Talk:The Master (2012 film)

United States: Cinema / Arizona Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Arizona portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arizona (assessed as Low-importance).

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Consistent Plot Exposition[edit]

The plot summary randomly switches between referring to Freddie Quill as either Freddie or Quill with no consistency. It needs to be addressed.74.68.149.19 (talk) 04:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assumptions of Plot Details[edit]

There is no actual confirmation that Freddy had a vision of Dodd calling him, and that he didn't just have pause for a moment some time later before leaving. There was nothing to suggest this was a dream sequence other than inference made by the original author.

There is confirmation, though, when Freddie himself describes it as a dream later: See clip here: https://clip.cafe/the-master-2012/if-figure-a-way-live-without-serving-a-master/.SuttonStokes (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can you clarify this? Not sure I understand: "that he didn't just have pause for a moment some time later." SuttonStokes (talk) 13:38, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is also the matter of Freddie making a decision to leave The Cause which is never said in the film, and must be inferred from the actions that follow. It may be a quibble to argue that, but again, the plot summary is inferring things that were left intentionally open-ended and ambiguous and it would be presumptive to assume that these decisions or actions truly occurred as the synopsis describes them, given the strong critical reaction by viewers at large to the ambiguous nature of the climax and ending of the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.75.78.2 (talk) 17:26, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that the vision or dream at the end of the film described by the article's original author is an inference, but I think it's reasonable and I haven't a better description of the sequence at this point. I removed the reference to torpedo juice, which is a likely explanation of Freddie's brewing but isn't stated in the film either. For the sake of brevity I think it's enough to describe Freddie as sex-obsessed and maladjusted; the film doesn't diagnose him and every detail of his behavior is unnecessary. The inkblot sequence simply underlines his obsession with sex, as much as his conduct on the beach. The film's depiction of Freddie embracing the crude sand woman at the beginning and the end of the story is a powerful statement without words. Beadmatrix (talk) 09:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)Beadmatrix[reply]

First, new here, so hopefully I'm not doing any of this wrong. But I edited the article to indicate the movie-theater/phone-call scene is a dream, based on Freddie describing it that way during his visit to Dodd in England. See clip here: https://clip.cafe/the-master-2012/if-figure-a-way-live-without-serving-a-master/. I also think that for Dodd to appear to have supernatural powers like this would utterly transform the movie, although I realize that is an inference. I still would think it was a dream even if Freddie didn't say so, because it's believable he could be deluded on this point, but again he does say so. To me, this is a great, small detail that shows Dodd the skilled manipulative charlatan at work, because of the way he takes mention of a dream and just runs with it. SuttonStokes (talk) 14:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Release Date[edit]

What should the date be? Some say 2012 and some say 2013. The IMDb says 2013. Should we just make it TBA? TheSecondWaltz (talk) 23:00, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks as if it is getting a late 2012 release according to some interview with one of the producers, so never mind. TheSecondWaltz (talk) 04:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

70 mm[edit]

Something should be added about the film being screened in 70mm. Not sure were to add that info. A few articles are here here here here Allwham (talk) 18:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And this talks about the advanced screenings in New York; Los Angeles; San Francisco; Seattle; Boston; Washington D.C.; Austin, Texas.

Mary Sue or Peggy? The name of L. Dodd's wife[edit]

I've read several articles that make mention of the character of Lancaster Dodd's wife being named "Mary Sue" just as L. Ron Hubbard's wife was named Mary Sue. This Wikipedia article refers to the character as "Mary Sue" in the Analogies With Scientology section, but as "Peggy Dodd" in the Cast section. Both references cite credible sources, but "Peggy" is the name on IMDB.

It seems quite possible, but not necessarily the case, that the character was originally named Mary Sue in prerelease versions of the film, but the name was changed in an attempt to create the appearance of more distance between it and the principal figures of Scientology. I've seen the film and I didn't notice that the character was ever called by name in dialogue.

That's just a theory, but the article as it is now is inconsistent on what the name is. I suggest that rather than remove references to "Mary Sue," the article should mention that early press for the film referred to the character as such, but she ended up being named Peggy. If someone could find a source explaining why that is the case, I think that would be optimal. -- 71.193.222.187 (talk) 12:40, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sales[edit]

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=themaster.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.207.213.185 (talk) 14:44, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It could easily be described as a BO bomb. It opened well in limited release, but at the time it was released wide the buzz was gone. At this point it won't break even, unless a miracle happens overseas.

Soundtrack Composers[edit]

The Music section says "All music composed by Jonny Greenwood". This is clearly not true for the songs which give the film the feel of the period. "Get Thee Behind Me Satan" is an Irving Berlin tune; "Changing Partners" was composed by Larry Coleman and Joe Darion; etc. Someone should edit the article to say so. I'm not confident about the style. Genialimbecile (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary needs work[edit]

I just watched this movie and the plot summary needs work as it doesn't capture the cult/coercive aspect of "the Cause" at all which is clearly a theme of the film. The summary as is casts a positive light on Dodd and the Cause which I don't think is consistent with the movie. The interpretation of here of the last scene seems particularly off the mark. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.34.121 (talk) 21:30, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Digital Internegative information is incorrect[edit]

Removed this line:

Because Anderson prefers working with film, he bypassed the use of a digital intermediate and digital editing, instead cutting using the film negative and color grading with the use of a photochemical timer.^[1]

The referenced article says nothing about bypassing digital editing or cutting using the film negative. They actually say the opposite here:

You weren't cutting on film were you?

No, we cut on the Avid but we printed film. Dailies were printed, we saw film dailies and then a work picture was created based on our Avid cut list so we had film screenings. ^[1]

References

^ ^a ^b "Photography of "The Master" in 65mm". in70mm.com. September 25, 2012. Retrieved November 6, 2012. Cite error: The named reference "editPC" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

disappointed[edit]

Come on guys, this film deserves feature article status, lets work on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilmLover91 (talk • contribs) 10:49, December 20, 2014

Impotence[edit]

Isn’t one of the main themes here impotence? Quill seems to be frustrated by his impotence and compensating by being raunchy (the jacking over the sand sculpture, the crass talk at the Rorschach test). There seems to be some “problem” with his relationship with Doris, even before he leaves for sea. He has a chance at a woman model, drinks until he passes out, and then loses his job at the department store when he picks a fight with a customer. He refuses the advances of Dodd’s daughter. He appears visibly frustrated when Dodd sings the ribald song with the naked women at the party. And, only after leaving the Cause finally does he successfully hook-up with a girl he meets in a bar. It seems to me part of the message of the film is that, as fraudulent and manipulative as Dodd is, he actually was able to help Quill confront his key weakness. Dutchman Schultz

Accolades section split[edit]

I believe the accolades section is large enough to warrant its own separate article now. Thoughts? Blue sphere 10:13, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Film about alcoholism[edit]

Given that both lead male characters spend much of the movie soused or alcohol dependent or trying to give up alcohol, it seems pretty easy to say that The Master could be categorized as a film about alcoholism. I would invite other editors to weigh in here on the talk page to arrive at consensus rather than undertaking what appears to be an incipient edit war with unproductive language in edit summaries. Pinging editors who have contributed on this subject: User:TheOldJacobite, User:69.201.140.177. Other views are welcome too, of course. Thanks. GetSomeUtah (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

65mm vs 70mm[edit]

There seems to be a misunderstanding about 65mm vs 70mm. No theatres were ever 'set up' for 65mm projection, only 70mm. 65mm is the film used in the camera. For projection, it is printed to 70mm - it has the same image size as 65mm but the extra 5mm were for up to 6 tracks of magnetic strip audio on the final print. It's best to think of 65mm as a shooting asset, while 70mm is a screening format.

[editPC-1] "Photography of "The Master" in 65mm". in70mm.com. September 25, 2012. Retrieved November 6, 2012. Cite error: The named reference "editPC" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

[1]