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

there needs to be a companion film that is 90% Amy Adams and Laura Dern

there probably is tbh

i like the cut from the photo lab to him passed out at the bar

1000 hrs of deleted scenes on the blu-ray xp

the shot after they drank the bomb fuel was incredible, would like to just see that scene again

I didn't come out of it thinking "but what does it MEAN" but I did find myself feeling surprised that these particular aspects of Scientology were what PTA found so compelling as to hang a whole movie on. it didn't feel like enough. I liked it though but felt like those characters could have been in an even better movie I guess.

The Master II: Back in the Habit

Re-mastered

i like when he keeps moving the light closer and closer to the guy's face for the photo

movie would've been better if joaquin started a rival cult and then they have a dance-process battle to the death

I have a question ... who really did the mastering in this movie

Good PT Anderson interview on Fresh Air today, in spite of the occasional ridiculous terry question

I only heard a little part of that. TG: "The men's suits are all blue, but ... I mean, they're *really* blue." PTA: ...

the DVD case for Punch Drunk Love tells you to adjust your TV so the blues are really blue or something like that iirc

pta's one and only music video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68ugkg9RePc

well that was...something.

yeah its a pretty trippy music video

lol i was referring to the master, shld pay more attention when posting in zing.

Yeah this is about my reaction. It's like... this movie sure exists. It had my attention the whole time and I enjoyed looking at joaquim's face, but I can't find much else to say about it. i can't really even figure out what the movie was missing.

― Hungry4Ass, Sunday, September 23, 2012 1:33 AM (1 week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

as usual h4a nails it

everyone's right that the last scene ruled, to me it just seemed like he had finally figured out what all psh's bullshit was good for, to help him achieve his ultimate desire of getting laid.

this movie was so obviously impressive in a couple of important ways that one runs the risk of giving it the benefit of the doubt on a couple of other v. important items. don't really think i can do so until i've thought a lot more about it.

Joaquin interviewed by Elvis Mitchell... way more interesting than just the awards-bashing paragraph.

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/joaquin-phoenix#/_

It's a carrot, but it's the worst-tasting carrot I've ever tasted in my whole life.

I don't know if you gave me The Ring if I could carry it and bring it to Ozamorph, or whatever you call it.

oh man lol

PHOENIX: I know, but that's still what I remember. I loved hip-hop—that's why I did it, because it's something I actually knew about. From, like, '88 to '94 was my time. Black Moon was a great band. Enta da Stage [1993], Nas's Illmatic [1994], and Wu-Tang Clan's Enter the Wu-Tang [1993] all came out within a year, and it was mind-blowing because I was so deep into it. I love hip-hop.

Don't call them a band, jeez. what ru my dad

better or worse than Adrien Brody professing his love for Jeru the Damaja

Some thoughts from a second viewing tonight:

Quill and Dodd's doubling of each other really stuck out to me. (Of course it should've done so the first time but I'm a bit thick.)

Also more obvious this time was that the language of the Cause, Dodd's language and apparatus, basically amounts to word salad. Dodd is an ill man, basically incapable of completing a line of thought. F. ex., his wedding speech about the dragon gets a big laugh, but it's a joke with no punchline and no kind of sense.

Peggy Dodd is the goal-directed, aggressive driver of the Cause, and Lancaster's fantasies her vehicle—not just by the end of the film, but from the beginning. I don't think that this is somehow the "point" of the film (or its title). But without Peggy, Dodd wouldn't be a Master, and that reinforces the co-evolving/doubled Dodd/Quill relationship.

Just saw this on a rainy afternoon (my work to do was all waiting for returned calls/emails, so took a few hours off).

Naked party: figured we were jist seeing the party through his primal eyes, the visual equivalent of a Malick voice-over. That PSH was clothed was one of the indications that Dodd was offering an alternative to just seeing everyone a naked.

Ending: Freddie rejects a system that aims to get him beyond "animal" state, goes back to animal state with a few new tools to reach intimacy.

Thought the whole thing was more about the AA idea of alcohol being a "higher power" than it was about Scientology--as if PTA started with Freddie and then worked to figure out who his biggest antagonist would be.

yes i agree with that, which is why I referenced Gregory Bateson's essay about AA.

Oh yeah--just catching up on all of this now.

Just saw this in 70mm--still digesting but I liked it about as much as I liked TWBB, which is a lot with reservations.

Strangely (or perhaps not) it reminded me a lot of Gregory Bateson's thesis about alcoholics and their obsessive need for self-control--basically the dialectic that both Freddie and Dodd seem to struggle with.

― ryan, Friday, September 21, 2012 7:48 PM (1 month ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah, the basic idea is that alcoholic is caught in a double-bind of control (ie, controlling his drinking and being controlled by it). I think this is a relevant passage:

The friends and relatives of the alcoholic commonly urge him to be "strong," and to "resist temptation." What they mean by this is not very clear, but it is significant that the alcoholic himself—while sober—commonly agrees with their view of his "problem." He believes that he could be, or, at least, ought to be "the captain of his soul." But it is a cliché of alcoholism that after "that first drink," the motivation to stop drinking is zero. Typically the whole matter is phrased overtly as a battle between "self" and "John Barleycorn." Covertly the alcoholic may be planning or even secretly lay¬ing in supplies for the next binge, but it is almost impossible (in the hospital setting) to get the sober alcoholic to plan his next binge in an overt manner. He cannot, seemingly, be the "captain" of his soul and overtly will or command his own drunkenness. The "captain" can only command sobriety —and then not be obeyed.
Bill W., the cofounder of Alcoholics Anonymous, himself an alcoholic, cut through all this mythology of conflict in the very first of the famous "Twelve Steps" of AA. The first step demands that the alcoholic agree that he is powerless over alcohol. This step is usually regarded as a "surrender" and many alcoholics are either unable to achieve it or achieve it only briefly during the period of remorse following a binge. AA does not regard these cases as promising: they have not yet "hit bottom"; their despair is inadequate and after a more or less brief spell of sobriety they will again attempt to use "selfcontrol" to fight the "temptation." They will not or cannot accept the premise that, drunk or sober, the total personality of an alcoholic is an alcoholic personality which cannot conceivably fight alcoholism. As an AA leaflet puts it, "trying to use will power is like trying to lift yourself by your bootstraps."

Really interesting,

Just found this interview with PTA:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/paul-thomas-anderson-the-master_n_1874053.html

Phil says it best in his press conference in Venice. He says, I wish I could walk out into the streets and shit and fuck every woman that I see and all this different kind of stuff, but I can't do that, and I think I'm gonna go find a master to teach me how not to do that

Towards the end of the 75-minute conversation, an audience member asked [James] Franco to discuss a specific movie role on his resume that had initially intimidated him. Franco couldn’t really think of one, which reminded him of a funny story.

“Well, I don’t know if this is a funny story but it’s a true story,” he said. “Paul Thomas Anderson was getting ready to make the Master and he called me and we met. And we talked and we ended up meeting for coffee. We didn’t talk about the Master but I met him to chat. And then he kept calling me and he wanted to talk and talk but I didn’t know what he wanted to talk about because we’d always just kind of bulls— on the phone. So then when he started talking about the role he said ‘Do you feel like you can do this?’ And I said ‘Yeah, totally. Look, I think you’re like the best American director. I feel confident. I know I can do this.’ And he said to me ‘But I want this to scare you. I want this role, going on this journey to scare you.’ And I was like ‘Scare?! I know I can do it.” Franco now had the laughing audience in the Stephen F. Austin Intercontinental ballroom in the palm of his hand. “And so, incredible movie, needless to say I didn’t get the part. I guess I wasn’t scared enough or something, or whatever reason I didn’t get it. And then when I saw Joaquin in that movie I realized ‘Oh, he wanted me to like lose my mind.’ And so I guess that’s just to say I usually don’t get scared of roles."

lolllll

ha yes

from rex reed's review:

espite the undeserved praise some critics have lavished on the director for filming the whole thing in 65-millimeter, the expensive process is wasted on an endless parade of debilitating and annoying close-ups.

er, surely he means 70mm?

the format used resulted in a 65mm frame on 70mm stock or something like that

lol @ the notion of 65mm being 'wasted' on a close up

needed more cock shots

there r lots of benefits to shooting on a bigger negative that apply whether youre shooting a face or a canyon - like, look at the portraits of richard avedon, u cant get that 'look' from a smaller negative

its 65mm in-camera but printed on 70mm stock iirc, the extra for the soundtrack.

yeah I saw this in 70mm twice and I'm no expert but I don't think the 35mm version would've shown off Joaquin's craggy paralytic face to its full effect

think I saw it in 35mm, but regardless, the 'look' of being shot on 65mm will come through whether its projected in 35mm or 70mm or w/e

it looked really good

I'm going to give this another try tomorrow night. lag∞n, you might want to avoid this thread for a few days.

er, surely he means 70mm?

― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Saturday, November 17, 2012 1:34 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

its shot on 65 and printed on 70, iirc

the whole thing wasnt actually shot on 70, there were definitely some 35mm scenes

what on earth does this even mean