I had been meaning to look into Paul Thomas Anderson's films for a long-ass time, and a couple weeks ago I finally got around to watching The Master, with it having been near the top of my to-watch list due to Foxy and Crudblud having had hyped it up for me. And because it was great and I felt dumb for not having seen it earlier, in the past few days I got around to watching every other full-feature film he's made. So I thought I'd write up some short reviews for them, listed in the order in which I saw them.
The Master (2012)
It's a small-scale character study set in the 1950s, focusing on a drifting alcoholic WWII soldier who can't get a grip on his life, and his coming to get involved with a religious cult not too dissimilar to scientology. There's not too much to say about it, but at the same time there's so much to say about it that it's too difficult to articulate. At its simplest it's a neat and well executed character study, and it doesn't need to be anything more than that. I've read a lot of posts that go way more in-depth on thematic analysis, even drawing some startingly accuracte analogies to Freudian psychology. But without having considered any of that shit in my viewing of it, I still thoroughly enjoyed it for the realistic actions of the main characters and how they interact with each other, the magnificent performances from Phoenix and Hoffman, and the gorgeous cinematography, in part thanks to the film having been shot in 70mm, that portrays the period in beautiful vivid colours. 9/10
There Will Be Blood (2007)
Everyone's already praising it, so might as well join the club. It shows a much bigger character ark than the subdued character study in The Master, starting from Daniel Plainview's humble beginning as a miner, through his growth as a charming businessman, and finally as a crazy recluse holed up in his mansion. But for such a huge story to go through in two and a half hours, it really doesn't feel like it's missing anything. Every action feels justifiably motivated within the framework of the story, and without a doubt much of that is achieved by Daniel Day-Lewis' magnificent performance. Paul Dano deserves much praise as well as the evangelical pastor.
Once again, Anderson nails the aesthetic of the period, with all of its oily grittiness and dry plains. It's just an all around very well executed film. 9/10
Magnolia (1999)
So, this film has a lot going on. The narrated intro really sets you up for an expectation for a deeply layered, tangled story involving a large cast of characters, but what I ultimately felt at the end of it was just that there were six, give or take, stories that were at best tangentially connected. It feels more like most of the work on trying to make this network of stories work was done in editing, because this film has a habit of not following any particular story for a lengthy period of time. On several occasions the film falls into a groove of having rapid shots of the different stories cycled through with the same music playing consistently throughout the sequence. Usually this sort of thing is used at the climax of the story and for only a brief moment, but here they go on for 20-30 minutes, and just to move the stories forward. It's too exhausting to watch, and to me it seems to only serve the purpose of creating an illusion of interconnectivity, but ultimately I found it to be detrimental more than anything else. This all sounds pretty negative, but the individual stories themselves are all quite great and the characters are well fleshed out, so it does have that going for it.
There's a magnificent idea hidden in this film, and with better execution it could have been a magnificent film, but it missed its mark by too much. It does feel like the sort of film that improves on repeat viewings, so maybe it's too early for me to give cohesive view on it. 7/10
Boogie Nights (1997)
It's a really fun film, until it stops being quite so fun. Anderson really proves himself as a master of the craft with his use of long shots and soundtrack to establish a mood with perfection. The beginning scene in the night club with its establishment of characters, the party at Jack's house where we're familiarised with the rest of the cast, and the murder-suicide scene at the New Year's party all demonstrate excellent uses of long shots to establish the mood, vibe and atmosphere of the 70s, without ever sacrificing on plot progression. For the first half of the film it feels like it never misses a beat.
Then it turns to the 80s, which mainly focuses on the downfall of the cast of characters. This is where the film starts to feel like it's no longer playing to its strength. Perhaps it was inevitable for the sake of the plot, but the vibe that drove the first half of the film goes largely missing, replaced by the depictions of the characters hitting rock bottom. It's all still very well made, but a part of me feels like it wasn't necessary for the film to take that route. 9/10
Punch-Drunk Love (2002)
It's an Adam Sandler film that wasn't made by Adam Sandler. It's lightly comedic, lightly romantic, and it features Adam Sandler. There's a strange, off-putting atmosphere to it, with its clinical aesthetics punctuated by bright spotlights and lens flares, as well as the ”experimental” sounding soundtrack, that makes everything feel like it's in a dream-like state.
Despite being characterized as a romantic film (I guess?), I found it difficult to see it as that. I was so lightly invested in the romantic interest character that it felt more like a way to motivate Sandler's character's actions than serve the purpose for an actual romantic plot. Hoffman makes an appearance as the ”antagonist” of the film, and his performance is my favourite thing in it, so it's a shame we don't see more of him. Other than that, I didn't really think much of this film. It's just things happening, and me not being all that invested in the characters. 6/10
Hard Eight (1996)
Not much to say about this one. It feels like exactly what it is, a debut feature film from a young filmmaker. There's some high notes in here, but most of them happen in the establishment of the story. The story itself, concerning a hostage situation, is poorly played out and feels unnecessary. The film works at its best when it's about gambling, so it really should have just stuck to being about gambling. Given how amateurish this film feels, it's really quite remarkable how Boogie Nights, which was released only a year later, feels like it's made by an extremely talented and experienced filmmaker. 5/10