Often, I would take points off wit for lack of clarity, but I don't think that the problem is not conveying the point well, but the unworthiness of the point to begin with. In TWBB, we have a film almost worthy of being called a morality play, in the least condescending way possible. We see a character do bad things and we see what that does to him. And if we're honest and not sociopaths, we don't like it. Maybe it frightens us. Magnolia literally narrates a sort of short documentary on coincidence before giving us a story that illustrates its main theme. Punch-Drunk Love is even more complicated, but it still is a simple tragedy. Man of high standards with a normal life experiences awful, disastrous circumstances that turn out to be mostly his fault. Not simple, but not over-complicated.
Obviously, I think that the story is well-written and acted; I gave it a 9.5 out of 10. The dialogue and the sequence of scenes is beyond fascinating; it is enslaving. Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams really sell their characters, the charismatic leader of a new religion and his dedicated, if dogmatic and particular wife. But the absolute best is Joaquin Phoenix. Can I just say how happy I am that I'm Still Here was a hoax? It would be a loss too great to bear. He addresses the character of the unstable PTSD sufferer with a great deal of tenderness and compassion, while being raw and even frightening. He tears you open and makes you feel his pain without requiring you to understand it or even relate to it. It reminds me of a novel, Children of Men, upon which the film is based but not the same in so many ways. The main character is not relatable or likable, but you can see him for all he is and the story gains a lot in being told through him. I don't mean to leave Philip and Amy out. Philip really gives you a sense of how a person starts a religion, even a false one, with a certain kind of honesty. Amy is harsher and more grating than I have ever seen her before, a real departure. She's almost frightening. Jesse Plemons, previously of Breaking Bad, was also pretty interesting. Amber Childers and Rami Malek also did good. Lastly a great, if brief performance by Christopher Evan Welch, who plays a skeptic harassed by Joaquin.
The last .5 is off mostly because of a couple of scenes which contain an ambiguity as to whether they are to be seen as really happening or not. There is a single scene with a good deal of nudity that is surreal enough that I assumed it hadn't happened and to make you wonder what is really happening and what's not.
Wisdom is 9 because I heard and, as I see it, understood what P. T. wanted to say. This has something to do with questioning the possibility of living without a master or being your own master. For this reason, I think that the titular master is not the leader of the cult, but Joaquin. He insists on a sort of freedom that might be seen simply as slavery to oneself. This idea is good, but I'm not sure the whole movie is justified by that one point. But I like it. I'm still pretty ambivalent here. I could watch it again next week and remove this section of my review entirely, but I still have that nagging feeling that made me leave the theater a little disappointed. It may be comparable to the feeling I got when I saw The Darjeeling Limited. Following There Will Be Blood is even harder than following The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. What a thing!
Wonder here is pretty straightforward for Paul. He knows how to do nearly anything that can be done in film with fresh vision, an idea I'm stealing from somebody else, though I can't remember who. No, I remember. It's from his IMDb profile. Good point anyway. Jonny Greenwood succeeds again, in a great way with the music, as he did in TWBB. I say like, but it was nothing like it, except in its quality.
This has not been an easy film for me to review; there's so much uncertainty, but I would suggest it to anyone who's seen and like previous films of Paul's, though if you haven't I'd start with something else.
Obviously, I think that the story is well-written and acted; I gave it a 9.5 out of 10. The dialogue and the sequence of scenes is beyond fascinating; it is enslaving. Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams really sell their characters, the charismatic leader of a new religion and his dedicated, if dogmatic and particular wife. But the absolute best is Joaquin Phoenix. Can I just say how happy I am that I'm Still Here was a hoax? It would be a loss too great to bear. He addresses the character of the unstable PTSD sufferer with a great deal of tenderness and compassion, while being raw and even frightening. He tears you open and makes you feel his pain without requiring you to understand it or even relate to it. It reminds me of a novel, Children of Men, upon which the film is based but not the same in so many ways. The main character is not relatable or likable, but you can see him for all he is and the story gains a lot in being told through him. I don't mean to leave Philip and Amy out. Philip really gives you a sense of how a person starts a religion, even a false one, with a certain kind of honesty. Amy is harsher and more grating than I have ever seen her before, a real departure. She's almost frightening. Jesse Plemons, previously of Breaking Bad, was also pretty interesting. Amber Childers and Rami Malek also did good. Lastly a great, if brief performance by Christopher Evan Welch, who plays a skeptic harassed by Joaquin.
The last .5 is off mostly because of a couple of scenes which contain an ambiguity as to whether they are to be seen as really happening or not. There is a single scene with a good deal of nudity that is surreal enough that I assumed it hadn't happened and to make you wonder what is really happening and what's not.
Wisdom is 9 because I heard and, as I see it, understood what P. T. wanted to say. This has something to do with questioning the possibility of living without a master or being your own master. For this reason, I think that the titular master is not the leader of the cult, but Joaquin. He insists on a sort of freedom that might be seen simply as slavery to oneself. This idea is good, but I'm not sure the whole movie is justified by that one point. But I like it. I'm still pretty ambivalent here. I could watch it again next week and remove this section of my review entirely, but I still have that nagging feeling that made me leave the theater a little disappointed. It may be comparable to the feeling I got when I saw The Darjeeling Limited. Following There Will Be Blood is even harder than following The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. What a thing!
Wonder here is pretty straightforward for Paul. He knows how to do nearly anything that can be done in film with fresh vision, an idea I'm stealing from somebody else, though I can't remember who. No, I remember. It's from his IMDb profile. Good point anyway. Jonny Greenwood succeeds again, in a great way with the music, as he did in TWBB. I say like, but it was nothing like it, except in its quality.
This has not been an easy film for me to review; there's so much uncertainty, but I would suggest it to anyone who's seen and like previous films of Paul's, though if you haven't I'd start with something else.
