Blucher One of the worst movies I've ever seen

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

neicho-79775 The screenplay of the film, the crispness of the image. The acting by Hoffman and Pheonix is incredible.

marieltrokan A strange casualness, is a normal strangeness. A normal strangeness is the illusion of normality and the illusion of strangeness. The illusion of normality is the reality of strangeness. The illusion of strangeness is the reality of normality.Normality is reality. Strangeness is fantasy. The reality of reality is pure reality. The reality of fantasy is the impurity of fantasy.An impure fantasy is an impure strangeness - an impurity that's impure.An impure impurity is a corrupt corruption. A corrupt corruption is a pure corruption.A pure reality is a corrupt purity. A pure corruption is a corrupt purity.The corruption of purity is a history. The history of a corrupt purity is not a corrupt purity - the history of a corrupt purity is a pure purity.A purity can't be invaded. A pure purity is the non-invasion of a non-invasion.A non-invasion is a freedom from invasion. A freedom from invasion a dependence on freedom. A pure purity is a dependence on freedom that's dependent on freedom.A pure purity is the purity of freedom needing freedom: needing freedom is the purity of oppression.An actual pure reality is one in which freedom is valuable because of the purity of oppression - the impurity of freedom.Actual purity is when freedom forces itself to become tyrannical so that the experience of freedom is a welcome change.Actual purity is when freedom hurts itself so that it can be the source of its own nature.Actual purity is when freedom doesn't rely on outside forces to help the experience of freedom keep onto its status - freedom is willing to do the work in order to help itself be what it's supposed to be

diogomanuel This movie is a deep one, the problem is that it is a deep journey to nowhere!We learn nothing from it, we don't enjoy watching it, and not even the good performances of the main actors overcome the sense that we have wasted our time watching a movie that isn't worth watching!This movie may have been done to please a group of individuals with too much money on their hands...1 out of 10, because we can't give 0. Faultless acting though.

paul2001sw-1 Paul Thomas Anderson's typically lengthy movie 'The Master' tells the story of the association of a drifter and a cult guru, the latter clearly modelled on L. Ron Hubbard. As with his earlier 'There Will Be Blood', the story is both linear and not especially well-shaped, though Philip Seymour Hoffman is quite good as the pseudo-Hubbard. Indeed, that's the bigger problem here: Hubbard's story is quite interesting, and a good basis for fiction, but no light is shed by it that story through the eyes of a random acquaintance. What is presented here is just a story of two odd people, each of whom are hard to relate to. My favourite film of Anderson remains his first, 'Hard Eight'; interestingly, that was also his shortest.