I recently watched through Paul Thomas Anderson’s entire filmography from beginning to end (short films and bizarre commercials included!) in preparation for Licorice Pizza, as well as immersing myself in his thought process through interviews and film commentaries. However, while researching there is a recurring theme that I find from critics, commentators and film goers that PTA went through a massive change in his style around Punch-Drunk Love or There Will Be Blood, depending on who you're talking to. There’s even been several video essays on youtube expanding on this topic released over the last month or so.
However, I would venture to say that PTA hasn’t really changed over the course of his career; his ideas and visual literacy have simply become more refined. I think he’s a great example that a director doesn’t need to completely reinvent themselves every time they make a film to keep their style fresh and compelling. I’ve identified four key features of his visual style that I think have become more refined and I thought I would share them with the astute readers of this subreddit.
(Just so I cover myself in regards to plagiarism, I adapted this essay into video form which can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQI9H0GjJ3w)
I. Expression Through Movement
Anderson is a huge fan of camera moves that draw attention to themselves. While some filmmakers like David Fincher aim for the camera to have an omniscient and invisible quality to it, Anderson aims for the polar opposite. This includes those fast dolly in/crash zoom shots that he borrowed from Scorsese and his handheld shots which move frantically through well-decorated sets.
He often uses these shots to emphasise the most dramatic moment of a given scene. Consider the scene in Magnolia when Jim and Claudia are sitting down and having dinner. (https://youtu.be/g0JIohn0pfU?t=135) The camera is completely static for the entirety of the conversation, and when they finally go in for the kiss, BAM. That famous dolly in/crash zoom move. His camera moves have drastically slowed down from the coked-up fever dreams of his early work, but they're still no less kinetic. So his fast dolly and crash zooms become slow, Kubrickian, drifts through the world of the film. Watch these series of shots from There Will Be Blood. Same basic idea, similar composition, just slower. ([https://youtu.be/jLo
... keep reading on reddit ➡
I have my thoughts which I've already stated many times, but I'm interested in hearing what other people think.
"Licorice Pizza" is the latest that, despite a strong start in limited release, has hit the wall upon releasing wide. The audience scores such as RT and Letterboxd started out strong and are steadily dropping. You could argue that it's because of the controversies, but I don't believe it's just that.
When you compare him to his peers, what do say, Tarantino, the Coens or Wes Anderson do that Anderson doesn't? Why do audiences adore The Big Lebowski but dislike Inherent Vice? Why did Uncut Gems do significantly better at the box office than Punch-Drunk Love? Wes Anderson seems to have now broken out of his niche box and has become a box office name that brings in audiences. What changed for him and is it anything that the other Anderson can employ?
Is Anderson's work really more difficult than Stanley Kubrick's, whose films more often than not were hits?
Licorice Pizza was described as his "most accessible" film (at least since Boogie Nights, which wasn't really a hit either it should be noted) so why the disappointing audience scores?
What do you all think? Will he ever make a film that really connects with audiences? Can he really be considered a major filmmaker without it?
The peak of the 90's PTA brand, composing of fast dolly shots and frenetic pacing while juggling a great amount of characters with expansive runtime lengths. To me, I prefer Magnolia as my favorite from the director because it is such an interesting one. Borrowing heavily from Robert Altman's Short Cuts, Magnolia is consisting of multiple characters woven into one story as they deal with regret, chance, and forgivness which offers an enthralling experience for me.
Magnolia is masterclass in acting, offering some of the greatest performances I've ever seen from an ensemble, and maybe some of the greatest ever. This film and Eyes Wide Shut made me realize that I kinda like Tom Cruise as an actor. In here, he may look like he is playing himself, but his character is grown to become more fragile and vulnerable and is done with great complexity that it would be hard for anyone else to pull it off. The rest of the cast is equally as outstanding. From Julianne Moore to William H. Macy to Melora Walters, Anderson gets the best of his actors in Magnolia.
The score is one of my all-time favorites. It camouflages itself into the film that is supports the fuel of it. Jon Brion has been one of my favorite composers for a while so I might be a bit too biased. The camerawork (especially the long takes) here is astounding. It feels needed to show the connection between the characters introduced. Despite being roughly three hours long, Magnolia doesn't feel like such. It feels relentlessly entertaining for me that I can't seem to be bored, which probably has to do with the frenetic energy of PTA's earlier works.
Magnolia will always remain my favorite from Paul Thomas Anderson. It is such a fascinating experience that provides more details that I may have missed upon first watch, and offers some of the greatest performances from an ensemble cast.
Rotten Tomatoes: 100% (9.20 in average rating) with 15 reviews
Metacritic: 95/100 (12 critics)
As with other movies, the scores are set to change as time passes. Meanwhile, I'll post some short reviews on the movie.
> At its best, Licorice Pizza demonstrates a lightness of touch that hasn’t been so evident in Anderson’s work since Boogie Nights, nowhere more so than in the fabulously lived-in scenes with Alana and her family, played to considerable amusement by Haim’s actual sisters and parents. But the thrilling propulsion of Boogie Nights is matched here only in fits and starts. The movie, particularly in its meandering second hour, often leaves you wondering where it’s going, more in frustration than curiosity.
-David Rooney, The Hollywood Reporter
> In “Licorice Pizza,” time isn’t something that keeps people apart — it’s the only thing that allows them to find each other in the first place. And this euphoric movie doesn’t waste a minute of it.
> This is lighter and sunnier than previous Anderson pictures; subtract the porn and indeed the sex from "Boogie Nights" and you have something like it; remove the metaphysical anxiety from "Inherent Vice" and that comes reasonably close, too. It’s such a delectable film: I’ll be cutting myself another slice very soon.
-Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian: 5/5
> There’s an extraordinary ensemble here, but it’s these two untried leads who elevate “Licorice Pizza” to the joyful, engrossing experience that it is. It’s certainly of a piece with Anderson’s filmography — the romanticism of “Punch-Drunk Love” meets the terrain of “Boogie Nights” — but it’s altogether a one-of-a-kind delight from a daring and always-surprising filmmaker.
> In a world of algorithmically sorted content, Anderson’s ninth film, and his first since 2017’s Phantom Thread, is irresistibly hard to pin down: you’d have to go back around 50 years, to the likes of Hal Ashby’s Shampoo or Peter Bogd
... keep reading on reddit ➡I went to see Licorice Pizza today and walked away from it thinking the same thing that I’ve thought about every P.T.A. film since There Will Be Blood: “That was fantastic on every level except for the script”. It seems like Anderson, as an established filmmaker, gets away with making these oddly baggy and meandering scripts that do patience-testing things like introducing new characters throughout the 3rd act. I get the sense that, if he was a first-time writer with a spec script, his work would be rejected outright in Hollywood or subjected to plenty of rewrites. Of course, this is just my three-act addled opinion.
So, if we ignore his directing and focus purely on his storytelling, what do you guys make of Paul Thomas Anderson’s scripts?
I want to see movies that don't depict sex as something that's healthy, positive and natural, but instead as an addictive, invasive force that can leave a person feeling powerless. I'm prefer movies that explore the topic from a secular perspective, although I wouldn't completely discount religious movies. I'm also not looking for romantic movies about how shallow hook-up culture is when compared with true love. I'm looking for characters that suffer because of the nature or magnitude of their sexual impulses.
My only real criteria is quality. If you think the movie is good, and fits the description above, then go ahead and suggest it.
Hope you guys have a great 2022.
I really love PTA and have recently been binging his movies. I have seen nearly all of them and my favorite it Punch Drunk Love. The music, cinematography, and acting are some of the best of all time and the story is so chaotic yet endearing and beautiful I just can’t love it. And Adam Sandler is so good in it. What is your favorite movie from PTA and why? I’d love to hear your opinions and maybe mine will be swayed.
Now that Licorice Pizza is out how would you rank PTA’s filmography? He’s certainly one of the most popular directors on Letterboxd so I’ll be interested to see your responses. Here is my list for reference: My Updated PTA Rankings
Taking a quick look over his filmography the only films he's made that have made a significant amount of money are Boogie Nights and There Will Be Blood, with all his other films (besides Licorice Pizza which is has only come out) seemingly being flops.
I usually can’t help myself when it comes to watching trailers for movies I’m excited for, but I wanted to try going in blind for once with one of his movies.
Licorice Pizza in just over twenty days. Can’t wait!
Hey everyone, first time poster, long time lurker.
As you may or may not know, Inherent Vice director Paul Thomas Anderson has a new movie coming out called Licorice Pizza. It’s a movie that follows small character vignettes in and around the Hollywood film and music industry in the 1970’s – around the same time as Inherent Vice. In the movie, there’s a bit of a whacky movie producer named Sam Harpoon (who may or may not be played by an uncredited Ben Stiller).
Ever since July, months before the first trailer for LP, a Twitter account by the same name has been tweeting in character as the producer, sharing stories and various aphorisms. It’s fairly obvious this is a legit account – it’s followed by most of the cast/crew from the film, as well as other directors like Rian Johnson and the Safdie Brothers (one of which stars in the film). When asked about Sam Harpoon at Q&As, PTA has been remarkably coy – saying that he’s “absolutely a real producer” despite no record of him ever existing.
Besides these tweets all reading exactly like Pynchon – the account also has an odd number of references to his work, including an homage to the 50th anniversary of Gravity’s Rainbow in his Twitter bio. I’m sure some of the more well-versed among you will spot references I missed. The account is also tweeting a LOT. There’s almost a small book’s worth of tweets made since July alone.
We know TP and PTA are friends, and him secretly tweeting a micro novel’s worth of fictional 70’s film history feels so Pynchonesque I can’t help but believe it’s him behind the keyboard. There was also some speculation that he was secretly posting on 4chan leading up to the release of Bleeding Edge, and those posts take on a remarkably similar rhythm and style to what’s being tweeted out now. Thoughts?
