XIXAX Film Forum

The Director's Chair => Paul Thomas Anderson => Topic started by: wilberfan on December 01, 2017, 06:55:26 PM

Title: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on December 01, 2017, 06:55:26 PM
Phantom Thread Press Embargo Slip?

http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/entertainment/movie-review-oldman-is-flawless-darkest-hour-is-not/article_3d9511a8-0c38-5694-a861-ba4339962bdb.html

Quote
Apart from the possibility of three-time Oscar winner Daniel Day-Lewis in Paul Thomas Anderson’s equally uneven “Phantom Thread,” winning his fourth Academy Award, there is no one is more deserving of the industry’s top prize this year than Oldman. The only thing that could torpedo his chances right now is the film itself which is not nearly as impressive as its leading man.
[/size]

I haven't seen the Oldman film yet, but I certainly didn't think Thread was "uneven".


Hint of Phantom Threads wider-release schedule?  (At least in Canada?)

Quote
Fortunately, there is a reliable supply of December releases likely to make the cut, at least in larger cities. Winnipeggers, alas, are obliged to endure the platform releases of likely contenders into the new year. Paul Thomas Anderson’s Phantom Thread, for example, releases only in New York and Los Angeles on Christmas Day and even those pampered Torontonians will have to wait till Jan. 12 to see Anderson’s anticipated second collaboration with Daniel Day-Lewis, set in the world of fashion.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: budwillies on December 07, 2017, 12:06:38 PM
Another masterpiece from Anderson. One of his best, according to the reviews thus far.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on December 07, 2017, 01:41:38 PM
Birth.Movies.Death ( :yabbse-thumbup:)

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/12/07/phantom-thread-review-reclaiming-her-time-and-his-too (http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/12/07/phantom-thread-review-reclaiming-her-time-and-his-too)
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on December 07, 2017, 04:11:21 PM
I'm curious:  How many of you will avoid reading reviews before you have a chance to see the film yourself?   How many of you feel like you've already read too much about the film?

I've seen the film, and am starting to read the reviews...and feel like knowing the least about the film possible would make for a more satisfying experience.  YMMV.

[edit]  In fact, I've just decided I'm going to stop reading them until after I've seen the film a second time...
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Drenk on December 07, 2017, 04:15:18 PM
I've read tweets. And I do feel like it's too much. But I'm unable to do a full blackout. It's the first I haven't watched the trailer/am not reading reviews. That combo can spoil the first viewing: creating expectations. You're waiting for bits.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Sleepless on December 07, 2017, 04:48:27 PM
I think I'm going to avoid reviews. I've read some headlines and it all sounds positive, so I'm happy.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on December 07, 2017, 04:54:07 PM
I didn't watch the trailer (I scrolled through just to see a few images), I didn't read any reviews, I tried my best to go in as blind as possible, that's really the only way to do it IMO.

I'm actually kinda nuts about it. When I saw No Country For Old Men in the theatre, I ran out when the CMBB trailer came on. I like my first impression to be of the whole thing, not battling whatever idea of the thing I've built in my head.

Even having seen the film, I've only read a handful of reviews and interviews. I want to see it a few more times to solidify my feelings on it. You have the rest of your life to look into the critical assessment of a film, you only have one opportunity to approach it apart from all that static. It's a special time right now.

Also, this is only tangentially film-related, but lately, I feel as if I'm drowning in a sea of opinions that I'm not even consciously seeking out. Every time I go online, or talk with people, its just this endless, borderline mindless, rattling off of opinions, and I think its become kind of unhealthy. It becomes harder and harder to approach art or politics or even facts themselves when there is such a strong compulsion to see how everyone else feels about shit while I'm still formulating my own feelings. When I like something, why should I give any kind of fuck if someone else doesn't, or why they don't? If I tell someone I liked something, and then they tell me, unprompted, "Oh, I hated that thing", how does that add to my life in any kind of way? I dunno. I'm not suggesting that criticism or discussing opinions are inherently bad things, just that I feel totally overwhelmed right now. I might try a thing where I don't offer an opinion unless asked, and don't actively seek any out unless I really, consciously feel like it will enrich my life in some way. At the moment its just a bunch of fucking noise.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on December 18, 2017, 09:30:25 AM
Glenn Kenny at rogerebert.com with a 4-star review:

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/phantom-thread-2017
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on December 22, 2017, 06:28:40 PM
David Edelstein (NPR) reviews 'Phantom Thread'

[SPOILERY FOR MY TASTES]

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/22/572597961/phantom-thread-is-deeply-weird-and-marvelously-entertaining

Quote
The resolution is preposterous even for Paul Thomas Anderson, who once opened his characters' hearts in "Magnolia" by pelting them with a biblical rain of frogs. That said, if you're an Anderson fan, you'll relish the insights into his character. This is the work of a fiercely self-centered artist who seems to long nonetheless to surrender, especially to a combination lover and mommy. As I said, it's deeply weird.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on December 23, 2017, 08:34:44 AM
Leonard Maltin makes my eyes roll.

http://leonardmaltin.com/phantom-thread-an-odd-pattern-of-behavior/
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on December 23, 2017, 07:54:49 PM
A different perspective:  The New York Times Fashion Critic on Phantom Thread

"The Daniel Day-Lewis Version of Fantasy Fashion Diva"

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/fashion/daniel-day-lewis-phantom-thread-myth-of-the-designer.html

Quote
“The Devil Wears Prada” and “Funny Face” aside, fashion has traditionally played better in documentaries than in feature films. (Remember Robert Altman’s “Prêt-à-Porter” or Ben Stiller’s “Zoolander 2”?) In part that’s because the temptation to turn its characters into caricatures of caricatures rarely ends well. So all of these accolades got my golden thimble tingling, especially because Mr. Day-Lewis is famous for actually learning to do what his characters do (and you can see all the needle pricks on his thumbs).

Had Mr. Day-Lewis and Mr. Anderson managed to succeed where so many others had failed? Had they created a realistic portrait of a designer for posterity?

Nope. They mythologized an old one. There’s no better perspective on how far we’ve come than seeing a once-upon-a-time stereotype, even one as compellingly watchable as Mr. Day-Lewis as Reynolds Woodcock (what a name), looming many feet high on the big screen.

He may be a designer, but he’s the designer as tortured genius, a man whose idiosyncrasies and unreasonable behavior are enabled and tolerated in the service of his art. It’s an old and favored trope in fashion, once cultivated by many. But while that version of the aesthetic auteur may still be revered in other realms, from Hollywood to SoHo, it has actually fallen out of favor in fashion. Or perhaps more pointedly, we’ve stopped falling for it.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Drenk on December 23, 2017, 08:02:54 PM
I haven't seen the movie but it doesn't matter if that type of person is current/was current in fashion or not.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on January 11, 2018, 07:55:45 PM
Bret Easton Ellis chiming in with some high praise for Phantom Thread (exciting for me because he's been a bit ambivalent about PTA's last few releases)

http://www.talkhouse.com/the-2017-talkies-talkhouse-film-contributors-top-films-of-the-year/
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: jenkins on January 11, 2018, 09:09:57 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/0Ib6owv.jpg?1)

Quote
2. Phantom Thread 162 points
“Phantom Thread is not only a ravishing piece of pure cinema but it’s one of the best movies I’ve seen about an artist and his process: the control freakery, the seduction, the manipulation, the inspiration, the depression. It’s a movie primarily concerned with atmosphere and character, casting a spell without narrative contrivance and without (finally!) Daniel Day-Lewis devouring the movie he’s starring in and allowing Vicky Krieps (the find of the year) and Lesley Manville their space. The movie is funny and suspenseful but it ends up, for some, in a remote and perverse place, and though I bought the idea and I bought the execution I still felt a little disconnected from it on a first viewing–but it doesn’t matter: this is the most gorgeous movie I saw in 2017. I’ve drifted away from PTA in the last two decades but Phantom Thread is a jolting reminder that he’s one of the last great auteurs working on a grand scale in mainstream American film.” (Bret Easton Ellis)
Image by Jack Dunphy and John Cibula

oh but IV was entirely concerned with atmosphere and character and cast its spell without narrative contrivance. entirely. i think it was BEE's own problem that he'd forgotten and needed reminded. i have no idea what kind of movies BEE likes but i know he's a shittalker and it's always good to be on a shittalker's side. again i think part of what's happening is people walked away and they're excited to turn back.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: KJ on January 23, 2018, 12:53:58 PM

Pitchfork review of the soundtrack (7.5)  (https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/jonny-greenwood-phantom-thread-original-motion-picture-soundtrack/)

Quote
Since the start of his career, the director Paul Thomas Anderson has exhibited an acute sense of how music can shape a film’s narrative—how cues and leitmotifs come to define not just individual scenes but the entire world being built from scratch. (The Gen-X angst of Magnolia would not be the same without Aimee Mann’s ballads, for example.) Since 2007’s There Will Be Blood, Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood has composed the music for each of Anderson's films. The collaboration between the two has only strengthened the distinctiveness of Anderson’s work: The frantic string compositions of There Will Be Blood and the stoner-rock grooves of Inherent Vice are essential to those viewing experiences. On Anderson’s latest feature film, Phantom Thread, Greenwood’s music appears across the majority of the film’s 130-minute runtime, elevating the director-composer partnership to a new level.

Set in mid-1950s London, in a world of high fashion and faded glamour, Phantom Thread is among Anderson’s most luxurious and romantic period pieces. It follows a tumultuous courtship between the renowned dressmaker Reynolds Woodcock (Daniel Day-Lewis) and a waitress and model named Alma Elsen (Vicky Krieps). Greenwood’s compositions are as lavish and lush as the film’s old-world beauty: Aided by a 60-piece orchestra, the scope of the score far exceeds his previous work for film.

Working with such an opulent backing band allows Greenwood to craft truly ornate pieces. He has said that a principal reference point was Glenn Gould’s Bach recordings—the kind of cerebral, minimalist, and “obsessive” baroque music that would fit with the film’s hifalutin mood. But there are also touches of popular jazz and big, bodacious string recordings (inspired by Ben Webster) in the background of the score, to give the film’s setting its appropriately grand feel. The resulting songs are intense and almost comically rich—the sonic equivalent of a caviar and foie gras sandwich. ( :shock: )
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Lewton on January 24, 2018, 08:01:24 PM
Quote from: Pitchfork
On Anderson’s latest feature film, Phantom Thread, Greenwood’s music appears across the majority of the film’s 130-minute runtime, elevating the director-composer partnership to a new level.

In other words, Greenwood's music is featured more frequently here than in TWBB, TM, and IV? Is that true?
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Tictacbk on January 24, 2018, 10:02:11 PM
In other words, Greenwood's music is featured more frequently here than in TWBB, TM, and IV? Is that true?

I'd say so, yes.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on January 27, 2018, 10:51:32 PM
Offered in the wake of the nomination for Costume Design...?  (Spoilers)

The Dresses in “Phantom Thread” Aren’t as Jaw-Dropping as They Should Be

https://garage.vice.com/en_us/article/yw573b/the-dresses-in-phantom-thread-arent-very-good

Quote
Phantom Thread is about a lot of things: postwar gentility, psychological brinkmanship, emotional dependency, the ways love and mania are the same thing, breakfast meats, death. What it is not about, despite some moony reviews and a W magazine cover line proclaiming Day-Lewis “Hollywood’s Ultimate Star in Fashion’s Ultimate Film,” is fashion. Put another way, Phantom Thread is about fashion the way The Devil Wears Prada is about journalism.



Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: riotmaterial on January 28, 2018, 03:58:48 PM
Reviewed at Riot Material magazine
riotmaterial.com

review excerpted below:

Reviewed by Kristy Puchko

In the post-Weinstein era, we look around at the carnage of shattered lives and wonder how we got here. What a poor time for the release of Paul Thomas Anderson’s Phantom Thread, which pushes the narrative that geniuses are on some level allowed to be abusive. If your work is beautiful enough, your soul can be made of scabs and darkness. The world excuses so much if you’re talented and male.

As we regard the allegations coming out of Hollywood, old school anecdotes of bullying creators feel less charming and more ominous. To Anderson’s credit, his tale of a tyrannical fashion designer does have a thread of criticism, as its female lead pushes back and declares Reynolds Woodcock (60-year-old Daniel Day-Lewis) is “a spoiled baby.” Still, there is a stark power imbalance between the two, both within the plot and the structuring, that cannot be ignored or overcome. Phantom Thread will try to convince you that in the amusing muse Alma (34-year-old Vicky Krieps), Reynolds’ has at long last met his match. Anderson’s script, however, only ever considers her in the context of him.

The story begins at the end of a cycle. Over breakfast in 1950s London, a sullen woman sniffs over Reynolds’ lack of attention. His stern sister Cyril (Lesley Manville) suggests this dour girlfriend be cut from his life. He swiftly agrees, leaving Cyril to do the dirty work, while Reynolds is free to look elsewhere for love and inspiration. Almost immediately, he finds the clumsy, blushing waitress with a charming smile, and decides she shall be his new project/paramour. Before the end of their first date, Alma is already in Reynolds’ studio, stripped to her underthings, awed by his attention, and being unapologetically criticized over her small breasts and bit of belly by an intrusive Cyril....

To read the entire review, go to http://www.riotmaterial.com/p-t-andersons-phantom-thread-couldnt-come-at-a-worse-time/
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on January 28, 2018, 04:20:48 PM
I normally like Kristy Puchko, but this... no.

So many critics are very certain they know what this movie is trying to say.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilder on January 28, 2018, 04:24:13 PM
There’s a disturbing trend of critics wanting stories that are virtuous or propagandistic in their depiction of human behavior rather than embracing of the weaknesses that make us…human. It seems cynically misanthropic to me. Or politically myopic. Reminds me of the last line of that first Variety review, too.

SPOILERS

Quote from: Variety's Owen Gleiberman
The film, in what should have been its culminating passages, loses steams and grows repetitive, building toward the scene in which Reynolds eats an omelette, colluding — knowingly — in his own punishment and reform. It’s supposed to be the film’s capstone of perversity: toxic masculinity toxifying itself. But it just made me wish that Paul Thomas Anderson would stop making movies about people who are so stunted that he can’t help adoring them for it.

Thankfully it seems like these sorts of perspectives, trading so narrowly in the currency of the current times, are in the overall minority.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on January 28, 2018, 04:37:40 PM
SPOILERS

Kristy Puchko's review bizarrely does not engage at all with, you know, where the story GOES, which is the whole point of the story. Alma completely dominates Reynolds. She needles him throughout their relationship, making noises with toast and spoons and such, and we're meant to be on her side throughout it all. She makes no accommodations for his fussiness; in fact she basically tells him to grow out of it. It's a story of her conquering his nonsense.

By the way, Slate's Dana Stevens gave a glowing review of Phantom Thread (here (https://slate.com/arts/2017/12/phantom-thread-with-daniel-day-lewis-reviewed.html)) and gushed over it with her friend in the Spoiler Special podcast (here (https://slate.com/arts/2017/12/a-spoiler-filled-review-of-phantom-thread.html)). They address the gender dynamics, both understanding them and unpacking them in a surprisingly straightforward way.

Likewise, the podcast Who Shot Ya? gave the movie a glowing review (http://www.maximumfun.org/who-shot-ya/who-shot-ya-episode-21-fashion-film-and-phantom-thread-drea-clark) and also completely understood the gender dynamics. It's not that hard, people.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on January 28, 2018, 05:04:03 PM
I normally like Kristy Puchko, but this... no.

So many critics are very certain they know what this movie is trying to say.

Such criticism seems to have gone in with its mind already made up.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: modage on January 28, 2018, 07:19:31 PM
I'm friendly with Kristy IRL but yeah, everybody misses the mark sometimes (myself included).

I'm actually surprised that her take is such a minority as I would've expected this backlash to be a much larger contingent of people misunderstanding the film.

It's amazing how much everyone gets and loves it. Especially now as people seem to expect art to be a reflection of this exact moment and impose a What Does This Say About Us In 2018? (Which, is a really terrible filter to use to judge all art.)
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: ©brad on January 28, 2018, 09:14:55 PM
"He may be a designer, but he’s the designer as tortured genius, a man whose idiosyncrasies and unreasonable behavior are enabled and tolerated in the service of his art. It’s an old and favored trope in fashion, once cultivated by many. But while that version of the aesthetic auteur may still be revered in other realms, from Hollywood to SoHo, it has actually fallen out of favor in fashion. Or perhaps more pointedly, we’ve stopped falling for it."

No, you haven't stopped falling for anything. Everyone in fashion remains batshit crazy fueled with more delusions of grandeur than Trump.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on January 31, 2018, 01:44:02 AM
Slashfilmcast just released their Phantom Thread episode, and guess what, Kristy Puchko is their guest. (She has been a semi-regular guest in recent months, so I'm not actually surprised.)

I really made an effort to understand her argument, especially now that she could make it with full spoilers. Distilling it to one sentence: Since PTA made the decision to engage with these issues, it was his social responsibility to execute this film with full feminist rigor, including more backstories for his female characters.

Which is super ridiculous. I do understand where she's coming from, but it's frustratingly narrow-minded. Her other comments on the movie were weirdly technical and superficial, too. And she's not a PTA fan, so I don't think she was interested in his particular type of weird magic, which probably resulted in her just reading surface-level themes like we're in an English literature class.

Anyway, here's the episode:

http://www.slashfilm.com/filmcast-ep-452-phantom-thread/

The review of Phantom Thread begins at 1:12:18
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on January 31, 2018, 01:14:41 PM
Jesus, that was painful. She really missed the boat on this one. Yikes. If you ask me, she went in with these criticisms virtually pre-established, and nobody really effectively rebuts them because...they're afraid to? Sigh. I would have had immense trouble hiding my irritation with her take. Do people care about art anymore? Or is it all ideology?

She is just plain wrong about so much. Even just little details, for instance, she says we know nothing about Alma except she's obsessed with Reynolds; we don't know if she has family or anything of the sort. WRONG. We know she has a sister. Had a mother. Has experience making dresses herself. So much more about her is there to intuit, for those of us who don't need everything hammered on the surface. It's called subtlety, what the fuck do people want? And another example, she insists, INSISTS, that Cyril also commented on Alma's breasts in the first date/measurement sequence - nope, never happened. Oh they objectified her, what a horrible, unforgivable scene - it's FASHION!! And what is with her complaining about Reynolds discussing various superstitions involving wedding dresses...that it's poking fun at women who would have such superstitions and that's wrong because marriage at that time determined so much of their future? What a bunch of malarkey. This sort of thing makes me see red.

Dana Stevens, on the other hand, knows what's up.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on January 31, 2018, 01:37:01 PM
Slashfilmcast is basically my second favorite podcast in the world, so this is a sad event. Their episodes on my two favorite movies of the year (PT and mother!) were kind of sabotaged by guests who turned out to be very poorly-reasoned critics. What really caught my ear in this case is that Kristy keeps saying the movie needed to be more clear and "concrete." Have you ever watched a PTA film?

I think Jeff and Devindra did an okay job rebutting her while preventing the debate from getting too heated. Devindra actually calls her out on one of those inaccuracies you mention. Unfortunately they all saw the movie at least 2 or 3 weeks ago (and they intended to do this ep last week), so the details are not entirely fresh.

I've actually immensely enjoyed all of Kristy's other appearances on the podcast. (But I won't lie, this worries me.)
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on January 31, 2018, 03:44:10 PM
What really caught my ear in this case is that Kristy keeps saying the movie needed to be more clear and "concrete." Have you ever watched a PTA film?

Right, it was a failure of the artist that she needs her hand held at every turn. Why is this sort of nonsense even tolerated?
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on February 01, 2018, 11:39:07 AM
The good news is, with the Internet, anyone can review films.

The bad news is, with the Internet, anyone can review films.

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/arts_and_entertainment/review-phantom-thread-was-made-to-win-awards-isn-t/article_fedc4dea-056b-11e8-819e-eb45f8d528c7.html
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Drenk on February 01, 2018, 12:00:29 PM
There's definitely a trend in Anderson movies where he hides innovation between what can, at first glance, looks old school—and we live in the Snapchat Era, so...

Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 01, 2018, 12:17:16 PM
The good news is, with the Internet, anyone can review films.

The bad news is, with the Internet, anyone can review films.

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/arts_and_entertainment/review-phantom-thread-was-made-to-win-awards-isn-t/article_fedc4dea-056b-11e8-819e-eb45f8d528c7.html

That might be the dryest movie review I've ever read.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on February 01, 2018, 12:22:42 PM
The good news is, with the Internet, anyone can review films.

The bad news is, with the Internet, anyone can review films.

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/arts_and_entertainment/review-phantom-thread-was-made-to-win-awards-isn-t/article_fedc4dea-056b-11e8-819e-eb45f8d528c7.html

What is he, 12? Whose son is he?
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Mogambo on February 02, 2018, 04:51:39 AM
LOL if PTA was a hack like Tom Hooper, he would have inserted some political/social message/theme in Phantom Thread.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Fitzroy on February 03, 2018, 05:34:45 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhRCSiNNE6o

Phantom Thread reviewed by Mark Kermode for BBC Radio 5 Live.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Mogambo on February 03, 2018, 11:07:33 AM
I love Kermode so much. :)
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on February 03, 2018, 12:14:44 PM
Are you Jeremy Blackman, the guy who played Stanley in Magnolia, or is that just a username you chose? Was going through the cast list and the name sounded familiar.

(If so, he would have been 16 when he first registered on this site.  Certainly possible...  Would he have used his real name?  Also possible...if perhaps a tad unlikely?)
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Mogambo on February 03, 2018, 12:17:00 PM
Are you Jeremy Blackman, the guy who played Stanley in Magnolia, or is that just a username you chose? Was going through the cast list and the name sounded familiar.

(If so, he would have been 16 when he first registered on this site.  Certainly possible...  Would he have used his real name?  Also possible...if perhaps a tad unlikely?)

Fuck. I think I deleted my post the same time you quoted it. Yeah it's possible. But I guess it's none of my business who he is IRL so I deleted the question lol.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 03, 2018, 02:20:46 PM
I'm not the real one. I'm pretty sure.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: KJ on February 03, 2018, 02:25:02 PM
I'm sad you aren't the real one. I'm also sad that I'm not the real Karl-Jan. :(

(https://w.cdn-expressen.se/images/7f/47/7f4731e2fefd8c4a82a2db3810967f62/680.jpg)
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on February 06, 2018, 10:46:31 PM
Can we all stop pretending Phantom Thread is a masterpiece?

https://theweek.com/articles/752319/all-stop-pretending-phantom-thread-masterpiece
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: ono on February 06, 2018, 11:00:33 PM
Her name is Jeva.  Fucking millennials!  (heh)  Something, something lack of life experience.  But I've known kids fresh outta college younger than her who grok it.  The polarization is to be expected.  It's almost in vogue to fall in with those who would give it a less than favorable review.  It's not about the fashion, or whether a dress is "beautiful" or not.  That is subjective, but there has to be suspension of disbelief anyway.  Like a dress, this movie is so well made, and I think that's what I take away from all of PTA's work.  The craftsmanship.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: BB on February 06, 2018, 11:24:19 PM
Craftsmanship at the very least! If you're a film critic and you can't see (and hear) that PTA's films are impeccably well made, I don't know what to tell you. These people got out of bed to start hating, damn.

Not to make the obvious comparison, but it's like those rare critics who don't like Kubrick or think he peaked with Paths of Glory or whatever. I'm always stunned that they can't see the phenomenal technique and appreciate the movies on that basis alone.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: ©brad on February 06, 2018, 11:52:55 PM
She admits several times that the film poses ideas that are substantive and interesting, but she's frustrated that they aren't tied in a neat Spielbergian bow?
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 07, 2018, 12:29:27 AM
Click on Jeva's byline. She's not even a film critic. Mostly a political reporter. Guess we can't afford film critics anymore.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Fitzroy on February 07, 2018, 05:22:19 AM
The film is great. The film is always great. It's not because Paul Thomas Anderson is adored by the critics that the film is great. The film is great because it is great. Because it's beautiful. Maybe one day you will change your taste Jeva.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: modage on February 07, 2018, 06:32:32 AM
One other factor that must be considered (if you're a long-time Xixaxer) is that PTA is the establishment now! So some young film Geeks will push back against him because he's not the young upstart who just kicked in the door with Boogie Nights. He's the filmmaker 20+ years into his career making interesting mature films that usually play better for auds more familiar with his work than newbies.

Scorsese making Age Of Innocence.
Altman making Vincent & Theo.
Demme making Beloved.
Kubrick making Barry Lyndon.

I'm not saying this is right or wrong. Just that we should brace for it.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on February 07, 2018, 07:42:37 AM
Ohmygod guys, not only does she like "get" all this Freud stuff ("A dead mother's locks sewn into Reynold's coat? Please.") but she finds it like totally, annoyingly overabundant! I hate my generation (though she might be a bit younger than me) and I hate that the internet makes it so easy for me to rile myself up. "Can we all stop pretending Phantom Thread is a masterpiece?" Yeah, as soon as she stops pretending she's a writer. Love how everyone else MUST be pretending simply because she fails to grasp it. She even says, "Not to kinkshame, but if your partner poisons you, it's a crime." What a hero!  :doh: All the films she name-drops too - the obvious ones everyone is mentioning like Rebecca, Vertigo, but also Rivette's La Belle Noiseuse, for instance - anyone else have a teeny tiny suspicion that she maybe hasn't actually seen them? Perhaps I'm becoming an old crank....
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Mogambo on February 07, 2018, 09:18:34 AM
Perhaps I'm becoming an old crank....

Nah you're not. I'm 20 and I agree with everything you said. She just sounds like a contrarian to me, from my limited understanding of cinema, of course.

Oh, the writer has a twitter thread:
https://twitter.com/Jee_vuh/status/960889865209606145
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on February 07, 2018, 09:59:55 AM
Oh, the writer has a twitter thread:
https://twitter.com/Jee_vuh/status/960889865209606145
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: wilberfan on February 07, 2018, 10:36:50 AM
Agreed.  But as an old theater buff, that photo is fucking awesome (in a tragic way).
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: eward on February 07, 2018, 10:38:53 AM
True, excellent photo.

Also:
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Mogambo on February 09, 2018, 06:25:07 AM
   
True, excellent photo.

Also:

That second tweet is so true. I think almost every acclaimed movie that is an award frontrunner goes through every phase mentioned in the tweet.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: Lewton on February 09, 2018, 02:30:01 PM
It's unfortunate that Lange's article has a title that suggests fans of Phantom Thread are insincere or whatever, but it's worth noting that editors occasionally choose titles, so that might not even have been her decision. That point is not repeated in the article itself. Anyway, if she did come up with the title, then it's a poorly-chosen rhetorical device that fits in with the tenor of certain parts of social media and the online discussion of films, so it's at least understandable why such a title exists. I think it's part of the argot nowadays, unfortunately. Still, I don't think this warrants harsh responses or anger -- even Mark Harris' snarky tweet seems ill-considered because, again, who knows if she even picked the title.

Also, she is a critic, regardless of her official job title. I mean, she's criticizing the film in the context of an article, so she's a critic. I don't think she's inherently wrong about anything, either. I disagree with her perspective, but it's art, so it's debatable. If there was no voice of dissent in the case of this film then that'd be weird. I think the fact that these kind of takes show up is, for me, just a reminder that PTA is doing good work and, as Anthony Lane once put it in his review of Inherent Vice, following his own star. He's taking artistic risks, and this is what happens when artistic risks are taken. Godfrey Chesire's review of TWBB: same thing -- he wants a more straightforward film, which misses the joy of PTA's movies, but whatever, my tastes aren't universal.

Again, though, I disagree with her take. This bit, for instance, is about as far from my own impression as possible:

Quote from:
Here's looking at you, kid, this is not.

The lines she's referring to are actually top-tier in my estimation. I mean, let's see how they hold up over time, but I'll make the claim that this particular exchange ranks among the great bits of dialogue from cinema history (or, more precisely, the selection of movies I've seen). I'm as eager to praise that dialogue as she is to denigrate it.
Title: Re: Phantom Thread - Critic's Reviews
Post by: csage97 on February 10, 2018, 11:04:32 PM
It's unfortunate that Lange's article has a title that suggests fans of Phantom Thread are insincere or whatever, but it's worth noting that editors occasionally choose titles, so that might not even have been her decision. That point is not repeated in the article itself. Anyway, if she did come up with the title, then it's a poorly-chosen rhetorical device that fits in with the tenor of certain parts of social media and the online discussion of films, so it's at least understandable why such a title exists. I think it's part of the argot nowadays, unfortunately. Still, I don't think this warrants harsh responses or anger -- even Mark Harris' snarky tweet seems ill-considered because, again, who knows if she even picked the title.

The title, which suggests that some sort of mass conformity or unwillingness of the bystander to speak up, is quite odd. I won't comment on the article aside from saying that one interpretation to resolve her fixation on beauty in the film is that the film could be suggesting that beauty can be superficial, and hence a reason why there's no further probing of concepts of beauty more than showing nice dresses and well-ornamented people. Indeed, Reynolds even seems to despise and understand the irony of serving clients who shell out massive sums of money for something less than skin deep.

The twitter comments are a bit funny. In these, she's fixated on the dog and how DDL went through the trouble of suggesting the preferred breed of his character while the dog isn't even seen on screen. She hasn't considered that any shots of the dog were thrown out in the cutting room, nor that they possibly chose not to shoot any of the dog because they decided after that it wasn't needed. As far as DDL specifying the breed, it's called being very prepared and covering all bases. Sometimes, a piece of knowledge, a tool, a scene, an idea, etc., isn't used, but the information and prep was instrumental in zoning in on exactly what's needed for a final product.

The other thing about the dog is that she seems to think no one looks after it. She can't stretch her imagination to think that this rich and highly successful dressmaker who owns two homes (or possibly more than two -- but let's not push her cognitive limits too far), has a squadron of cooks and maids (one of whom is even shown in the cottage house in a subsequent scene), an expensive car, and vast social connections, can't possibly know or pay someone to house sit or drop by to feed and walk the dog. No, no ... that's certainly not possible.

I actually do enjoy reading negative reviews of things I enjoy; I find they bring perspective and there's more or less a limit to a piece of art being objectively good. I typically don't meet bad reviews with negative emotions, unless they're shortsighted or what have you. In this case, I couldn't help it.