Pages

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

The Master Review: So... Now What?

WordMaster




  Paul Thomas Anderson has a knack for theatricality. His 1999 tour de force Magnolia might as well have been a play filmed on camera, and the critically beloved Best Picture nominee There Will Be Blood has, at least on the surface, all the makings of a classic Shakespearean tragedy. How effective that theatricality is probably depends on the whims of the individual viewer. Personally, I thought it worked splendidly in Magnolia, but There Will Be Blood was overwrought to the point of pretentiousness. The thing is, when your movie is full of hysterical characters, exaggerated emotions and intense music, the actual content has to be worthy of all that drama; I suppose my main complaint about There Will Be Blood is that beneath the breathtaking cinematography and deliciously spine-tingling score, the story itself is rather ordinary, and I’m still not quite sure what people find so fascinating about the character of Daniel Plainview. After that chilling, wordless opening scene, it looked promising, but by the time the credits rolled, my main thought was: So what?


                I was sincerely hoping that The Master would alleviate the sour taste left in my mouth by There Will Be Blood, and while I watched the movie unfold, I did find it thoroughly compelling. Still, as I walked out of the theater, I couldn’t get rid of the feeling gnawing at the back of my mind that something was missing, a feeling that only intensified the longer I thought about it. It isn’t that The Master is a bad film; in fact, it’s a near-flawless film, at least from a technical standpoint. But it could have been more. It could have been a masterpiece, a genuine revelation. Instead, it’s merely another well-made, well-acted prestige picture, more intriguing than brilliant or powerful.


                If the movie deserves awards attention for anything, it’s (predictably) the acting. In his first real role since he “retired” to start a rap career, Joaquin Phoenix gives us a reason to breathe a sigh of relief that his brief, tabloid-worthy foray into insanity was nothing more than an elaborate, albeit perhaps pointless, hoax. Within the first few minutes of the movie, before there is even a single line of dialogue, you forget all about his off-screen antics, and he morphs once again into the dedicated, enigmatic actor who rose to fame with his intense performances in such films as Gladiator and Walk the Line. Here, Phoenix plays the volatile, sex-obsessed drifter Freddy Quell who stumbles upon a mysterious cult led by Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s Lancaster Dodd. He’s a brooding jumble of mannerisms and tics – like his habit of mumbling through the corner of his mouth rather than talking – that should come off as gallingly affected, yet he burrows into the character’s mind and skin with such fearless diligence that the performance never feels less than authentic. You can sense Freddy’s inner turmoil, his repressed anguish, simply by watching the actor’s hunched shoulders, stubbornly crossed arms and dark, sunken eyes.

Nonetheless, the undeniable star of the show is Hoffman, who has turned into something of a muse for Anderson, appearing in Boogie Nights, Magnolia and Punch-Drunk Love prior to The Master. When he’s onscreen, it’s impossible not to watch him, so magnetic is his presence and so commanding is his voice – that booming bass has a remarkable ability to sound stern and affable at the same time, the tone of both a teacher and a father. He exudes charisma so that even when you know he’s saying nonsense, you want to believe him, to follow him. As Dodd’s wife Peggy, Amy Adams is perfectly cast. At first, this seems to be yet another reiteration of the cheery, innocent role that made her adored by critics and the general public (see: Junebug, Enchanted, Doubt), but as the movie progresses, it becomes clear that beneath her rosy-cheeked, red-haired beauty, she’s much more complex – and perhaps much more sinister. There’s something vaguely unsettling about the Dodds’s relationship, and the dynamic between Hoffman and Adams is one of the most riveting and unexpected parts of the movie.

                Visually, The Master is exquisite. There’s one especially stunning shot near the beginning, when Freddy is running away from a group of cabbage farmers who suspect him of poisoning an elderly coworker: all you see is a figure sprinting across a vast, silent, empty field, shrouded by mist, a haunting metaphor for Freddy’s mental state. In many cases, the images, captured with loving meticulousness by cinematographer Mihai Malaimare Jr. (who surprisingly did not work on There Will Be Blood), seem to convey more meaning than the actual dialogue or plot. As easy as it is to admire the gorgeousness of the period detail and the atmospheric lushness of the soundtrack assembled by Jonny Greenwood (one sequence set to Ella Fitzgerald’s “Get Thee Behind Me Satan” is among the movie’s best scenes despite the fact that nothing actually happens in it), the narrative itself feels strangely hollow. What is Anderson trying to say about religious cults, post-war trauma, family dynamics? I’m still not quite sure. 

                Perhaps the most glaring problem is the character of Freddy, who is simply not captivating or sympathetic enough as a protagonist. As mentioned before, Phoenix does a terrific job, but even he can only do so much to distract us from the fact that we don’t actually get to know Freddy at all; at the end of the movie, he’s not much different from the deranged, licentious alcoholic that we met at the beginning. Anderson keeps the camera curiously distant, so we never get a concrete idea of Freddy as a three-dimensional human being or, for that matter, of his relationship with Lancaster, around which the film supposedly revolves. The two men interact quite frequently, discussing philosophy and arguing, yet I couldn’t quite understand why they cared about each other in the first place. Why did Lancaster take a special interest in Freddy? Why is Freddy so eager to defend Lancaster from his detractors? However intentional the ambiguity may be, it’s not effective. The Master promises viewers a provocative glimpse at the inner workings of a cult and the psychology of disillusionment, but it delivers a cold, meandering odyssey to nowhere, as aimless as its hero.





Links:

No comments:

Post a Comment