The Master (2012)

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

A Masterpiece!

For having a relatively low budget, the film's style and overall art direction are immensely impressive.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

There is a particular scene in Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" in which Joaquin Phoenix gives a raw portrait of a tortured man so perfectly that its intoxicating. Not only is his performance single-handley one of the mast authentic and dynamic portraits from any actor in film history, but his character is a truly fascinating man crafted from the mind of Paul Thomas Anderson. Anderson's film deals with the notion of cult and its affects on those who follow it. More specifically, however, Anderson examines the role of the drifter and the outsider in society, and how one's personal emotional and mental trauma affects one in the real world. "The Master," while uncomfortably honest and raw at times, is a truly extraordinary work of mastery from a gifted artist. Not only does Anderson direct the magnificent performances from Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour-Hoffman with such natural vision, but he creates a story about a tortured soul and crafts an intimate film about this man's tragic journey. The character of Freddy Quell (Phoenix) is a tough nut to crack, yet we're always on his side and ultimately want good things to come for him, regardless of how strange and destructive his behavior is. Perhaps what makes "The Master" so genuine is how the actors are given long sequences to act, allowing the true nature of human beings to be revealed in beautiful fashion. Visually, this film is magic, but its the legendary performances and gifted script that make this one of the best films of he 21st century.

A strange casualness, is a normal strangeness. A normal strangeness is the illusion of normality and the illusion of strangeness. The illusion of normality is the reality of strangeness. The illusion of strangeness is the reality of normality.Normality is reality. Strangeness is fantasy. The reality of reality is pure reality. The reality of fantasy is the impurity of fantasy.An impure fantasy is an impure strangeness - an impurity that's impure.An impure impurity is a corrupt corruption. A corrupt corruption is a pure corruption.A pure reality is a corrupt purity. A pure corruption is a corrupt purity.The corruption of purity is a history. The history of a corrupt purity is not a corrupt purity - the history of a corrupt purity is a pure purity.A purity can't be invaded. A pure purity is the non-invasion of a non-invasion.A non-invasion is a freedom from invasion. A freedom from invasion a dependence on freedom. A pure purity is a dependence on freedom that's dependent on freedom.A pure purity is the purity of freedom needing freedom: needing freedom is the purity of oppression.An actual pure reality is one in which freedom is valuable because of the purity of oppression - the impurity of freedom.Actual purity is when freedom forces itself to become tyrannical so that the experience of freedom is a welcome change.Actual purity is when freedom hurts itself so that it can be the source of its own nature.Actual purity is when freedom doesn't rely on outside forces to help the experience of freedom keep onto its status - freedom is willing to do the work in order to help itself be what it's supposed to be

I feel like this movie will become more appreciated over time. In my opinion Joaquin Phoenix and Seymour Hoffman give two of the greatest performances i have ever seen- the complexity of both characters and their relationship really being the centre of the film. Although it takes a while to get off the ground, if you're interested in character heavy drama, this is a must see.

Paul Thomas Anderson's typically lengthy movie 'The Master' tells the story of the association of a drifter and a cult guru, the latter clearly modelled on L. Ron Hubbard. As with his earlier 'There Will Be Blood', the story is both linear and not especially well-shaped, though Philip Seymour Hoffman is quite good as the pseudo-Hubbard. Indeed, that's the bigger problem here: Hubbard's story is quite interesting, and a good basis for fiction, but no light is shed by it that story through the eyes of a random acquaintance. What is presented here is just a story of two odd people, each of whom are hard to relate to. My favourite film of Anderson remains his first, 'Hard Eight'; interestingly, that was also his shortest.