The Master (2012)

Director Paul Thomas Anderson has always been known for his character-driven narratives with hits like 'Magnolia', 'Inherent Vice' and the recent 'Phantom Thread'. However the director's best (at least in this writer's opinion) is this taut psychological drama that gave Anderson his first Oscar nomination for Best Director. Written by the director, the story follows a troubled WWII veteran, Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), who after a bender joins a mysterious group only known as the Cause. This group is led by the charismatic Lancaster Dodd (the late great Philip Seymour Hoffman), the titular character, who begins to form a controlled bond with the troubled Freddie until Freddie's behavior becomes too much to handle.In his second Best Actor nomination, Joaquin Phoenix delivers arguably his greatest performance as Freddie Quell. Coming across as a boorish, ape-like, trouble-making nuisance when we initially meet him, Phoenix begins to morph into a quiet fanatic of the Cause as he wins favor with Lancaster Dodd, but his prior behavior does not disappear no matter how much hypnosis is used to curb his fighting instinct. Able to convey his inner conflict mostly through quiet and menacing glares, it's the body language that speaks volumes to how incurable Freddie's PTSD and tendency for tussling is. When Phoenix does speak the well-crafted dialogue written by Paul Thomas Anderson, the actor conveys his dark sense of humor (particularly with Philip Seymour Hoffman) but also his inner torment when certain nerves are struck and agitate him; coming to the roots of his demons which will never leave him.As usual, Philip Seymour Hoffman shines in the role he is given especially in a juicy leading/supporting role like Lancaster Dodd. While we never actually learn how he gained his position or where the Cause originated, this adds to the mystery of how Dodd is able to wield such power over his followers. While this is denied by the director, an observant viewer will draw comparisons between Lancaster Dodd and Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard; especially in how the Cause operates and looks for donations from wealthy clientele. Hoffman brings his trademark reserved charisma that radiates an aura of commandment, but also a caring nature for those close to him. Many of the late actor's greatest scenes come from his interactions with Joaquin Phoenix's Freddie (such as their first session together where Anderson flexes his comedic writing muscles and prowess for hitting the mark of inner character conflict), whom he initially treats as a surrogate son and treasures Freddie's commitment to the cult. However when Freddie's behavior escalates to reckless, Dodd begins to shun the army veteran after "treatment" fails to reign Freddie in. Probably the greatest showcase of the beginning of their fallout is after the two are arrested (Dodd for fraud and Freddie for fighting with the arresting police officers) where the two male leads snap and argue like caged tigers.A nod to the smaller role of Amy Adams as Peggy Dodd, the wife of PSH's Lancaster. While not really Oscar-worthy to this writer, Adams does a good job being the one who really holds the power between her character and Lancaster when the two are alone. Stated by Paul Thomas Anderson himself that 'The Master' is his personal favorite of his own work, it isn't hard to see why. The story is quite grounded as there are cults like The Cause who have been (and are still) around; again the film's cult is based on Scientology despite the director's denials. There is a message about mental illness with Freddie's struggle with his PTSD and the mind control used by the cult to control him, but also cautionary for the consequences of one's reckless behavior.

I often think to myself while watching films that he who over-analyses brilliance often misses it. There are plenty of great films that are not perfect. If you put your critic's hat on, you can pick at anything. But to do that, you often miss real greatness. Great movies are often more than the sum of their parts.But, occasionally, a movie can be less than these. "The Master" boasts at least two extraordinary performances. Its direction, as always from PT Anderson, is flawless. It even has a singularly unnerving score from Radiohead's Jonny Greenwood.What went wrong? It feels like the movie is missing some negligible, yet essential, ingredient, holding it all together. For one thing, the movie is basically without resolution. It begins, markedly, where it started. There is a lot of trouble, pain, up on the screen, and no answers, not that movies require these. But no resolution, and a lack of momentum that makes Anderson's refined structure of his film seem slipshod.The film's focus is, unexpectedly, not on Seymour Hoffman as the cult-leader, but on Joaquin Phoenix as the deeply troubled, alcoholic, sex-obsessed WWII veteran in his thrall. The sense is that these are both men in deep pain, with different strategies to hide it, but no real way of dealing. Hoffman, as Lancaster Dodd, reacts with surprising anger at a stranger who questions him, calling the conversation a "grilling" - though it's nothing compared to the "processing" he subjects the members of his cult to.Despite being enthralled with Dodd, Phoenix as Freddy Quell never stops drinking, and while watching him perform one day, imagines all the women in his entourage naked, showing his sexual obsession never abated, either.This is a movie without resolution, and perhaps that's the point of it, to show that Dodd's instructions were empty. Unfortunately, this disturbing, unsettling film also begs comparison with the much-less seen, though superior, 1990 movie, "The Rapture".

I feel like this movie will become more appreciated over time. In my opinion Joaquin Phoenix and Seymour Hoffman give two of the greatest performances i have ever seen- the complexity of both characters and their relationship really being the centre of the film. Although it takes a while to get off the ground, if you're interested in character heavy drama, this is a must see.

For over two and a quarter hours we are slowly walked through the relationship between a hopelessly war damaged drunk lost soul navy veteran and a charlatan who is the head of a cult. We surmise nothing much will come of this relationship for the drunk or the charlatan as it is easy to quickly ascertain (from the excellent acting) that neither of these leopards are about to change their spots. It has been alluded to that the movie's drifting non-narrative style is a metaphor for the drunk navy drifter. Get it? ... Or maybe it's supposed to be an indictment of Scientology or cults in general. For those of us not in need of edification on that front it seems pointless - over two hours of "Yeah. We KNOW." It kills me that so many movies which are held up as examples of cinematic artistic achievements have such awful sound. And I don't mean the soundtrack (which didn't seem to add to the film) but the dialog suffering from varying levels and is at times unintelligible. Why is dialog easier to understand from movies many decades older technologically? So that leaves us with some damn fine acting that for some may be worth the time.