The Master (2012) Review - Director Series

Paul Thomas Anderson had been working on this script for nearly 12 years before it was finally greenlit. The idea for the film came to him after reading a quote that periods after wars are productive times for spiritual movements to start.

It began as a leader of a new religious organization, like Scientology. This marked his return to collaboration with Philip Seymour Hoffman. Maybe Paul decided to write one of his greatest roles as an apology for There Will Be Blood was sans Hoffman.

Hoffman had the idea to focus the story on the Freddie character. Thus became the basis for The Master, a film about a codependent relationship and how the concept of the Id and Superego serves as a metaphor for codependency.

The human id; only seeking pleasure, only reactive, never thinking about the consequences of its/their actions, almost like a dog. The human superego, the ethical component of our mind that provides our moral center.

Freddie is quick to anger, lusts easily, and can fall asleep anywhere, all exemplified by the time in the house in Pennsylvania. Freddie imaging all the women nude as Lancaster dances and sings shows the only thing Freddie thinks about and is the basis for all his actions.

Lancaster believes he is about worldly pleasures and emotions. He can control his urges unless an outside force, like his wife Peggy (Amy Adams), does as she commands him to lay off Freddie’s hooch.

It’s these behaviors that draw Lancaster and Freddie to each other, yet are toxic for each other. Lancaster cannot help but indulge his id’s desires when he is around Freddie. All his loved ones can see how toxic Freddie really is, but Lancaster is blinded.

That’s what makes the “Slow Boat to China” scene so surprising. You’d think Freddie would be the one who got “dumped,” the one who is clamoring for Lancaster to come back. Instead, it is the opposite. With Lancaster serenading Freddie to come back.

Even if Freddie hasn’t learned anything by the end of the movie, he knows this relationship cannot continue. I see people mislabel this film as a “cult” film, showing the dangers of them. However, this is a toxic relationship set in the world of cults.

I have always wondered how the color blue fits into this film. This color is so vibrant compared to all of PTA’s other films. Douglas Sirk’s films, All That Heaven Allows (1955) and Written on the Wind (1956), blue is frequently associated with societal constraints, emotional repression, and the artificiality of upper-class life. Think of the cool, blue-toned interiors of the wealthy homes, contrasting with the warmer, more natural colors associated with freedom and genuine emotion.” – The Filmmakers Academy.

That blue never disappears from the film; in fact, it’s in the final frame as Freddie cuddles up with the nude lady sandcastle. Lancaster and Freddie are isolated in their behaviors, lost in a blue sea; they’re like buoys to each other.

The blue could also represent Lancaster’s repression of emotions, which begins to outburst the minute he is questioned. As if you push too hard, he will lose faith in himself.

In any case, this rewatch has made me realize this is Paul Thomas Anderson’s homage to Douglas Sirk, a Technicolor doomed love story.

The technical aspects of the film are no less rich. This is Paul Thomas Anderson’s luscious film to date. Its colors and 65mm Panavision cinematography look incredible on my 4K TV. Even if I just have a Blu-Ray transfer.

It was Paul’s first film without cinematographer Robert Elswit; instead, working with Mihai Mălaimare Jr., a less experienced cinematographer, but he captured exactly what the film needed.

Joaquin Phoenix as Freddie Quell and Philip Seymour Hoffman as Lancaster Dodd give two of their finest performances.

The processing scene alone is worth the price of admission. It shows why PTA is such a great director of actors; he sets his camera and lets his actors go, showcasing their ability to emote.

Like all other Paul Thomas Anderson films, I get something new every time I watch this film. It’s why he’s remained my favorite filmmaker. Every one of his movies is so layered that you find something new on every rewatch.

5/5 Stars