Movie Review Phantom Thread

Phantom Thread (2017) 

Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson 

Written by Paul Thomas Anderson

Starring Daniel Day Lewis, Lesley Manville, Vicky Krieps 

Release Date December 25th, 2017 

Phantom Thread is incredible. I’m not surprised by this; P.T Anderson has proven to be one of the most remarkable and consistently inventive directors of his era. Nothing surprises me about P.T Anderson crafting an incredible film. What did catch me off guard was the strange and fascinating way in which Phantom Thread is incredible. There is no predicting where this study of obsession and genius is headed.

Reynolds Woodcock, a name that could only belong to a character played by Daniel Day Lewis, is a famed London designer. Woodcock has dressed queens, princesses, movie stars, and many of the world’s moneyed elite. His attention to detail and peculiar sense of style is unmatched by designers of his day. This peculiar and obsessive manner, however, comes at the price of his relationships.

Woodcock can’t stand to be around anyone other than his sister, Cyril (Leslie Manville), who manages the House of Woodcock. Cyril’s duties include managing Reynolds’ business affairs and his personal affairs, such as when Reynolds tires of a female companion and cannot be bothered to be rid of them himself. Any early scene has Cyril sending a soon-to-be-former companion on her way barely batting an eye.

So averse to conflict or disruption is Reynolds that he takes off for his country home while Cyril clears out this latest affair. It’s not long, however, before Reynolds’ well trained eye has fallen on a new subject. While having breakfast at a country inn, Reynolds is smitten with Alma (Vicky Crieps). At first he is charmed by her awkward beauty but soon we find that he wishes to dress her, seeing her frame as perfect for his work.

Find my full length review in the Geeks Community on Vocal.Find my full length review in the Geeks Community on Vocal. 

Classic Movie Review The Age of Innocence

The Age of Innocence (1993) 

Directed by Martin Scorsese

Written by Jay Cocks, Martin Scorsese

Starring Daniel Day Lewis, Michelle Pfeiffer, Winona Ryder 

Release Date October 1st, 1993 

Published September 2023 

Flower imagery is important for Martin Scorsese in The Age of Innocence. The open credits roll over footage of a flower. The first moving image of The Age of Innocence is an opera singer (Cindy Katz), picking up a flower as she sings. According to the Old Farmer's Almanac, conveying meaning via flowers was something of an elaborate pastime in the late 1800s, the time in which The Age of Innocence is set. The color of the flower, the type of flower, the bow tied to the flower, and the way in which the flower was given all had a specific meaning that was known among those in the Victorian Era. 

For instance, a yellow flower indicates romantic rejection whereas Red is the color of passion. The opera singer in the opening of The Age of Innocence has picked a yellow flower and whether or not you understand the language she is singing in, the flower is an indication that the man who is behind her in this scene, played by Actor Thomas Gibson of Dharma and Greg fame, is receiving a romantic rejection. Daniel Day Lewis' Newland Archer is seen as Scorsese pans over the crowd and is wearing white carnation which, again, according to the Old Farmers, indicates innocence, pure love, and sweet love. 

Newland is newly engaged to May, played by Winona Ryder, and appears happy to be betrothed to young woman from a good and respectable family. His well being however, is upended by the appearance of Countess Ellen Olenska, played by Michelle Pfeiffer. Where May is much younger than her husband to be, Ellen is the same age and the two had known each other in their youth. For various reasons, they never became romantically involved. Ellen moved to Europe, married into royalty and is now scandalizing New York City with the notion that she may actually become divorced. The plot truly kicks in when Newland is assigned by his law firm to represent Ellen and encourage her to return to her powerful husband or risk scandal and ruin. 

Nearing the end of the first act we get more flower imagery. Newland, after having visited Countess Olenska, decides to send her flowers but not before he's reminded by the florist that he should send flowers to his wife-to-be, May. Newland sends May her favorite flower, Lilly of the Valley which symbolizes sweetness, tears of the Virgin Mary, and humility. These are lovely and also damning traits. For the Countess, he sends yellow roses. Now, yellow does symbolize rejection but, yellow roses have their own meaning. in this case, they symbolize jealousy, decrease of love, and infidelity. 

Read my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review: There Will Be Blood

There Will Be Blood (2007)

Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson

Written by Paul Thomas Anderson

Starring Daniel Day Lewis, Paul Dano, Ciaran Hinds, David Willis, Kevin O'Connor 

Release Date December 27th, 2007

Published December 26th, 2007 

Sometimes when I am writing an odd thing happens. A review that I initially would be quite positive becomes slightly or entirely negative. When I walked out of There Will Be Blood, for example, I was expecting to sit down at my computer and praise the film endlessly. I was transfixed by the performance of Daniel Day Lewis and I marveled at the cinematography of Robert Elswit and the films stunningly authenitic early 20th century California setting. However, now, as I sit down to write I still have appreciation for certain aspects of the film but I am also more aware of the films many flaws. Hanging strands of plot, sloppy storytelling and unformed ideas and metaphors. I still like much of There Will Be Blood but the initial euphoria has definitely worn off.

Daniel Plainview was a prospector, searching for silver and gold like any other late 19th century gold rusher. However, when Daniel accidentally comes upon a supply of oil in one of his mines, his new calling in life is found. It's not long before he is erecting derricks and hiring workers to pull his black gooey gold out of the ground. After an accident killed one of his workers, leaving behind the man's baby son, Plainview makes the boy his own son and ostensible partner in the new business. You see, having a son and playing the role of family man is just one of the many ways an oil man might seperate the willing sucker from his land and thus his supply of oil beneath that land.

By the time that Plainview meets Paul Sunday, he is already quite well off. He doesn't need the lead that Paul offers him on a supply of oil beneath the small community of Little Boston California. However, when Paul mentions that Standard Oil has been buying up the surrounding towns, Plainview decides he needs to get Little Boston before his competitors do. To get the land Plainview will have to deal with Paul's father Abel (David Willis), a willing sucker, and Paul's twin brother Eli, a preacher who is far more aware than his father is of the value of the land Plainview is trying to fleece from them.

Eli wants to start a church in town and feels that the money from the oil should be used to build and fund it. Cutting a deal with the devilish Plainview, Eli gets his 'donation' and Plainview begins drilling. The two men then begin a battle of wills over the soul of this small town.

That is a simplified description of the plot of There Will Be Blood with the biblical undertones laid out much more specifically than What Paul Thomas Anderson presents in the film. Anderson paints the metaphors much more vaguely than I have and thus leaves the viewer grasping and puzzling over the films intent. Though it would be easy to believe that this is a story of good vs evil, corruption vs virtue and whatnot, at some point There Will Be Blood loses it's grand ideas in favor of being just a portrait of one arrogant, disturbed character and the havoc he wreaks on the lives around him.

That isn't such a bad thing given the astonishing performance of Daniel Day Lewis as Plainview. From the accent to that mustache, everything about Lewis' performance stands head and shoulders above the film. Lewis dominates the screen and shows the true power of a great actor, that even in a movie that is less than the sum of his performance he can still shine. There Will Be Blood is a real mess all around the performance of Lewis but you won't realize it until later because while you watch it you are simply transfixed by the great Daniel Day Lewis.

What may occur to you days later are the hanging plot strands of There Will Be Blood. For one, there is a character named Henry (Kevin O'Connor) who claims to be Daniel's brother. Henry is introduced to us for a moment and then cast aside in stunning and confusing fashion. The great Ciaran Hinds is in There Will Be Blood though you would be hard pressed to notice him. Then there is the questionable casting of Paul Dano as both Paul and Eli Sunday. Some have wondered if there is a deeper meaning to having the same actor in both roles. The reality is, the actor playing Eli quit or was fired a few days into shooting and director Anderson just called Dano back and decided they were twins. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for the brother character, Henry, his introduction is fumbled and confusing. He exists not to further the plot but rather so that Plainview can deliver one of the films most important speeches and have someone there to witness it. Henry is then is dispatched when no longer needed. It's sloppy filmmaking and just one of many examples of where Anderson could have adjusted the film to flow smoother and quicker to his ending. The film is desperately bloated at 2 hours and 30 minutes. Hand off the speech listening to Ciaran Hinds or young Dillon Freasier as Plainview's son, cut the brother character completely and the film might get to it's conclusion in a more timely fashion.

I get that Anderson may have fallen for the performance of O'Connor who is quite good in this small role but then the answer might have been expanding the role so that it matters to the rest of the film. Introducing him and then shuffling him offscreen several scene later without effecting the plot in an important way is just shabby.

Too much of There Will Be Blood is characters just standing around marveling at Daniel Day Lewis. Don't get me wrong, we in the audience do it to, but then when the ending comes and we are to rely on the other characters to deepen the tragic ending, there is nothing there but Lewis. The tragedy is communicated but it lacks depth beyond our fascination with this character. There should be a greater tragedy, There Will Be Blood needs to leave us gasping for air and instead simply ends with a thud. "I'm done".

Movie Review Nine

Nine (2009) 

Directed by Rob Marshall

Written by Michael Tollin, Anthony Minghella 

Starring Daniel Day Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Penelope Cruz, Nicole Kidman, Kate Hudson

Release Date December 18th, 2009

Published December 17th, 2009 

The musical “Nine” starring Antonio Banderas is a middling attempt to bring Federico Fellini to the masses. Italy's legendary surrealist director has, since his turn to surrealism after successfully defining Italian cinema and culture in the 1950's, been a mystery to most. Creative types have always felt that they understood what the Italian master was after and Maury Yeston, who wrote the music for the Broadway production, was apparently one of those creative types; so much so that he felt the need to water down Fellini with tired song and dance and a three act structure.

Now, Yeston's watered down work becomes a slightly more sophisticated but still wrongheaded movie musical. Oscar winner Rob Marshall is the latest to see the need to explain Fellini's genius to the great unwashed and like Yeston, he is a fabulous failure.

The story of “Nine” surrounds Italian director Guido Contini (Daniel Day Lewis), our substitute Fellini,  who, pushed by his producer, is about to begin production of his latest film “Italia.” This is despite the fact that he hasn't written a word of the script. Guido has lost his inspiration and calls upon the many muses of his past to bring a story to mind.

These muses include his wife Luisa (Marion Cotillard), his mistress Carla (Penelope Cruz), his late mother (Sophia Loren), his long time star, Claudia (Nicole Kidman) and a sex worker (pop princess Fergie) who taught him and his friends a little of the birds and bees decades ago. Meanwhile, he seeks advice from his best friend and costume designer Lilli (Judi Dench) and a little ego stroke, among other things, from a journalist named Stephanie (Kate Hudson).

Each of these women offer Guido a song or two, belting out their inner monologues, mostly about what a genius he is, save Luisa who calls him out for the bastard philanderer he truly is. If you have always held the impression that directors are self involved egotists, these songs, this film, will do little to disabuse you of that notion.

“Nine” is a shambling disaster for most of its run time. We are informed from the first moment that Guido is a genius but he is never required to demonstrate any kind of genius. When Lewis gives him voice for the first time he might explain a little about Guido but it's hard to hear over the gales of laughter elicited when his Italian accented singing is compared, not so favorably, to Jason Segal's singing Dracula puppet in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall.”

The rest of the cast is far stronger in singing with Cotillard, naturally, the stand-out. The actress who won an Academy Award for her portrayal of Edith Piaf in “La Vien Rose” proves once again to be a natural and charismatic singer. Meanwhile, Kate Hudson is the surprise of the singers. Hudson has the film's one original song, “Cinema Italiano,” and it is the one really lively moment in the film, if not the most coherent or necessary.

Rob Marshall dismisses narrative coherence for a series of Guido's masturbatory fantasies, interrupted from time to time by his wife and a little Catholic guilt. Every woman in the film is asked to bow to his brilliance and their bowing is treated as evidence of his genius. Yet, never once does Guido have to prove his brilliance. This might not be a problem if Daniel Day Lewis gave Guido any dimension beyond a tortured libido.

Speaking of tortured, for a movie about Fellini, whose fanciful work included clowns, strolling musicians and endless parades, “Nine” tends toward a dirge. From Day Lewis's tortured “Guido's Song” opener to the feature tune “Be Italian,” sung by Fergie, the songs of “Nine” are a slog. “Be Italian” sounded rather brilliant in the film's exceptional trailer but in the film it becomes not a celebration of Italian culture but a command from a taskmistress.

“Be Italian” is a major misstep from Director Marshall who fumbles not just the song, staged a little too much like something from his far better musical “Chicago,” but the back story. Fergie's sex worker character is a turning point in the life of Guido Contini, a moment that shaped the way he treated women the rest of his life. Yet, do we see Fergie getting sexy and giving young Guido a truly formative memory? No, instead we cut from Marshall’s lame staged song to scenes of Fergie cavorting with child Guido and pals like a slightly creepy babysitter.

What could have possessed anyone to want to bring a Fellini type to the big screen in such a conventional and old fashioned manner? It's typical of the arrogant audience to talk down to the masses but how is this spoon-feeding of Fellini supposed to entice anyone to want to see 8 1/2 or Satirycon or even Fellini's more conventional films such as La Strada or Nights of Cabiria? Trust me dear reader when I tell you that Nine will not be able to prepare you for the wondrous surrealist brilliance of Federico Fellini. Nor will it prepare you for his brilliant use of subtlety and sadness. 

Nine is like Fellini for Dummies minus any actually helpful information. On top of failing as a tribute to Fellini, Nine simply fails as a movie. Take the inspiration away and all that is left is this boorish, tin-eared mess of a movie made by people who think dumbing down art to the lowest common denominator is the only way to promote great art to the masses. How dreadful is that? 

Movie Review Gangs of New York

Gangs of New York (2002) 

Directed by Martin Scorsese 

Written by Jay Cocks, Steven Zaillian, Kenneth Lonergan 

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day Lewis, Cameron Diaz, John C Reilly, Jim Broadbent 

Release Date December 20th, 2002 

Published December 18th, 2002 

The argument rages on as to who our greatest living director is. Certainly an argument can be made that there is no more popular and well known filmmaker than Steven Spielberg. The quality of Spielberg's work is impeccable. But when you talk about artistry in filmmaking and storytelling there is none more talented than Martin Scorsese. Though some may argue his work is too “East Coast,” that it lacks mainstream appeal and thus is not popular, the man' artistry is too great to deny. Scorsese's latest work, though again very “East Coast,” is nonetheless another work of stunning artistry.

Gangs Of New York is not just the story of its lead characters, Bill "The Butcher" Cutter (Daniel Day Lewis) and Amsterdam Vallon (Leonardo DiCaprio). It's also the story of our country and how it was forged in the blood and sweat of immigrants. It's a history that many don't like to reflect on. A history of incivility and murder, of prejudice and inhumanity. This is no wondrous tale of how Lincoln led the charge to freedom, it's far too honest to make a hero of anyone ,even a sacred cow like President Lincoln.

Gangs Of New York takes place on the fringe of the Civil War, in the ghetto known as Five Points where the Irish immigrants fleeing famine in their home country have established a foothold. Opposing Irish immigration is a group calling themselves The Natives led by Bill the Butcher. A vicious crime lord, The Butcher's hatred of the immigrants leads to a showdown in 1846 that would decide control of Five Points. Leading the immigrants is a man known as Priest Vallon (Liam Neeson). Though not a real Priest, he wears a collar and carries a staff with a cross on it which he uses as a weapon.

In this opening showdown Priest is killed by The Butcher, who claims control of Five Points. Witnessing the bloody carnage from the sidelines, young Amsterdam Vallon witnesses his father’s murder and vows revenge on The Butcher. Amsterdam is taken away from Five Points and sent to a prison school called Hell's Gate until he is of age. Years later Amsterdam returns to Five Points to claim his revenge.

Amsterdam is quick to find that the neighborhood has changed a lot and The Butcher is still in control. In fact he is now now more than just a vicious thug, The Butcher has made inroads in politics, buying the freedom of his syndicate through his relationship with New York's political leader Boss Tweed (Jim Broadbent). Killing The Butcher will not be easy, so Amsterdam schemes his way into The Butcher's inner circle with the help of a friend named Johnny (Henry Thomas). Once in close contact with the butcher however Amsterdam is nearly seduced by his charm and honor. 

There is no doubt that The Butcher is a cold blooded killer but he is also an honorable fighter who has, ever since the great gang battle of 1846, honored the memory of Amsterdam's father with a massive celebration. The butcher is unaware of Amsterdam's identity until Johnny, jealous of Amsterdam's relationship with a lovely pick pocket, Jenny Everdeane (Cameron Diaz), tells Bill the truth and nearly gets Amsterdam killed.

In a scene of incredible staging, Amsterdam makes an attempt on The Butcher's life during the celebration of his father’s death. He fails, but The Butcher, now aware of Amsterdam's true identity, shows mercy on Amsterdam and allows him to walk out, but not before scarring his face with a hot blade. This leads to the film’s climactic street fight between the immigrants and the natives. A combination of civility and brutality, which begins with a meeting between the gangs to decide on rules, weapons and a date and time for the fight.

How historically accurate is Gangs Of New York? Well like any Hollywood film, there will always be artistic license whether you like it or not. Scorsese has repeatedly stated his meaningful attempts at accuracy, which many see as the reason the film’s budget ballooned past the 100 million-dollar mark. Indeed the costumes and cobbled streets seem to fit what is known of the era. Not many history books outside the state of New York tell the story of the 1860's such as the draft riots which lead to bloody battles in the streets between New Yorkers and union soldiers. Indeed that actually happened whether we want to remember it or not. Similarly, people would like to forget the corruption and violence of 5 Points and the Gangs of New York. 

History lesson or not, Gangs Of New York is an enthralling tale told by a master storyteller. Scorsese is in complete control and the passion he clearly has for this material, which he has wanted to film for 20 plus years, is expressed remarkably on the screen. The Oscar buzz surrounding the performance of Daniel Day Lewis is more than justified. Lewis' Butcher is a seductive villain, charming and cunning. Even Amsterdam, who has for years thought only of killing him, is briefly seduced by him because despite his evil, he has honor and lives by a code of the streets that is long gone.

But while everyone praises Daniel Day Lewis these days, I would like to call attention to DiCaprio who makes a real statement in this film. DiCaprio has grown up and though he still carries many teenybopper fans who swoon at his every word, we critics can no longer write him off as a guy who trades on his good looks. In Gangs Of New York, DiCaprio steps up to the big time and now must be taken seriously as an actor of depth.

Gangs Of New York is epic filmmaking in every way possible. It has scope and scale but not at the expense of character development and scripting. The production value and performances and script all come together under the craftsmanly eye of Scorsese who makes yet another masterpiece. If Scorsese doesn't win best director this time around there is something very wrong with the world. Gangs Of New York is one of the best films of the year.