Supermallet

Seems kind of silly to me. There's no one "right" way to be a serious film fan. And unless you want to watch every movie you come across, reviews can be a useful way to separate the wheat from the chaff.

mhg83

This thread stinks of Film elitism.

IIG

Just got back and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Anyone know how close to Scientology "The Cause" is? Because... um, yeah.

mhg83

This is playing at a theater near me this weekend. Going on Sunday. Can't wait!

Supermallet

I feel like what we saw of The Cause is nowhere near as ridiculous and damaging as Scientology.

CloverClover

I hated this film, it was soo fake and hacked together, the characters were thin and not realistic, the religious themes werent explored. It felt like three movies in one trying to duke it out. It was also full of cliches. I get why it is so praised, PT Anderson made there will be blood and hes the hot director, but this was embarrassing. The new Heavens Gate. Cant believe I waited five years for it

Hazel Motes

Heaven's Gate is one of my favorite films of all time. So your review actually spun The Master in a positive light, making me more anxious to see it.

Buttmunker

There are three right-off-the-top reasons why I want to see this film:

01: My main man, Phillip Seymour Hoffmann
02: Joaquim Phoenix
03: P.T. Anderson

Until any of those three start to disappoint me year after year after year (like Tom Cruise, for example, who I used to see regardless of the subject matter), I will always be there. It doesn't hurt that it's a drama, and it doesn't hurt that the story is interesting.

I am seeing it tomorrow (Saturday). I will post my initial thoughts. Then, 15 years later, I will dig this thread up from obscurity and post my long-thought-out thoughts on the film.

Throwing Copper

I just saw it and haven't had much time to process it. I did enjoy quite a bit.

I loved about the first 1 hour, 10 minutes or so, but felt it started drag over the next 45 minutes.

A common complaint about PTA is he needs a good editor. There were just some scenes that did nothing to advance the story at all.

I liked the final 15 minutes or so and was pleasantly surprised that there appeared to be more of an "ending" than I expected. I will agree with some that the actual "story" here wasn't as good as I thought it was going to be.

It was great to see Joaquin Phoenix again. Such a great performance.

I also think Amy Adams gets a Supporting Actress nod for her role. That scene with PSH in front of bathroom sink was done so effortlessly by her, almost as if she has a lot of experience in that department.

I'll be going back to the theater again for a second viewing. There are so many great scenes to think about. Kind of jumbled right now.

PopcornTreeCt

This was P.T. Anderson's "Tree of Life" - a disaster of epic proportions.

Solid Snake

wait are you saying Tree of Life....was a disaster or that just this film was a disaster?

JumpCutz

I believe he's saying Tree of Life AND The Master are disasters of epic proportions.

Then again maybe not.

PopcornTreeCt

Correct. Both were magnificent failures.

FinkPish

Hyperbole is the best thing ever.

PopcornTreeCt

Okay, slightly longer review.

Joaquin Phoenix was amazing. Probably the best performance of his career. There's a scene where he's being interrogated by Hoffman and Phoenix pulls it off masterly. I thought that's the scene where he wins his Oscar. It was nice seeing Amy Adams play a character that was sometimes sweet and other times cruel and angry. Philip Seymour Hoffman was Philip Seymour Hoffman. He kept his guard up for most of the film and for that I'd say he has the weakest performance of the three.

Having said that, this movie was a fucking mess. It meandered too much, camera would stay too long in scenes or on characters. It just kinda went from scene to scene with no direction, plot, or character guidance. I'm totally cool with plot less movies, I actually prefer character driven movies but this... this wasn't driven by anyone. Sometimes Phoenix would advance the story, sometimes Hoffman would but most of the time it felt like no one was in charge.

Also, this has been talked up as a criticism of scientology. For me it didn't live up to that particular hype. It could have just as been a criticism of mormonism or of Charles Manson and his followers. It was a cult with nothing specifically similar to other cults or religions.

I compare it to Tree of Life because both were beautifully shot and had terrific performances. Both Phoenix and Pitt were on top of their game in their respective roles. However, in both movies, the director was a little too indulgent and shot scene after scene with no particular destination in mind. That is the reason why I call it a magnificent failure. Because it had so much going for it. Breathtaking cinematography, extremely talented actors and very capable, proven directors. It bugs the hell out of me that Anderson whose There Will Be Blood is one of my favorite films and what I think is one of the best movies ever made could be responsible for The Master.

Anyway, cool to see "Todd" from Breaking Bad in the film. Also, I think the shot of Amy Adams looking directly into the camera saying "fuck" will make for a fun animated .gif.

Dr. DVD

Saw it. A fascinating movie that has bar-non the best all around acting of any movie of the year, maybe in the last five years for that matter. I wonder if both Phoenix and Hoffman could get nominated for this? They're both outstanding. Kind of disturbing at parts as well, but then again, that's religion . However, I agree that it is being over praised a bit. I liked it, but the actual substance didn't seem all present. Maybe I couldn't wrap my head around it completely either.
I am thinking that most critics are praising this because it is mid September and they have spent the past three or four months being bombarded with what they consider popcorn fluff. Therefore, when something serious that harkens back to their film theory classes arrives, they shower it with praise.

FinkPish

So the proportions of the failure weren't necessarily epic; the film was epic and it failed in some respects. I agree that the film meandered towards the last third of the film, but in no way did I feel like the whole film was rudderless.

It sounds like some of your own expectations colored your reaction to the film; you expected it to be a sharp criticism of Scientology, but it didn't really delve into that. That's not a fault of the film, it's simply what you expected. I don't remember reading any real hype about it being a takedown of Scientology, only that it was loosely based on L. Ron Hubbard and his work in the 1950s.

PopcornTreeCt

I admit I had great expectations because I'm a huge Anderson fan and love Phoenix, Hoffman, and Adams. But I didn't have any expectations about scientology. It didn't bother me that it wasn't about scientology, it bothered me that it wasn't about anything.

Why So Blu?

Thank you.

Strevlac

None of PT Anderson's films are sincerely about anything. Their primary purpose is to cement Anderson's artiste status in his own mind. Too bad he doesn't have a genuine thought in his head.

foofighters7

He's an artist in my mind, so there's one more.

Solid Snake

Do they need to be about SOMETHING? Can't they just be a story about characters doing things and experiencing a situation or event over having say...a thematic point for it's existence?

I've loved all of PTA's films, barely remember the 1st one he did though..so I need to see that one again..but anyway...he's an artist for sure.

Buttmunker

Just saw it, and agree with those saying the acting was top-knotch, but the story...? Meh. It seems that PT Anderson's films go in cycles. One may be to your liking, but the next one was done almost as if Anderson was trying to entice a different audience. Then he'd do another film that appealed to those who enjoyed the movie before the last one, etc. For example, I liked "Boogie Nights," but didn't care for "Magnolia" (except for certain scenes that I liked, but as a whole, didnt' care for). I loved "There Will Be Blood," but I think "Master" will fall into another "Magnolia" category for me.

Solid Snake

so wait...what about Punch Drunk Love?

Troy Stiffler

Is that a problem? My most memorable movies just kind of roam around and make me feel crazy stuff that I can't explain. The absolute best movies go 50/50. PT Anderson movies are really about the feeling. Plot comes second, and maybe what happens to the characters matters - or maybe it doesn't.

I think that PT Anderson makes his own movies, with his own tone and voice - even when he is borrowing the greats' styles. I would say the same thing about Tarantino.

Saw Dredd today. Definately catching Master in the morning. I'm glad that it went wide quickly - instead of waiting a couple months to hit Phoenix.