BunnySkull
Silver Meritorious Patron
I decided to look for some negative reviews of "The Master" thinking the cult has got to be trying to influence some critics to write bad reviews. Now while most serious reviews are overwhelmingly positive, there are a few who pan it or give it so-so reviews. It's expected that a movie won't please everyone. But then I stumbled upon Rex Reed's review for The New York Observer, the mag owned by Donald Trump's son-in-law.
It is not a movie review, it is an attack that eschews all ground rules of professional critique and even tells outright lies. It reads like the cult paid Rex to write this review - and given his background it wouldn't be surprising, nor would blackmail be out of the question. (Ol' Rex has had some embarrassing exposures, caught shop lifting, exploits with hot young men, etc..)
Even more curious is the fact Rex tells outright LIES about the movies reception. In Venice it swept the awards, and was met with massive praise, but Rex reports it was "booed." It got rave reviews in Toronto, but Rex says people "walked out." it's like he is reporting the reality CoS dreams was occurring. He goes on to say all the critical adulation must be a plot from the studio to "rescue" this film.
Then to top it off he only mentions Hubbard & Scientology once and that's only to discount the movie has anything to do with either.
Its not just me, the comments are on fire questioning what the hell type movie review this is supposed to be.
It's truly a very suspicious review, nothing about it reads like a legitimate or professional review. It reads like a bad cult PR ploy.
I don't really want people to give this hack any more hits, but here is a sampling of the review.
"Since it doesn’t make one bit of sense—and probably isn’t supposed to—there’s not much to say about it except … why? It begins with Joaquin Phoenix masturbating and goes steadily downhill from there. With agonized silences interrupted by operatic rages, he plays a lost, unfocused sailor stationed in the Pacific during World War II named Freddie Quell, who creates the image of a woman out of sand on a beach and humps it unmercifully. Subject to black depressions, unprovoked violence and crying jags, he’s an obvious mental case. He’s also such a hopeless alcoholic that he even drinks airplane gasoline and cleaning fluid. After the war, Freddie (removing text for spoilers).....his gullibility lands him in the clutches of another nutcase, writer-philosopher-scientist Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman), who has invented a new cult religion called “The Cause.” Early hype promised an exposé of Scientology, with Hoffman as a thinly veiled L. Ron Hubbard, but as it turns out, The Master has nothing to do with either—or much of anything else."
Link here: http://observer.com/2012/09/the-mas...hoffman-joaquin-phoenix-paul-thomas-anderson/
It is not a movie review, it is an attack that eschews all ground rules of professional critique and even tells outright lies. It reads like the cult paid Rex to write this review - and given his background it wouldn't be surprising, nor would blackmail be out of the question. (Ol' Rex has had some embarrassing exposures, caught shop lifting, exploits with hot young men, etc..)
Even more curious is the fact Rex tells outright LIES about the movies reception. In Venice it swept the awards, and was met with massive praise, but Rex reports it was "booed." It got rave reviews in Toronto, but Rex says people "walked out." it's like he is reporting the reality CoS dreams was occurring. He goes on to say all the critical adulation must be a plot from the studio to "rescue" this film.
Then to top it off he only mentions Hubbard & Scientology once and that's only to discount the movie has anything to do with either.
Its not just me, the comments are on fire questioning what the hell type movie review this is supposed to be.
It's truly a very suspicious review, nothing about it reads like a legitimate or professional review. It reads like a bad cult PR ploy.
I don't really want people to give this hack any more hits, but here is a sampling of the review.
"Since it doesn’t make one bit of sense—and probably isn’t supposed to—there’s not much to say about it except … why? It begins with Joaquin Phoenix masturbating and goes steadily downhill from there. With agonized silences interrupted by operatic rages, he plays a lost, unfocused sailor stationed in the Pacific during World War II named Freddie Quell, who creates the image of a woman out of sand on a beach and humps it unmercifully. Subject to black depressions, unprovoked violence and crying jags, he’s an obvious mental case. He’s also such a hopeless alcoholic that he even drinks airplane gasoline and cleaning fluid. After the war, Freddie (removing text for spoilers).....his gullibility lands him in the clutches of another nutcase, writer-philosopher-scientist Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman), who has invented a new cult religion called “The Cause.” Early hype promised an exposé of Scientology, with Hoffman as a thinly veiled L. Ron Hubbard, but as it turns out, The Master has nothing to do with either—or much of anything else."
Link here: http://observer.com/2012/09/the-mas...hoffman-joaquin-phoenix-paul-thomas-anderson/