phoenix in parts.

It's crazy though that only this movie its main actors are nominated (and well deserved) for an Oscar but it's not nominated for even one of the visual and technical awards. And both visually and technically this truly is an impressive movie as well. I'm not even talking about Paul Thomas Anderson's directing and storytelling approach but more so about the movie its look and atmosphere. It's set in the 1950's and the entire movie totally, looks, feels and smells that way. It's absolutely incredible to see, some of the stuff they pulled off for this movie. Guess it does in fact make a big difference on which format you shoot your movie. The cinematography is absolutely stunning, as are all of the period costumes and other minor details.

But lets end this before this review actually starts to become longer than the actual movie. After all, this is absolutely something you need to experience for yourself and not read about it. Only maybe afterward, to try to grow a better understanding of things and read about things from multiple different perspectives, which might make you like and appreciate the movie all the more. But chances are you are going to end up loving this movie regardless, simply based on your own interpretation of things. You are the very least going to love this movie for its acting and visual approach alone, if nothing else seems to be able to grab you, which is hard to imaging.

9/10

Watch trailer

Trailer #3: The Master (2012)

A Naval veteran arrives home from war unsettled and uncertain of his future - until he is tantalized by The Cause and its charismatic leader. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and others
Current release date: September 21, 2012

Trailer #2: The Master

A Naval veteran arrives home from war unsettled and uncertain of his future - until he is tantalized by The Cause and its charismatic leader. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and others
Current release date: September 14, 2012

Trailer: The Master (2012)

A 1950s-set drama centered on the relationship between a charismatic intellectual known as "the Master" whose faith-based organization begins to catch on in America, and a young drifter who becomes his right-hand man. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and others
Current release date: October 12, 2012

Teaser trailer #2: The Master (2012)

A 1950s-set drama centered on the relationship between a charismatic intellectual known as "the Master" whose faith-based organization begins to catch on in America, and a young drifter who becomes his right-hand man. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and others
Current release date: October 12, 2012

There Will Be Blood (2007) Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson





(Review originally written at 1 May 2009)

'They don't make them like this anymore' is a much uses expression when saying something about a classy '40's epic. "There Will Be Blood" however is just a movie like that. Appearantly there are still directors around with the talent to bring back the old feeling of a brilliant epic from the early days of cinema, with the same style and approach of things, that might seem slow and old fashioned for some people but are a real treat for the lovers of cinema.

"There Will Be Blood" is a slow but real intriguing and very detailed portrayed of a man. It's like an autobiographic movie without being based on an actual person (well, not 100% fully). Just like in real life he faces some extreme ups and downs, of which the downs are of course the real interesting aspects of the movie. It's a real powerful movie to watch, even when there is actually very little happening. It's a movie made with such an eye for detail that this becomes a subtly brilliant movie.

'When ambition meets faith' is a great tag-line for the movie. It really describes what the movie is about. It's main character is a real driven one that has aspiring ambitions but countless times he's being pulled down by events and people around him, even when things are going really well for him. He basically sacrifices his entire life, without giving his actual life, for reaching his goal. When he has eventually reached that goal life is also empty for him. The movie is a great character study of a greedy man, who of course also still has an heart and soul.

Of course the movie is almost completely being driven by Daniel Day-Lewis. He for 90% basically makes this entire movie. Without him there also truly wouldn't had been "There Will Be Blood". Like always he really becomes the character, which is perhaps even a bit scary at times to see him get into his role so deeply. As expected he also won an Oscar for his role. Whenever Daniel Day-Lewis plays a role like this one there simply is no other competition for him. Most of the time he also completely plays all of his fellow actor from the screen in this movie, which perhaps sounds as a compliment but actually is more a bit of a complaint. He lets some of the other fine actors look bad, of which the movie doesn't benefit. Luckily though the movie is purely about Daniel Day-Lewis for 90% of the time, making the complaint not much of a complaint anyway.

But of course Paul Thomas Anderson shouldn't be forgotten. After all he is the man that had the guts to directed this movie, that isn't exactly mainstream in its core but nevertheless became a modest box office hit due to his professional skills. The movie won lots of awards, which of course wasn't just due to Daniel Day-Lewis his performance. Paul Thomas Anderson is a real talented director who really knows how to tell a story powerful, effective and intriguing, even when in its core the story might seem far from any of that. He proved this before with movies such as "Magnolia" and "Boogie Nights". "There Will Be Blood" however still remains his most grand and epic production as of yet.

It's also a real beautiful looking. The movie does a very good job at creating a very authentic look and atmosphere for the story that is set at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. The movie is gritty and dark and has a depressing look without ever giving you a depressing feeling. The movie also really deserved its Oscar which it won for its cinematography. The movie was nominated for a total of 8 Oscar's, making it one of the big movies of 2007. It won only 2 Oscar's though and lost out its most important awards to the hit-movie "No Country for Old Man".

A great unique movie made in the style and tradition of the movies from the 'good old days'.

9/10

Watch trailer

Boogie Nights (1997) Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson





(Review originally written at 13 August 2006)

I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie at first. I expected this movie to be a fun and non-serious one. After all the movie its premise and concept seems at first sight like fun comedy material rather than heavy dramatic stuff. Overall the movie did had a fun and non-serious feeling and atmosphere all over it but the movie is not without good and powerful dramatic moments as well. The movie and its story even take epic proportions at times, especially in the movie its second halve. You can say that this movie really surprised me in a positive about how good it was and it surely surpassed all my expectations.

Basically this movie is a great example of good storytelling. It takes its time to set out the lines. Lots of characters are introduced and the movie takes its time to develop every one of them. The first halve of the movie sets up things and it does this in a pretty lighthearted and fun way, with lots of crazy over-the-top, stereotypical characters. Once the second halve kicks in the movie becomes more dramatic and serious. It all works surprisingly powerful and effective. Surprising, since it's obviously in contrast with the first halve of the movie. "Boogie Nights" is a well balanced movie that gets heavy and serious but never without its overall fun lighthearted atmosphere. The characters and situations force you to not take this movie serious, no matter how heavy and dramatic it gets. In this case that is not a bad thing, since it all is so extremely well balanced. It's like the one thing helps to make the other better in this movie, instead of working distracting from- or making it not credible.

The movie also does a very good job at recreating the feeling, look and atmosphere of the '70's. It does this of course with its clothes, sets and facial hair but also with more subtle things such as its dialog. It all helps to make "Boogie Nights" a very style-full looking movie with a creative feeling and atmosphere of its own.

It does a good and creative job at keeping the nudity and sex sequences to a minimum, although it of course is impossible to keep out all the nudity and controversy. That is simply impossible, since the movie is about a controversial subject. The movie provides a good refreshing and I think also realistic(?) look into the world of porn in the '70's and '80's, when the video's and cinematic adult movies were new and popular. It however does this in a respectful way without making really any fun of it. It's highly tempting to turn a movie set in the '70's into a satirical comedy of that era. It does make fun of several things, such as the typical '70's television series but the movie never turns into a full satire.

The movie is filled with some wonderful and well known actors, who all give a very good performance. Many big names are involved and that says something about the quality of the Oscar nominated script, that obviously inspired and impressed the fine actors involved. Mark Wahlberg shows that he can handle a big and heavy carrying role. He shows his qualities and skills in this movie. Also really great were Burt Reynolds and Julianne Moore, who both were nominated for an Oscar as well. Other fine roles are being portrayed by good and well known actors such as Heather Graham, John C. Reilly, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Don Cheadle, Thomas Jane, Luis Guzmán and Alfred Molina. Yes, it certainly is true that there are many and perhaps too many characters in the movie. It tries too follow one or two too many plot lines with as a result that not everything and everyone works out quite well enough. This perhaps is the only flaw in this otherwise great, wonderful, compelling and powerful movie.

A fun to watch but yet also wonderful compelling and powerful movie about the rise and fall of a porn star in the '70's/'80's. A movie that takes surprising epic proportions! Certainly among the very best movies of the '90's.

9/10

Watch trailer

Top