The Master

The Master has left me conflicted. This highly (and I stress highly) anticipated film from independent film royalty Paul Thomas Anderson follows a young troubled drifter shortly after World War II as he falls in with "The Cause". It's not like Scientology, but has an enigmatic leader and spiritual philosophies that deal with space and time travel, past lives, and other esoteric ideas. So it's basically Scientology.

PT Anderson blew expectations out of the water with 2008's There Will Be Blood which introduced us to what Daniel Day-Lewis could do if given the right role, surrounded by music by Radiohead's Jonny Greenwood, and an absolutely masterful film making team. Anderson proved on the spot that his cinema verite was so pure and beautiful, it was almost unbelievable. Had it not been for No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood would have swept the Oscars.

Anderson has taken an interesting path to get to this point, and has essentially created two kinds of films; masterpieces, and oddities. Stepping back in time to 1997, he created an underrated film called Boogie Nights. It rivaled 1994's Pulp Fiction in its impact on the independent film circuit, introducing us to a plethora of incredible actors who have since dominated Hollywood. It was a dark gem with such smart and original emotional appeal that it resonated long after watching it.

Fast forward a couple of years, and PT offered up Magnolia, a disjointed and misunderstood ensemble drama that showed us a side of Tom Cruise that we hadn't seen before. It was not a great film on first viewing, but it grew on me over the years, and after seeing it again a couple of years ago, I gained a new appreciation like one that you would develop for an incontinent pet. Good, but not great. Unusual, and the style grows on you so you begin to know what to expect.

2002 introduced us to Punch Drunk Love, which was definitely an oddity. It failed on so many levels, and just never really made sense. Adam Sandler tried his darnedest to break free from his goofy reputation, but it didn't work. Punch Drunk Love brought PT back down a few rungs on his ladder to the pantheon of filmmaking gods.

Then came There Will be Blood in 2007. Beautiful. Spot on. Daniel Day-Lewis at his absolute best. If it were possible, he should have received the Best Actor of the Decade Oscar.

PT Anderson's Modus Operandi is clear. He is a visionary that plays by nobody's rules in the film world, and he creates original works exactly the way that he wants to. That said, The Master is a complicated and confusing piece of work that has too much ethereal pondering, I felt a little bit like I was watching a Terrence Malick film. Throw in the gratuitous nudity, and I could imagine Stanley Kubrick rolling over in his grave.

There was a row of elderly folks in the theatre with me, and one by one, they walked out due to the discomfort that the film evoked. Be it the language, the confusion, or the nudity, there were a total of eight women who couldn't stick with the film. That sums it up nicely. It's just strange.

That said, this film will give us two Best Actor Oscar nominees in Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Joaquin Phoenix. This will be the first time since 1984's Amadeus that it will have happened. If either of them isn't nominated, it will be a crime and I may boycott the Oscars. OK, I won't, but I'll rant about it. Ironically, Hoffman won his Best Actor Oscar for Capote in 2005, beating out a deserving Phoenix for his portrayal of Johnny Cash in Walk the Line. The two of them are mesmerizing.

Phoenix is the true lead as Freddy Quell, a misguided young man who finds comfort in various forms of liquid intoxicants, and who is portrayed as a sexual deviant although PT Anderson doesn't quite explore this angle as deeply as he should. Hoffman plays Lancaster Dodd, the self-proclaimed "Writer, nuclear physicist, theoretical philosopher, and man." Their characters are rich in flaws and strengths, but they are never quite given the time to fully actualize their potential. I'm not sure any length of film could, they are that compelling on the screen. The acting alone makes this film worth seeing, and the premise of a religious cult is the perfect backdrop for hypnotic conversations and prolonged scenes of discomfort. They play off each other in a way that is so rare and authentic that you forget that you're watching a movie at times. It is magical.

The other side of the coin however, is the plot, which has just too many unanswered and irrelevant turns. The conclusion is anti-climactic and strange, trying to be a bit too mysterious and artful. I was expecting a bit more from the final few scenes, which is probably my own fault. This film needed a conclusion to quench my cinematic thirst.

That said, I am still conflicted on how to rate this film. Kudos to PT Anderson for assembling a wonderful cast and creating a slow boiling controversy (tastefully and respectfully done) around Scientology, but he could have put more into the story and thrown a little bone to the mainstream audience. The direction and cinematography is remarkable. The best I've seen all year so far, and this film will garner numerous Oscar nominations, but I'm not convinced at this point that it will have enough overall support to earn any victories. Two actors pinned against each other in the same film and the same category will polarize some voters, as a very strong case could be made for either one of them. It is for this reason that sadly, neither will win (Unless Seymour Hoffman somehow ends up in the Supporting Actor category, which would be interesting).

I can't recommend this film. It's not as bad as the elderly women made it seem, and I would never walk out of a PT Anderson film, no matter how bad it may be. The two lead performances can't be complimented enough, and this is a very worthy effort on the part of the writer/director. I look forward to every piece of work he does, but this one is more in line with Punch Drunk Love than There Will be Blood. 7/10.