January 14, 2022
His newest film was released late last year and is generating very strong reviews, including likely Academy Award nominations, coming in a few weeks. I’m talking about Paul Thomas Anderson, who has been making movies since the mid 1990s, and while he might not be as big of a household name as Tarantino or Nolan, he consistently delivers high-quality, original stories on a variety of topics and genres. Licorice Pizza is his latest movie and I’ll be covering this one (spoiler: it’s wonderful) as part of my year-end review of my favorite films, starting next week. It’s too early to figure out where Licorice Pizza fits into my PTA rankings, so for now, I’m going to focus my thoughts on his other eight pictures.
Wait a minute – he’s been working for over twenty years, but he’s only made nine movies? That’s right. Unlike some filmmakers who are cranking out movies every year (like Steven Soderbergh), Anderson takes his time in between projects, writing his own scripts, developing stories that explore various themes and time periods. He has been described as a film auteur, putting his own style of filmmaking, including lighting, music, and production design on display with each project. He may be the best director working today at shooting exterior scenes with natural light. There are some scenes in his movies that are just plain magical. In a lot of ways, he reminds me of Quentin Tarantino, Christopher Nolan, and Wes Anderson. You are not going to get a lot of quantity in terms of number of projects, but when a new film emerges from one of these directors, it feels like an event. Much like Wes Anderson, he has also assembled a collection of actors who have regularly worked with him, the most frequent of these was Philip Seymour Hoffman, who acted in five of Anderson’s first six films before his death in 2014.
Let’s jump into his filmography, starting with his debut feature picture.
#8 – Hard Eight (1996)
It’s really difficult to be critical of a director’s first effort, so I won’t say that Hard Eight is “bad” – it’s not. In fact, I don’t think Anderson has made a bad movie. Hard Eight just doesn’t resonate that strongly with me, compared with his other projects. After a successful short film landed him a spot in a Sundance Film program for aspiring directors, he got a shot at making his first feature, an expansion of that short film. Hard Eight stars Philip Baker Hall (a frequent Anderson collaborator) as a seasoned gambler, who takes a young protegee (John C. Reilly) under his wing to show him the ropes in Vegas. Reilly gets mixed up with a prostitute (Gwyneth Paltrow in an early role) and a gangster (Samuel L. Jackson) and Hall has to help bail him out. Hard Eight has an interesting set of characters and a pretty good plot. While it’s not one of my favorites, it demonstrated Anderson’s talent and potential for future greatness to come.
#7 – Inherent Vice (2014)
Most of Anderson’s projects are written from an original idea developed by him, or loosely based on a book or events in history. Inherent Vice was the first (and to date, only) true adaptation of a previous work that he has tackled. The film is based on a 2009 novel by author Thomas Pynchon and is best described as an off-beat noir picture with some subtle comedic moments. The strength of the movie is the cast, led by Joaquin Phoenix as a private investigator trying to find an ex-girlfriend who has disappeared. Along the way, he encounters a variety of cops, drug dealers (and users), a few oddballs, and many suspicious characters. Phoenix is excellent as the PI (who, I should probably mention is a stoner living in 1970s California, which adds a lot to the vibe of the story). The film’s plot is very detailed and complicated, so a close viewing is required to follow it. While I thought it was a decent story, it was a little too bizarre in places for me to rank higher on my list.
#6 – Punch-Drunk Love (2002)
After the mammoth film he directed in 1999 (we’ll get to that one later), Anderson decided he wanted to change gears and make a movie that was more of a romantic-comedy, and was a crisp 90 minutes. He was pretty successful (it’s a little over 90 minutes) with Punch-Drunk Love, a movie that some might describe as a romantic-comedy with an edge. While it has some sweetness in it, this is not your typical Netflix rom-com that you forget about shortly after watching it. No, this one has moments of tension and suspense, integrated with a sweet love story about a man trying to figure out who he is and if he can ever be happy.
Anderson recruited Adam Sandler to play the lead role of Barry, a self-employed salesman who suffers from anxiety and bits of rage, most likely due to years of dealing with his seven overbearing sisters. He meets Lena, one of his sister’s friends played by Emily Watson in a wonderful performance. She has her own quirkiness and along the way, they find a way to work through their idiosyncrasies to figure out a way to be together. Punch-Drunk Love was a departure for both Anderson and Sandler, who is nothing like the characters he played in his SNL-type movies – this is not Happy Gilmore, it’s more like Uncut Gems. There are a few side stories that offer some tension to Barry’s life, creating conflict and a sense of desperation. The score Anderson chose for the film helps this feeling as well, creating a sense of propulsion and tension for the audience as we experience Barry’s feelings with him. Anderson has an incredible ability in not only finding new talent for his projects, but showing us a different side to actors we have a lot of experience with, and that is certainly the case with Sandler and Punch-Drunk Love.
#5 – The Master (2012)
The film that is considered one of Anderson’s best works of art, but is probably the most difficult for the average viewer to connect with, has been described as Anderson’s favorite of his directorial projects. Some movies have a good balance between plot and themes, where you can see a linear plot, enjoy the ride, and have an appreciation for the themes that the movie explored. My #1 pick in this list is a perfect example of this kind of film. The Master, however, leans a little too heavy into the thematic elements, and is a little too light on the linear plot for me to rank it any higher. And then, there are a few WTF scenes that had me shaking my head the first time I watched it. When The Mater was released, the headlines seemed to indicate that Anderson was telling the story of the beginnings of Scientology. And that’s not really what this movie is. Yes, a central figure in the film is the leader of a religious movement in the 1950s that has many similarities to Scientology, but it’s not referred to as such by name.
That leader is Lancaster Dodd, played by the brilliant Philip Seymour Hoffman, who along with his wife (Amy Adams) and extended family, travel around preaching the word of The Cause. Early in the film, Dodd meets the main character of the movie, Freddie Quell, played by Joaquin Phoenix in an outstanding performance as a World War II veteran who is struggling to acclimate to post-war life. Freddie has the emotional intelligence of a teenager, animalistic outbursts of rage and sexual frustrations, leading him to many conflicts with those he interacts with. He sees a possible solution to his life’s problems with Dodd’s movement, latching on to the community. Freddie is pushed through a series of exercises and initiation rights to help him acclimate to their beliefs. Dodd sees Freddie as some combination of surrogate son and / or an object of his repressed sexual frustrations. The film explores various themes of power, identity, religion, and an individual’s belief system in what is real or created. While the movie features amazing performances, a wonderful score, and incredible cinematography (all trademarks of Anderson’s films), it doesn’t always connect for me, but I can see gaining more appreciation for The Master over the coming years.
#4 – Magnolia (1999)
As much as people had a hard time connecting with The Master, the picture that might be the most divisive of Anderson’s filmography was Magnolia, his 1999 follow up to his first taste of success (which we’ll get to in a moment). This is a massive tale of many characters across Southern California over the course of a few days. In the spirit of Robert Altman’s excellent 1993 film Short Cuts, it weaves together vignettes and storylines that are somewhat connected, but not entirely. There are themes of loneliness, connectedness, fate vs. free will, parents and children, and many more that I probably missed along the way. Like many of Anderson’s movies, Magnolia features a propulsive score throughout the film, interspersed with a strong soundtrack of songs by Aimee Mann. In fact, many of Anderson’s films include few scenes where there is just silence – there is always something going on, whether it’s crackling dialogue, background music, or a combination of the two. More often than not, the music amplifies the emotions he is conveying with the images perfectly.
Magnolia doesn’t really have a lead actor – instead we have a murderer’s row of stars – Jason Robards (in his last role), Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julianne Moore, Philip Baker Hall, John C. Reilly, William H. Macy, and in one of the most daring performances of his career, Tom Cruise. He plays a motivational speaker who takes the practice of seducing women to a misogynistic low, along the likes we rarely see on screen. The language he uses is pretty rough (another reminder that Anderson is not shy about depicting the ugliness in our world), but it’s fascinating to see Cruise take a risk like this. It goes to show you the trust that an actor will put in a filmmaker – in any other director’s hands, this could have turned out ugly.
The big criticism that Magnolia has received over the years is its length (it’s just over three hours), elements of melodrama, and the ultimate WTF ending. Yes, it’s a little too long – it would have been better served being 30-40 minutes shorter. And some of the performances are a little over the top, particularly Moore in a few scenes. And the ending is definitely….something. I won’t spoil it, except to say 1) it’s biblical and 2) you might need to google an article to understand the theme behind it. Suffice it to say, I can look past those criticisms and recognize this for a wonderful examination of people who are trying to survive day to day, dodge the sorrow and loneliness in their lives, find a connection with someone, and search for the ultimate definition of happiness.
#3 – Phantom Thread (2017)
Ten years after making a phenomenal film together (and my #1 pick), Anderson convinced Daniel Day-Lewis to make one more project together. This was the last film the actor would work on, retiring immediately afterwards, saying he was done with this chapter of his life. I suspect we’ll see him once again – maybe Anderson can convince him to make a third movie together. But if this was it, Phantom Thread was a hell of a way to cap a wonderful career.
Day-Lewis plays Reynolds Woodcock, a fashion designer in 1950s London, whose life is upended when he meets Alma, a waitress who becomes his love interest and muse. To say Woodcock is fussy would be an understatement – he’s a downright pain in the ass, but the people in his life tolerate him because of his professional brilliance. He is considered the premier fashion designer and people fawn over the thought of being fortunate enough to have him design their dresses. His partner in crime is his sister Cyril, who helps run his fashion house, delivering the hard messages when needed and keeping the staff in line. She is also the surrogate mother to Reynolds, who is still traumatized by the death of his mother when he was young. He is constantly looking for someone to take care of him emotionally, and he finds that with Alma. This naturally creates conflict with Cyril and the performances by Vicky Krieps and Lesley Manville as the muse and sister create a tense dynamic throughout the movie.
Phantom Thread was another departure for Anderson in that we’re not seeing beautiful landscapes and a tension-filled score. Instead, we feel the claustrophobia of the fashion house making the tension among Reynolds, Cyril and Alma even more strained. The score is comprised of beautiful string arrangements, which amplify the scenes where we see people admiring Reynolds’s beautiful craftsmanship. There is a component of the story which highlights Anderson’s cynical edge about the ugliness in the world that makes this more than just a period-piece drama. I won’t spoil it, but it lends itself to the theme of a brilliant man who just can’t be on his own and desperately needs a woman to care for him to survive.
#2 – Boogie Nights (1997)
Imagine being a 26 year-old director with exactly one film under your belt, and trying to convince a studio to finance your next picture with an unconventional premise. A coming-of-age story about a young man navigating the late 1970s and early 1980s Southern California scene, with his rise and fall aligning with the shift from the disco 70s to the cocaine 80s. Sounds interesting, right? Oh, wait – one more thing. It takes place in the adult film industry. Wait, what? That’s right – Anderson somehow convinced New Line Cinema to not only move forward with the film, but give him “final cut” to complete the picture within his own vision. His first movie, Hard Eight, had various changes made to it that Anderson was not happy with and he was determined to not let that happen with Boogie Nights.
As the film opens, Anderson takes us (through a long tracking shot, a standard in most of his movies) into a California night club, winding his way through all of the characters and costumes inhabiting this 1970s disco-fueled world, just as Best of My Love (by The Emotions) kicks into high gear. We immediately realize that we’ve been transported back in time to go on a journey we’ve never seen before. We meet Jack Horner (played by Burt Reynolds in an Oscar-nominated performance), one of the big-time producers of adult films, and the stars of his movies – Amber (Julianne Moore, also nominated), Rollergirl (Heather Graham), Reed (John C. Reilly) and Buck (Don Cheadle).
When Horner spots a young man who he thinks could be his next big star, he recruits him to join the business and their traveling circus, with all of the good and bad that comes with it. That man is Eddie Adams, who adopts the moniker Dirk Diggler as his stage name, played by Mark Wahlberg. Now, I’ve been very critical of Wahlberg (as I just think he’s not a very good actor), but he is excellent in Boogie Nights. Fun fact: Anderson wanted Leonardo DiCaprio for the role, but he had to turn it down because he had agreed to do another little movie about a ship and an iceberg that was released the same year. What a sliding doors moment that would have been.
As we see Dirk’s rise within the industry and his life get turned upside down with money, fame, ego, vanity, arrogance, drugs, and the inevitable fall from grace, we take the journey with him into the early 1980s when the adult film industry experienced a seismic shift from theatrical releases to videotape popularity. Anderson does a fantastic job of putting the industry on full display in all of its excesses – with alcohol, drugs, money, and fame – as tantalizing attractions for people to get into the business, with the on-screen talent taking the brunt of the impact. While Boogie Nights is rated R, it’s got some pretty rough scenes that are not for the faint of heart. Anderson knows that this is a business, but it’s an ugly one, and he’s going to show you as much of the ugliness that he can get away with and still qualify as an R-rated movie. In addition to a phenomenal cast, which also included William H. Macy and Philip Seymour Hoffman as behind-the-scenes members of the crew, the film features the best of Anderson’s soundtracks. He is always good at bringing the right vibe to his movies, but this one features excellent songs from the 70s and 80s. You’ll never hear Sister Christian (by Night Ranger) again and not think of this movie after you’ve seen it. Boogie Nights might be my “favorite” film directed by Anderson, but in terms of his “best”, there is really only one answer.
#1 – There Will Be Blood (2007)
Let’s get one thing out of the way – this movie is a freaking masterpiece. Not only is it the best movie Anderson has made, it’s likely the best picture of the last twenty years. Everything about There Will Be Blood is what I love about a quality film – the story (loosely based on a 1927 novel), the cinematography (glorious!), the score (haunting and suspenseful), and most of all, the performances at the center of the picture. Daniel Day-Lewis won the second of his three Best Actor Oscars for his portrayal of Daniel Plainview, a sinister oilman who will stop at nothing to achieve wealth and power. His main foil is Eli Sunday, a preacher played by Paul Dano.
Unlike some of Anderson’s other movies that have long runtimes and can drag at times, this does not feel like a two hour and forty minute picture. Throughout the propulsive storyline, we are transported to the early 20th century as we see Plainview explore every angle, cut any corner, and step on anyone in his way, to achieve his power. While starting to build out an oil exploration business, he learns about a family farm that is sitting on top of a massive oilfield. He quickly scoops up all of the land and begins exploration, but not before he cuts a deal with Eli, one of the older sons, who wants a church built on the property. Throughout the film, we see the ebbs and flows of capitalism and religion go back and forth as two men, representing the best and worst of (let’s face it) salesmen for their “businesses,” try to convince their community that they are more important than the other.
It goes without saying that Day-Lewis is one of the best actors we’ve ever seen, and There Will Be Blood is Exhibit A of that talent and commitment. He embodies the sinister nature of Plainview throughout the film, making you realize just how evil he can be. But, what is just as impressive is Dano’s portrayal of Sunday. It’s not easy to go toe-to-toe with one of the best who’s ever done it, and they have a few amazing scenes together, but Dano more than holds his own with Day-Lewis. Interesting story I learned in researching this film – Dano was originally hired to play Paul Sunday (Eli’s brother). When the actor originally cast as Eli wasn’t working out (reportedly because he was intimidated by Day-Lewis), Anderson asked Dano to take on the role of Eli as well, and made the brothers twins. Sometimes happy accidents result in greatness. While Day-Lewis won an Oscar for his performance, Anderson lost his three nominations (Picture, Director and Screenplay) to No Country For Old Men, in what some consider an “it’s their time” for the Coen Brothers. As you’ll read in a few weeks, I’m hopeful that this year, the Academy determines that it’s Anderson’s time and he receives his long overdue Oscar, for his wonderful new film, Licorice Pizza.
That’s all for this week. I hope you enjoyed my look at one of my favorite filmmakers and one of the most talented directors working today. I’ll be back next week for part one of my look at the best (and worst) of the year 2021 in film. If you’d like to be notified of future posts, you can subscribe here.