The Master - SPOILERS!

Started by polkablues, August 18, 2012, 01:41:45 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Quote from: Cloudy on February 13, 2013, 09:12:49 PM
(Cinema near me kept it since September).



LOL damn is right. Berkeley people have good taste, it's a little 48 seat cinema and it always has a crowd.


What's funny is that unlike CMBB I honestly don't know what to tell people when they ask me if they should go and see it. Of course I always say "sure, you should see it", but then I get all those questions about what the movie is about and it starts getting weird. I end up telling them it's an experience more than a regular movie. That ends up getting them excited and I always have an excuse if they complain that they didn't like. "Hey, I warned you."


Well I saw it but I can't talk about it too much. Seen it twice now, feels I can't stop thinking about it. Read everything here, mulling it over. The second time was even better. What I've been telling people is that the general public does not deserve films as great as this.



Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Frederico Fellini

I was watching something on TV earlier on, about Martin Short and his career and all that. Well, there was a part where they talked about SNL, and his character  "Ed Grimley". They showed some parts of skits and the first thing that came to my mind was "Freddie":

The shirt, the super high pants, the posture/body language, talking without opening his mouth too much, etc.

Seeing as PTA is a huge SNL fan, I think it may have been in his subconscious somewhere.
We fought against the day and we won... WE WON.

Cinema is something you do for a billion years... or not at all.

Frederico Fellini

We fought against the day and we won... WE WON.

Cinema is something you do for a billion years... or not at all.


I've been wanting to give my take on the visual dynamics of this shot ever since I saw it, now that i have a copy of the film, I can screenshot the frame and finally post it (Yes I downloaded the film, but I've also pre-ordered so whatever).

Straight after the processing scene when Dodd and Freddie symbolically fall in love and have a post coital smoke (Kools).

As you can see the placing of the actors, Freddie next to his man Dodd, and there appears to be a symbolic void (the doorway) visible now between Dodd and his wife.

Amy Adams keeps looking at Dodd then Freddie, glancing at Freddie at the end with a suspicious look (reverberated in so many instances later in the film).

Just one of the many great visual layering from The Master

Frederico Fellini

That was pretty good Heywood. 

PTA has always been a very visual filmmaker, but I love how in THE MASTER his visuals have become much more subtle. One of my favorites has to be this:

On the right side of the frame. He falls asleep, can't have sex:

On the left side of the frame. Now he's sexually frustrated and pissed the fuck off, and on the right side of the frame in the background there are 2 mannequins getting married:

"Is this for your wife?"

Also notice that there's a baby crying loudly in the background during that whole scene. It's all so simple but so fucking great.
We fought against the day and we won... WE WON.

Cinema is something you do for a billion years... or not at all.


Speaking of downloading, if any of you guys who have the bluray can upload the extras that would be sweet. Don't have a Bluray player.




Quote from: Cloudy on January 28, 2013, 10:43:12 PM
I've definitely heard/thought of this angle before, but I always get stuck when the final shot of the film of Freddie at peace with the sand-woman chronologically isn't congruent with the experiences he had. And really, that shot doesn't exactly resonate "peace", it feels more like a drunken, comfortable, last-resort safe cuddle.
The most interesting thing about this shot to me is that in the background all the men are all heading off somewhere in a single file line, while Freddie is asleep.  Almost like he missed the boat, or will miss the boat, literally and metaphorically. In fact, I'm not sure anyone else touched on this, but it's the only beach scene with this exact composition (the sailors leaving single file in the Background).

Quote from: Cloudy on January 28, 2013, 10:43:12 PM
The fact that it's a woman "made of sand" makes it even more layered, because sand is fleeting, and Freddie is incapable of having this kind of cuddling/safe/sustained connection with a fleshed person. His master may not be a person, but his constantly moving, changing, dissolving, and building emotions are, and also what they make him latch on to. And these can be characterized as a sand-woman. It's really hard to intellectualize this, and I don't think the film is meant to completely intellectualize it, which is even more beautiful because this film is just as beautiful to intellectualize as it is to feel.
Life is something that gets washed away, that must be given back, so I find there to be as much of an allegory about life, love, taming the dragon, etc than specifically speaking to Freddie's arc as a character, but i can dig it both ways (no pun intended).
it's not the wrench, it's the plumber.


Well, I've seen it three times now.
I guess after reading all these comments I have few things to say, but PTA's mention of Raoul Walsh as a "nuts & bolts director" and influence here really starts to make sense after the second viewing. This film goes very directly from one thing to the next, every scene as a consequence of the last. There's almost no wasted time, no contextualization, no introductions, just the action, the moment taking place. You're there in the moment with Freddie, particularly during the first 15 minutes or so, when everything happens so fast and you start realizing it's all about him, it's all about how he's walking directly into the Cause. But after Lancaster and Freddie meet, this continues. I think that by using elipsis in this way PTA is somehow rediscovering narrative cinema for us. He is going the opposite of what "contemplative cinema" does, and at the same time he's distancing himself of all the "narrative fat" most films have. It really is a "nuts & bolts", very direct film. It may be just too direct for audiences to follow completely, which would explain why people think is pointless. They can't keep up with it's rhythm.


Quote from: Alexandro on March 08, 2013, 01:41:26 PM
He is going the opposite of what "contemplative cinema" does, and at the same time he's distancing himself of all the "narrative fat" most films have.

I like the way you put this.