2. Punch Drunk Love

3. Magnolia

4. Hard Eight

5. One Battle After Another

6. The Master

7. Phantom Thread

8. Boogie Nights

9. Inherent Vice

10. Licorice Pizza

Frankly, 2-8 are all almost interchangeable.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49314433)

2. There Will Be Blood

3. Magnolia

4. Phantom Thread

5. Punch Drunk Love

-----(substantial drop-off)-----

6. Licorice Pizza

7. Inherent Vice

8. Hard Eight

9. One Battle After Another

10. The Master

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49316905)

I also feel like The Master is massively polarizing, but I liked it after a second watch.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49317080)

I have seen The Master several times and I have never enjoyed it at all even a little bit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49317176)

It's safe to say I'm a PTA fan.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49317797)

Reconsider your position

Licorice Pizza was only any good in the same way that Tarantino's "Once Upon A Time" could be considered as any good and will not hold up in the slightest once a couple years have passed. That said, PTA's best films have all been made *after* his coke addiction went and left. Discuss

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49317567)

Licorice Pizza is the only PTA film I really didn’t like and it is several ticks below Inherent Vice.

I think the coke addiction changes are more about PTA growing as an artist and becoming more sure of himself rather than trying to pay homage to Scorsese, as in Boogie Nights.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49317793)

I'm not gonna say LP was a masterpiece but it was a fun romp. It was a lot better than OUATIH.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49317808)

"What if" guys lol win one for positivity! Go us! *contextless Peckinpah gore explosion sans Sam's sense of distinctly Christian morality-driven ambivalence rolls over the credits*. It started off fairly strong and then became pornographic from the Bruce Lee and Manson Ranch bits and on

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49318644)

I am someone who thinks that every great movie has a great story, and no good movies don't have a story. There's a great Red Letter Media episode breaking down why the Star Wars prequels suck about this. The guy says describe Han Solo without saying his name and all these people go oh well he's a dashing rogue, a thief with a heart of gold etc. Now describe Qui Gon Jin and they're like uhhh stoic?

It's the same with any great movie. I could probably recite the entire plot of The Godfather scene by scene with no preparation. Now do OUTIH. It's about an actor who's pissed that he's not in movies anymore? He watches TV a lot? And his friend is jacked and they go to the Manson ranch? I guess? It's just not good. Nothing without a plot is good. Show me a good movie with no plot I'll give you one million dollars.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49318683)

counterpoint: some of fellini (that one that was just 8 or 9 unconnected vignettes) or maybe other "low concept" italian experimentation films from the 60s and 70s. the big lebowski has an "anti-plot" which is still a plot in a sense. inherent vice is also in this camp. "paris texas" was more or less plotless but still a gripping film. i guess you could lawyer "nature documentaries" or similar as being great but plotless films. there was a movie from one of the shaw brothers greats that was just a guy walking around hong kong and interacting with street vendors and stuff as a slice of life AV experience but idr the name of it. koyaanisqatsi (sp) was plotless but still a great film

once upon a time definitely has a defined plot but it's self-fellating, pornographic, and all of this happens at a benthic michael bay level of self awareness married to tarantino's similarly high level of technical skill so you wind up with something propagandistic, heavy-handed (especially for the times), and maybe even a little unsettling to rewatch without proper contextualization. like "inglorious basterds" release vis a vis the era it comes across as tone-deaf and not in a genuinely challenging van sant infant terrible auteur way but as a dopamine junkie manchild pooping his pants and gleefully pointing attention to their soiled trouser leg sort of fashion

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49318728)

autoadmit geek show

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49322865)

It's about accepting your limits as a man and then using that acceptance to break forward.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49319082)

he could've done something radical and artistically bold but instead decided to make more pornography. it's probably going to be the last major film made about the end of the flower generation for a long while. it was a squandered opportunity

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49320031)

The disjointedness is part of the thematic framing as well as an accurate representation of the structure of the plot

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49318232)

it's a very "busy" film both in visual texture and dialogue, appropriate for the lushness of the source material

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5781505&forum_id=2Elisa#49320023)