Breaking Emotions: Tears and Surprise

Mettel Ray has started new blogathon – Breaking Emotions – on her blog. Blogathon is already in its third week and you can read all about it here. In my 2 and half week slump this month I missed the first set of emotions and this Monday she also gave 3^rd set to everyone. I, however, am going to do the post about the emotions given by her in second week – Tears and Surprise. 

I think it is obvious that all these entries will be spoiler heavy but still, you’ve been warned.

I don’t want to flaunt my Man card or anything but I rarely cry in the movies. However that makes the moment when I do very special. Here are my 3 choices of films that made me cry.

1. Finding Neverland(2004): I haven’t seen this film in over 5 years and many details of it are now blurry in my mind but I have seen this film multiple times in college and there was one moment in it that I got teary eyed every time I saw it. After Peter’s mother Sylvia, played by Kate Winslet, dies, there is a conversation between J.M. Barrie and Peter somewhere on the park bench where they talk about what happens to the people after they are dead. Just the way Freddie Highmore’s lips move in that scene, like a fish out of water, always used to get me.

2. Grave of the Fireflies(1988): Over the course of these two years this has become my favourite animated movie ever but I still refuse to watch it again because of the mess I was after first time. I can include the whole film but if I have to choose one scene, I will go to the one that gives the film its title. Setsuko and Seita have both abandoned their aunt’s house and are leaving in the cave. Up to this point, movie is very serious tonally. With Seita making the water bubbles and catching the fireflies, this is probably the first time where we get a little respite from that seriousness. But that is the very scene that affects me the most because in the very first scene we know the eventual fate of both Setsuko and Seita. Knowing that this might be the last moment she gets to be the child she deserves to be and tenderness with which that whole scene is handled makes it almost impossible to hold my tears.

3. City Lights(1931): That’s a shoe-in entry for me and for a change these are the tears of joy; absolute, unabated joy. I don’t even think I have to tell anyone which scene I am talking about. That is the smallest, purest, tenderest and beautifullest(I can go on for quite a while) moment in the history of cinema that gets the biggest reaction out of me. There is nothing else in this world that makes my heart warmer than the look on both Tramp and Girl’s face in that moment. Nothing!

Now, on to the Surprise which interestingly was even harder to choose. Couple of months ago, I ranted that it has become increasingly difficult over he last year or so for a film to wow me. Maybe it is the matter of watching 300+ movies/year for last two years but it is even rarer than me crying in a film and hence, obviously, even more rewarding when it does. All the three moments below are the epitome of "What the FXXX just happened?"

1. The Usual Suspects(1995): This is a grand daddy of all the cinematic surprises. The moment Kevin Spacey stops, looks back, breaks off his limp and quietly starts walking normally again might be the first moment ever I said What the FUXX just happened? out loud. This is another film highly due for a rewatch, so much that I actually do not remember anything other than the final scene, but that moment is etched into my memory forever. I may not have understood everything that was going down in the film but I definitely got the end because I remember I have never jumped so much in my seat any other time.

2. The Departed(2006): Like many others, I am sure, I principally remember Scorsese's best picture winner for it's phenomenal ensemble cast. But there is no denying the power of its extremely clever and fast paced screenplay. It is one of the movies you have to take time out to breathe. In the end as people start dying swiftly, there is one death that merits a special mention. Leonardo DiCaprio's. I NEVER saw that coming. What's even more surprising is not only it happens, it happens so suddenly that you almost take a moment to notice it actually happened. Probably that's the reason it's so effective.

3. There Will be Blood(2007): This is my 2nd favourite movie of all time and the scene in question does play significant role in making it that but I will let our director friend Alex Withrow describe this one for me simply because I can hardly do any better.

Bowling alley.  Eating steak off the floor like a dog.  Drainage.  Milkshakes.  False prophets.  Third revelations.  Blowing pin.  Heavy breathing.  “...Mr. Daniel?”

“…I’m finished.”

Not hardly, Mr. Plainview.  Not hardly.

That's it from me but you can see all the other great entries by many other amazing bloggers here.

There Will Be Blood or How I loved the outrageous!

This post is 8th entry into my semi-regular feature in which I go through some of my favourite films. Even though all the 7 films I have written about in this series before are some of my favourite movies, most of which fall within #20 in my Top 100, I never touched my Top 3 – Inception(2010), There Will Be Blood(2007) and Pulp Fiction(1994). In fact, the only time I have said anything about them on this blog is when I covered their respective directors in another one of my semi-regular features, Profile of a Director. Probably the main reason behind doing so was when I started blogging back in 2011, it felt like blogosphere was over saturated with conversations about at least two of them and I could hardly find anything original to say that someone else didn't already. I am not sure if I still can add something valuable to discussion but at least now it feels like enough time has passed for people to be ready to talk about them again.

There were so many great films released in 2007 that I am almost certain it is ‘The’ year of 21^st Century so far and even one of the best in the history of cinema. I have always advocated 1957 as my favourite year but if there is one that might pose a serious threat to it, it must be 2007. Back in 2007 when There Will Be Blood was released as well, I was in the last year of my college and even though I did watch more movies than a casual movie-goer, I was nowhere near being a cinephile. My earliest memory of this film is its fierce Oscar race with No Country for Old Men(2007). It would be another two and half – three years until I'll watch either of the two and until then confuse them with each other referring both as 'movies with long names that were in the Oscar race that year'.

Along with Christopher Nolan, I consider director Paul Thomas Anderson to be the defining director of their generation. Only reason I still hesitate calling them ‘one of the best ever’ is both of them have not made many films but they certainly have multiple decades ahead of them to prove us right. In the 15-odd years both of them have been working, they have left their definite impression and I am more than confident will continue to do so. Knowing my adoration for this director, saying this sprawling epic of oil, family, religion and most importantly greed is PTA’s crowning achievement itself is speaking highly. But I will go even further and add my voice to everyone else saying that it is the film that has most potential to be a future classic. Many years into the future I really believe we will consider it a masterpiece, if aren’t already.

I am saying this right away because I know lot of people do not think of There Will Be Blood as the masterpiece that I think it deserves to be and quite frankly, I can easily see how it can rub someone the wrong way. It is not as polarizing as The Master(2012) but PTA doesn’t make it very easy for us to like it either. I doubt if PTA ever did or will. It might be paced laboriously but every once in a while it gets it rolling and; let it be him trying to convince certain community his worth(“I am an Oil Man”), his baptism in the Church of Third revelation(“Louder, Daniel. I am a sinner!”), dinner in the Sunday household(“Do you think God is going to save you for being stupid? He doesn't save stupid people, Abel”) or that beautifully shot and paced oil explosion scene. I can go on and on; he hits it out of the park every single time. I am a novice at best when it comes to scores or music in general but Greenwood’s groovy score and Robert Elswit’s gorgeous cinematography that won his Oscar go long way in elevating to that status as well.

One of my friends believes that the natural acting is the only pure form of acting. His philosophy is if you have to go over the top, you are doing it wrong and I always plead Daniel Plainview as a counter argument to him. Daniel Day-Lewis is at least two feet over the top throughout this performance but it still is the best performance I have ever seen by anyone and that is saying a whole lot. It’s kind of interesting that as much as I love subtle, down-to-earth performance that still manage to catch your eye, majority of my favourite performances are flashy, over-the-top kind that are anything but subtle. Thing with such performances is there is a very little room for maneuvering. If you underplay it a little, it may not make its impact and if you go too overboard, it might get ridiculous. But when someone gets it right, it can be a sight worth seeing and damn me if DDL doesn’t get it just right!

Plainview is at the center of everything here but he gives us every reason to despise him. He is cold and conflicted; a terrible father and proves repeatedly he wouldn’t skip a heartbeat stepping over you if it is for his benefit. All he ever wants is to get filthy rich and is ready to pay any price for that. Any! That greed consumes him in most spectacular fashion. I might despise Daniel Plainview to the core but Daniel Day-Lewis makes it impossible to take my eyes off him for even a second. Once again, I completely understand anyone who can shrug it off as over-acting but his deep, borderline scary voice, formidable body language and even his misanthropy; everything about him fascinates me to no end. Add Paul Dano and his Eli Sunday to the equation and you have a knockout 1-2 punch.

I think it is pretty obvious by now that I will choose There Will Be Blood over Best picture winner No Country for Old Men but you will never find me flaking it for winning over TWBB. No Country is as respectable Best Picture winner as you can find; a rare example of AMPAS doing something right despite getting it wrong. Remarkable thing about either of the two is they are both near perfect films in every aspect. Both can test your patience in parts but when they pick up, they can take your breath away. Both have some of the best performances I have seen, enthralling story, stunning visuals and incredible philosophy behind them giving each as much depth as you are willing to explore.

If I have to choose one aspect of TWBB that makes it so much dearer to me, it would obviously be tour-de-force performances of Daniel Day-Lewis as Daniel Plainview and Paul Dano as Eli Sunday. For No Country, that aspect would have to be its philosophy. As much as I loved everything else, I have often wondered if I would consider TWBB as highly if it wasn't for these two towering performances but then I know No Country wouldn't be what it is without Anton Chigurh and Sheriff Bell or even with anyone else playing them and that is not even what I like the most about that film.

Over the past two and half years of my blogging, one thing has certainly changed for me and that is exhilaration you feel after watching something memorable. Not that I don't feel it anymore but it has certainly become less frequent. I remember waiting 6 months for Inception, watching a late evening show on the opening day and then discussing the hell out of it till 2:30 in the morning in theater parking lot. I remember being in awe of Daniel Plainview and going batshit crazy in bowling alley scene. I remember being stunned by the greatness of Rashomon(1950), by the audacity of making a film in one room of 12 Angry Men(1957) and the beauty of Ingrid Bergman and Notorious(1946). Maybe I have become more cynical or more experienced and ante-up my own game but that rarely happens anymore. Maybe that is what makes these movies special.

Rating(out of 5):

Past Favorites:

Notorious(1946)

Rashomon(1950) 

City of God(2002)

12 Angry Men(1957)

Bicycle Thieves(1948)
Wall-E(2008)
City Lights(1931)

Profile of a Director: Paul Thomas Anderson

There are two things that bring us to this post. First of all, Wes Anderson's profile that I did last month. That was the first profile where I saw every movie in his filmography and wrote about it. After that, I was thinking about which director to cover next, which brings us to the second thing. That would be release of P.T. Anderson's The Master(2012) which reminded me that I still had not seen Boogie Nights(1997) by then. I had all the time in the world to see it before but I guess, I needed to set this target for myself - watching all the movies PTA did to do another profile, Wes Anderson style. Over the next month, I got hold of all the PTA movies that I had not seen(that would be 3 including Boogie Nights) which brings us to this post right here, right now. I really don't think that there are many people in the industry who have as much knowledge of the craft as much as Paul Thomas Anderson and that's even more remarkable if you take his age into account. Born and brought up on '70s cinema; which in my opinion was probably the best decade for American Cinema; he not only seeped everything he possibly can from the likes of Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola and most notably for him, Robert Altman but more remarkably even developed his own distinctive style. There must be something in the water in '70s since, for better or for worse, almost every director from that school has his own distinctive style. Think Quentin Tarantino or Wes Anderson. Let us get right into the filmography of Paul Thomas Anderson.

The Dirk Diggler Story(1988)(short): This is where it all started. First short that PTA made set up the base for what he will make a full-length feature out of 10 years later and call it, Boogie Nights(1997). If you are a fan of movie(and who isn't), you can have a look at it here. As the name suggests and if you have seen the movie, you would know that this is the story of Life and Works of Dirk Diggler trying to make his mark on the porn industry. To tell you the truth, by no means it is anywhere close to Boogie Nights. Most actors working in it are really bad and look and act like actual porn stars(for all I know, they might actually be). But there is a good possibility that if we did not have this, there may not be any Boogie Nights and for that; it needs to be seen. Grade: B+

Cigarettes and Coffee(1993)(short): Another short that is worth your time that PTA did before getting into feature films. For a 24-minute short, it is remarkable to see how many storylines PTA handles in it and it is really exciting to see him slowly merge these seemingly different arcs into each other. A story that revolves around $20 bill and multiple characters that come in possession of the note, we soon realize that even though none of the characters know each other despite being in the same diner, only thing that they have in common with each other is that note. Featuring much better known actors like Phillip Baker Hall who also worked with him in couple of his next movies and Miguel Ferrer, this probably is the first example of great storytelling that PTA has become known for. Grade: A

Hard Eight(1996) aka Sydney: So, this is probably where it all really started. PTA's first full-length feature. It may not be a good idea to start with this but it is probably the weakest of his whole filmography. But then again, it isn't saying much considering I am a PTA Fan-boy through and through which should be clear once you see the ratings below. Basically it is a story of Sydney who is a professional gambler. One day, he meets John sitting outside some cafe somewhere in the vicinity of Reno. He buys him a coffee, lends him 50 bucks and also teaches him how to make the most of them. John - who has no money, no one and nowhere to go - follows Sydney from them on and becomes a small-time and moderately successful gambler. He even finds love in Clementine, part-time waitress, part-time hooker. But something Clementine does threatens to destroy their world. It is completely de-stylized, neither slows down at any point nor speeds up - completely monotonous in pacing and I do not mean any of this necessarily as a complaint. However, some of his characteristics are pretty evident from the very first film - excellent performances all round, simple but tight and interesting story and his photography. If you have seen it, the conversation between John and Sydney might remind you of the conversation in Cigarettes and Coffee but comparison stops there.  Grade: B+

Boogie Nights(1997): This is as good as it gets and no, I am not talking about 1997, Helen Hunt - Jack Nicholson movie. This is as fine a movie you will get to see. I saw this movie very recently and promptly kicked myself for not having seen it early. It is a story of young man, who somehow gets drawn into the world of porn films after one of the directors finds him and thinks that he has a great potential in him. After some initial hesitancy, he follows him and that road takes him to the top very quickly but his ego takes him to the rock bottom equally fast and brings him right where he started it. As I already said above that PTA's first short was the test ride for this ultimate roller coaster of a ride that still makes everyone wonder, how did he do something as amazing as this at such a tender age?, including myself. For a movie about the porn industry, Boogie Nights maintains it's balance wonderfully well that it does not become a porn movie itself but at the same time never looses it's grip on the subject. Maintaining that balance would be a very delicate affair and it's very easy to fall off either way but PTA thrives on it. Another thing that I have to mention here about it is performances. First of all, there are so many wonderful performances in it that I will be here all day. So, I am not even going to bother listing them. Just Everyone, every single one that appears on screen, even for a second. But more importantly, they are all playing actors, bad actors and everyone does a great job of portraying bad actors. I do not know much about it but I presume making a great job of playing bad actor should be pretty damn hard. Grade: A+

Magnolia(1999): Back in the day when I first saw this movie, this movie was my prime example of 'Something that I never thought I would Like and ended up Loving'. I remember watching a little bit of Magnolia and turning it off, not because it was boring but because it felt too heavy to me then. For next six months or so, I kept its same impression and always opted for something else over it. The fact that it is almost 3 hours in length wasn't helping much either. One 'fine' day, I finally bit the bullet, sat in front of the TV and saw it but more importantly, instantly Loved It !! It is really difficult to summarize Magnolia because it is Cigarettes and Coffee's multiple inter-wining story lines concept at its grandest - PTA at his personal best. For the first watch, something which is easily one of the ultimate "WTF!!" moments in cinematic history (Do I even need to tell you what I am talking about ?)was probably the biggest highlight even though it took me some time to know the biblical reference and hence the actual meaning of that scene. Once again in typical Robert Altman style, there is a whole cast full of people with wonderful performances but the first time around Tom Cruize and Melora Walters took the cake for me. When I say that it has a cast full of wonderful performances, I really mean it because I have done its re-runs looking at just a couple of performances every time - Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Juliana Moore once, then William H. Macy and John C. Reilly and so on. I still haven't run out of them after multiple watches. Grade: A

Punch-Drunk Love(2002): Apparently, PTA is big fan on Adam Sandler and his type of comedy. So, he did a movie for him, in his style that will suit Adam Sandler as well. So he did this story of Barry Egan who has seven sisters and the way they treat him or almost abuse him, has had some psychological impacts like it has kept him away from everyone or unpredictable in a way he will react to any situation. However, he finally finds a girl that he likes and who even finds him interesting. But one call he made one day to a phone-sex line threatens to ruin all that. Ohh and I forgot to mention that there is a harmonium and lots of pudding in it as well. Some of the highlights of it were Adam Sandler which surprised me as well but he was really good in it, Emily Watson - Brilliant and it is weird but somehow I noticed her cloths a lot and most importantly, Tracking shots and lots of them. It was a fun movie and I liked it a lot and I do not mean it as a criticism against Punch-Drunk Love but it's such an odd-man-out in PTA's filmography. I actually wanted to check if they got the right Anderson since it is much more Wes Anderson than P.T. Anderson. You see, Barry Egan and his seven sisters, whole plot with Phillip Seymour Hoffman will fit perfectly well in Wes Andersonian world and even more importantly, music used in this. I have never seen anyone else use anything like that. Only real difference was any of the characters or everything around them is that they aren't that stylised maybe and hence feel like they belong to this world. To me, most of Wes Anderson films look like they belong in a completely different world. Grade: B+

So now, I can talk about Couch(2003) but Adam Sandler himself doesn't talk in it and now-a-days we have trailers longer than this or Blossoms and Blood(2003) which is just a collection of alternate takes or deleted material from Punch-Drunk Love which when put together, surprisingly makes a lot more sense than it should. And then there is also Mattress Man Commercial, commercial for a shop Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character runs in Punch-Drunk Love, which is actually quite funny. I like the way he falls off but I'll rather get to the next one.

There Will Be Blood(2007): I think this will be the shortest paragraph I have written for any movie. This is as close to perfection as any movie can ever get. In Every. Single. Aspect. This is my second favorite movie of all time and Daniel Day-Lewis' portrayal of Daniel Plainview is 'THE Best Individual Performance I have Ever seen' and the bowling alley scene is probably THE Scene as well. So, this is where I run out to the street and start screaming "PTA Is God !! PTA Is God !!". Grade: A++(if there is any other Grade higher than that, I would give that too)

The Master(2012): After There Will Be Blood and all the gushing over it, it was imperative that wherever PTA goes, I will be there. Naturally, as soon as I knew that there is going to be a PTA movie in 2012, it went right into my most anticipated movies of the year along with Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises(2012), another director I obsessively geek over. Strange comparison eh? Wait till I tell you how much similar I think both their career paths are? They might be going in very different directions but I feel like they are following a very similar paths. I can even go as far as to say that PTA is Martin Scorsese to Nolan's Spielberg. Too far? OK. I will stop. So, The Master. Another movie with great cast. I am almost certain that all the three leads will have an academy nominations. Screenplay, Director and Movie nominations seem likely as well. If you ask me, watch the first 'processing' scene. Enough. Great work with Camera, stunning cinematography, haunting score. But as I said in my review previously, decisive factor here is the story. As you must have already seen; if you can connect with story in some way, people will call it a great cinematic achievement. If you don't, you might think of it as boat load of crap and even though I belong to the first group myself, I completely understand those in the other. Funny thing is until The Master, I never realized that PTA's movies can be as divisive. Now that I think back, I realize that every movie he did can be and to an extent, has been. Grade: A-

Previous Profiles:
Wes Anderson
Billy Wilder
Christopher Nolan

Sidney Lumet
Martin Scorsese

Woody Allen

The Master

If you remember reading my last post, which miraculously vanished from my drafts couple of days after publishing it and I never found it, I promised that I am going to try and write down some kind of review of The Master(2012), Paul Thomas Anderson's latest venture. Anyone who has seen this movie or read what someone else has written about it, you probably have some idea of why I am saying that I will 'Try' to write a review. The Master isn't a kind of movie you will come out of and expect to have understood it fully. On top of that, I usually do not write about latest releases because generally I watch movies considerably late than everyone else and take my time to write anything I write. Combine the three things together and common sense says I shouldn't be writing what I am right now. But, it's PTA - if I broke my rule for Chris Nolan reviewing The Dark Knight Rises(2012), I can do that for PTA too right? and once in a while, I have seen it in time. I think I am little more used to writing now as well. So, I am going to look at this as a challenge and take it. I DO NOT guarantee the outcome will be pretty.

So, The Master. Right from the very first scene when we see Freddie Quell, we know that he is a disturbed individual. We catch up with him on his ship, working in Navy in second World war. War ends soon after and they all have to come back to civilization to start re-building their lives. It doesn't really say anything about it but from what we learn about Freddie in a process, tells us that Freddie isn't exactly thrilled about it and there are reasons. Freddie isn't exactly what we will say - a people's person. He is much more savage, much more raw and unconventional even by today's standard. As you would expect, he struggles to find livelihood in normal world going from one trouble to another. I have no idea how he lands up in the cabbage farm, somewhere in East Asia I am assuming, from the department store or from there on board of yacht of Lancaster Dodd. Dodd is a founder of some kind of philosophical, cult movement called 'The Cause'. After some initial interaction, Dodd believes that Freddie needs help and he should help him. After their first one-on-one session which Dodd calls 'Processing', he is rather convinced that he can not only help Freddie but can make him "His Masterpiece", an answer to those non-believers who question the methods of The Cause. Dodd, like many leaders even in Real world, definitely possesses one ability - to make people believe in what he is saying, regardless of whether it is right or wrong. I may not agree with a single thing they say but I can not help but admire the way they hypnotize those around them. However it isn't an easy way for either Freddie to work within the confines that someone else has built for him or for Dodd to tame the beast like Freddie. Also, the fact that no one else in The Cause, including Dodd's wife Peggy, believes Freddie to be fit to join them isn't helping either of them. We follow the winding path that they both follow in each other's company but the real question is can either of them learn anything from or help the other one and if they do, who ?

For a lot of reasons, I think this is this year's The Tree of Life(2011). Both the movies are extremely beautiful to look at, have some of the stellar performances that will certainly be in the mix in the award season, and also because of their unconventional presentation and cold characters. If you can connect with them, you will love it. If you don't, you will hate it. I really wouldn't be surprised if people call this movie pointless. Well, they have. For what it is worth, even Roger Ebert did and I can definitely understand their point of view because that's what I feel about The Tree of Life. Only difference for me is somehow I connected with The Master and didn't with The Tree of Life. Throughout 137 minute length of movie, it challenged my perception, my need to compartmentalize the characters as Good or Bad. Freddie Quell is compulsive alcoholic who would literally mix anything he can get as long as he gets a kick out of it. In fact, that is the reason Dodd keeps him on his yacht on very first night, because he likes whatever Freddie has concocted but his habit and need nauseated me, he answers every question asked to him in his first processing session quickly, firmly and with amazing conviction(I have no idea how the hell did he do that scene. My eyes were watery just watching it) - that fascinated me. And right until the very last shot of the film, he never knows what he wants out of his life, probably more importantly IF he wants anything at all.  He is completely a lost cause and I pitied him. For my money, I do not remember a character or a movie that has evoked such a range of emotions from me. Even Amy Adams' character. There is a point in movie where her character kind of turns it on(quite literally) and she is nothing like before from that point onwards. From then on, we know what's her worth in everything that master is building.

However divisive The Master may turn out to be, I am sure that almost everyone will agree about few things. All the three leads giving stunning performances would probably be the first one. You can say that the characters are cold(which they are) and story doesn't really go anywhere(SPOILER: It pretty much ends exactly where it started. But that doesn't mean it didn't GO anywhere, does it?) but I doubt if anyone will question the quality of the performances from all the three leads. PTA has always been great in eliciting memorable performances and he doesn't disappoint here either. I wouldn't say I have seen whole lot of Joaquin Phoenix, playing the central role of Freddie Quell but from what I have seen and heard, this should be his finest performance till today. From the word go, this guy was so much into his character, it was scary. Even smallest of his movements, single twitch of a muscle does not feel like out of place. I might sound like a broken record talking of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, titular master and as solid as ever, but I really have never seen him in a bad role. Personally, Amy Adams is probably THE favorite actress working today. So, maybe I am biased but she is just as great as two male leads. Given the script that mainly revolves around male leads, she doesn't have a lot to do. But even then she left a strong impression on me. Shot in 70 mm, it looks stunningly beautiful, score and background music used is haunting. I never knew that PTA's films were so divisive. I always thought of him as one of the best directors with very distinct style and loud voice. I understand that most of his movies are rather difficult to stomach including this one and have some of the ultimate WTF? moments(Frog rain in Magnolia(1999), Bowling Alley scene in There Will Be Blood(2007) or last shot of Boogie Nights(1997)) but in my opinion that's what makes him great. However, real selling point here will remain to be story and it's characters.

Now, about the things that did throw me off a little. First of all, it jumps up a lot. Within a blink of eye, he goes from that department store to cabbage farm and then when he gets in trouble there, on Dodd's yacht. We have no idea of time or location of either of them. On couple of occasions, it also jumps in and out of reality like nobody's business. I had no idea what's happening after Freddie gets a phone call in the theater until I assumed it must be a dream. Not necessarily a bad thing but it is a story that takes time to grow and demands your complete attention. However, the positives out of this movie far outweigh the negatives. If nothing else, it is worth watching for all PTA Fan-boys and for three central performances.

Rating(out of 5):