SummaryIn the years after WWII, an American intellectual creates a religion. When he meets a troubled drifter, he invites the man to help him spread the new faith. As their congregation increases, the drifter begins to question the religion he once accepted and the mentor who gave his life direction.
SummaryIn the years after WWII, an American intellectual creates a religion. When he meets a troubled drifter, he invites the man to help him spread the new faith. As their congregation increases, the drifter begins to question the religion he once accepted and the mentor who gave his life direction.
With potent performers and poetic visuals, Anderson has made the boldest American picture of the year. Its strangeness can be hard to process, but this is a shattering study of the impossibility of recovering the past.
The Master takes some getting used to. This is a superbly crafted film that's at times intentionally opaque, as if its creator didn't want us to see all the way into its heart of darkness.
Paul Thomas Anderson is one of the most highly regarded directors of all time, and his film, The Master, brilliantly demonstrates why. Freddie Quell is a very interesting protagonist. Two other notable characters in this film are Lancaster Dodd and Peggy Dodd. When these characters are on screen it is nearly impossible to look away.
Two things stand out: the extraordinary command of cinematic technique, which alone is nearly enough to keep a connoisseur on the edge of his seat the entire time, and the tremendous portrayals by Joaquin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman of two entirely antithetical men
On reflection, and despite these cavils, we should bow to The Master, because it gives us so much to revere, starting with the image that opens the film and recurs right up to the end-the turbid, blue-white wake of a ship. There goes the past, receding and not always redeemable, and here comes the future, waiting to churn us up.
This superb, cerebral film about unchecked belief is a fictionalized and cutting drama hinging on the origins of Scientology. Scratch around a bit, though, and its wider indictments become clear.
Fabulously well-acted and crafted, but when I reach for it, my hand closes on air. It has rich material and isn't clear what it thinks about it. It has two performances of Oscar caliber, but do they connect?
Call The Master whatever you want, but lobotomized catatonia from what I call the New Hacks can never take the place of well-made narrative films about real people that tell profound stories for a broader and more sophisticated audience. Fads come and go, but as Walter Kerr used to say, "I'll yell tripe whenever tripe is served."
This is, in my opinion, Paul Thomas Anderson’s best movie. Performances like Joaquin Phoenix's and Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s show acting at its finest. Even with the immense powerhouse performances that they give, their supporting cast remains steadfast and exceptional, especially Amy Adams. The Master feels in many ways like a documentary or a biopic. The movie may seem very unreal, but, with entities like the church of Scientology existing in real life, it feels bound within reality. The dynamics between Lancaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) and Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) are constantly changing and representative of the true potential and ranges of the two leading actors. The Master is well written and well-acted, but it is so much more than that. Even if The Master were just the sum of its parts, it would be a great movie, however, these parts, in conjunction with one another, go a step further in cementing the film’s greatness. The sequencing, cinematography, directing, casting, score, and shot composition all go so well together that it is hard to see the movie as existing without any one piece. The Master is deeply disturbing in the exploitation shown but it does so in a cautionary and purposefully off-putting way.
"The Master" 10 Scale Rating: 6.0 (Decent) ...
The Good: Phillip Seymour Hoffman carries the film as it loses some of it's power when he is not in it. The subject matter itself is extremely interesting and happens to be a topic that I have always been fascinated with. While his character is only mildly interesting, Joaquin Phoenix does a solid job.
The Bad: It is two hours and eighteen minutes long, but it feels much longer. It gets very tedious and a little boring at times. Too much filler and too many scenes that seemed to be crammed into the film.
Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" represents everything a challenging movie should be compellingly dissonant performances, intentionally vague thematic ideas, and a virtual plentitude of eye-catching images. It may not be for everybody, but it's definitely a philosophically engrossing ride.
The acting is great. It looks really cool. The characters are horrible. The story is ponderous dreck. I cannot recommend this and PT Anderson (after the equally bad There Will Be Blood) is losing all the stock he built up with the sublime Magnolia and Boogie Nights. Maybe those were flukes. His recent work is crap.
Too confusing to watch. I finished the movie hoping it would resolve into something I could understand but it just kept getting weirder and weirder. It just seems to be about two crazy guys that act crazy together. I could not detect a plot. Great acting of course.