A Master Builder

This film is a story of the old gods. Solness is the Demiurgos, the Insane God who created the Earth and the Universe we live in.

Seen in this light, suddenly the film makes sense.

The dialogue is encoded. Note how the discussions in the first few scenes are nonspecific to the point of nonsense.

That is - unless you know the code.

They are talking about the creation of the Universe (by Solness), and who will take it over, and who will create the next one (the Villa by the Lake).

Does Ragnar have the Right Stuff to be a God? That is in question. Solness says "No".

Ragnar? Ragnarok, Chaos. The Undoing. The coming apocalypse that Kaia (Gaia) will participate in (the Wedding). This is about whether the Earth will go through Apocalypse, Chaos, and begin anew, or whether She will hang on with Solness in the old way, and try and work it out.

Solness is in love with Kaia, but in reality he wants to keep Ragnar (Lucifer?) close because he needs him. Light and Dark being nothing without each other. In this case Lucifer is not to be confused with Satan (Shaitan - the Opposer) who is mere darkness as in - when the old sun (Saturn) went away. He is The Light Bringer, the Shining One of Milton.

The film is also Masonic in a BIG way. But that is an easier decode, and I will leave it to "Jay" who works at that level.

A successful, ego-maniacal architect (Wallace Shawn) who has spent a lifetime bullying his wife, employees and mistresses wants to make peace as his life approaches its final act.

While this is a very good film, it must be stressed: this was originally a play, and it comes across very obviously as a play, even on film. The dialogue is dense, far more than your usual conversation. And the sets are minimal. Not sparse, but few... are there even six different rooms in the whole two hours? I feel like I have seen another version of this play done before (on film, not in person). But this probably is the defining version. Wallace Shawn is great, but really Lisa Joyce steals the show. In the few years this has been out, her career has moved along steadily, but she's not the big name she should be. Someone cast this woman in the right role!

It's neat to see Jonathan Demme's direction of this, which was five years after the last feature film he made (Rachel Getting Married). It's still very good, as are his recent documentaries like My Cousin Bobby. You can tell this is a play adapted for the big screen but Wallace Shawn is amazing and as far as plays go you can't do much better than Ibsen. It's a great play and the adaption is good.

I can't help but feel that this will definitely be the kind of film that sort of warrants a rewatch in the future, especially because it just comes across as pretty complex, maybe too much so. It seems like a complicated play, but all I know is that the acting is outstanding. It has the sortof very dreamy, airy atmosphere that one wants out of a film like this, since it's the atmosphere that really help carry it even when the dialogue seems a bit puzzling. Overall, definitely has many admirable qualities, certainly not your run-of-the-mill stuff, but then again being based on a play one expects that. Many probably won't like it, but as far as I'm concerned, it's a definite winner.

Wallace Shawn is the titular aging architect who, although having a very successful career, is utterly dissatisfied. Early in his career, he usurped his mentor Andre Gregory and his career prospered while he has deliberately kept Gregory down. He has kept Gregory's son (Jeff Biehl) in his employ, refusing to let him go out on his own even though he knows he has talent because he fears being usurped in the same fashion. He employs Biehl's fiancé (Emily Cass McDonnell) and keeps her in a kind of sexual thrall to keep Biehl in line

Shawn has also prospered from his wife's (Julie Haggerty) misfortune. His career got a huge boost when her familial home burnt to the ground. This lead to severe depression on her part and the death of their infant sons due to neglect, but Shawn profited by parceling off the land and building new homes on the ruins.

Then Lisa Joyce arrives at Shawn's home. She is a casual acquaintance that they agree to put up overnight, but she reveals to Shawn that they have known each other for far longer. A decade earlier, when she was 12, he put up a building for her father and promised her he would return in 10 years to take her away. She has come to collect on the promise.

This is a very odd film. Obviously a third film project from Shawn and Gregory is of great interest, but this falls quite a bit short of the heights of "My Dinner with Andre" and "Vanya on 42nd Street". Like "Vanya", this is a play that the two have worked on for some time. Shawn provided a new translation of Ibsen's play and Gregory directed it for the stage. A filmed version of another of their adaptations of an intimate chamber play sounds promising.

Strangely though, they've taken a play that is very abstract and symbolic and given it a far more blandly realistic staging than "Vanya", which ends up making it a far more difficult play to process. While you can see setting "Uncle Vanya" in this film's rural house setting, this play screams for that film's bare stage setting. It's also odd for Shawn, who does not speak Norwegian, to provide a new translation for a play that already has a definitive English translation, and then to alter the beginning and end in a way taht renders the play even more obtuse.

Demme is also a very odd choice to direct this, and he seems sort of lost here. He just kind of steps back and points his camera at the actors.

Perhaps that is the best approach. The best thing this film has to offer is it's cast, who are really extraordinary dealing with a difficult play and odd staging by delivering really fine performances. Shawn could not be farther from Ibsen's conception of this character (Burt Lancaster in his waning years seems to be the ideal), but he does a really fine job ... he's magnetic in a part most folks will find utterly loathsome. Haggerty is magnificent and reinforces the fact that we do not see enough of her.