or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Master
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Master - Page 2

post #31 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penman View Post

With Argo, Lincoln, Zero Dark Thirty, and to a lesser extent, The Master, the question of a feature film's historical accuracy was rightly front and center this year.

IMHO "It's just a movie!" is a disingenuous dodge by cake-eating cake havers.

If filmmakers didn't want the added appeal and cachet of "Based on a True Story" attached to their movies, they'd change all the identifying facts and keep the essence of whatever appealed to them about the story.

Which is precisely what PTA did with The Master. He was interested in the psychology of and interaction between severely damaged leaders and followers; he could not, apparently, care less as to whether L. Ron Hubbard (I almost typed P. T. Barnum--why?) had affairs or drank or buried his best "scriptures" or whatever.

Zero Dark Thirty and Argo are much, much more problematic on this question of historical accuracy, and their creators take the cake-eating cake-having cake: Both Bigelow and Affleck say--even in the space of the same interview--"It's history, it's a true story" and "It's just a movie, it's a story." I like my Dodgeball with Ben Stiller, thank you.

For better or worse (worse, come on), in our ahistorical aholed-ridden country, movie history IS history, and so getting something wrong (Torture Got Bin Laden--YAY!) has consequences.
I had no idea my identical twin posted on this forum......wink.gif
post #32 of 53
Just watched it last night. Had no knowledge of it prior other than saw who was in it and decided to give it a watch. Very odd movie but superbly acted and shot. The visuals were compelling. I just wish the story told matched up to the visuals better. The whole dream in the theater with the phone call was confusing. If there was no real call, how did he know where to go and that he had "figured out" where they met before? Two nuts perfectly in tune? I didn't spend much time trying to figure that out.

For period films trying to capture the real look - this far exceeded Argo imo. Superb costume, set design and direction to capture it all in the frame. I really felt transported back in time rather than feeling like they really dressed up the set well with extra attention to the hair styles.
post #33 of 53
Thread Starter 
there's no comparison...
the master is a masterpiece... argo is a passing fancy.
post #34 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchu18 View Post

there's no comparison...
the master is a masterpiece... argo is a passing fancy.

Correction, a propagandists fancy.
post #35 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I had no idea my identical twin posted on this forum......wink.gif
As in evil twin wink.gif
post #36 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

Correction, a propagandists fancy.

...a revisionist propagandist's fancy...
post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

...a revisionist propagandist's fancy...

Well propaganda would not be propaganda without the revisionism.
post #38 of 53
Self indulgent film making at its best. And weird for weird's sake. This is probably the weakest of P.T. Anderson's films. His dialog and characterizations are getting more unrelatable and bizarre too (especially after watching There Will Be Blood)... almost to the point where I question Anderson's continuing grasp on reality.

Yes, there are moments of shear brilliance with some very gripping and emotionally draining scenes between Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix' characters, but they fail to make up for a very unengaging, almost standoffish plot. While Phoenix's character Freddie is a severely troubled and emotionally unbalanced man, that doesn't necessarily mean the movie's narrative structure has to act the same way in order to keep the audience riveted.
post #39 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Self indulgent film making at its best. And weird for weird's sake. This is probably the weakest of P.T. Anderson's films. His dialog and characterizations are getting more unrelatable and bizarre too (especially after watching There Will Be Blood)... almost to the point where I question Anderson's continuing grasp on reality.

Yes, there are moments of shear brilliance with some very gripping and emotionally draining scenes between Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix' characters, but they fail to make up for a very unengaging, almost standoffish plot. While Phoenix's character Freddie is a severely troubled and emotionally unbalanced man, that doesn't necessarily mean the movie's narrative structure has to act the same way in order to keep the audience riveted.

Agree completely - and this comes from a huge fan of PTA's earlier work. I thought it was kind of a mess.
post #40 of 53
I love all the players so had to see this movie (despite not enjoying There Will Be Blood much if at all) and thought it was pretty awful. I did find the scene Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
where Amy Adams jxxks-off PSH
to be memorable for what most likely is a first for AA and causes me to want to see American Hustle.

wink.gif
post #41 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Self indulgent film making at its best. And weird for weird's sake. This is probably the weakest of P.T. Anderson's films. His dialog and characterizations are getting more unrelatable and bizarre too (especially after watching There Will Be Blood)... almost to the point where I question Anderson's continuing grasp on reality.

David Lynch is weird for weird's sake. Paul Thomas Anderson is evolving and since his next film is a Thomas Pynchon adaptation. You've been warned.
post #42 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Self indulgent film making at its best. And weird for weird's sake. This is probably the weakest of P.T. Anderson's films. His dialog and characterizations are getting more unrelatable and bizarre too (especially after watching There Will Be Blood)... almost to the point where I question Anderson's continuing grasp on reality.

Yes, there are moments of shear brilliance with some very gripping and emotionally draining scenes between Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix' characters, but they fail to make up for a very unengaging, almost standoffish plot. While Phoenix's character Freddie is a severely troubled and emotionally unbalanced man, that doesn't necessarily mean the movie's narrative structure has to act the same way in order to keep the audience riveted.

I couldn't agree with everything you said any more. I wanted to like this movie, but standoffish, weird, and unlikable are very appropriate terms for it. I loved loved loved There Will Be Blood, but this I kind of hated. Even with the amazing performances.
post #43 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Self indulgent film making at its best. And weird for weird's sake. This is probably the weakest of P.T. Anderson's films. His dialog and characterizations are getting more unrelatable and bizarre too (especially after watching There Will Be Blood)... almost to the point where I question Anderson's continuing grasp on reality.

Yes, there are moments of shear brilliance with some very gripping and emotionally draining scenes between Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix' characters, but they fail to make up for a very unengaging, almost standoffish plot. While Phoenix's character Freddie is a severely troubled and emotionally unbalanced man, that doesn't necessarily mean the movie's narrative structure has to act the same way in order to keep the audience riveted.

I couldn't disagree with you more.

some people balk at the idea of having to put thought into a movie to get something out... but some of us can't wait for those movies to challenge us.
post #44 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchu18 View Post

I couldn't disagree with you more.

some people balk at the idea of having to put thought into a movie to get something out... but some of us can't wait for those movies to challenge us.

For me, I wish it were about a movie challenging me or putting thought into it. I welcome the movies that do that. The Master just didn't for me. I didn't see a story unfold in front of me, as much as ideas that seemed to be not very well thought out, and implemented even more poorly. TWBB challenged me and made me think, but The Master just made me long for a better movie.

I fully understand that some people love it. It just didn't work for me.
post #45 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchu18 View Post

I couldn't disagree with you more.

some people balk at the idea of having to put thought into a movie to get something out... but some of us can't wait for those movies to challenge us.

There were moments in the film of great power, but on the whole it left me completely cold. I really didn't give two hoots about any of the characters and the story was a mess.
post #46 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordcloud View Post

For me, I wish it were about a movie challenging me or putting thought into it. I welcome the movies that do that. The Master just didn't for me. I didn't see a story unfold in front of me, as much as ideas that seemed to be not very well thought out, and implemented even more poorly. TWBB challenged me and made me think, but The Master just made me long for a better movie.

I fully understand that some people love it. It just didn't work for me.
Nothing happens in There Will Be Boredom. Freddie Quell > Daniel Plainview.
post #47 of 53
Thread Starter 
indeed... the freddie Quell character was one of the best flushed out and vividly portrayed characters I have ever seen on film... and I did say FILM. It's a legitimate travesty that award was not given to that character for leading actor. I think it is unceasingly interesting to watch this character destroy himself on his search for meaning. Lewis is obnoxiously disgusting, Phoenix is beautiful and touching.

As far as the story not being flushed out... I think that if you are looking for a conventional linear storyline, you missed the entire reason for the movie. I don't mean linear in the sense that the movie is traveling along a straight timeline, I mean linear in the sense that this movie is NOT conventionally in it's ideology in the same way that Scientology is "alien" to the public en masse.

Ultimately, the coldness and unrewarding feel that most experience from the movie is in fact a credit to it's brilliance in that the movie almost has no meaning to anyone other than quell and dodd... unless, as a watcher, you are willing to accept that fact and also accept that we are watching the transcendence of the two spirits over generations, you probably will never "GET" this movie.

We're watching "love" between two individuals in a reincarnated state, with quell unable to deal with his loneliness and loss by exercising drink, and dodd exercising his by searching for meaning in the spiritual world.
Edited by MSchu18 - 12/24/13 at 9:31am
post #48 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchu18 View Post

indeed... the freddie Quell character was one of the best flushed out and vividly portrayed characters I have ever seen on film... and I did say FILM. It's a legitimate travesty that award was not given to that character for leading actor. I think it is unceasingly interesting to watch this character destroy himself on his search for meaning. Lewis is obnoxiously disgusting, Phoenix is beautiful and touching.

As far as the story not being flushed out... I think that if you are looking for a conventional linear storyline, you missed the entire reason for the movie. I don't mean linear in the sense that the movie is traveling along a straight timeline, I mean linear in the sense that this movie is NOT conventionally in it's ideology in the same way that Scientology is "alien" to the public en masse.

Ultimately, the coldness and unrewarding feel that most experience from the movie is in fact a credit to it's brilliance in that the movie almost has no meaning to anyone other than quell and dodd... unless, as a watcher, you are willing to accept that fact and also accept that we are watching the transcendence of the two spirits over generations, you probably will never "GET" this movie.

We're watching "love" between two individuals in a reincarnated state, with quell unable to deal with his loneliness and loss by exercising drink, and dodd exercising his by searching for meaning in the spiritual world.

I can't disagree with this. But this does not a movie make, and certainly not a good one. If I'm being generous, this movie felt more like an experiment in filmmaking than an accomplished and movie maker making a compelling film. I definitely got the "love" theme, however, that still doesn't change the fact that the movie was done in a very ugly way to me. It didn't make me want to watch it again, to delve deeper into the movie or try and pick up on things I may have missed previously, like most movies like this do. This movie simply made me feel as though I had just sat through a failed attempt at deep art.

Of course, everyone's opinion may differ, and does, but I kind of hated this movie. I'd rather sit through Martyrs again, which I felt was a truly brilliant movie, but almost unwatchable for me a second time.
post #49 of 53
Thread Starter 
:thumbsup:
love talking movies, both pro and con
post #50 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordcloud View Post

Of course, everyone's opinion may differ, and does, but I kind of hated this movie.
Agreed--one wonders how it got funded.

I have the DVD of Magnolia sitting on the shelf--I wonder if I'll ever be inspired to stick it in a player and look at it. The Master is now the 2nd time this director has actually pissed me off for wasting my time! I did not enjoy TWBB at all.

mad.gif

I guess I've now been fooled twice by him; shame on me... redface.gif
post #51 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laserfan View Post

Agreed--one wonders how it got funded.

I have the DVD of Magnolia sitting on the shelf--I wonder if I'll ever be inspired to stick it in a player and look at it. The Master is now the 2nd time this director has actually pissed me off for wasting my time! I did not enjoy TWBB at all.

mad.gif

I guess I've now been fooled twice by him; shame on me... redface.gif

Magnolia was a damn good movie. I recommend watching it. I liked TWBB a lot though, so you may hate it.
post #52 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordcloud View Post

Magnolia was a damn good movie. I recommend watching it.
Good, I needed a recommendation. And if I'm gonna watch a 3 hour movie it may as well be in the dead of winter.

Also, if I don't like it, then it will have been LC that fooled me and not PTA... wink.gif
post #53 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordcloud View Post

Magnolia was a damn good movie. I recommend watching it. I liked TWBB a lot though, so you may hate it.
OMG lc I watched this last night--just a great movie! eek.gif

I liked Boogie Nights but Magnolia was really special--three hours and eight minutes and I didn't want it to end!? OK so PTA is riding on past accomplishments to get "The Master" made. Perhaps he will pull a rabbit (or a frog?) out of his hat and make another good movie someday!

Thanks for pushing me over the edge to devote an evening to Magnolia... cool.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Master