Read User Reviews and Submit your own for The Master

4

rollcredsFeb 6, 2023

Great acting but was not in love with the progression of the plot. Also very hard to follow up “There Will Be Blood.”

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

tonyGreenJan 10, 2014

A film with two great performances by Phoenix and Hoffman and great character development. Another fantastic uneasy soundtrack from Jonny Greenwood gives this a feel similar to There Will Be Blood, although this film seems even darker inA film with two great performances by Phoenix and Hoffman and great character development. Another fantastic uneasy soundtrack from Jonny Greenwood gives this a feel similar to There Will Be Blood, although this film seems even darker in tone. Worth more than one viewing… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

NickTheCritickNov 3, 2021

After There Will Be Blood (masterpiece) PTA is back to direct an other half-masterpiece. Memorable performances by Joaquin Phoenix and the late Philip Seymour Hoffman in this film that beautifully talks about loneliness, sects and how man isAfter There Will Be Blood (masterpiece) PTA is back to direct an other half-masterpiece. Memorable performances by Joaquin Phoenix and the late Philip Seymour Hoffman in this film that beautifully talks about loneliness, sects and how man is always intrinsically looking for a guide and how men feels the need to be leaders among those who know they cannot be actually. Great, stunning, unbelievable cinematography and wonderful directing by a PTA in full awareness of its means.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

KenROct 12, 2022

The Master – Is In Need Of A Master It’s become trendy to make movies about subjects that go all out to either shock and offend or challenge the viewer to stay awake to see if they add up to anything worthwhile – And this movie-maker hasThe Master – Is In Need Of A Master It’s become trendy to make movies about subjects that go all out to either shock and offend or challenge the viewer to stay awake to see if they add up to anything worthwhile – And this movie-maker has settled in to provide it all. Writer, producer, director, Paul Thomas Anderson fits well into Harvey Weinstein’s formula of movie perversion. If you've ever wondered what a movie might be like that's written and directed by a self-confessed cocaine user, under-aged pornography addict, as well as being, Quote; “my favorite filmmaker copycat” - then this could be getting close to realizing your dream (perhaps it might also sadly sum up cinema today along with certain audiences)

It doesn’t really matter if Anderson based his screen story on the life of Scientology’s Ron L Hubbard, as some have claimed, for the whole exercise depends on whatever the viewer is prepared to make of it. Here we have a story where the ‘master’ has become ‘infatuated’ (as some interpret it) with one of life’s deranged social psychopaths - Why, is only hinted at and never explained, leading to a rather ambiguous dead end. On the way to establish what the ‘masters’ message might be, the movie-maker indulges in his trademark perversions, illicit boozy concoctions made up of lighter fluid, photo fixer chemicals, Paint Thinner, alcohol mixers, and whatever else takes his fancy - gratuitous female full frontal nudity (for no valid reason to the story) even grotty public masturbation, all presented in assorted unresolved violent actions, or outlandish situations. This invites over the top praise from the festival crowd and critics who salivate at every vulgar turn as if they have discovered a new anti-hero. Some of these critics even admit to watching the film several times and still not understanding what it’s about (tells us much).
Some even claim Anderson as the new Orson Welles, and looking back on that career, after ‘Kane’, how much else did Welles ever produce that was finished or successful? It should also be noted; for ‘Kane’, the studio supplied Welles with some of the industry’s top professionals to help him over the line - from there, it was all downhill. Those that like to lay claim to understanding the meanings within these ambiguous grotty works, often argue that anyone who doesn’t appreciate them, is only capable of understanding simple action fare. How wrong they are - the fact these movies rarely make a return on their costs - should speak volumes about how unsupported by a discerning public they are. Performances are powerful but sometimes come across as actor abuse; I could imagine Mr. Hoffman and co might have needed respite care after these grueling sessions. Also, the hard-working Mr. Phoenix’s verbal delivery, unfortunately, is too often unable to be understood. The best aspect to shine through might be the Cinematographer Mihai Malaimare Jr, shooting on 65mm film -again for no truly good reason- as this in turn is mostly wasted on many internal locations. Summary; For a limited audience or perhaps, for health’s sake, keep this out of your head.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

NdrwdvdbrsnOct 9, 2022

Paul Thomas Anderson is one of the most highly regarded directors of all time, and his film, The Master, brilliantly demonstrates why. Freddie Quell is a very interesting protagonist. Two other notable characters in this film are LancasterPaul Thomas Anderson is one of the most highly regarded directors of all time, and his film, The Master, brilliantly demonstrates why. Freddie Quell is a very interesting protagonist. Two other notable characters in this film are Lancaster Dodd and Peggy Dodd. When these characters are on screen it is nearly impossible to look away.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

kyle20ellisMar 21, 2022

Although 'Inherent Vice' has yet to be seen, Paul Thomas Anderson strikes me as an equally talented film-maker and director who has yet to make a bad film. Even his weakest (so far, to me) 'Hard Eight' is still very good, and of his filmsAlthough 'Inherent Vice' has yet to be seen, Paul Thomas Anderson strikes me as an equally talented film-maker and director who has yet to make a bad film. Even his weakest (so far, to me) 'Hard Eight' is still very good, and of his films 'Boogie Nights' and 'There Will Be Blood' are particularly note-worthy films.

'The Master', when ranking his films, ranks as his second weakest. However as said, this is in no way a knock as it is still a very good film and often fantastic, the few not so good things are far outweighed by the numerous good things. And when the good things are good, man do they shine.

Biggest flaw in 'The Master', the only big one really, is the final act. A case of an incredibly strong first two acts being somewhat let down by the somewhat unsatisfying final one. The momentum isn't as strong and it also seemed vague, incomplete and confused. Again, like 'Magolia's ending was, it is a polarising ending, that some will find touching and others will be negatively dumbfounded. It's not without emotional impact, just that it feels unsatisfying. While much of the script is fine, there are a few parts that are a bit too repetitive.

However, as always with Anderson 'The Master' is superbly made. Anderson's films are some of the most visually beautiful and bold around, and 'The Master' is no exception. Exquisitely shot with sumptuous and atmospheric production values, Anderson's trademark visual style shines completely with his distinctive use of constantly moving camera, steadicam-based continuous long takes (a famous example in his films being the opening shot in 'Boogie Nights'), tracking shots and very multi-layered audio-visual imagery. Anderson's direction is superb.

Paul Thomas Anderson's films have always had memorable utilisation of music, and again 'The Master' shines, being memorable and rich in emotion. The script is incredibly thought-provoking, rich in its bold use of multi-layered themes and gives 'Magnolia' a run for its money in the poignancy department. While not as polarising as 'Magnolia' perhaps, though some may disagree, 'The Master' is a challenging watch but also highly rewarding. The story on the most part while deliberately paced is just as thoughtful and very touching, it's also thematically intriguing and richly developed and contains realistically flawed and compelling characters if hard to like, important for a film that is essentially a character study.

Great acting helps, and even the word great doesn't do justice to the quality of the acting here. Joaquin Phoenix is spellbinding, one of his finest performances and a standout performance that year. The late great Philip Seymour Hoffmann also gives a powerful performances that ranks among his best, his best performance in any of his collaborations with Anderson and he has been in most of them. Amy Adams and Laura Dern's performances are no less inferior either.

In conclusion, very good and often fantastic, let down only properly by an unsatisfying final act. 8/10 Bethany Cox… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

DawdlingPoetNov 22, 2021

This is a mystery drama film, with themes covered including scientology, cults and hypnosis. The main character, Freddie Quell, comes across quite early on as a bit of a drunkard, a down and outer, someone seeming not particularly motivatedThis is a mystery drama film, with themes covered including scientology, cults and hypnosis. The main character, Freddie Quell, comes across quite early on as a bit of a drunkard, a down and outer, someone seeming not particularly motivated or bothered about what he does. He is referred to in the script, fairly early on, as a soundrel. Its clear that the time he served in World War 2 has had an impact on him.

The film is relatively stylish, with some bright colours of the times shown via the interior decor at various places, so expect lots of bright blues, yellows and greens for example. I thought it used some good camera angles to give the scene an added feel of tension and mystery at times, such as viewing things from one particular persons angle, or from behind the furniture, as if we're a shy toddler peaking out at whats happening in the room. I found it being quite engrossing and there is definitely a sinister, mysterious aspect to it, with the ringleader equivalent, the so called master of the cult (Lancaster Dodd) grilling Freddie about his persona, his emotions and morals and being quite strict and outspoken. I found it interesting to see how he dealt to criticism made against his cult/group movement.

I think its fair to say that the term 'smoke and mirrors' applies to this film. Freddie is quite erratic and certainly challenges Lancaster at times, although he himself has his own moments, you could say but moreso behind closed doors. Dodd very much works hard to maintain a certain facade but I won't say any more so as to not provide spoilers - the way the plot played out I found quite intriguing and it wasn't as cliched as I feared it may be. Repetition and hypnosis style exercises very much play a regular role in the way that Dodds attempts to manipulate his members, or followers.

I did notice that there were some scenes, particularly in the first half of the film, which featured relatively quiet, somewhat mumble-y dialogue, thus I (obviously) found it hard to hear all of it. I imagine this would be particularly off putting to anyone with hearing issues. In some scenes, it can be quite quiet for a while and then the volume increases somewhat quickly, which might make you a little jumpy.

The music used did reasonably well at increasing my sense of tensionm, with stringed instruments heightening the atmosphere, as I say. I was quite impressed with the film overall. It kept me guessing for some time, as far as the plot is concerned. I thought it was a good film and it was somewhat thought provoking too, making me wonder about people who have fallen for such so-called organisations or movements. There is a moral element to it I guess, although there are other films, more specifically documentaries, about other such organisations, such as the one with science in its title.

Yes I'd recommend this film. It is quite sinister in tone, features some good cinematography and a great cast and it kept me guessing (plot wise) for some time. I thought the characters were intriguing and I enjoyed it, apart from some scenes featuring fairly quiet dialogue that was hard to hear clearly.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

geewahJun 17, 2021

PT Anderson produces yet another fine sweeping epic loosely based on real life historical figures.
Hoffman (as per usual), Phoenix and Adams put in excellent performances in this powerful drama.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

DrBlahBlahApr 26, 2021

One of PTA's best films, with maybe the best screen performance ever given from PSH and a memorable turn from Phoenix, who was warming up for Joker...

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

AJ_13Jan 11, 2021

Great performance by Phoenix, but wow, Phillip Seymour Hoffman is absolutely stunning. It may be a bit slow but its really interesting and thought-provoking.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

fmmOct 30, 2020

This was/is clearly one of those critics' darlings, so I entered with an open mind in 2020 because I will watch ANYTHING with the incomparable actors (Phoenix, Hoffman, Adams). Their performances don't disappoint, nor does the sublimeThis was/is clearly one of those critics' darlings, so I entered with an open mind in 2020 because I will watch ANYTHING with the incomparable actors (Phoenix, Hoffman, Adams). Their performances don't disappoint, nor does the sublime direction and cinematography; but as rendered, the story does. I'm becoming a bit circumspect of daily film reviewers. I wonder how they would review "The Masters" in 2020.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

LegitSaltMay 8, 2020

This is, in my opinion, Paul Thomas Anderson’s best movie. Performances like Joaquin Phoenix's and Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s show acting at its finest. Even with the immense powerhouse performances that they give, their supporting castThis is, in my opinion, Paul Thomas Anderson’s best movie. Performances like Joaquin Phoenix's and Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s show acting at its finest. Even with the immense powerhouse performances that they give, their supporting cast remains steadfast and exceptional, especially Amy Adams. The Master feels in many ways like a documentary or a biopic. The movie may seem very unreal, but, with entities like the church of Scientology existing in real life, it feels bound within reality. The dynamics between Lancaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) and Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) are constantly changing and representative of the true potential and ranges of the two leading actors. The Master is well written and well-acted, but it is so much more than that. Even if The Master were just the sum of its parts, it would be a great movie, however, these parts, in conjunction with one another, go a step further in cementing the film’s greatness. The sequencing, cinematography, directing, casting, score, and shot composition all go so well together that it is hard to see the movie as existing without any one piece. The Master is deeply disturbing in the exploitation shown but it does so in a cautionary and purposefully off-putting way.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

zNeverSleepingFeb 26, 2020

The Master 7/10

Em termos técnicos, The Master não foge muito do que estamos habituados em obras muito bem dirigidas. Aqui há uma fotografia concisa mas meio timida, uma ost que acrescenta muito as cenas e uma direção muito vem fundamentada.The Master 7/10

Em termos técnicos, The Master não foge muito do que estamos habituados em obras muito bem dirigidas. Aqui há uma fotografia concisa mas meio timida, uma ost que acrescenta muito as cenas e uma direção muito vem fundamentada. As atuações são excelentes, mas quem chama mesmo a atenção é Joaquim Phoenix, com seu personagem cheio de transtornos pós guerra, e Philip Seymour Hoffman, que entrega um personagem persuasivo, manipulador e que realmente dá a sensação de que ele acredita nas mentiras dele. Inclusive, a cena entre O Mestre e o Cético foi o ponto mais alto do filme.

Porém, não posso negar que não pude compreender o propósito do filme. Indo para um lado mais cultural ou vivencionista, eu poderia dizer que fiquei satisfeito. Porém falta algo no qual vá além do filme, que eu possa refletir. E aqui não houve isso.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

NavyBeanJan 19, 2020

The acting is great. It looks really cool. The characters are horrible. The story is ponderous dreck. I cannot recommend this and PT Anderson (after the equally bad There Will Be Blood) is losing all the stock he built up with the sublimeThe acting is great. It looks really cool. The characters are horrible. The story is ponderous dreck. I cannot recommend this and PT Anderson (after the equally bad There Will Be Blood) is losing all the stock he built up with the sublime Magnolia and Boogie Nights. Maybe those were flukes. His recent work is crap.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

AvishanHOct 9, 2019

Paul Thomas Anderson knows too much about cinema and how to make a technical movie. casting was great.I think Amy Adams is a good actress but this time I didn't like her act

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

wealthychefMay 28, 2019

Too confusing to watch. I finished the movie hoping it would resolve into something I could understand but it just kept getting weirder and weirder. It just seems to be about two crazy guys that act crazy together. I could not detect aToo confusing to watch. I finished the movie hoping it would resolve into something I could understand but it just kept getting weirder and weirder. It just seems to be about two crazy guys that act crazy together. I could not detect a plot. Great acting of course.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

imthenoobFeb 19, 2019

On my first viewing of it, I really did not care for it. Sometime later, I decided to watch it again recently and I was blown away. Phoenix and Hoffman, along with the rest of the cast, give fantastic performances that really highlight theirOn my first viewing of it, I really did not care for it. Sometime later, I decided to watch it again recently and I was blown away. Phoenix and Hoffman, along with the rest of the cast, give fantastic performances that really highlight their careers. And as always, Paul Thomas Anderson delivers with a lengthy but satisfying film that kept me interested from start to finish.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

drone41May 20, 2018

Not a fan at all of Paul Thomas Anderson's movies. I can't say he is bad, but i think he is overrated. Solid movie in the end.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

amheretojudgeMay 8, 2018

you seem so familiar to me..

The Master It redefines the drama genre where the makers doesn't flinch to go bold, creative, dark and places where you have never been before. Paul Thomas Anderson shines all over the feature since he is theyou seem so familiar to me..

The Master

It redefines the drama genre where the makers doesn't flinch to go bold, creative, dark and places where you have never been before. Paul Thomas Anderson shines all over the feature since he is the only one that can pull off such convoluted relations of pragmatic yet amusing characters that resides in his self-imaginary sketchy bubble. Anderson's premise is supported by gripping screenplay brought alive by his brilliant execution skill where he reaches out for something colossal out of mere scattered thoughts or opinions. The performance is stupendous by the actors like Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and Phillip Seymour Hoffman who have invested all their chips in, being aware of the stage and range offered to them. The Master is rich in craft that goes deep and explores the character's perspective not coming off as overcooked but exhilarating, thought provoking and electrifying that keeps the audience engaged for more than 2 hours on the edge of the seat which rarely occurs on a character driven feature.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

orangedroogDec 20, 2017

The Master is the kind of movie that changes you. It's falls in the upper echelon of films including Mulholland Drive, Psycho, A Clockwork Orange, etc. It is a film of such enormous breadth that it feels almost entirely inaccessible. UponThe Master is the kind of movie that changes you. It's falls in the upper echelon of films including Mulholland Drive, Psycho, A Clockwork Orange, etc. It is a film of such enormous breadth that it feels almost entirely inaccessible. Upon repeat viewings, the films transforms into the deepest of meditations on human relations. Sexual, emotional, religious, cerebral, even otherworldly concepts abound in a movie that could have only been written by the wonderful Paul Thomas Anderson. This is a movie that transformed my ideas of what narrative even means in a film. A film with such rich character development that even Amy Adams (who can't be on screen for more than 20 minutes) is able to leave an indelible impression on any committed viewer. This is not a movie that strives for a great entertainment value, but a movie that will give you threefold returns on the effort you are willing to put in. Tenfold upon second viewing. A hundredfold upon a third. I have seen the film seven times. It has never decreased in value. I will watch it again as soon as I find the right friend to show it to. It is timeless. It is a period drama that feels futuristic. It is a wonder. An impossibility. An unmissable masterpiece.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

avr50Jun 10, 2017

The master is, i believe, the best movie made by Paul Thomas Anderson. It has masterfull performances with Joaquin Phoenix on his best. The story may seem not to give much but believe me, it gives a lot to the movie. It´s incredible that aThe master is, i believe, the best movie made by Paul Thomas Anderson. It has masterfull performances with Joaquin Phoenix on his best. The story may seem not to give much but believe me, it gives a lot to the movie. It´s incredible that a man could think in something like this and take it to the screen in a masterful way, but Thomas Anderson did.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

7

jmain504Jul 13, 2016

The Master is not quite a masterpiece, but it is a solid thought provoking film. It isn't enrapturing and it doesn't grab a hold of you and drag you in, but it does raise questions about post-WW2 ptsd, the charismatic nature of cult leaders,The Master is not quite a masterpiece, but it is a solid thought provoking film. It isn't enrapturing and it doesn't grab a hold of you and drag you in, but it does raise questions about post-WW2 ptsd, the charismatic nature of cult leaders, and why they can exist, and self doubt about one's work. It is beautifully shot and it does lift and lower your spirits, with humorous and somber moments. The dialogue is not deep in words, but it feels concise and to the point; there are no wasted words. The chemistry between Hoffman and Phoenix is visceral and beautiful. It made me want Hoffman to succeed as a leader, partly because of his frustration and humanness, but at the same time, I know he is a cult leader with, literally, out of this world beliefs.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

The3AcademySinsJun 7, 2016

Truly one of the best films from this past decade. Amazingly acted and beautifully shot, The Master is the tale of one man who truly becomes his own master, while providing a thoughtful critique on human organizations. One of Paul ThomasTruly one of the best films from this past decade. Amazingly acted and beautifully shot, The Master is the tale of one man who truly becomes his own master, while providing a thoughtful critique on human organizations. One of Paul Thomas Anderson's best works.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

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

8

Rutger-KikkertNov 23, 2015

The Master directed by the masterful director Paul Thomas Anderson starring Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams is again a good movie from Anderson. First of all there's some really good acting, and by good I mean OscarThe Master directed by the masterful director Paul Thomas Anderson starring Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams is again a good movie from Anderson. First of all there's some really good acting, and by good I mean Oscar worthy performances especially by Phoenix and Hoffman. Some excellent writing too. Just only looking at the scenes where Hoffman's character is questioning Phoenix's character. The writing is just very good. The cinematography is also just beautiful. Long takes, a good use of focus and lighting makes this a very beautifully looking picture. At certain scenes I was just smiling, not because there was something humorous, but because it was so well done on every level. But where this movie flaws is where certain scenes felt a bit unnecessary and out of place. This movie is already vague at some moments and these scenes make the movie even more vague and overly convoluted at times. This can really take away the enjoyment of this movie for you. Especially when those scenes keep on going for too long. This leaves the viewer with questions in the end. This is that kind of movie that really needs a second view because the plot is at times too convoluted for its own good.
In the end: this movie is really good. From the acting to the writing to the cinematography. But the flaws lay with the plot as I already have sad. It is for me too close to an art-house picture. But when you're into that kind of stuff I can really recommend this movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

MattBrady99Nov 16, 2015

When I first watched The Master I didn't really like it that much. I thought the movie was slow and kind of dull on my first viewing, but after re watching it for a second time, I really liked this movie and the film did grow on me afterWhen I first watched The Master I didn't really like it that much. I thought the movie was slow and kind of dull on my first viewing, but after re watching it for a second time, I really liked this movie and the film did grow on me after awhile.

Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and Philip Seymour Hoffman were absolutely brilliant in this movie, as I think this is the best I've ever seen from them. The cinematography was perfectly shot, the writing was great and Paul Thomas Anderson directing was superb. The Master is a work of art.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

Zadaris2021Jul 22, 2015

Superb acting is in this film - for viewers who love to see actors tear themselves apart with a role, here it is. Phoenix and Hoffman are at the pinnacle of their respective abilities. Phoenix, playing Freddie Quell draws you in the minuteSuperb acting is in this film - for viewers who love to see actors tear themselves apart with a role, here it is. Phoenix and Hoffman are at the pinnacle of their respective abilities. Phoenix, playing Freddie Quell draws you in the minute you see his creased up face answering questions from a psychological evaluation post WWII. Hoffman, the deranged but maybe even genius Lancaster Dodd does exactly what he always does - makes you fall dearly in love for twisted and maniacal men. And to give due credit to Paul Thomas Anderson, a director who literally can't have a bad idea; this is one of my favorite directors and this movie is what sparked my interest even more than it ever was in method-acting, the Daniel Day-Lewis-esque idea. With both Philip and Joaquin getting an Academy Award nomination, Amy Adams must also receive due credit and recognition for playing the far-seeing Peggy, whose eye's seem to be peering through people rather than at them. She received a nomination as well. I love this film and these actors. Watch it!… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

10

CameraBounceGodJul 8, 2015

it gets a ten because the thought of amy adams being smarter than hoffman would kill him in real life... not to mention the scene in the prison cell and the fact that modest mouse told me to watch it.......makes it automatic ten...also loveit gets a ten because the thought of amy adams being smarter than hoffman would kill him in real life... not to mention the scene in the prison cell and the fact that modest mouse told me to watch it.......makes it automatic ten...also love cults to death… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

CaesaroctopusMay 2, 2015

If There Will Be Blood is the best movie that Paul Thomas Anderson has ever created, then The Master fills in the 1.b. category on the list of his movies. The Master is as artful and cerebral as its acclaimed predecessor, and one of the bestIf There Will Be Blood is the best movie that Paul Thomas Anderson has ever created, then The Master fills in the 1.b. category on the list of his movies. The Master is as artful and cerebral as its acclaimed predecessor, and one of the best movies of the decade so far.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

PfenderStrat621Apr 13, 2015

I personally consider this film better than There Will Be Blood. The decisions of filmmaking were extremely original and with purpose, the performances are perfect, the directing is top notch, the story is intriguing, complex and engaging. II personally consider this film better than There Will Be Blood. The decisions of filmmaking were extremely original and with purpose, the performances are perfect, the directing is top notch, the story is intriguing, complex and engaging. I am not even sure If i got the whole thing! But the things that i got made me love this movie. The use of music is perfect to set out the tone and the characters are very interesting and well written. Paul Thomas Anderson again brings us a masterful film that is misunderstanded now.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

ScraperMar 30, 2015

The cinematography wraps a quaint, pleasant world around two men navigating a hopeless search for order in the world and themselves. The audience won't immediately identify with the manic behavior or violent mood swings (Rex Reed hatesThe cinematography wraps a quaint, pleasant world around two men navigating a hopeless search for order in the world and themselves. The audience won't immediately identify with the manic behavior or violent mood swings (Rex Reed hates anything that isn't immediately likable like a dessert), but the audience will certainly identify the religious aspects and human behavior surrounding tightly-gripped philosophies and beliefs: certainty, skepticism, narcissism, insanity. It's serious, funny, subtle, just perfect to dissect and enjoy.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

AkashVijayJan 19, 2015

This is a work of art and Paul Thomas Anderson has constantly shown us again and again that he may be the most artistically gifted film-maker working today. Although it's brimming with philosophical ideas about deception, manipulation,This is a work of art and Paul Thomas Anderson has constantly shown us again and again that he may be the most artistically gifted film-maker working today. Although it's brimming with philosophical ideas about deception, manipulation, scientology and psychiatry and pervaded with beautiful visuals, at its essence the Master is a love story. It follows the storyline of a Naval veteran (brilliantly played by Joaquin Phoenix) who arrives home from war unsettled by the traumatic events he's been through and unsure of his place in the world. By the end of the film, we learn that the real question to ask isn't if he's ready to be a part of the world, but, "Is the world ready to know him?".… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

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

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

10

hillfingerhNov 4, 2014

The Master is not only Paul Thomas Anderson's best work but it is also one of the very best art films in cinema history. It is shot beautifully, acted superbly, written and directed in the best possible way. No, it is not a type of film thatThe Master is not only Paul Thomas Anderson's best work but it is also one of the very best art films in cinema history. It is shot beautifully, acted superbly, written and directed in the best possible way. No, it is not a type of film that can be comprehended just by first viewing; it requires revisiting like 2001: A Space Odyssey. This film divides the audiences into two different reactions; they love it or they hate it. Not just mainstream audiences but also to critics and film lovers (which doesn't happen so often). If you are a serious audience who appreciate pure art-house cinema, this will be a wonderful gift for you. If that's not, this might be a nightmare; a very terrible one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

nicholasbertSep 5, 2014

When a director has such a fame as PTA has - with people calling him wunderkind, the next blabla and other appalling names - it is inevitable that each new film tends to be seen as a new step in his career, as if his works were all connected.When a director has such a fame as PTA has - with people calling him wunderkind, the next blabla and other appalling names - it is inevitable that each new film tends to be seen as a new step in his career, as if his works were all connected. I don't think this is the case: The Master kind of stands alone amongst PTA's filmography, and I must confess, if I were to rate it comparing it with his previous films, I'd give it a 4.

The performances are good, especially Hoffman's rather than Phoenix's in my opinion, the cinematography was spectacular as always - the real problem is the storytelling. The unusual film choice might have extended in sort of a "total 50s feel" where even the pacing of the film is old-fashioned. Anyway, the story itself is interesting, it just isn't delivered as potently as it could have.

That said, still one of the good movies. My jaw drops when I see "The Avengers" rated more than this by users.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

beingryanjudeSep 1, 2014

Every so often we get a film that challenges us--this is that film for 2012. Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and Philip Seymour Hoffman each give some of their finest work. With such boldness and poetry through the eyes of Paul Thomas Anderson,Every so often we get a film that challenges us--this is that film for 2012. Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and Philip Seymour Hoffman each give some of their finest work. With such boldness and poetry through the eyes of Paul Thomas Anderson, The Master will not be easily forgotten.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

MovieGuysAug 18, 2014

The Master is a well-executed and thought-provoking drama from Paul Thomas Anderson that raises many moral questions, and refuses to accept easy answers. While countless directors have gone down the "dystopian future "road, Anderson creates aThe Master is a well-executed and thought-provoking drama from Paul Thomas Anderson that raises many moral questions, and refuses to accept easy answers. While countless directors have gone down the "dystopian future "road, Anderson creates a very interesting "dystopian past". Now I use this term loosely because this film is based in real society, but the dystopian part shows in the mind of PTSD sufferer Freddie Quell, a disturbed man who is drawn in to the lifestyle of Lancaster Dodd, a cult leader. While the film may overstay its welcome in the final third, it's still a great and important picture.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

NitishAug 14, 2014

It's an extremely slow movie which gives you no conclusion neither during the movie nor at the end. But what special about this movie is it's plot which is so deep and artistic that even you were getting bored with the slow pace but you willIt's an extremely slow movie which gives you no conclusion neither during the movie nor at the end. But what special about this movie is it's plot which is so deep and artistic that even you were getting bored with the slow pace but you will keep wondering what going to happen next. These are certain high moments as well. Joaquin phoenix is great as always.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

SpangleJul 30, 2014

I truly did like this one, though I do not find it to be as deep and sophisticated as many critics and others who have watched this one. At the end of the day, this one has themes like every other film, but for the most part, the question,I truly did like this one, though I do not find it to be as deep and sophisticated as many critics and others who have watched this one. At the end of the day, this one has themes like every other film, but for the most part, the question, "What is this one about?" can be answered by saying that it is a character study of a deeply troubled man and his father-son type relationship with a cult leader. Nothing profound or deep and, to me, many people are looking into this one too closely and looking for something that is simply not there. Now, onto the film itself. Joaquin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman are fantastic and are a great juxtaposition to one another, as Phoenix is over the top, unhinged, violent, and angry, while Hoffman is calm, cool, collected, and calculating. Amy Adams is also good here, though I do wish her role was larger, but at the end of the day, this one is about Phoenix and Hoffman's relationship. The script here is also very strong and does a fantastic job developing the characters. The cinematography is gorgeous, in particular the repeated shots of the water and then the shots of them in desert. Really well done and beautiful to look at without question. Paul Thomas Anderson's direction is also strong as well. After watching Punch-Drunk Love and not liking it after having loved There Will Be Blood and liking Hard Eight, I was still worried that maybe Anderson's films would be more hit and miss for me. However, this one convinced me that that may not be the case, as his direction and this film were really good. At the end of the day, The Master is not for everyone, but for me, it was right up my alley.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

westauJan 21, 2014

Terrible. This is the kind of movie critics love but I can't find a single person I know who liked it so most of the positive reviews are just trying to be cool like the critics. My wife fell asleep it was so boring.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

ZhiemieDec 15, 2013

Wow what a dud. In the 60's when I began looking more critically at movies, character development, production values, etc., nudity, people masturbating, puking was kind of shocking. Now, with the advent of so many minor league producers andWow what a dud. In the 60's when I began looking more critically at movies, character development, production values, etc., nudity, people masturbating, puking was kind of shocking. Now, with the advent of so many minor league producers and directors, it is commonplace. The notable part of this disaster was having such an array of fine actors scrummed in this lightweight, faux masterpiece.
It is sad that movies need explosions, t&a, autoeroticism as subsitutes for good writing and directing. The Master was a total pile of manure.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Compi24Dec 9, 2013

Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" represents everything a challenging movie should be compellingly dissonant performances, intentionally vague thematic ideas, and a virtual plentitude of eye-catching images. It may not be for everybody,Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" represents everything a challenging movie should be compellingly dissonant performances, intentionally vague thematic ideas, and a virtual plentitude of eye-catching images. It may not be for everybody, but it's definitely a philosophically engrossing ride.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

JosephMarroquinNov 10, 2013

strong and smart perfomances, this is a movie teach you how can you change, and the most important the script is something than you never forget......

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

pinkpheonixNov 10, 2013

Horrible, boring movie that critics love so that they can feel intellectually superior to the rest of us who just don't 'get" the move. Boring. Pointless. No plot, no resolution. But hey, the acting is good.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

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

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

pr3d4torAug 7, 2013

This is pretty much the worst movie I've ever seen. Good acting, but what for? There's no plot. They should either say that in the summary or just leave it blank. An absolute waste of time.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

MetaVinceAug 1, 2013

This is a public service announcement: Do not waste your money on this flick, we paid $1.00 at Redbox and stopped the movie 30 minutes in due to 'not wanting to waste another 2 hours of my life' on such a morose, insignificant, depressing,This is a public service announcement: Do not waste your money on this flick, we paid $1.00 at Redbox and stopped the movie 30 minutes in due to 'not wanting to waste another 2 hours of my life' on such a morose, insignificant, depressing, weird movie. These actors (who are superb, by the way) tried to save it, but couldn't. Other uses of my $1.00? Would have preferred the dollar menu at McDs or maybe a dime bag to forget I rented this slop.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

10

farhoodnJul 23, 2013

this movie is not for people whom are not movie lovers. this artwork is a masterpiece and actually PTA is The Master. acts are brilliant. Hoffman is great as always and this is Joaquin's best act ever. along side with The Holy Motors, thethis movie is not for people whom are not movie lovers. this artwork is a masterpiece and actually PTA is The Master. acts are brilliant. Hoffman is great as always and this is Joaquin's best act ever. along side with The Holy Motors, the best movies of 2012... if you know about movies and PTA, this comment is unnecessary and you already ignored the low scored reviews.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

lholzJul 21, 2013

The Master with Joaquin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman altho the acting was very good the story was repetitive and unfulfilling. My understanding had been it was about an L Ron Hubbard type charlatan and a mentally crippled WW2 soldierThe Master with Joaquin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman altho the acting was very good the story was repetitive and unfulfilling. My understanding had been it was about an L Ron Hubbard type charlatan and a mentally crippled WW2 soldier looking for something. It sometimes got a hit but more frequently seemed comatose and missed the ball...I expected something more incisive and not obscurantist poetic.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

rkeincJul 13, 2013

Two hours and seventeen minutes of whaaaaa... My misconception was that this was about L. Ron Hubbard the founder of Scientology but it was about a fictitious founder of "The Cause". I sure missed something. I struggled through it hopingTwo hours and seventeen minutes of whaaaaa... My misconception was that this was about L. Ron Hubbard the founder of Scientology but it was about a fictitious founder of "The Cause". I sure missed something. I struggled through it hoping it would get better. It didn't.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

EnriqueKikJul 9, 2013

Paul thomas Anderson has once again made a movie that almost reach perfection; not only because of the beautiful cinematography, the unique soundtrack, and the amazing actings. But because of the fact that it's strenght comes from the littlePaul thomas Anderson has once again made a movie that almost reach perfection; not only because of the beautiful cinematography, the unique soundtrack, and the amazing actings. But because of the fact that it's strenght comes from the little intense moments, and the deepness of the characters; not because of a story. The screenplay is great as it is. It is a proof that a film doesn't need a complex storyline to be great.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

loki-sfJul 2, 2013

Although it appears that others do appreciated the pace of the film, If found it too slow for my liking. Had no other option to stop less than half way and give up on it.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

StevenFJun 25, 2013

Paul Thomas Anderson continues to mesmerise us with his gripping and powerful and intriguing techniques of film, and the journey doesn't stop with The Master,even if the film never fully let's us in on the whole plan.
Joaquin Phoenix alsoPaul Thomas Anderson continues to mesmerise us with his gripping and powerful and intriguing techniques of film, and the journey doesn't stop with The Master,even if the film never fully let's us in on the whole plan.
Joaquin Phoenix also proves once again that he is one of the finest and most hard working actors of his time with his performance as Freddie Quell, a man who Phoenix could have you convinced is very much real and sitting next to you, his personality erratic and broken after finding it extremely difficult adjusting to life after serving in World War II, his behaviour lands him in various amounts of trouble as he decides to take up portrait photography, but is continued abuse of alcohol and sexual obsession causes him nothing but problems, then Lancaster Dodd comes along, played by the growing phenomenon of acting that is Philip Seymour Hoffman, who in the film plays a man who is the leader of a movement of what can be outlined as free thinking and overcoming all sorts of issues, he truly has all the answers.
His approach to therapy along with his family is frowned upon by many, they stay in the houses of their followers while his wife Peggy (Amy Adams) sees that Freddie may be their downfall. The true outline of the film is how human behaviour and a large array of personalities can collide, Quell is damaged, erratic and full of surprise, almost bipolar, while Dodd is a collected and content man, with goals and ambitions always in his sight, his motives are unclear and these are indeed hidden from the viewer, a technique that works on many occasions, but at times can become puzzling and may be misinterpreted.
A score from the same composer of There Will Be Blood has its important and pivotal part in this thrilling film, a mixture of sombre but upbeat tones perfectly mirrors the difference in characters who are bound to collide at some point.
The opacity that people are diving at to destroy the film is the ideal way for the viewer to interpret this film how they see fit, the movement that is prominent throughout the film is reminiscent of Scientology, and while not as horrific as The People's Temple, the flashes of mastery and looking to one true person leave it to the lucky viewer to decide exactly what is happening, plenty of questions lead to an array of interesting answers.
A powerful and enthralling effort that will not cease to amaze in terms of performances and writing, you won't get these performances "staring at a wall".… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

0

MovieMan12Jun 13, 2013

No movie is possibly as artless or worthless as this movie is. Since all the actors were great I should give them some credit, but I hated it so much. I rather have vomited than see this.

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

All this user's reviews

0

twodmJun 1, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Two Word Critic: Pretentious Nonsense.
I wanted to like this movie because the director has made fine movies in the past, but this movie has no interesting value. Two lead characters who are unwatchable from the very beginning of the movie to the end, what was the point? It seems to me the movie was some kind of joke played by the director on the audience, why do you hate us mr. Anderson? What did we do to you?I watched until the end hoping something clever would happen. I wasted 2 hours on this movie. Avoid at all costs. Most uninteresting bit: Amy jerks off Phillip in on scene, Other that that, they have no chemistry in the movie, and so at the end of it all who cares?… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

Longbottom94Apr 27, 2013

The power house performances from Phoenix and Hoffman help create some of the most mesmerizing scenes of 2012, and Paul Thomas Anderson has a great eye for scenery. However, I felt that the story ultimately meandered around the concept ofThe power house performances from Phoenix and Hoffman help create some of the most mesmerizing scenes of 2012, and Paul Thomas Anderson has a great eye for scenery. However, I felt that the story ultimately meandered around the concept of cult and towards the final act fell apart for me, leaving a sense of unfulfillment. It is not his best film to date (that honor still goes to 'There Will Be Blood') but any fan of Paul Thomas Anderson will find greatness through the failures.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

8

LaGuertaApr 20, 2013

A rare breed of film which compels it's audience to think and come to their own conclusions about what they are witnessing. From the soundtrack to every poignant shot, 'The Master' demonstrates technical excellence and brandishes a superbA rare breed of film which compels it's audience to think and come to their own conclusions about what they are witnessing. From the soundtrack to every poignant shot, 'The Master' demonstrates technical excellence and brandishes a superb cast. How such a momentous piece of work can be so grossly overlooked is unfathomable.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

MBond1810Apr 11, 2013

This movie is interesting and it has something to say. Sometimes it is brilliant, sometimes not.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

VidsRuleApr 1, 2013

Excact same experience as There Will Be Blood. The first time you'll notice the amazing acting but the film with seem pretty empy. The next time you watch it you see all sorts of potential in it and the acting will seem even better. EveryExcact same experience as There Will Be Blood. The first time you'll notice the amazing acting but the film with seem pretty empy. The next time you watch it you see all sorts of potential in it and the acting will seem even better. Every time you watch it after that it will seem rich and full, and you'll realize P. T. Anderson actually truelly knows what he is doing. My favorite movie of the year, and DD Lewis was great but I wish the oscar went to Jaoquine. Did you know his brother was River Phoenix? I somehow didn't know that till recently. Anyways, I digress.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

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

6

SlimShaddyMar 20, 2013

Very beautifully acted, a really great cinematographic achievement, however i do think this movie is really difficult to connect with as an audience. 6/10

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

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

0

PugwashMar 16, 2013

Modern self-indulgent rubbish. Too long. I gained nothing from watching this. It's nicely photographed, but that is a given in the 21st century. The acting is fine, but this is a review of the movie as a whole. Don't waste your time.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

oliver1hMar 15, 2013

One of the most interesting and highest quality movie I have seen for a long time. The acting was superb. Mr. Joaquin Phoenix and Mr. Philip Seymour Hoffman acting was more than brilliant. Amy Adams was also great in her role. What is thatOne of the most interesting and highest quality movie I have seen for a long time. The acting was superb. Mr. Joaquin Phoenix and Mr. Philip Seymour Hoffman acting was more than brilliant. Amy Adams was also great in her role. What is that movie about? I think it is a character study and a meditation on the human desire to find its place in life. This is shown through the life of a "lost" man who is looking for happiness, a purpose and a bond with others (a family of some sort). This way He (Phoenix) bumps into the Cause, and meets the Master (Philip Seymour Hoffman). The Master is a man who is also kind of "lost" in life, and tries to find his happiness and place trough the cult he is leading. In the movie we see a snippet from the life of a cult and the people behind it. These people (like many other people) try to find a meaning behind their life. I think this was the main theme of the movie, beside many more themes... in my opinion… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

EvolutionaryMar 12, 2013

PT Anderson is one of the greatest talent's in American cinema, for one simple reason; He does not pander to the masses. This is a beautifully directed character study of a charasmatic man trying to levetate above animalistic biology and hisPT Anderson is one of the greatest talent's in American cinema, for one simple reason; He does not pander to the masses. This is a beautifully directed character study of a charasmatic man trying to levetate above animalistic biology and his antithesis, a man destined to succumb to them. At no point does Anderson give in to character exposition or reveal his intentions. The acting of both male leads was sublime. Phoenix, doing enough in my opinion, to best Day Lewis in Lincoln. The Oscar snub for Best film and director was clearly a reaction to the Scientology basis, even though this is not strictly a film about Scientology.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

BrianMcCriticMar 10, 2013

Paul Thomas Anderson continues to prove that he's one of the best directors going today. If you want a film with superior acting and outstanding dialogue then I would highly recommend The Master.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

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

7

Nesbitt10Mar 3, 2013

The acting prowess of the trio of Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joachim Phoenix, and Amy Adams that made this worth-while for viewers. Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" is fabulously well-acted and crafted--no question, but it's the material thatThe acting prowess of the trio of Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joachim Phoenix, and Amy Adams that made this worth-while for viewers. Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" is fabulously well-acted and crafted--no question, but it's the material that is not clear. It has two performances of Oscar caliber, but how do they connect? "The Master" won't likely impress the audience of his earlier masterstroke. A film that starts off seeming like the best of 2012 slowly becomes a chore to sit through. It didn't have to be that way. The things that are lacking in "The Master"--are those any good screenwriter could have fixed. Alas, Anderson wrote this one himself.

Phoenix plays Freddie Quell, a soldier back from the Second World War who's finding it hard to adjust back to society, given his violent tendencies and is usually in a floating world of his own, fueled by his own deadly mix and concoction of any liquids he can find to develop into bootleg alcohol. In his drunken stupor one day he stumbles upon the boat full of followers of The Cause, and as a stowaway gets to meet the charismatic Cause leader Lancaster Dodd (Hoffman), who decides to take him under his wing, with Freddie's ability to conjure up some of his magic juice a plus to have around the community. It's a toss-up as to what Freddie requires most a master, a sponsor, or a shrink and Dodd vacillates between all these roles when he takes Freddie on as a pet cause. For the next half hour, the film explores the odd bond that develops between this brilliant, articulate master manipulator and this confused, tongue-tied grifter. The Animated the first half hour soon slows down-- and then--sooner than later, grinds to a halt as "The Master" becomes a series of episodes. Just scenes from life inside a burgeoning cult-like organization.

If you're hoping for insights into Scientology, or some kind of expose, there are none to be had. The movie's focus remains on those two men, Freddie and the Master, but there's really very little to explore there, and so the movie, ever so slowly and yet ever so definitely, begins to sag and then cave in. What made this film compelling to watch despite its scenes that seem to linger in indulgence--and requiring patience to sit through scores of repetition--are the powerhouse performances. Ultimately it's a plain sailing affair, with only its great performances to thank and shore up what's lacking in strength of story. "The Master" is a film that is too vague or compelling about it's Cause.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

0

Trev29Mar 3, 2013

A long lamentable movie that has no positive qualities. It is among the most lifeless pieces of cinema I have ever seen. Why people love this movie is beyond my comprehension; it is just deplorable on every single level.

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

10

Johann_CatMar 3, 2013

This film plays more like a fevered dream than like realist history, so people expecting some sort of conventional narrative may quickly lose patience with this movie. They may also be missing something special. In addition to being glowingThis film plays more like a fevered dream than like realist history, so people expecting some sort of conventional narrative may quickly lose patience with this movie. They may also be missing something special. In addition to being glowing symbols more than they are conventional characters, neither Freddie Quell (Jochain Phoenix) or Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffmann) is especially likable. But the performances suggest emotional and historical truth in ways that are often moving, without pretension or sentimentality. Freddie Quell is a figure of the American male id, post World War II: violent, sensuous, insatiable. He's driven to drink drafts of American industry to quench his burning: the fuel of torpedoes, the fluids of photography, institutional cleaners, all mixed with the fruits of the earth. Dodd, "The Master," is a new-model super ego who might tame and direct Quell. Dodd is smug as a baronial magnate, as full of literary pretensions as Tom Sawyer; his resolve is borrowed from his steely wife (Amy Adams). Hoffman's Dodd, contrary to rumors about the film, is not a charismatic, psychological autocrat, but is wounded, defensive, and dreamy. He lives out a fantasy of priestly insight and command, but few people really believe him; he gets the benefit of many doubts. As Quell is drawn to Dodd's fantasies of mind over history, Dodd is drawn to Quell's energy and chemical inventiveness. Together they suggest different means of achieving atomic-age versions of the old American goal of obliterating the past and standing alone in a new present. They also suggest the polar tensions of raw animal desire and magisterial fantasies of triumph present in many American men. Quell's desire to consume, dominate and love the earth (Quell is obsessed with a woman sculpted in sand) meets a rhetoric of platonic self-mastery in Dodd. The preposterous incongruity of the men and their desires does not result in a drama of control and exploitation, which audiences may expect, but in inchoate attempts at mutual understanding in several scenes that are more humanly intimate and dramatically resonant than most sexual episodes in movies. The 70mm "real film" photography in this movie is amazing; many of the film's strongest moments, including those with people, are wordless. An irony of the film is that lush and magnificent nature (the Pacific ocean, the Arizona desert, the San Francisco Bay) is often overlooked by Quell and Dodd in their self involutions. Nature in American writing often becomes a symbol of self; it automatically is for these two. But nature may have the last word, in an ending that is unexpectedly funny and tender. I rate this as one of the best American movies.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

2

Bart0814Mar 3, 2013

What a rambling movie. I really tried to get engaged but the plot just kept on bouncing around. I did find that acting excellent by Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour Hoffman, but they could not overcome the ramble. Cinematography wasWhat a rambling movie. I really tried to get engaged but the plot just kept on bouncing around. I did find that acting excellent by Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour Hoffman, but they could not overcome the ramble. Cinematography was beautiful; scenes were well shot and crafted. But too slow a pace, too thin an understanding of the characters, too much boredom,… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

0

csw12Mar 3, 2013

I have never seen a movie that got on my nerves more than the Master. Boring is actually the least of the problems. From the pace, to the incoherent story, to the horrible ending, the movie is utter garbage. The movie goes nowhere and by theI have never seen a movie that got on my nerves more than the Master. Boring is actually the least of the problems. From the pace, to the incoherent story, to the horrible ending, the movie is utter garbage. The movie goes nowhere and by the 20 minutes into the film you want it to end, problem is you have another 2 hours of hell to sit through.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

shaunmedFeb 28, 2013

ok phoenix is pretty awesome as an actor but the plot is grotesquely pointless and you will be cheated out of nearly 3 hours of your life if you watch this literally plotless movie.

5 of 16 users found this helpful511

All this user's reviews

3

BKMFeb 28, 2013

It's official: The Master is Paul Thomas Anderson's strangest film to date, ousting Punch Drunk Love from the top spot. I'll admit that I'm not entirely sure what to make of this shapeless jumble aside from the fact that Phoenix and HoffmanIt's official: The Master is Paul Thomas Anderson's strangest film to date, ousting Punch Drunk Love from the top spot. I'll admit that I'm not entirely sure what to make of this shapeless jumble aside from the fact that Phoenix and Hoffman give masterful performances and that Anderson is, I think, exploring the psychological makeup of delusional mystics/prophets and the minds that are drawn to them. The only thing I can say with any certainty, however, is that it is painfully pretentious and dull. I was truly hoping for more from one of the most talented directors working today.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

thairocks88Feb 27, 2013

I consider Anderson's "The Master" to be one of his weakest narrative films. Yet, Anderson's weakest film can still be considered as a great film when compared to other film maker's works. While Phoenix and Hoffman's performances wereI consider Anderson's "The Master" to be one of his weakest narrative films. Yet, Anderson's weakest film can still be considered as a great film when compared to other film maker's works. While Phoenix and Hoffman's performances were phenomenal, they really out shined their supporting cast. The screenplay and plot were above average in comparison to other great original screenplays such as "Amour" or "Django Unchained." What really stood out in this film were the technical elements. The directing, music, editing, and cinematography had a unique Paul Thomas Anderson signature. This same signature that brought some of the best films of the 2000s. Anderson is, in my opinion, one of the greatest auteurs of his generation. It is difficult to meet the standards that you have set yourself. I'm still a fan!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

CoffeeandcreamFeb 26, 2013

The Master symbolizes our inner fight. Our friend, ruler or foe. Unexplained human reaction explained by ghosts of the past. Group that practice no sensitivity judges the stranger as feeble-minded but they all envy him on his freedom. PeopleThe Master symbolizes our inner fight. Our friend, ruler or foe. Unexplained human reaction explained by ghosts of the past. Group that practice no sensitivity judges the stranger as feeble-minded but they all envy him on his freedom. People create conditional love unconsciously... Beautiful pervaded philosophical work.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

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

9

lasttimeisawFeb 12, 2013

Perceived as my most anticipating film of 2012, THE MASTER is Paul Thomas Anderson’s ambitious comeback after THERE WILL BE BLOOD (2007, 9/10), 5 years interval may be too long for PTA fanboys, but again the wait is unmistakably deserved.Perceived as my most anticipating film of 2012, THE MASTER is Paul Thomas Anderson’s ambitious comeback after THERE WILL BE BLOOD (2007, 9/10), 5 years interval may be too long for PTA fanboys, but again the wait is unmistakably deserved. Post-WWII, a USA naval veteran inadvertently hops on a yacht one night and is hooked on a cult named “The Cause”, lead by its eloquent yet irascible master, while being an avid follower of the master, his perennial booze-abusive, sex-driven, violent nature enables himself to be the soul needs salvation, a side-kick and a role model, it also encroaches his mental realm and life orientation, eventually challenges his loyalty with The Cause and the master. PTA’s trademark roving and tracking long-shots maintain as engaging as any directors could ever achieve, not obtrusive but impeccably tally with the storytelling; the retro-soaked palette authentically establishes a mystic aura of the inexplicable internal mechanism of how our emotion rises and falls, attended by a rhythmic score from Jonny Greenwood.

Joaquin Phoenix gives me a first impression of Michael Shannon (whose TAKE SHELTER 2011, 9/10 is among my top pick of 2011), in a far gaunter figure, he embodies his character so devotedly and destructively, it is a privilege to appreciate his hunchback stance, the unique way when he speaks (English words evade me now, help?), his exuberance, his furore, his confusion and his determination. The erosive bitterness conceals in his gawky body is compelling and he is a war victim, a damaged good seeking for a rejuvenation, the master and The Cause may or may not cure him, anyhow, he still possess his free will, if only the power of repetition works. Philip Seymour Hoffman, doesn’t need too much physique alternation though, is equally mesmerizing if not too overbearing, his mind-blowing delineation of the master’s polarized volatility is another textbook archetype of performance art. Amy Adams, whose fourth Oscar-nomination in 8 years has wrought some dissent here, accomplishes an amazing expressionless supporting performance, her role doesn’t require any ostentatious flare-up, but each time her composure and relentlessness exudes disparate feelings from inside (blithe, haughty, disdained, confident, commanding, suspicious, disgusted, etc.), and her “milking the cow”coalition with Hoffman is simply petrifying. Grabbing only 3 acting nominations (with faint possibility to win any of them), THE MASTER’s bumpy Oscar-road is far from triumphant compared with THERE WILL BE BLOOD, but time will testify whether it is an overlooked masterpiece or an elusive piece of self-indulgent, but no matter on which case, one cannot deny that it heralds that PTA is most probably on his way to be the Stanley Kubrick of our generation (not least suggested by the evocative nudity scenes which seemingly pay tribute to the masked orgy in EYES WIDE SHUT 1999, 8/10), and it is a tremendous blessing for all the cinephiles.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

MarkAngelFeb 5, 2013

Superbly crafted, The Master is the ultimate contemporary Avant-garde film. The complexity of the story and the lack of dramatic coherence and unity, combined with richly colored cinematography, Greenwood's brilliant score and Anderson'sSuperbly crafted, The Master is the ultimate contemporary Avant-garde film. The complexity of the story and the lack of dramatic coherence and unity, combined with richly colored cinematography, Greenwood's brilliant score and Anderson's nearly unprecedented artistic talent rich in philosophically adventurous and thematically exploitative spirit, makes The Master a layered statement against conventional narrative and determined resolution. Therefore, it sustains its marvelous and enigmatic opacity and many may find it very difficult to deal with it. Nonetheless, even those who find it difficult to digest Anderson's lack of transparency and non-eventful story, should be able to find a lot to enjoy in, e.g. the masterclass performances. Besides the grand aesthetic values, the film also explores themes such as post-war American society, its psychological, emotional and moral structure, the western's world principles of freedom and the conflicting yet absorbing authority of the master, the loss, weirdness, sadness, mental illness, belief, accompanied with suggestive philosophical ideas such as the impossibility of reconstructing and ultimately, facing one' s past.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

10

lahaine2012Feb 3, 2013

Where do I begin with this mystical masterpiece, and where do I end? Off the heels of his modern day classic, The Will Be Blood, Paul Thomas Anderson constructs yet another challenging art film that’s sure to mystify and perplex viewersWhere do I begin with this mystical masterpiece, and where do I end? Off the heels of his modern day classic, The Will Be Blood, Paul Thomas Anderson constructs yet another challenging art film that’s sure to mystify and perplex viewers across the globe in The Master. The film follows Freddie Quell, an unstable drifter fueled by alcohol, who recently returned from the Second World War. Plunged deep within his most basic animalistic instincts, Quell stumbles upon the charismatic, self-actualized man known as Lacaster Dodd, who leads a movement (cult!) called the Cause. Dodd sees this man as a new challenge, and the film treks his attempt to tame this beast that is Freddie Quell. Is Dodd truly the Master (as he is commonly referred to in the film) or is it Quell who has mastered and embraced his animalistic instinct… One could even go further to question if Dodd’s wife (played with chilly precision by Amy Adams!!), who seems to be married to the Cause, has more clout than she lets on. Clearly inspired by scientology and its founding father, L. Ron Hubbard, the movie attempts to indulge us without being too candid. Its open ended-ness begs you to question whether there was any real resolution or if the extensive, thought provoking process was worth it. But these are the raging questions that make you appreciate this complex piece of work even more. Anderson constructs a masculine ballet of words, between man and animal. Both men played brilliantly by Joaquin Phoenix (Quell) and Philip Seymour Hoffman (Dodd). Phoenix channels much rage and aggression in a difficult role and Hoffman, conversely, channels a lot of charisma and wit (which may come across as easy) in an equally difficult role. Adams also gives one of the best performances of her career in this film; as the enigmatic, Peggy Dodd. With its brilliant editing and cinematography, not to mention the score that was a character of its own, the film proved to be a feast for the mind, eyes and ears. Next to Cloud Atlas, The Master is the most ambitious films of 2012, that’s expected to endure decades of analysis and reinterpretations. It is simply the year’s best.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

MajesticUterusJan 25, 2013

Just because it's unconventional doesn't mean it's bad. Audiences need to stop being repulsed at the thought of being challenged by a film. This is one of the best movies I've seen, because it has so many layers. I could go back many timesJust because it's unconventional doesn't mean it's bad. Audiences need to stop being repulsed at the thought of being challenged by a film. This is one of the best movies I've seen, because it has so many layers. I could go back many times and get more and more meaning out of it.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

vdiaz9Jan 23, 2013

If you hated this but loved Tree of Life, you need your head examined. Both are prime examples of an auteur filmmaker getting the opportunity to make pictures that go against Hollywood norms for the sake of their own artistry. It's a miracleIf you hated this but loved Tree of Life, you need your head examined. Both are prime examples of an auteur filmmaker getting the opportunity to make pictures that go against Hollywood norms for the sake of their own artistry. It's a miracle a movie like The Master can even get made when the entire industry's sole purpose is profit. A movie like this doesn't get made to please the masses. Paul Thomas Anderson deserves credit for, once again, writing and directing a film that is reminiscent of Kubrick or Welles. Anderson's films appeal to an audience that enjoys great acting and character over repetitious conventions in plot development. Only a handful of movies like this get made a year that end up getting a nationwide major theater release and audiences should be welcoming it, rather than admonish it. Don't bother with The Master if you honestly believe Skyfall is worthy of a Best Picture nomination.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

catcarloJan 22, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Alla fine, uno si chiede: ma Freddie, in fondo, ha sempre e solo considerato importante il sesso? Forse non la più profonda tra le tante domande che possono nascere dalla visione di 'The master' ma, come tutte le altre, è impossibile fornire una risposta certa. Nel film che, per molti, è stato il vincitore morale dell'ultimo festival di Venezia, Anderson (suoi anche soggetto e sceneggiatura) si limita a raccontare, senza l'esigenza di dare spiegazioni o esprimere giudizi: se Lancaster Dodd può ricordare vagamente Ron Hubbard, La Causa si rifà a Scientology come potrebbe ispirarsi a qualsiasi altra setta basata sul condizionamento mentale. L'interesse del regista è incentrato sulle dinamiche interpersonali: la più importante è quella tra i due protagonisti principali, ma le altre sono comunque necessarie per delineare il microcosmo in cui si svolge l'azione, a partire dal rapporto (di forza) tra Dodd e la moglie Peggy. Da tutto ciò si possono dedurre con facilità due considerazioni: si tratta di un film complesso, tutt'altro che immediato anche perché la storia è quasi solo un esile pretesto (motivo per cui l'opera ha la sua schiera di detrattori fra coloro che pensano che due ore così siano eccessive o inutili); perché ogni cosa funzioni, è necessaria una maiuscola prova d'attori. Il che puntualmente accade, con un cast ben assortito e funzionale su cui giganteggiano Phoenix e Hoffman (con relativa pioggia di premi e nomination che coinvolge anche Amy Adams che è Peggy). Il primo interpreta Freddie, un marinaio reduce della Seconda Guerra Mondiale con più di un problema annidato in una psicologia incline alla violenza, dandogli una camminata e un modo di parlare da Braccio di Ferro vestito come Humphrey Bogart (ah, i pantaloni a vita alta..), ma mantenendo in miracoloso equilibrio un ruolo a forte rischio caricaturale. Il secondo è invece Dodd, pifferaio magico capace di parlare molto senza dire nulla e riuscendo comunque a condizionare le menti di chi ne subisce il fascino fino alla commozione, come la Helen Sullivan nei cui panni ho ritrovato, dopo una vita, Laura Dern. Freddie entra nella sua orbita, complici anche i fortissimi liquori che egli stesso fabbrica, ma, pur restando coinvolto nel rapporto maestro-allievo (anche se 'maestro' non rende appieno l'originale 'master'), riesce a mantenere sempre una sottile linea di resistenza alla completa sudditanza :è vero, qualcosa ci perde … Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

nathanrobertsJan 17, 2013

This film is genius. but lacks a story and ultimately looses the audience with it , this film was SELF INDULGENT, and didn't speak to the audience its too far ahead of its time i' m sure in 20 years it will be voted one of the best films.This film is genius. but lacks a story and ultimately looses the audience with it , this film was SELF INDULGENT, and didn't speak to the audience its too far ahead of its time i' m sure in 20 years it will be voted one of the best films.
The acting was definitely down the Oscar path but the cinematography and the screen play feel like they belonged in a gallery or a art house book. I love this sort of film but I just think the master missed the mark.

a true 'marmite' film ...love it or hate it… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

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

3

TheBearJan 9, 2013

It looks stunning, sounds stunning and is superbly acted. There's no denying Paul Thomas Anderson's ability to make a film except for me The Master is pretty incomprehensible and as a result feels extremely overhyped and very unsatisfying.It looks stunning, sounds stunning and is superbly acted. There's no denying Paul Thomas Anderson's ability to make a film except for me The Master is pretty incomprehensible and as a result feels extremely overhyped and very unsatisfying. Disappointing.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

bennington13Dec 29, 2012

Critics have been desperately prostrating themselves before The Master, Paul Thomas Anderson

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

AngusWardDec 26, 2012

2 hours and 24 minutes of what seems to be rather an astonishing performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix less than an entertaining and interesting narrative. The story lacks the gripping sense of delving into the world of a2 hours and 24 minutes of what seems to be rather an astonishing performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix less than an entertaining and interesting narrative. The story lacks the gripping sense of delving into the world of a WWII veteran and his gradual involvement in a cult which aims to "cure" him and others of illness of the mind and soul. Instead it conveys a continuous and monotonous journey of Freddy (Jeaquin Phoenix) with no change in mental state or an arc for character development, nor is there really any objective/motivation of the protagonist, just a drifting nothing. For a film that I had such high expectation, the film had me looking at my watch every two minutes and counting the aisles of the cinema room before taking a sigh of relief to the fact that the film was over so I could enter the boring reality of my world which is far more thrilling than Paul Thomas Anderson's 'The Master'. The subtleties of the plot could be picked up on giving it artistic merit but only to the fact that sometimes the script needed to be to the point and objective focused rather than babble on about nothing with no entertainment value or character development occurring. Of course, the film appears to be highly orchestrated and a beautiful craft of screenplay/film techniques, however, it is in dire thirst of the fundamental aspect of film...to entertain and strike interest.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

wagny70Dec 23, 2012

I saw the movie at the Venice Film Festival. I loved it: deep, well directed and acted in an extraordinary way. I found great interpretation of P. S. Hoffman.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

cameronmorewoodDec 20, 2012

Some will say the storyline of The Master seems basic, and told in an overly convuluted way; however, any true movie-hound knows Anderson doesn't care about what's happening on the surface. It's all about the symbolism, and The Master isSome will say the storyline of The Master seems basic, and told in an overly convuluted way; however, any true movie-hound knows Anderson doesn't care about what's happening on the surface. It's all about the symbolism, and The Master is filled with fascinating meanings and subtle truth, the when looked for, hit you like a bullet train. It is a magnificent accomplishment in acting, writing, directing, editing, cinematography, and score, and the best American film of the year.… 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

2

squeezingsNov 28, 2012

I went to see this movie because of positive critic reviews. Although there are good performances by the excellent cast, the overall movie is incomprehensible and boring. All four of us fell asleep. As a reference, I've fallen asleep duringI went to see this movie because of positive critic reviews. Although there are good performances by the excellent cast, the overall movie is incomprehensible and boring. All four of us fell asleep. As a reference, I've fallen asleep during about 3 movies in my entire life. In my opinion and in general, it's a bad sign when the user score is dramatically lower than the critic score here on metacritic.… Expand

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

All this user's reviews

8

cnrcnrNov 23, 2012

Beautifully crafted, perfectly acted and a genius score to go with it. But, you cant help feel that the storyline was rather weak. you really want to connect with the characters and really get into the film, but it just doesn't seem to giveBeautifully crafted, perfectly acted and a genius score to go with it. But, you cant help feel that the storyline was rather weak. you really want to connect with the characters and really get into the film, but it just doesn't seem to give as much as you want it to. Saying that it is still a brilliant piece of cinema!… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

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

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

0

Apache287Nov 21, 2012

I went into the cinema expecting a film that would take a serious or thought provoking view on Scientology or cults like it. What I got was 3 hours of tedious boredom in which It seemed to follow a cycle of Joaquin Phoenix displaying his sandI went into the cinema expecting a film that would take a serious or thought provoking view on Scientology or cults like it. What I got was 3 hours of tedious boredom in which It seemed to follow a cycle of Joaquin Phoenix displaying his sand fetish, Philip Seymour Hoffman repeating the same lines over and over then deciding to prance around like a lunatic and then when all interest is lost it puts on awkward nude scenes. Never before have I been to a film where the audience was either collectively falling asleep, swearing at the screen over how terrible the film is or cheering when they think it's all over but then have their hopes of escape dashed.

The characters themselves are impossible to like or take seriously seeing as they have no personality or they are all over the place and you're left wondering which character is meant to have PTSD.

Overall a review in one sentence would be ' Makes Twilight look like a masterpiece '.… Expand

1 of 7 users found this helpful16

All this user's reviews

9

dante_finnNov 19, 2012

Dustin Hoffamn and Joaquin Phoenix are remarkable

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

nutterjrNov 18, 2012

Truly remarkable performances from Phoenix and Hoffman, with the former (Freddie) portraying an navy veteran, a true outcast and degenerate, unable to conform, always following his instincts in contrast with the latter (the Master) who has itTruly remarkable performances from Phoenix and Hoffman, with the former (Freddie) portraying an navy veteran, a true outcast and degenerate, unable to conform, always following his instincts in contrast with the latter (the Master) who has it all worked out and will not reason with anyone who does not believe in 'The Cause', a philosophy of life he introduced and cultivates and promotes through his method. When the two men are brought together, they inevitably effect one another, with the Master inspired the animalistic behaviour of Freddie whilst Freddie goes on a journey to find himself. I would not be surprised if this film wins a number of awards especially for acting.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

NKOASNov 17, 2012

It's enigmatic trailer drove a lot of curious minds to the theatre in the hopes of gaining clarification on the mystery P.T. Anderson presented. What we left with instead were many more questions. The film is, undoubtedly, a puzzle. P.T.It's enigmatic trailer drove a lot of curious minds to the theatre in the hopes of gaining clarification on the mystery P.T. Anderson presented. What we left with instead were many more questions. The film is, undoubtedly, a puzzle. P.T. Anderson's usually straightforward, grounded style is eschewed in favor of a centrifuge of ideas and emotions all tossed around, reminiscent of Slaughterhouse Five's blend of moments to create tone while still throwing the audience andy time it thinks it has a grasp on the meaning of the work. The film's "message", if it has one, doesn't become clear until long after one has left its seat, and the internal debates the film instigates will last even longer. With cinematography as sharp as There Will Be Blood and performances as stellar as Magnolia, P.T. Anderson's puzzle is a glorious one, and one well worth solving.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews