Cannes Film Festival 2013

Review: 'The Master' features searing performances around a hollow center

An actor's showcase with an oddly thin script does not resonate

  • Critic's Rating B-
  • Readers' Rating B-
<p>Joaquin Phoenix is astonishing in 'The Master' even when the film can't live up to his performance</p>

Joaquin Phoenix is astonishing in 'The Master' even when the film can't live up to his performance

Credit: The Weinstein Company

Are you a fan of Motion Captured?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

There are few filmmakers working whose output has been as consistently exciting and rewarding as Paul Thomas Anderson, and there are few films I have anticipated with as much confidence this year as "The Master."

So you'll understand if it unnerves me a bit to find that I don't love it.

I respect it and even admire it, but for the first time, I find myself struggling to connect on that extra level that we reserve for the films that matter most to us.  "The Master" is, as was rumored, a fictionalized look at the dynamics that existed in the early days of Scientology, but simply viewing it through that prism, looking for the parallels and trying to parse Anderson's stance on the house that Hubbard built, would be a simplistic way to approach it.  Instead, I think the film is really trying to grapple with the way broken or damaged people reach for salvation and balance and the extremes they will suffer in the futile hope that someone else will give them the answers, which is certainly fertile ground for drama.

Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) is a dangerous man as the film opens, ruled by impulse and addiction.  He has only one real skill set that we see him demonstrate, the ability to mix up makeshift alcohol out of anything up to and including the fluids from inside a torpedo.  His cocktails seem to be burning holes in his brain, leaving him a raw nerve who can barely strangle his way through a sentence.  The opening movement of the film is just Freddie raging at the world, unable to find any place where he fits.  It's not until he stows away on a boat, drunk and not sure where he is, that he starts to work his way towards some larger understanding of himself and his actions.

The boat turns out to be under the command of Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman), who is the leader of a nascent religious/philosophical movement called The Cause, and from the moment Freddie and Dodd meet, there is some strange pull between the two of them.  Dodd's wife Peggy (Amy Adams) is not sure what to make of this strange mad dog that her husband adopts, and the people around Lancaster seem nervous to see how quickly Freddie is allowed into the inner circle.  For his part, Freddie seems to barely understand what's happening to him, and there is an early scene where Lancaster subjects Freddie to a sort of personality exam, a psychological word game that is fun at first but that eventually pushes Freddie to an emotional epiphany that suggests that there is some sort of humanity buried deep inside the scar tissue that seems to make up 99% of his body weight.

Want More...

Toronto Film Festival?
  • Toronto_at_night_article_story_main_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.
The performances in the film are beyond reproach.  I am astonished at what Joaquin Phoenix does here.  It looks like he is constantly on the verge of a total breakdown, and there's nothing about it that feels calculated or safe.  It is one of those performances that is so committed, so real, so uncomfortable that I almost felt like calling someone to help him.  I know he's younger than I am, but he looks 50 years old here, with a face like ten miles of bad highway, worn by life, with haunted eyes sunken into his ruined visage.  Philip Seymour Hoffman, on the other hand, is perfect as this preening, phony intellectual, a man who knows just enough to convince the hungry and the lonely around him that he has the answers.  He is pink, soft, in love with the luxury that comes from being worshipped, and when he is challenged in any way, his instant rage seems like a man desperate to maintain the kingdom he's carved out for himself.

One of the keys to the film seems to be Amy Adams as Lancaster's wife, pulling strings from the sidelines, constantly course-correcting her husband and focusing his salesman's nature in the right directions.  She burns with a zealot's heat that even Lancaster can't fully commit to, and it is obvious that she would be more than happy to destroy anyone she views as an enemy of The Cause.  She is suspicious of Freddie, but more than that, she's aware that he seems to speak to some part of Lancaster that yearns to be more free, more animal, and she knows exactly how to get her husband back on track.  It's not a performance we've ever seen from her before, and it's hard to reconcile this hard-faced woman with the cheery rom-com version of Adams we've seen in so many films before.  There's a scene where Freddie imagines all the women in a room naked as he watches Lancaster dance among them, singing to them, and Adams sits in a chair, naked and seemingly pregnant, one of the least vain images I can imagine.

And while I think the character work is all interesting and pitch-perfect, I'm not sure the film ever really does anything aside from set up this dynamic, Freddie struggling to find some sort of peace in this process, constantly straining to find meaning in Lancaster's work.  The film has an ominous underbelly, aided quite a bit by Jonny Greenwood's alarming score, which throbs with menace, but it remains unexplored, unreleased, tension without resolution.  Even at the end of the film, there is nothing like a conclusion offered up.  The photography by Mihai Malaimare Jr. is gorgeous, and you can tell that it was shot in 65MM, particularly when it comes to the many sequences that are just close-ups of these faces.  There is a lush, rich, hyper-clear quality to the movie that is hypnotic, but I felt myself resolutely outside of the experience as a viewer.  I don't need Anderson to hit any conventional story beats, and there's no comment I hate more about a film than that the main character isn't "likable," but in this case, the film almost seems stubborn about the way it refuses to offer up any sort of closure or clarity.  And as far as the Scientology comparison are concerned, I can certainly see how this lines up with the details of Hubbard's early days with his organization, but it's hardly an expose or an attack.  That's just a perfect example of how to build and protect a cult in the mainstream, so Anderson uses those similarities to give a grounded sense of reality to The Cause.  That's all.

I would never call this a "bad" film, because it's not.  It is expertly crafted, and I am sure actors will watch this work for decades to come to see how close to the bone you can play pain and rage, but it is a film I can't claim to love, and that depresses me.  "The Master," like Lancaster Dodd himself, offers up lots of talk and lots of sound and fury, but no answers, and it is one of the most frustrating experiences of the year for me as a result.

"The Master" opens in theaters in limited release on September 14, and then rolls out wider on the 21st.

Drew-mcweeny-sm
Drew McWeeny
Film Editor
A respected critic and commentator for fifteen years, Drew McWeeny helped create the online film community as "Moriarty" at Ain't It Cool News, and now proudly leads two budding Film Nerds in their ongoing movie education.
Trending Now on HitFix Boards
Topic Started By Latest Post Replies
sandylewis90
12 days ago
2
sandylewis90
about 1 month ago
1
Discuss In Theaters and Coming Soon on HitFix Message Boards »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Brendan

    So it's THERE WILL BE BLOOD without the final reel, huh? Still anxious to see this thing for myself.

    September 9, 2012 at 8:49PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    blake

    Well this is too bad. Maybe he can bounce back with his next film although considering that won't be for another half a decade going by his schedule we won't see for a while.

    September 9, 2012 at 9:35PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      JJ1 Film has been getting raves across the board- save for a few "I'm not sure what I just saw" reviews... it's hardly the beginning of the end... PTA continues to dominate intelligent film-making and for that I'm thankful.

      September 9, 2012 at 10:29PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Brian Marino One review does not prove anything. Almost across the board the film is being called brilliant (this is the first time i've heard hollow).

      Not critiquing the review (haven't seen the film myself yet) just saying not to pre-judge it based on this one guy's opinion.

      September 10, 2012 at 12:22AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    blake

    Weird my post didn't comment.

    Anyways hoping he'll bounce back but it won't be for a while as it takes forever for his films to get financed and made. I hope this isn't the begginning of the end for him.

    September 9, 2012 at 9:38PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Images_talkback_profile

    Laura Stewart

    I feel like this is a film that requires multiple viewings -at the very least- in order to fully process and appreciate? #PTApower

    September 9, 2012 at 10:28PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Jeff_avatar_2_talkback_profile

    Mulderism

    Drew, have you ever watched a film that you didn't like at first but did after a second viewing? That was my experience with "Magnolia" and to a certain degree "There Will be Blood".

    I actually hated Magnolia when I first saw it but I now consider it one of my favorite films of all time.

    Do you think "The Master" would be any different after a second viewing?

    September 9, 2012 at 11:34PM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew Rarely. And not with the films you mentioned. I think people are going to tie themselves in knots over this one, and I'm sure I'll have plenty of people yell at me, but it simply isn't his best work. It's like it's missing an entire reel.

      B- isn't the end of the world. It's just not on par with his earlier better films, that's all.

      September 10, 2012 at 2:16AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    AER

    This is exactly the kind of measured and nuanced reviewing that keeps me coming back here. Even if you're not blown away by it, you've mentioned enough aspects that still make me want to see this ASAP -- with tempered expectations, of course. I'm so tired of this "Masterpiece!" or "Piece of Shit!" binary that dominates so much discussion. Some works are transitional -- and can even be more interesting/revealing in hindsight.

    September 10, 2012 at 9:57AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    JL

    "There are few filmmakers working whose output has been as consistently exciting and rewarding as Paul Thomas Anderson..."

    Really? Based on what?? You must admit that Boogie Nights was just a re-hash of Goodfellas with sitcom-porn sensibility. And how can you possibly admire "Magnolia"?? A blatant rip-off of Robert Altman's "Short Cuts" - only with characters and writing that are paper-thin. Did you find "Punch Drunk Love" to be THAT exciting or groundbreaking??

    I hope that you will use The Master as a "teachable moment" to reassess this director altogether. You've apparently fallen into the P.T. Anderson cult where you have such a personal need to love him, that you even feel the need to qualify a bad film by saying you "respect and admire it".

    Why do you hesitate in calling it a "bad" film when you clearly think it is?

    Your first duty as a critic is to be honest with yourself and express that honesty - despite overwhelming social pressures by others to cower you into saying you liked it.

    "Capone" on AICN obviously has the same problem - suggesting that one needed to see it two or three times before deciding that it somehow might be a good film. He obviously hated it too - and is just as cowardly in being able to admit it.

    Ask yourself this critical question: If you never heard of this director before and were shown the exact same film without the end credits - would you be writing the same review here?

    Stop being an emotional coward. You will never be a good writer or critic until you can be honest with yourself.

    September 10, 2012 at 1:38PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Shawn You need to go back to Drew's Moriarty work and read his old reviews of M Night Shaymalan's early movies. Specifically when Drew talks about how films can sometimes be "uneven," have good qualities even if the films do not add up.

      He clearly states what he likes about "The Master" even he doesn't think what he likes adds up. You don't get that because you've either Loved or Hated every movie you've ever seen. Instead of finding them "okay" or "mediocre"

      That's okay, it's your opinion, just don't shit on other people's opinion. Drew isn't being a coward, your just not reading it well, being a troll, or your just a fucking moron douche...pick one.

      September 10, 2012 at 3:00PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Tye-Grr And who are you to assume he doesn't mean the exact words he wrote? Why must it be "love" or "hate"? I personally wasn't head over heels for 'Hugo', but I thought it was a beautifully crafted film that just failed to engage me on an emotional level (I know many DID find it touching, but I did not, and I blame the script and thinly written characters). I thought it was a good film, nothing more, but I absolutely admired the craft and care that went into it, and Scorsese's brilliant direction. Your attack on Drew's review is rather shallow, and it seems like it's more of an issue with P.T. Anderson than anything.

      September 10, 2012 at 3:58PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Jernio Good Post, JL, even though I think more highly of Punch-Drunk Love than you, and love Boogie Nights despite its total indebtedness to Goodfellas. (By the way, I think Magnolia an utter mess.) Too many so-called critics fail to faithfully translate their own impressions (if they have any), rather leaning on politic statements and a craven diffidence. I applaud McWeeny for not completely censoring his criticisms of the film, but I agree with JL about the despicable trend in film reviewing.

      September 10, 2012 at 4:44PM EST
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew I flat out love "Boogie Nights." No hesitations or qualifications to it. I love the cast, I love the energy, and while there's a mix-tape quality to the way he references movies he loves, it's also clear that he adores the people he's writing about and that he really believes that family dynamic that they create. I think "Magnolia" is a big lovely shaggy thing, and the Altman comparison is apt. It's certainly not a "Short Cuts" rip-off though. Name me one storyine in the two films that is similar. Altman didn't invent the idea of a large multi-character canvass. I'm on the record about why I think "Punch-Drunk Love" is great, and I still think it's the only truly interesting exploration of Adam Sandler's angry man-child archetype. And "There Will Be Blood"? Good god, I love it. So, yeah, I think I was EXACTLY AND COMPLETELY HONEST when I said what I said, and I think the performances in this film and many of the individual scenes are very good, even great. I just don't think it all coheres, which is why I gave it a B-. Imagine that... I was specific and clear, and yet you projected your own feelings about his work onto me and then called me dishonest.

      Weird how that works.

      September 13, 2012 at 3:22AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Eyes

    Expectations lowered. Movies don't have to have a point, but whenever you sit in a dark room for two hours to watch one, it's nice if they do.

    September 11, 2012 at 12:30AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Maxwell

    I completely agree with Drew on this one. Expertly crafted, but I simply could not connect. It left me very cold and uninterested. Which is a shame, because Magnolia is one of the films I hold most dear.

    September 12, 2012 at 1:22AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    ReelG

    Check out what two old-school Hollywood veterans have to say about "The Master"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2LmHqDkI1E

    September 20, 2012 at 5:26PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web