THE MASTER (2012) P.T. Anderson's film on the origions of Scientology (sort of), Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams, and Laura Dern

it's just that everything feels like it is trying to impress me!

I get that from both these directors, but I prefer PTA's attempts to impress me. WA seems even more "I'm about to have the big scene where you feel something so be ready for that" - what you see as incoherence/inconsistency in PTA I see as a read on naturalism - his characters' motivations are inconsistent, as are: mine, those of most people I know, etc. Clean narrative is kind of a romantic need; most people, like Plainview, are motivated by whatever their needs are at the moment, imo.

I find Boogie Nights to be extremely joyful overall

Have said as much many times; the scene at the end where Reynolds glides around his house checking in on everyone is as joyous as anything I can think of.

So, Tom Cruise has seen this and he "has issues". They are trying to screen it for Travolta next. There's no better publicity than an incensed Scientologist, I suppose

Oh, come on, they are not really screening this for notable celebrity Scientologists, are they? That does not seem to be PTA's thing.

PTA and Cruise are friends, so it makes sense that he'd want to show it to the guy.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/tom-cruise-has-seen-paul-thomas-andersons-the-master-has-issues-with-it-20120522

Even so, what the fuck? So PTA would puss out his movie to please Tom Cruise? Why even make it, then?

I assume it was just a courtesy. I doubt he'd make any changes just cause Cruise didn't like it

i don't think this is going to be the blistering excoriation of hubbard / scientology that many folks are hoping for. it's likely to be a complicated character study of l. ron hubbard, and if scientologists have 'issues' with showing the flawed humanity of their dear leader, it's because they've been indoctrinated to believe the man infallible in his teachings.

the link saying the screenings are more about deciding whether to explicity mention/acknowledge Scientology in the marketing film, which makes sense. he probably also just wants Cruise to have a heads up, so he doesn't feel anxious or ambushed when the movie hits theaters.

iirc, one of the introductory passages of _dianetics_ says that if you don't understand any passages of the book, then it is YOUR FAULT as a reader, and that you must reread the passages until they make sense. any misunderstanding is in NO WAY because hubbard presents a confusing belief system via turgid, confusing jargon.

i can only imagine what sort of cyclopean, messianic asshole this thinking made hubbard irl, and i can see why followers might be uncomfortable with that.

we know, dude. scientology sucks. thread kinda doesn't need to be about that.

yea lets keep on topic of ranking ptas prior filmography, gosh

jeez i'm just saying elmo kinda went off apropos of nothing

yeah woah, totally off topic, speculating about the possible movie and how its controversial subject might be received, gosh i'm sorry bout that

tom-cruise-has-seen-paul-thomas-andersons-the-master-has-issues-with-it

Joke's gonna be on all of us when this turns out to be a MANOS prequel.

http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/manos/notapproved.jpg

it was more the way you did a mini-rant, then i posted something, then you went in for another rant that seemed even madder and unrelated to the previous posts. i mean go ahead, rage it up, i just thought maybe you could pump your brakes.

glad weve gotten the thread back on topic

I don't know a ton about Hubbard & Co, but I will be pleased if Anderson has made his first wholly successful film since Hard Eight.

btw i thought it pretty clear that my point wasn't "scientology's bad" but "hubbard was probably a jerk" but *shrugs*

I don't know a ton about Hubbard & Co, but I will be pleased if Anderson has made his first wholly successful film since Hard Eight.

― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 15:31 (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

^^^^
The Master

who knows, maybe we'll see a softer, cuddlier side of hubbard in this film! which would be something much more interesting than "here's a crazy cultist huckster, who was bad"

Whoa whoa whoa. Rein it in a bit there, elmo, you utter maniac.

I don't know a ton about Hubbard & Co, but I will be pleased if Anderson has made his first wholly successful film since Hard Eight.

Morbs, just so I can keep tally when this comes out, what percentage of each of his films would you deem wholly successful?

Also, please list other wholly successful films, thanks.

(BTW, Morbs, you would totally love Hubbard!)

The reviews for TWBB were more unhinged and crazed than the movie itself.

My ranking:

Hard Eight
Boogie Nights
bits of TWBB

not doing the Someone Who Shouldn't Be a Respected Auteur's Career Recap in yet another thread.

gutted

Morbs, I want numbers! Show me the numbers!

i actually think PTA would be trolling harder if this film actually portrayed LRH in a sympathetic light than if it were a merciless debunking of all things scientology. that's not to say that trolling is the best or noblest thing he could do with this film.

i think it's legit and fascinating to wonder about how l ron hubbard understood himself and related to others. i can only imagine that being surrounded by a bunch of people who believe steadfastly in your quasi-divinity and made-up mumbo-jumbo might actually cause you to be contemptuous of people in general. but i can't really see a way to tell the LRH story without the ultimate verdict being pretty damning, because you know....

If Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character is supposed to be an LRH stand-in, does anyone know Phoenix's character's historical analogue?

tom cruise

Heinlein

amateurist OTM. i'm guessing the phoenix character might be the first person 'LRH' actually 'helps,' and who, from the trailer, actually seems in need of help? cultism aside, a lot of scientologists credit the system for liberating them from long histories of substance abuse, which i think most people would agree is a noble cause. so is he helping the helpless, or exploiting the weak, or both? this is the stuff i'm hoping the movie addresses, i'll probably be happy with whatever tho.

A drifter (Phoenix) becomes his right-hand man but as the faith begins to gain a fervent following, the drifter finds himself questioning the belief system and his mentor.

The drifter becomes the drifted.

if this turns out to be a "debunking" of scientology i'll eat my shoe

well he already debunked porn, oil and frogs, it was just a matter of time before he found the next target of his michael moore-style takedowns

debunking frogbs

Teaser Number 2!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5U8eyMFCpJw

Attempt 2 to embed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U8eyMFCpJw

i've got a feeling this film is going to have music in it

cool

Damn great. Wonderful to finally get a sense of how Hoffman is doing this.

Dunphy: “There’s another feature of today that is unique, it’s an honour for Liam to be sitting in between two former Millwall footballers – and it’s not often two former Millwall footballers appear on television.”

Sadlier: “Privileged.”

Brady: “Where do Millwall ex players usually appear? In the dock?”

Maloney: “We’d like to distance ourself from those remarks – and so would Liam.”

brady's best ever zing? can't wait for video of this to emerge.

Me neither.

gah wrong thread

I was wondering if I missed something in the trailer.

i wish they were in it

The Goal Master