Read Mixed User Reviews for The Master

6

Brutus54Nov 21, 2012

Difficult and depressing. On the one hand, the acting is sensational - both Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour Hoffman are clearly amongst the greatest actors of their generation, and are absolutely compelling to watch. On the other hand,Difficult and depressing. On the one hand, the acting is sensational - both Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour Hoffman are clearly amongst the greatest actors of their generation, and are absolutely compelling to watch. On the other hand, why put yourself through the trauma of watching horrible characters being horrible to each other and everybody else for about three hours? Occasionally humour, humanity and redemption do peek through, but it is still a bit of a slog. I had the same uneasy reaction to "There Will Be Blood". If you liked that, you will probably like this. But is this kind of relentless psychodrama a good night out? On balance, this is abject pandering to the desire of actors to stamp their authority on their art. Nevertheless, this movie is certainly different to anything else that is coming out, and as such deserves an airing. Just be aware that the subject matter and tone is unforgivingly dark.… Expand

5 of 5 users found this helpful50

All this user's reviews

4

jcasetnlDec 28, 2015

THE MASTER is a very pretty turd of a film. Beautifully shot and acted but it's an incomprehensible mess. I've yet to find a person who can actually explain it, but quite a few who will leap to: "the point is there is no point! It's art!"THE MASTER is a very pretty turd of a film. Beautifully shot and acted but it's an incomprehensible mess. I've yet to find a person who can actually explain it, but quite a few who will leap to: "the point is there is no point! It's art!" Really? In that case, I point you to the episode of the original Batman TV series where The Joker enters a "painting" into an art contest that's just a blank canvas, entitled "The Emptiness of Life". That managed the same trick and didn't take 2.5 hours to get there. There's an ever-present sense while watching THE MASTER that something deep and profound is going on just out of sight, but the film itself can't seem to find it. Maybe that's its point about Scientology, but if so, again, I say "cheap trick". Well, Darren Aronofsky had THE FOUNTAIN and now PT Anderson has his "so incomprehensible the critics are afraid to pan it, but quickly forgotten" film, too.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

jluaJan 12, 2013

Whether a movie is good, bad, opaque or an epic, it should never be boring. And, in my opinion, this film was boring. Joaquin Phoenix´s acting was very good, but acting very well a bad script is a bad result. Some situations wereWhether a movie is good, bad, opaque or an epic, it should never be boring. And, in my opinion, this film was boring. Joaquin Phoenix´s acting was very good, but acting very well a bad script is a bad result. Some situations were absurd, in the bad sense of the word. The characters, except that of Mr. Phoenix´s, were not well delineated, and the directing was all over the place, something not surprising given the poor script. The basis of the story was good, but it needed a good development. This film lacks a good development.… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

5

Rex_richardsNov 22, 2012

As usual the user reviews are better than the professional critics. This film is surely epic in the sense that it has some amazing acting and some nice scenery and the sort of spaciousness that There Will Be Blood had. BUT.... pretty muchAs usual the user reviews are better than the professional critics. This film is surely epic in the sense that it has some amazing acting and some nice scenery and the sort of spaciousness that There Will Be Blood had. BUT.... pretty much nothing actually happens. Get it later on DVD and you will soon be drifting off and checking your email while the characters sit in rooms talking. The plot is almost literally non-existent (apart from 'ex-sailor gets involved in religious cult') but really... it gets more and more boring as it goes on and the ending is very very lacklustre. It just sort of gives up. Almost as if there were no ideas. Style over substance. 90% of the film is people in rooms talking, about 8% Joaquin Phoenix's character swigging booze or looking perplexed, 2% action. ie some actual engaging movement on the screen. At no point do you really give a toss about the main characters and what happens to them, as aside from some moments where JP starts to get programmed by the cult, he's really not a likeable character in the least and the cult leader himself is shown as no more than a clever manipulator not really any kind of vulnerable human being.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

5

lancekozFeb 14, 2013

My wife and I both felt that this was an assemblage of progressively weirder scenes rather than a story... and there was truly no one in it to like. To take the talents of these main actors, all of whom I love, and have their intensity inMy wife and I both felt that this was an assemblage of progressively weirder scenes rather than a story... and there was truly no one in it to like. To take the talents of these main actors, all of whom I love, and have their intensity in service of this thin gruel is pretty disappointing. Gorgeous to look at, and the mise en scene was brilliant, the period was presented wonderfully. That began to be odd in itself. Why be so faithful to this period if there was not a compelling story within it? The story could be either true or somehow dependent the era. This assemblage of mild depravity was neither. So I gather it was mainly in exercise in style.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

gfnySep 21, 2012

Whenever the critics rate a movie above 80 I start to get nervous. The closer to 100 the movie gets to 100 the chance the movie will be either great or an "artsie" disaster. This movie was long, dull at times, and its message was obscure.Whenever the critics rate a movie above 80 I start to get nervous. The closer to 100 the movie gets to 100 the chance the movie will be either great or an "artsie" disaster. This movie was long, dull at times, and its message was obscure. It wasn't a disaster but too "artsie" to be enjoyable. Most in the theatre left with a look of "what did I just spend 2 hours looking at". I gave the movie a solid 5… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

5

BHBarrySep 24, 2012

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

CranksySep 22, 2012

There Will Be Hyperbole. The critical acclaim and the great performances are to what end? (I hope this movie does not precipitate any external or internal psychiatric events.)

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

4

AstorSapolskySep 22, 2012

Maybe the film went over my head, but I took nothing away from the Master. No feelings, no questions, no discussion. The Master is a film that sets out to tell no particular story, in no particular hurry. The characters are paper-thin, andMaybe the film went over my head, but I took nothing away from the Master. No feelings, no questions, no discussion. The Master is a film that sets out to tell no particular story, in no particular hurry. The characters are paper-thin, and really only give us glimpses of anything truly interesting. Make no mistake, the acting is superb, but I fear everybody is mistaking the wonderful acting for an overall enjoyable experience, film, and directing. Sure, Anderson tries a lot of different things to make it seem like an important film (shooting in 65mm), but he never made it a captivating one. If many take away nothing from a film other than adoration for the director, then is it really a film worth seeing, or is it simply fodder for the critics?… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

bitburnMar 21, 2013

I tend to love dark and weird movies but this one, just didn't work at all for me. A matte of fact, I thought it was completely retarded. Experience at your own risk.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

JalemanyJan 10, 2015

Should I watch it again?, I really don't want to ... but I clearly missed something. This film totally flew over my head without touching it. Don't take me wrong, I see and understand what happens, but I just don't care. Pointless?!

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

BhawkSep 23, 2012

Very sorry to have to say that The Master was a major disappointment. This one LOOKED like a "no-brainer" based on the brilliant trailer, the tremendous cast, and being written and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, whose last film, There WillVery sorry to have to say that The Master was a major disappointment. This one LOOKED like a "no-brainer" based on the brilliant trailer, the tremendous cast, and being written and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, whose last film, There Will Be Blood, was one of the most artistic movies of the 21st century. Although the story starts off intriguingly enough with Joaquin Phoenix brilliant in the role of a WWII vet struggling with a severe case of PTSD, once things soon meld down to essentially Clash of the (psychopathic) Titans (Phoenix vs Hoffman), the story never really goes anywhere, other than to provide Oscar bait scene chewing scenes for the two male leads. Don't get me wrong, the film LOOKS great (cinematography, sets, costumes), however, the overall feeling I was left with (at least 40 minutes before the film even ended) was frustration and disappointment of what COULD have been. This one is strictly for those interested in seeing some interesting acting choices from Phoenix, Hoffman and Adams. Past that,... I fully expect The Master to be expelled from theaters before Halloween. Save this one for your Netflix que,...if that. Grade = C-.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

LISTEN2MESep 22, 2012

Technically well done but did not like it otherwise. Tedious, pretentious and too long. Not a masterpiece by a long shot. The critics have been well paid to write glowing reviews.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

thedude74Sep 25, 2012

I love to see all of P.T. Anderson's movies, but I might give up after this one. He seems to have locked onto the idea of making movies now about the least likable characters possible. Whereas most films create an idealized portrait ofI love to see all of P.T. Anderson's movies, but I might give up after this one. He seems to have locked onto the idea of making movies now about the least likable characters possible. Whereas most films create an idealized portrait of humanity, lately he goes the other way, creating movies with grimy, grisly characters who seem to have very little redeeming qualities, if any. In "There Will Be Blood", I was okay with that because I thought it was just for one film. But he delves even deeper into darkness with "The Master", and this felt more like an assault against the viewer in its dark mirth and creepiness than the real telling of a story. The acting is, of course, incredible, but the biggest problem, for me, was that he seemed to take us to very dark places without it feeling like there was a satisfactory justification. I didn't feel like the film had any payoff. It was very interesting, and the acting was great, but it was super dark, and to me unsatisfying.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

EludiumQ36Mar 9, 2013

"The Master" is too good to be written off as bad, but not good enough to be recommended without reservation. I think the director (PT Anderson) was going for an Kubrick-esque "Eyes Wide Shut" vibe, the camera lingers too long, there's"The Master" is too good to be written off as bad, but not good enough to be recommended without reservation. I think the director (PT Anderson) was going for an Kubrick-esque "Eyes Wide Shut" vibe, the camera lingers too long, there's discordant music accompaniment, and a nude women scene that's more cringe-y than enjoyable. Anderson was definitely driving a parallel to LR Hubbard and Scientology's earliest beginnings, no doubt, and the insight had some value. Juaquin Phoenix's portrayal of a derelict alcoholic was Oscar worthy but I still didn't like the character or his journey but those affected by alcoholism may identify with him. Overall, the pacing was too slow, I was on the FF button alot, and there was just minor entertainment or information value, so I can definitely understand why some think it's a waste of time. I personally wouldn't recommend it unless you're a Scientology groupie, someone affected by alcoholism, or a fan of the cast.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

5

bgirlSep 28, 2012

I went into this movie with high expectations because of all the press it has received. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. I kept waiting for the storyline to go somewhere and it didn't. There was no plot to this movie. While JoaquinI went into this movie with high expectations because of all the press it has received. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. I kept waiting for the storyline to go somewhere and it didn't. There was no plot to this movie. While Joaquin Phoenix's performance was outstanding the movie itself was not. You know it's bad when during the movie you look at your watch and say to yourself this movie is not over yet...geez!… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

foxgroveDec 9, 2012

Pretentious, self consciously acted and ultimately boring film. Scene after scene drags on to little point or effect and the ending seemed vague. The three leads are not served well by the story or setting and i'm sure in a better focusedPretentious, self consciously acted and ultimately boring film. Scene after scene drags on to little point or effect and the ending seemed vague. The three leads are not served well by the story or setting and i'm sure in a better focused film they would be considered excellent in their roles. However, that's what might have been. Paul Thomas Anderson seems to enjoy making these long and profound films and whilst I enjoyed 'Boogie Night' and There Will be Blood' to some extent I wouldn't say either of them were completely successful either. Also disappointing was the rather bombastic score. Only the cinematography shines through here. The end result was so what!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

BrendanCogs99Mar 16, 2013

The Master is an interesting story with masterful performances by Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, and Amy Adams. But it drags to a point in which you count the minutes until it is finished. But even after the conclusion of the filmThe Master is an interesting story with masterful performances by Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, and Amy Adams. But it drags to a point in which you count the minutes until it is finished. But even after the conclusion of the film you are confused about what the hell just happened.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

DCEdmondsNov 13, 2014

"The Master" 10 Scale Rating: 6.0 (Decent) ...

The Good: Phillip Seymour Hoffman carries the film as it loses some of it's power when he is not in it. The subject matter itself is extremely interesting and happens to be a topic that I have"The Master" 10 Scale Rating: 6.0 (Decent) ...

The Good: Phillip Seymour Hoffman carries the film as it loses some of it's power when he is not in it. The subject matter itself is extremely interesting and happens to be a topic that I have always been fascinated with. While his character is only mildly interesting, Joaquin Phoenix does a solid job.

The Bad: It is two hours and eighteen minutes long, but it feels much longer. It gets very tedious and a little boring at times. Too much filler and too many scenes that seemed to be crammed into the film.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Andys_ReviewsSep 7, 2013

The film is beautifully shot, making full use of the various surroundings they find themselves in. The use of music from the period was quite effective also, not always to my taste, but it seemed to fit pretty well. As to performances, well,The film is beautifully shot, making full use of the various surroundings they find themselves in. The use of music from the period was quite effective also, not always to my taste, but it seemed to fit pretty well. As to performances, well, all the major parts were excellently portrayed with Philip Seymour Hoffman standing out. I found I really paid attention to every scene he was in; without him, meaning no disrespect to the other actors involved, it kind of fell flat. I though Amy Adams was excellent too, although I felt she was underused. There appeared to be an awful lot of improvisation, particularly from Joaquin Phoenix and I found these scenes very hit and miss. I sometimes felt like I was watching an acting class. As far as the narrative goes, well I found it meandering; it was very slow (not that this is always a bad thing) and when we did get to a point it would then go off in a totally different direction. Over all, it didn’t stand out as the particularly outstanding work the critics seem to think it is; but then again, I don’t have to watch all the dross they have to on a day to day basis. Maybe I have to watch a lot of really bad films and then watch this one again, but for now it’s ‘Recommended’, but only just.

SteelMonster’s verdict: RECOMMENDED

My score: 6.1/10.… Expand