vasb

I didn't check this over for spelling or grammar, so I apologize in advance.

This review may be vague, but I want to give others an idea of what I thought of the film without spoiling anything. Also, as I generally suggest, if you haven’t done so already try to avoid watching the trailer to the film as it does give away some key moments.

The first Paul Thomas Anderson film I ever saw was magnolia. I saw it the day it was released and was completely blown away. I immediately started a thread in what was then “At the Movies” praising the film. I saw it a few more times in the theater and it quickly became one of if not my single favorite film. I later rented Sydney (Hard Eight) and Boogie Nights and enjoyed both thoroughly, but felt that neither was the masterpiece that was magnolia. Obviously magnolia has been discussed to death since it was released and has divided viewers into two distinct camps – those who love it and hate it. I can understand and respect both points of view – after all most great films polarize viewers – but for me Paul Thomas Anderson became the great filmmaker of the 1990s. Naturally, I was dying to see his next film.

To begin with, though most probably know this already Punch Drunk Love is no magnolia. It is short, relatively slow moving at times, and could even be called silly and slight by some. It lacks the energy of magnolia and Boogie Nights and is more similar to Sydney in its pacing. As a result, magnolia fans expecting more of the same will be extremely disappointed. However, on its own terms Punch Drunk Love an extremely entertaining, touching and compassionate film. Though this film is supposed to be Anderson’s 90 minute Adam Sandler comedy, the film is difficult to classify. It is not a straight comedy (those expecting non stop laughs will be disappointed), nor is it just a romance. If anything it is a sometimes comic romantic thriller, as weird as that sounds. The romantic angle of the film is somewhat reminiscent of the Jim Kurring/Claudia Wilson Gator thread of magnolia, to give a hint at its tone. In fact, a dinner scene in particular parallels that previous romance.

I am not a huge Adam Sandler fan (I think he can be very funny but is usually miscast) but he was fairly good in this movie. His performance is certainly not a revelation, but it is a tough retrained role and he handles it well. The supporting actors (Emily Watson, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Luis Guzman, etc.) are as par very good.

Anderson seems to have toned down with this film, but there are definitely many of his trademark visuals – long tracking shots, key scenes shown using quick cuts, extensive use of the 2.35:1 ratio, etc. Though visually this may been seen as a more standard film, it does contain some incredibly arresting scenes, including a car scene, the scene featured on the poster, and a scene when Adam Sandler…well just see the movie. These visceral scenes are few and far between they have enough energy to keep the whole movie moving. That’s not to say the “slow” parts of the film lag, quite the contrary, these other parts of the movie are touching in an unexpected way. It is clear that Anderson didn’t want to just a make a mindless comedy with pawns instead of characters. He has genuine affection for his characters and his unique humanity shines through throughout the film. The result is a one of a kind film that does not live up to magnolia (naturally) but is an incredible film in its own right. Some people will blindly call this film a masterpiece just because Anderson wrote and directed it. They will simply say “you don’t get it” to those who may not like it. I don’t take this stance. It is not a perfect film and it does have flaws, the major one I had was that many story strands seem to build to a climax that never arrives. Characters are introduced that seem to go nowhere. This will not be the film Paul Thomas Anderson is remembered for, but it is an excellent diversion in what will hopefully a long career of incredible and unique films. Alas, though I strongly recommend this film to adventurous moviegoers I feel that it is going to do poorly at the box and receive poor word of mouth – most of the people I saw this film with disliked it. Regardless, I suggest you check it out.

3.5 stars/4 stars
B+/A-

Sydney
B+

Boogie Nights
A-/A

magnolia
A+

side note - I will be interviewing Paul Thomas Anderson next month and hope to add to this thread with some of his comments, my impressions etc.

CitizenKaneRBud

Thanks for the review, vasb. I'll probably see this on opening day.

That's cool that you will be interviewing Mr. Anderson. How did you pull that off? Do you work for a newspaper or magazine?

Frank TJ Mackey

thanks for the review.......i wonder how wide of a release this will get on OCt. 11??

Just NY and LA.....

maybe Chicago and a few others or wider???

anybody know...

vasb

According to imdb
http://us.imdb.com/ReleaseDates?0272338
it will be released in NY and LA of the 11th and will be given a wider release on the 18th.

CitizenKaneRBud -

I work on what is basically the lowest rung of a very small local paper. I am amazed and extremely lucky, to say the least, to get an interview with him.

Johnny Zhivago

Cool, thanks...

slop101

That's interesting because, while I really liked Magnolia, a problem I had with it was that it seemed like Anderson absolutely HATED every character and they all lacked any sort of humanity. If the opposite is true of PDL, it should be that much better.

ScottDe

Anyone know when this is being released around the country? How about Minneapolis?

Dr. DVD

How about Nashville? Like all PTA films, this one will probaby not do so well with mainstream audiences and a majority of the audience that lines Adam Sandler's pockets will be shut out by the R rating.

Coral

I believe Columbia is rolling out PDL slowly across the nation. They want to build word-of-mouth before going all out nationwide.

The 11th saw only 5 screens in 3 cities (NY, LA and Toronto).

According to http://www.ptanderson.com ... these are the cities that'll be showing PDL this Friday October 18:

New York (17 screens)
Los Angeles (20 screens)
Toronto (7 screens)
Chicago (4 screens)
Philadelphia (3 screens)
San Francisco (7 screens)
Boston (4 screens)
Washington, DC (3 screens)
Seattle (2 screens)
Dallas (2 screens)
Austin (2 screens)
Montreal (1 screen)
Vancouver, B.C. (1 screen)

UncleGramps

For those of you in the Philly/South Jersey region, I figured I'd fill you in. I know for sure that it is playing in Philly at the Ritz Five and in Voorhees, NJ at the Ritz Sixteen starting today. Check Ritz's site for details. It may well be playing at other theaters in the area, but I'll be seeing it at the Ritz Sixteen, so I didn't bother to look into it further. Hopefully someone on the board will find this info useful.

MrN

I watched this today and I thought PTA did a great job in utilizing Adam Sandler - though I stop short of handing out any awards or anything. Other than him, I didn't really get into any of the other characters. I guess the film didn't really have any time to dwell on the others without losing focus on Sandler. While I liked that the film was short, there was still a lot of gratuitous work from PTA. I know this is pretty much the signature style from him, but I don't get why he keeps the soundtrack so loud over dialogue. Its not as bad as Magnolia, but still noticeable.

So, a question for those of you who have seen it.
What was the significance of that first car crash?

Coral

MrN,

You should throw spoiler tags around your last sentence.

Anyways, my interpretation:

donnie5

I saw this on last night and really enjoyed it. I don't think it will be remembered as one of his greatest films, but I think it's an important thing for a director to stretch his legs and try new things. I especially liked the film's unpolished look which set it apart from Magnolia and Boogie Nights almost instantly. It's one of my favorites this year and I really hope it catches on with audiences.

HistoryProf

so why in the hell isn't this getting a wider release? My fiance and I were all set to go see this tonight after weeks of ads for it, only to find out it isn't playing here. What a bunch of bulls**t.....

C.H.U.D.

I saw it tonight, and although I liked the story, acting and dialogue, I absolutely hated the music. It almost ruined the entire movie for me.

berserker37

I saw this on Friday, and I really liked it. Plenty of interesting, original characters, situations, and dialogue. Adam Sandler was better than I was hoping he would be - he really nailed this character down with his delivery of lines and mannerisms.

I'll have to see it again to see where I'd rank it against his (meaning PTA's) other films (I'd give "Hard Eight" 3.5/4, and "Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia" 4/4); so far I'd give it 3.5/4.

For me, PTA's biggest strength - in addition to being a great writer and a great visual filmmaker - is in portraying characters going through a transformation, changing into a "new and improved" version of themselves as they deal with their shortcomings and weaknesses.

And "That's that"

Frank TJ Mackey

It seems like it's really being pushed because I have seen an unusual number of full-page ads in various magazines.

I think EW and Premiere were but a few.

Matt925

And I absolutely loved it. That and the editing did such a great job of building an incredible amount of tension throughout the film.

This is such a unique and wonderful movie. I think it's easily the best of the year so far and I need to see it again (there were so many little subtleties in the dialogue and with things going on in the background) but I think it is Anderson's best yet.

It's so weird because this is definately a "feel-good" movie, I was smiling the whole time, but there are so many parts that weird you out or even completely shock you (but even they add to the enjoyment). The movie seems so chaotic, but it is extremely consistent in its style and mood.

Very unique and very well executed. Great, great movie.

Phyre

Where the hell is this movie playing?? I live in Eugene, the second biggest town in Oregon (and it has its own damn university too) and this film is no where in sight, week after week.

Frank TJ Mackey

The official website for the film has a section listing all the cities where it opened on the 11th, 18th and I think the 25th as well.

RevLiver

As a big fan of P.T. Anderson's previous work, I had high hopes for this film. As a not so big fan of Adam Sandler's work, I had low hopes for this film. To my great pleasure, Anderson has gotten Sandler's best performance out of him.

The character he plays, Barry Egan, is Sandler to the core. He's not really different from any of the other losers Sandler's played, but here's he's stripped down to his emotional essence. The blind rage isn't played for laughs but to show the disparity in his emotional states. And it gets pretty dark at times.

Yet, the film remains relatively light-hearted and offers plenty of laughs. It's Anderson's skill that balances the darker, emotional issues with the comedy and romance between two misfits. The tension built through a subplot with the great Philip Seymour Hoffman tightens until it is finally resolved in an entirely uniquely way. Emily Watson is fine as Sandler's equally unstable, though in an entirely different way, love interest.

All in all, I'd rank it with Hard Eight and Boogie Nights, but a notch below Magnolia. It's a pleasant diversion from the usual Anderson opus, yet it still lets plenty of his quirks in both writing and technique shine through. 9 of 10 on the IMDb scale.

Frank TJ Mackey

finally saw this and it's funny and sweet.

hopefully a little polish-up, interlude for something grand for the next picture.

enjoyable film though. Sandler was good, Phil Sey also and E-Watson.

the sisters were funny. Luis Guzman really didn't have much to do at all here.

Geofferson

Saw this last night and enjoyed it.

I too really enjoyed the audio and music (especially the song "He Needs Me", from the Popeye soundtrack).

I'm not going to say that I liked it as much as PTA's previous 3 films, but it was a good film.

DrRingDing

excellent film. loved it.

i think the music worked well. i think that his drowning some of the dialogue with music worked to his advantage in building upon the characters.

way better than most crap hollywood produces nowadays..

on a different note, who produced this film (studio-wise)? i thought it was columbia, but then i saw New Line/Revolution credited in the end credits and no columbia logo. did columbia just distribute it?! i don't get it...
-di doctor-

Patman

My 2 word review: Seriously Whimsical.

I found the characters to be archetypes, not very fleshed out, but what's good about it is that PT Anderson has finally figured out the meaning of "economy" and cuts right to the essence of these archetypes for the characters in the film. No longer does Anderson feel the need to fill in all the gory character details that either lead to a meandering narrative, or turns characters into unsympathetic ones.

In P-DL, Anderson has found a way to cut to the emotion of the given moment of when love blooms against all odds to bring Barry and Leena together. Each of these 2 characters takes chances in finding love in spite of their psychological patterns and ruts, all for the slim hope of finding that one person, right or wrong, to share in each other's lives.

Throughout the first half of the film, Anderson even sets up a reaction that he wisely sidesteps because it shows the maturation of Barry by not "going there".

There are many visuals in the film that will creep into your subconscious once you see it, and you can see some good directorial choices at work here. Also, Anderson has fun putting a camera in shots where reflections might give the camera away, but it never does.

All in all, it's a rather odd film, but you come away with the feeling that the emotional content given off by the characters are true and honest, even if they aren't very well fleshed out in terms of heavy characterizations.

I give it 3.5 stars, or a grade of B+.