DAILY FILM DOSE: A Daily Film Appreciation and Review Blog: PT Anderson
[go: up one dir, main page]

Showing posts with label PT Anderson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PT Anderson. Show all posts

Sunday, 9 September 2012

TIFF 2012 - The Master

Almost every aspect of this beguiling new film from Paul Thomas Anderson seems to be designed to create discomfort for the viewer - the truly off-kilter and abrasive performance from Joaquin Phoenix, the oily slickness of Philip Seymour Hoffman's L. Ron Hubbard-esque character, and the idiosyncratic Jonny Greenwood score, which seems to be written more as a counterpoint to the drama on screen than as a complement. While PTA's previous 'There Will Be Blood' pushed these same buttons, 'The Master' looks to be a film to admire rather than embrace with love.


The Master (2012) dir. Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams

By Alan Bacchus

We could easily split PTA's evolving career into two specific phases. The first is the youthful wunderkind era of heightened melodrama punctuated by show-off visuals aping the hyperactive coke movies of Martin Scorsese, a trilogy of sorts which ended with the monumentally engrossing saga Magnolia. The second period shows a distinct shift, a new modus operandi, significantly less conventional, more understated, oblique, purposefully awkward, befuddling and obtuse - seemingly a conscious antidote to the criticisms of his first three pictures.

The Master finds PTA at his most oblique. The lineage of the story is no secret. It's a not-so-subtle look at L. Ron Hubbard, founder of the controversial Scientology. This is a bold choice of subject which brings to mind Orson Welles' hubris making a film about William Randolph Hearst.

As such, coming from Anderson we kind of expect something as ambitious and grandiose as Welles would have done. The film is certainly not a comprehensive biopic nor an overly ambitious film, but a strange character study of two eccentric personalities and their unlikely symbiotic relationship.

We don't meet the Hubbard character until approximately 20 minutes into the film. Instead Anderson introduces us to Freddy Quell (Phoenix), an oddball to the extreme, cut from the same cloth as Adam Sandler's character in Punch Drunk Love. Freddy is a drunk, someone who concocts his own moonshine from various poisonous solvents we were not meant to drink. Phoenix's extra coarse face shows him as a man of rock-hard constitution, a sociopath ethic Freudian nightmare to the extreme.

Early scenes brilliantly show him wandering through situations and lives trying to fit in but failing spectacularly. Freddy's brief stint as a department store portrait photographer is perhaps the film's most inspired scene. The Master is top-heavy with these scenes, including a raucous scene with a moonshiner on a share-cropping farm.

Eventually Freddy meets the Hubbard character, known as Lancaster Dodd, a perfectly superfluous name thought out as carefully as Anderson's porn star names in Boogie Nights. Dodd seems to be the only one able to corral Freddy's wild behaviour. Their conversation on his boat before his daughter's wedding is another master scene, which shows his calm authoritative demeanour that instantly dulls Freddy's abrasiveness.

The next two hours chart their symbiotic relationship. For Lancaster, Freddy represents the ultimate challenge for his religion, a deeply deranged psychotic who is ripe for 'processing' and a cure. For Freddy, Lancaster is the only one who can stand being in his presence.

The film plays out their evolving relationship, sometimes consensual and sometimes at odds. And while There Will Be Blood strung together a collection of bold memorable set pieces and became an instant pop culture anchor, The Master is humble and understated, a slow burn which gets under your skin and lingers long after the lights go up.


***

Wednesday, 9 April 2008

THERE WILL BE BLOOD


There Will be Blood (2007) dir. Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Paul Dano, Ciaran Hinds

****

No film from 2007 got better on its second viewing than “There Will Be Blood” – not even “Control” which I cited as my favourite film, nor “No Country For Old Men”. I’m convinced Paul Thomas Anderson’s masterpiece will gain an even stronger following over the ages and rise above and beyond its fellow 2007 Oscar nominees.

In my original review of “There Will Be Blood”, I gave a glowing four star rating with a mild asterix to the ending which I had thought was inconsistent in tone with the rest of the film. I’m not sure what my expectation was, but on second viewing, this minor blemish had erased itself.

Warning: Spoilers ahead...The finale, which changes from the open exterior plains of Texas to an expansive but cold and lifeless interior of the aged Daniel Plainview’s mansion, is the natural place for Anderson to take his film. The elder Plainview is a depressed and broken man. This final series of scenes explains everything about this wonderful character.

Contrast the opening scene to the final scene. The opening, which is shot and cut without dialogue, shows the painstaking detail of the process by which Plainview finds oil and becomes rich and powerful. The subsequent scenes show Plainview’s painstaking efforts to “swindle” the citizens of New Boston out of the oil they happen to sit on. Plainview’s enjoyment of his wealth derives completely from the process of making money – that is extraction, the swindling, and the destruction of his competition. Without the process Plainview is limp and lost.

And so Plainview’s hysterical drunkenness and over-the-top decadent and lifeless house is a result of a man with all the money in the world but nothing to accomplish.

Another fascinating aspect of the film which excited me on first viewing and deepened further on DVD is Anderson’s homage to “2001: A Space Odyssey”. Anderson’s frames subtly reference Kubrick’s ambitious film on several occasions:

Watch the opening shots which establish the environment of Texas, which eerily look like the pre-historic opening of the Dawn of Man sequence.



Watch the shot of Plainview alone at the beginning of the film eating his lunch, hunched over beside his well. He’s crouched eating his food with his hands like an animal. Compare this to Kubrick’s shot of the Neanderthal eating his first carnivorous meal after slaying the tapir.



Towards the end, check out the framing and action of Daniel Day-Lewis when beats down Paul Sunday with his bowling pin. Watch the identical framing of the famous discovery of weaponry scene by the Neanderthals, again in Kubrick’s Dawn of Man sequence.



And of course Anderson’s final act, which takes place in an opulent but cold mansion is eerily similar to Bowman’s final destination at the end of "2001".



It would be a stretch to find a thematic connection or something else profound in these specific similarities, instead it serves to show Anderson’s ambitiousness with his film. Like Kubrick in “2001”, Anderson aspires to greatness and pulls off the rare feat of achieving and arguably surpassing his and our expectations. Enjoy.

“There Will Be Blood” is now available on DVD from Paramount Pictures Home Entertainment

Sunday, 30 December 2007

THERE WILL BE BLOOD


There Will Be Blood (2007) dir. Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Paul Dano, Ciaran Hinds

****

“There Will Be Blood” is Paul Thomas Anderson at his most confident, cockiest and a little bit confounding. Six years after “Punch Drunk Love” PT returns with a departure from his previous films by delving into a novel (Upton Sinclair’s ‘Oil!’) and going back in time 80 years. Absent are the usual PT players (Luiz Guzman, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julianne Moore, John C. Reilly et al). Filling their shoes admirably is the amazing Daniel Day-Lewis. Lewis and Anderson are a force to be reckoned with and they deliver in spades an epic tale of greed, power, ego and oil.

PT sets the tone early by giving us an extended 15 mins sequence of then humble oil prospector Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) as he painfully sweats blood to find oil in a desolate patch of desert land in Texas. Starting with a single pick axe we watch over time Daniel’s oil empire grow and grow and grow. We watch as Daniel and his young son H.W. Plainview swindle land owners from the true value of their land. One day a mysterious boy appears at Daniel’s door claiming to know where oil-rich land could be bought at a cheap price. Daniel and H.W. travel to this acreage and discover some of the most profitable untapped oil land in the U.S.

Daniel either buys or leases the land from all the nearby towns and becomes an oil baron. Daniel’s nemesis is the equally ambitious Eli Sunday (Paul Dano) – a god-fearing evangelical who sees the opportunity to make a name for himself on the back of the oil boom. As Daniel ages, his ego and need to crush his competitors seems to cloud his sharp judgment. And with so much wealth he becomes drowned in money he can’t spend. But is it money he desires or just the power?

PT Anderson must have seen “Gangs of New York” and said to himself, “there’s my next film.” Anderson gives us Bill the Butcher again, and puts him in virtually every frame of its two and a half hour running time. He allows Day-Lewis to go full force with the character and live and breathe Daniel Plainview. At times, Anderson lets him go too far, but for the most part he carries and elevates the film beyond what any other actor in the world could have done. Day-Lewis’ voice, mannerisms, walk and bushy moustache seem to turn him into a sadistic maniac. Much of Daniel Plainview is Bill the Butcher, and that’s o.k. because I could watch Day-Lewis washing dishes for hours and still be mesmerized.

Daniel Plainview is a fascinating man. It takes us a while before we start to get a sense of who he is. We know from the first scene he’s ambitious, especially when we watch him hike himself up a mine with a broken leg and crawl to the nearest shopkeeper miles away. We soon learn he’s a family man, or so he tells us. His relationship with his son is important to the story. At times he can be cruel – like feeding him hard liquor as a baby – and also respectful and educational – teaching him the ways of oil. Is Plainview just a swindler or does he endeavour to make a difference for the lives of the townspeople as he claims? The final act shows us who Plainview is. Two awesome dialogue scenes at the end reveal everything about the real Daniel Plainview and will have you shaking your head in awe.

Anderson’s proficient technical skills are on display again and he’s never one to hide his influences. Other than the casting of Day-Lewis Scorsese is absent here, instead, believe it or not, it’s Stanley Kubrick he’s channels. The opening shot and the opening 15mins is lifted right out of, believe it or not, “2001: A Space Odyssey” and much of the sound design and music score is Kubrick-esque as well.

The film looks fantastic of course. Anderson's frequent cinematographer Robert Elswit shoots the film with beautiful anamorphic wide angle lenses. He underlits most of the nightime and interior scenes. These scenes, some of which are difficult to see because it's so dim, creates a creepiness and sense of unease throughout the film. There's always something hidden in the dark, something about Plainview's morals, or motivations, or both. The exteriors are majestic - evoking the best work of the great landscape films which likely inspired Anderson ("McCabe and Mrs. Miller", "Once Upon a Time in the West", the Dawn of Time sequence in "2001: A Space Odyssey").

Much of the film is about texture, mood and tone. Anderson knows when to quicken up the pace and raise the stakes. He announces these moments with his unique ear for music. Instead of Jon Brion or Michael Penn he employs rock-God Jonny Greenwood (of Radiohead) for the job. Greenwood delivers an accomplished classical score with hint of the new Radiohead “In Rainbows” progressive sound. It’s both fresh and familiar.

It’s frustrating because the film is a masterpeice, yet, as I write this, one scene continues to nag at me. As mentioned the finale enlightens us to the true character of Daniel Plainview. At the same time there’s tonal shift to a comic tone we hadn’t seen before in the previous 150mins. Though it got some laughter from the audience it didn’t quite work for me. PT Anderson needed to say ‘cut’ at one point. Instead he lets the camera roll too long and the scene turns into slapstick. I would have overlooked this if it didn’t come at the very end. Anderson is making a statement hear, and it’s the right message he’s sending, but he does it with the wrong tone. This nags at me because the film is so damned good it’s like that one nick in an otherwise flawless piece of art. Enjoy.



Saturday, 21 April 2007

MAGNOLIA


Magnolia (1999) dir. Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Tom Cruise, Jason Robards, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julianne Moore

****

I have a love/hate relationship with “Magnolia.” For years, it was a near god-like worship for the film. Seeing in it 1999, was an inspirational experience. Even on subsequent viewings my reverence for the film grew and grew. But lately I’ve tended to hate the film. Let’s try and comprehend why.

At 3 hours plus, it’s a dizzying tale of nine of more interconnected characters all going through life-changing moments during one 24-hour period. The title derives from an intersection in the heart of the San Fernando Valley of California (Anderson’s home turf). There’s Jim Kurring (John C. Reilly), a cop courting a young and disturbed coked-out girl, Claudia Gator (Melora Walters) – who is the daughter of a philandering alcoholic game show host, Jimmy Gator (Philip Baker Hall) who hosts a children’s game show whose main star is a child-genius, Stanley Spector – who doesn’t want to grow up to be like former child-star and kid genius, quiz-kid Donnie Smith (William H. Macy). The heart of the story is the relationship between Frank T.J. Mackey (Tom Cruise) an alpha male motivational speaker and his estranged father Earl Partridge (Jason Robards) who’s on his deathbed dying of cancer.

The combination of all these characters (and a few more) make up the mosaic of sorrow, loss, guilt and redemption that Anderson is trying to paint. And he certainly succeeds in spades. “Magnolia” wears its heart on its sleeve in terms of emotional catharsis. Characters’ motivations and inner secrets are slowly revealed throughout the film which creates the extreme peaks and valleys of the narrative. For example, in the middle section of the film, TJ Mackey, who is introduced as a despicable misogynist, is brilliantly broken down by a probing journalist (the amazing April Grace) in an interview between his speaking sessions. The revelation of Mackey’s past in this instance turns around the audience’s perspective of its characters.

Anderson’s stylistic excess equals the excesses in emotion. Anderson’s channeling Scorsese again, as he whips his camera around from character to character, subplot to subplot, rarely giving us time to breath. The second half of the film gives us quieter and more reflective moments – most famously during the scene in which each of our main characters express their remorse by simultaneously singing the Aimee Mann ballad, “Wise Up.”

The songs of Aimee Mann are the backbone of the film, which was one of the Anderson’s inspirations for writing the story. But it’s the pulsating rhythm of Jon Brion’s score which dictates the pace.

Despite these qualities, the film also feels bloated, self-serving and arrogant. The film walks a fine line between a brilliant operatic masterpiece and egotistical pretentious piece of shit. It’s so big and so grand, literally and metaphorically, like a painter given a canvas just a bit too large to see it all in one glance. Portions of the piece sizzle with artistic brilliance, other parts sag, and as a whole you’re not quite sure what it all means. And I’m not sure if Anderson knows exactly what “Magnolia” is either. Depending on my mood, I lean either way. But don’t forget when “Citizen Kane” was released the reaction was the same – many loved it and many hated it. But it is a masterpiece for exactly this reason. Enjoy.

Buy it here: Magnolia

Here’s the interview scene I mentioned:

Thursday, 29 March 2007

PUNCH DRUNK LOVE


Punch Drunk Love (2001) Dir. Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Adam Sandler, Emily Watson

***1/2

Guest review by Blair Stewart

What a profoundly weird movie experience this is, and what a thrill that P.T.A and Adam Sandler pulled this darkly lovely rabbit out of their hat on the general public. So this is what it felt like to be an American filmgoer in the unpredictable 70’s. I will always remember seeing this on opening night in a Vancouver megaplex in front of a packed crowd of Sandler fans and the horrified reaction as the end credits rolled with the Skittles tumbling out of everybody’s palms.
WHAT. THE HELL. WAS THAT?

Firstly, it is the very unconventional love story between virginal toilet plunger salesman Barry played by Adam Sandler with seething rage at the abuse he takes from his hectoring 7 sisters alongside the fact that he’s a virginal toilet plunger salesman and the mysterious red-dressed Lena played with saintly patience by Emily Watson as his romantic foil and likely savior. Secondly, it is Sandler and Anderson taking hammer and tongs to the caustic/sappy ‘Sandler’ persona of “Happy Gilmour’ and “Billy Madison” fame and to the entire ‘Romantic Comedy’ genre, adding art-house DNA of unpredictable violence and pathos to create this hybrid flower. Thirdly, it is an intense emotional experience for the viewer, its blinding florescent cinematography, disjointed soundtrack, tense acting and overall mood-tone enveloping you into Barry’s persona as he takes baby steps through self-inflicted danger towards the possibility of happiness. The film is blessed throughout with haunting beauty; a nighttime impromptu dance in the aisles of a grocery store, a sad close-up of a delicate character in peril that significantly raised my own heart rate to alarming levels, a silhouetted embrace that could be used as a visual definition of New Found Love.

Should Adam Sandler never veer down these odd side-roads again I will always admire him for the vulnerability and Travis Bickle-ish psychosis he displays in this role, with a supporting cast of Watson, Philip Seymour Hoffman at his sleazy best and a superbly baffled Luis Guzman that assist his flowering as a performer. While Anderson will likely spend the remainder of his career making grand cinematic statements on par with “Boogie Nights” and “Magnolia”, this I consider to be his best work for its subversive ingenuity. Now that I’ve praised it its up to you to view it, the mutant Adam Sandler project, the One That Got Away from the Hollywood Focus Groups, the $25 Million Romantic Comedy from Mars. Enjoy?

PS-Check out Philip Seymour Hoffman’s incredible stunt for the ‘Mattress Man Commercial” available on the DVD special features:



Buy it here: Punch-Drunk Love (Two Disc Special Edition)