PT. Anderson
 

I think he's a good director. His best work is Punch Drunk Love.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I'd like him EVEN more if his films were a wee bit shorter.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

PDL isn't long. Actually it just goes on for about an hour and 36 minutes.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

My favorite director :)

Re: PT. Anderson
 

What I've seen...

Boogie Nights C+
Magnolia B+
Punch Drunk Love C
There Will Be Blood A

So on average, this makes him about a B- in my books.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Hard Eight
Boogie Nights
Magnolia
Punch-Drunk Love
There Will Be Blood

I've been wanting to give Punch-Drunk Love another chance, last time I saw it was when it was in theaters. His best work is most certainly There Will Be Blood.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I found TWBB quite average. Good performances, and cinematography but the rest was average.

There Will Be Blood is the only PTA film that I've seen, but I doubt any of his others could beat it.

To me, absolutely nothing about the film is average. Performances, cinematography, score, aura, and direction are all top-notch. But, I could certainly see why the film wouldn't appeal to everyone's taste.

I think that the kid is excellent. Superb understanding of his craft and seemingly gives 110% to every film he makes. Boogie Nights is still his best film imo. I really liked There Will Be Blood for the fact that it was a change of pace for him and a highly ambitious piece of work, but Boogie Nights drew me in on an emotional level.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

http://laceysfilms.files.wordpress.c...re-will-be.jpg

There Will Be Blood

The best film of his that I've seen, and it's actually the only film from I've seen. It's just amazing, though. There are times were I think this should've beaten No Country For Old Men for 'Best Picture'.

Yeah he's a great director. His movies are like steel.

There Will Be Blood and Boogie Nights are two of my faves. To be honest, the only really good performance Mark Wahlberg has ever given was in Boogie Nights.

http://billsmovieemporium.files.word...03/boogie1.jpg

Re: PT. Anderson
 

You people need to get on his other movies :yup:

http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:...997-poster.jpg http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:...pg%3Fv%3D0 http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:...a/magnolia.jpg http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:...drunk_love.jpg http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:...l_be_blood.jpg

Each of films are heartily enjoyable for me , as far as technical skill goes he just might be the absolute best. He always gets the very strongest performances out of his actors and that's probably because he writes characters are understandable , but always bring something else to the story. He only directs his own scripts and always puts in the effort to realize his penned creations. Top-notch cinematography and constant "wow" moments lie in each of his works.

Hard Eight and Punch Drunk Love , both leagues apart in aesthetics and themes - but similar in their more intimate approaches to tell a story of only a few characters. While Hard Eight is set to the pace of luck and chance (gambling providing the contextual atmosphere) , Punch Drunk Love is more musical and attached to it's main character.

Boogie Nights and Magnolia are two massive ensemble pictures that tie in huge casts of characters into each other to realize a much bigger puzzle. They both encompass almost every major theme there is to explore , but each of them approaches it from a different perspective and attitude. Boogie Nights emphasizing money and family over Magnolia's complete understanding and acceptance of it's characters.

There Will Be Blood is a welcome change of pace to PTA's modernistic filmography (even if it's my least favorite of his). It also explores religious themes with a lead character who's entirely evil and impossible to comprehend.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I've also seen Magnolia and Punch-Drunk Love. Don't really remember Punch-Drunk Love, and although I liked Magnolia a lot at first it didn't have a lasting effect.

One of the best around, no question. Everything he's made ranges from good to great, and I think that's rare; every director, somewhere in the space of their first five films or so, seems to deliver a clunker. Not Anderson. There Will Be Blood is an amazing film, easily his best work, and - as good as he is - I don't even expect him to top it. But if he does? Wow.......

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I like him and his movies, although I'm not a big fan of Hard Eight. It's just that I don't think he's anything all that great. He's interesting, and There Will Be Blood is worth , but as usual with most wunderkinds, he hasn't delivered on all that promise yet, so I certainly hope he tops his best work so far. Being a personal filmmaker is not the same as being a great filmmaker.

Could you elaborate on that a bit as it relates to Anderson? Because while I think he handles his characters very well, "personal" isn't the first word I would use to describe him, yet I apparently like his work more than yourself.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Each of his five films seem very personal to me in that he always has a theme and idiosyncratic characters. I'll admit that his themes could seem to be all over the place although he does seem to latch onto a sense of belonging in all his films. His films seem to be about people trying to regain or form a family, and I'll admit that's not the most original of themes, but his personal side shines through in that the stories he uses to expound on his theme contain characters which most films don't really bother to highlight. He also includes just enough elements of fantasy/surrealism in them to make sure he keeps his audience off-balance.

So what, in your eyes, has kept him short of greatness? I agree with all the positive things you said re: the emotional content, and he seems to be a very technically adept director. I'm not saying he's perfect, but I'm hard-pressed to find any obvious flaws.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

To me, his characters and stories are mostly just too personal and idiosyncratic. I can get into the entertainment being provided but sometimes the characters just seem a bit beyond my own comfort zone. Punch-Drunk Love resonated with me because the Adam Sandler character reminded me of one of my best friends and his family, so the fact that I could get into the idea of my friend having a positive romantic fantasy was appealing to me. If I didn't have a friend so similar to that character, I'm not sure that I'd buy into the "outrageousness" of the entire story. Boogie Nights is very entertaining, but some of the scenes which people love the most (the Alfred Molina scene) just seem to go on-and-on to me well past the point they were trying to make. Magnolia crams so many characters into it I guess it's only natural to think that some are more interesting and successful than others. It's the fact that Anderson loves and feels for these characters which make him a personal filmmaker to me. I cannot totally relate to all his characters so at times, I have to step back a bit and question why I'm seeing what I am.

Exactly this movie doesn't appeal. All of his other movies have such personal and deep characters, There Will Be Blood had hardly none of that.

I thought that was exactly what makes a good filmmaker :eek:

Hard Eight (Sydney, 1996)

http://www.scene-stealers.com/images.../sydney02B.jpg

Grade: B+

Boogie Nights (1997)

http://blog.jinni.com/wp-content/upl...gie_nights.jpg

Grade: B

Magnolia (1999)

http://filmbender.typepad.com/photos...tom_cruise.jpg

Grade: B

Punch Drunk Love (2002)

http://www.offoffoff.com/film/2002/i...hdrunklove.jpg

Grade: B+

There Will Be Blood (2008)

http://laceysfilms.files.wordpress.c...re-will-be.jpg

Grade: A

Except for the clear and obvious flaws of completely and utterly ripping of Altman and Scorsese, most present in Magnolia. Magnolia has so many similarities to Short Cuts, it's ridiculous, up to and including the bizarre "act of God" ending.

You talk about how technically adept he is, and you are right, but he swiped much of his technical style from Scorsese's films. Again, Magnolia is the worst in this aspect.

That said... I like his stuff. He is certainly not a hack or a bad director, and I think he is a good, if not original, writer. I like the pacing of his films and I have to give props to a guy that takes on a project as difficult to put together as Boogie Knights and pulls it off.

In fact, I would say he is probably one of the better writer/directors working today, but he clearly owes a whole helluva lot to Altman and Scorsese.

I do own and like a lot of his flicks, though. He writes great comedy scenes, as well as some very touching personal scenes that hit home.

You know what they say - If you are going to borrow, borrow from the greats, so I can't completely dislike the dude for lifting so much, but I certainly won't agree with him being some sort of God-like director.

There Will be Blood was stellar, by the by. Arguably his best work, with lots of help from Daniel-Day Lewis.

I'm going to jump in here for a minute. I can forgive "rip-offs" of style. Especially when the director confesses to ripping things off stylistically. Regardless it's done well. The reason why I love PT Anderson and don't consider him a hack like Taraterpentine, is because he DOES NOT rip off stories. The theme of cancer is in Magnolia and that came from his own life with his father who died of cancer and his good friend, who played The Colonel in Boogie Nights. His content is his own. I guess I'm more about content.

So what? Scorsese "ripped" on Italian Neorealism in Raging Bull looking at films like Year Zero and The Bicycle Thief. Big deal. Taxi Driver was a "ripp" of film noir.

:)

And he certainly does... also Jonathan Demme. Listen to any of his audio commentaries on the DVDs.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

What exactly did he rip from Scorsese ? Well thought out kinetic camera-work ? In that case I'd wish most directors would rip off Scorsese :)

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Hey, like I said, if you are going to "borrow"... ;)

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Viddy - Good to see you around! How are things in Viddy-land?

RE: Magnolia - I really think he took a whole helluva lot from Short Cuts as far as the general outline/form of the film, as well as character construction and development.

He has borrowed a lot, true. But he has done it with such style, skill and precision that you can easily forgive the lack of originality.

I also like that his characters are really personal. I agree that his earlier works had more characters than he really needed, but it's his technical skill and pacing that makes spectating them more than bearable.

And for the record, the more I think about There WIll Be Blood, the more I dislike it. I mean, excellent performances, yeah, but I certainly couldn't relate to any of the characters and it just didn't do it for me on an emotional level.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Everyone borrows from everyone.

By "obvious flaws" I meant within the context of his own work; character development, dialogue, pacing, editing, visual sense, music, etc - I think he handles all of these quite well. The influence of Altman has always been obvious, and I can't imagine Anderson himself even denying it. (To further the connection, Anderson apparently spent time on the set of A Prairie Home Companion, and it's been speculated that he, to some extent, actually ghost-directed the film for the ailing Altman.) As for Scorsese, I've never thought of Anderson borrowing much from him. Perhaps some camerawork bears the Scorsese influence, but at that point we're getting into the "everybody borrows from someone" argument. I generally shy away from that perspective, because I see it occasionally used a crutch for lack of imagination, but I don't think that's the case with PTA. As for the endings to Short Cuts and Magnolia, in the latter case something essentially supernatural happens, which to me is a whole different ballgame. (It's been 6-7 years since I saw Short Cuts; am I correct in remembering there's an earthquake?)

In any event, he transcended the comparisons with There Will Be Blood, a film I like better than anything Altman or Scorsese ever made.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I would rank the ones I've seen...

1. Boogie Nights
2. Magnolia
3. There Will Be Blood

I own a copy of Hard Eight, but haven't gotten around to watching it yet.

Boogie Nights, in my opinion, is a masterpiece. Performances, writing, direction, music, all perfect. Magnolia comes close, but it would be hard to beat such a great film.

There Will Be Blood was a pretty good film. I'm not crazy about it, but the towering lead performance from Daniel Day Lewis is more than enough to recommend it.

He's supposed to be making a new movie sometime .... hopefully.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I just watched TWBB recently and while I still favor Magnolia over his other films, I thought it was pretty riveting. Hard Eight was an interesting smaller film that I haven't seen in a long time but thought was quite good.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Even though Magnolia is so obviously and clearly a rip-off job?

I did not know that. It makes me sad, I rate Magnolia very high. I will have to check out Short cuts. :(

No, because it's a great film. I liked Shortcuts too, but it isn't nearly as good a film IMO.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

And I should add that while the two movies share the interconnected ensemble construction and coincidence/fate theme, IMO their styles couldn't be more different.

Magnolia is very grandiose and melodramatic, which some people might dislike. I do not. Altman's film is very plain and naturalistic, which is somewhat tedious for me personally in a film, especially a very long one.

Short Cuts wasn't a bad film, but it lacked the emotional resonance of Magnolia, and like some other Altman films had a certain distant quality to it that keeps the viewer from becoming fully engaged. I prefer Magnolia because it is a more imaginative and heartfelt experience.

That's how I see it, anyway. I'm sure others disagree. It's more subjective than not.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

And one more thing, on this subject of what makes a great director: in my humble opinion, what makes a great director is not just technical skill, but his passion. A truly great director should make a personal investment in the material and have the directing chops.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

In the case of Altman, I'd say his best films that were emotionally powerful would be the brilliantly humanistic Mash and the hauntingly sorrowful western McCabe.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Magnolia is like the action movie remake of Short Cuts. Faster, bigger, tighter, and it probably cost 35 million more to make - which is why I prefer it by a mile.

lol :D

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I never thought I'd be the kind of person who would love a film like Magnolia...but I do. It feels, simultaneously, both unpredictable and obvious. Both easy and incredibly difficult. It's a pretty haunting film.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Magnolia isn't absolutely perfect, and yes it is inspired by Shortcuts, but I don't see that as a legitimate reason to dismiss it. Anderson is a huge Altman fan himself, and I don't think it's fair that he be so harshly faulted for it.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Let's get a couple things out of the way. I own both films and I do like them both to a certain extent, but my opinion of Magnolia went way down after subsequent viewings, and numerous comparisons to both Altman and Scorsese's work - another director PT tends to "lift" from constantly. That said, PT Anderson is probably the best writer/director working today, as I am having trouble coming up with a name of someone that is as strong in both categories. *Shrugs*

Your point about melodrama is spot on, though. In this case I preferred the more natural film.

Yeah, so I don't dismiss the film, that's for sure - the guy did a fantastic job with it, just not a particularly original job.

No offense. I wasn't directing that post to you specifically, just was putting forth the point of view that it shouldn't be dismissed on that basis.

In fact, I wouldn't call Altman a pure naturalist, really. His films could be considered fairly quirky. But I figured that it was implicit in the context of the post that the term fit by comparison.

It comes down to a matter of taste, as you say. They are both superior movies IMO, in a general sense.

However, I disagree with you in one area: I think that other than sharing the basic premise, Magnolia is a very original film.

Anyways, I was just now reading your top ten, Sedai, and I must say you have good taste in movies. :)

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Why thanks! Your list is...damn funny!

Oh and, no offense taken at any time - I have pretty thick skin...

It will take me some time to post a proper top ten because I have so many favorites. Glad you enjoyed the joke. :D

Re: PT. Anderson
 

^ I have had it with those MoFo movies in your MoFo list!

Yeah, I don't see any similarities between Magnolia and Shortcuts other than both have a lot of characters and moments of synchronicity. Both film's forms are different, work with different themes, and none of the characters/situations are analogous at all.

The final, big moment of synchronicity in both films gave me major chills. My favorite part in Magnolia probably when the camera zooms in on the picture on the wall behind the quiz show kid that says "but it did happen", and of course the murderous rampage that sets off the earthquake in Short Cuts. The latter is still very mysterious to me, and I love just thinking about it. Really took my breath away when I first saw it and still does.

Both films build symphonically, so that if you watch them all the way through, there is always an intense emotional payoff.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Yeah, that slow build in Magnolia is what captivates me. You know how, usually in even mediocre films, there's a scene that feels important and causes you to lean forward and pay a little bit of extra attention? Every freaking scene in Magnolia feels like that. I don't know how a movie can build for three hours (and then somehow find an insane enough payoff to make it all feel worthwhile), but it does. It just does.

It'd be safe to say Magnolia had a bit of an effect on me. And this is after knowing the ending going in and having seen bits and pieces of it over the years before sitting down and watching it straight through a few months ago.

Than I guess I would be the only one in the world making the comparison? Funny, I have seen the films compared many times, some right here on this very board. Yeah, we're all crazy!

Nothing analogous at all, eh? That's horse ****, and you know it.

I'd buy that comment if you were comparing Magnolia to Tron Legacy, but Magnolia and Short Cuts are clearly similar.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

For me, Magnolia is much more visually rich and interesting, which is important to me in a film of substantial length. Second, the movie uses music in amazing ways. Last, and definitely not least, I love the characters in Magnolia.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

I admit to finding PN's comment curious, not because I don't see what he means, but because he has often made comparisons between very disparate things because they share a similar structure.

I'd have to check, but I'll bet Anderson has probably gone on record as being influenced by Short Cuts.

As I mentioned, I think the music is key to the build of the film. It's interesting to watch while paying extra attention to the rhythm of the music throughout, how it links scenes, how it changes and dies down at crucial moments.

P. T. Anderson has gone on record to say more than that. He's clearly mentioned that Altman is one of his biggest influences, dedicated There Will Be Blood to Altman even though it was more of an homage to Kubrick; not to mention the fact that Altman himself saw Anderson as heir enough to make him standby director for his final film.

I'm just opposing this stupid idea that Magnolia somehow lacks originality and is therefore hampered because it is a deliberate homage to Altman.

If the fact that Julian Moore is in both is an analog, then maybe. But between the characters? Repressed sexuality is probably the main theme in Short Cuts. Sexuality is limited to Cruise's character in Magnolia and even then it is a peripheral issue. The cop in Magnolia is the polar opposite to the cop in Short Cuts. Singing in unison sequence is entirely original to Anderson. Anderson's camerawork is mostly unlike Altman's. Anderson works mostly in the dark, where Altman worked in the day.

Both are mosaics in structure and share a theme of chance/fate connecting various strangers but they play out quite differently. The details are important. Anderson, as I wrote before, is a longtime fan of Robert Altman, who from what I understand was pretty much his mentor.

They're both great movies, some of us just happen to like maqnolia better. :)

Fair enough. I used to be over-the-moon for Magnolia when I first saw it, that's for sure. I've seen it maybe 5 times, and that last watch I did I found myself picking it apart quite a bit, and it really came across as contrived in places. Still powerful in some sections, though, and that doesn't seem to diminish with subsequent viewings.

Thinking about it, I do like the screenplay a whole hell of a lot, but I guess some of the execution and structuring bug me a bit now, and as I said, some of it seems really contrived.

The cop jumped to mind for me, but then I discarded it because yes, it's basically a study in opposites. However, compare Anderson's camerawork to that of Scorsese...

The singing in unison... I guess I didn't like that idea (love the tune, though), but I know many just adore it. To each their own and all that.

Magnolia is clearly an achievement, one that gets plenty of respect around the globe, but for me, my adoration of the film just sort of fell off after the novelty wore off, while Short Cuts, a film I didn't immediately warm to, grew on me with time as the subtleties emerged.

Anyway, even though PN and I tend to crack horns a lot, I have a tremendous respect for his analytical skills, and I guess now I want to sit down and watch these films back-to-back, something I have yet to do. You folks have given me some fresh perspective on both pieces, so I think visiting them again is the next step. Deadite is clearly no slouch, either.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

We had a swell debate here. You guys are all true movie lovers in my book.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Anyway, like I said, it's not perfect, though I love it. My own personal peeve with the film is that the subplot involving the dead body and the black boy that Reilly's cop character deals with seems undeveloped and sticks out like a sore thumb on repeat viewings. It doesn't detract enough to take away from my overall enjoyment, but it's there.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

That rap scene with the kid and the cop is gold, though. Funny ****.

Dead body? In Short Cuts?

I just realized something. I watched How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days last night, so I must immediately withdraw from this debate, log out, and go punch myself in the face.

See you tomorrow! ;)

Re: PT. Anderson
 

No, the body in the closet in Magnolia.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Damn, I completely spaced on that apartment scene for a second! More proof to your claims that line isn't developed properly? I think so! My favorite stuff is the Stanley stuff centered around the game show and the exploitation of children, which I abhor (the exploitation). Setting up the relationship between the host, Stanley and Donnie as he catches snippets on the tube in the bar is quite brilliantly done, and allows the viewer to explore the logical trajectories of some of the characters through the stories of their older/younger counterparts.

Clearly, Daddy issues are front and center in the film, as well, which is where some of my misgivings begin to emerge. However, i like the overall message about the Daddy issues at the end of the film, as most characters experience some level of reconciliation.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

great director, 'magnolia' is the best, on my mind.. but "there will be blood" is the masterpice with its deniel - dei luis :)) my all time favourite actor.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

Has anyone here watched "That Moment", the behind the scenes documentary on the making of Magnolia? It's a very interesting watch, especially to see Paul Thomas Anderson's journey to make his "film of a lifetime". It's almost as interesting as the film itself.

It is a great watch. Insight not only into the film's production which is interesting in itself, but also PTA's head. He's more of a mad genus than I already assumed.

Re: PT. Anderson
 

The only weird thing about That Moment was that small part near the end, where PTA is shaking that woman, yelling "Boogie Nights was good!". It cracked me up.

Seriously, Paul Thomas Anderson is one of my favourite writer/directors. He has an amazing ability to elicit career best performances from his actors, and both the technical and emotional aspects of his films are astounding. I've seen all of his films but Sydney, and out of all of his films that I have seen, Magnolia is his true masterpiece. His most flawed, yet perfect film.

I love Daniel Day Lewis but I don't understand the fascination with There Will Be Blood. The pace was way too slow. I kept waiting for something to happen. I know many of you disagree, but for me, this was one boring movie. I think someone mentioned that it should have beaten out No Country For Old Men. Are you kidding me?
Now I can watch a Terence Malick movie all day long and expect nothing, just enjoy the great imagery.

I didn't think that much of There Will Be Blood myself, but there was a lot happening on a emotional level in that movie, and the cinematography was perfect. And what else can you say about Daniel Day Lewis' performance? It's brilliant. Now I'd rate it a , but that is purely for that one performance. Without it, it'd be a miserly +. But I'd like to see it again.