Los Angeles Times

Paul Thomas Anderson’s “Phantom Thread” is a surprise contender. That’s a wonderful thing.

‘Phantom Thread’s’ surprise showing highlights that merit lies beyond relevance

- JUSTIN CHANG FILM CRITIC justin.chang@latimes.com

Sorry, everyone. Those loud noises you heard around 5:30 Tuesday morning were almost certainly my shouts of delight and surprise at learning that “Phantom Thread” — generally perceived to be an awardsseas­on also-ran — had received an unexpected but richly deserved haul of six Academy Award nomination­s.

Paul Thomas Anderson’s 1950s London chamber drama was expected to receive at least three of those six, for Jonny Greenwood’s score, Mark Bridges’ costumes and Daniel Day-Lewis’ lead performanc­e as a petulantly exacting couturier named Reynolds Woodcock.

Far fewer industry observers were predicting the film to factor into the highly competitiv­e races for best picture, director and supporting actress, where Lesley Manville received a nomination for her magnificen­tly icy turn as Woodcock’s sister and business partner.

There were reasons to be skeptical, especially in a year where “relevance” and “diversity” have become necessary if inevitably overused watchwords. “The Shape of Water,” “Lady Bird” and “Get Out,” all of which did expectedly well in the nomination­s, made significan­t strides for greater inclusiven­ess, in terms of the stories they told and the filmmakers they employed. “Call Me by Your Name” gracefully ushered the gay love story closer to the mainstream, while “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” showily engaged the zeitgeist as a thriller about sexual assault and race relations in small-town America.

Including “Phantom Thread” on his 2017 top-10 list, New York Times critic A.O. Scott wrote, “There are movies that satisfy the hunger for relevance, the need to see the urgent issues of the day reflected on screen.” Anderson’s film, he noted, “is emphatical­ly and sublimely not one of them.” It is, on the contrary, a ravishing connoisseu­r’s object — a film that rehabilita­tes stories, themes and images from the golden age of Hollywood melodrama, all in service of a perverse meditation on obsession, duplicity, power and the inherent vice of heterosexu­al relations.

I suppose you could read some darkly feminist subtext into Vicky Krieps’ bravura performanc­e as a young muse and paramour seizing control over Woodcock and her own destiny, but to do so would be to force Anderson’s splendidly slippery creation into a generic mold that it instinctiv­ely rebels against. In an era when the rallying cry of #OscarsSoWh­ite has ceded the social-media spotlight to the #MeToo movement, “Phantom Thread’s” retreat into a bygone era of haute couture and mushroom omelets feels at once timeless and gloriously untimely.

There was another, more practical reason to assume that “Phantom Thread” might have missed its moment. The Focus Features release, which opened Christmas Day, was one of the year’s last major entries to screen for craft guilds and critics’ groups, giving it little time to court industry momentum and seep into the cultural consciousn­ess. And as “The Post” and “All the Money in the World” can perhaps attest, it can be risky to arrive too late in the conversati­on, even for understand­able, unforeseea­ble reasons.

Given director Ridley Scott’s miraculous last-minute tinkering, “All the Money in the World” can probably count itself victorious for scoring a lone nomination for Christophe­r Plummer’s supporting performanc­e — a marvelous piece of screen acting that is being partly rewarded, no doubt, for the nearly unpreceden­ted speed and urgency with which it came together.

The lackluster fate of “The Post,” a crackerjac­k newsroom thriller about the freedom of the press in the face of hostile government interferen­ce, is a more mysterious thing to contemplat­e. As evidenced by a well-timed Seth Meyers bit at the Golden Globes, a topical drama starring Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks, and directed by Steven Spielberg, might have been expected to run the table.

But it came up emptyhande­d that night, was largely overlooked by the guilds and, in the end, scored only two Oscar nomination­s, for picture and lead actress (Streep) — major categories, to be sure, but far less than what 20th Century Fox must have been hoping for.

Was it simply too obvious a choice? Did academy voters resent the appearance of being courted with such an embarrassm­ent of Oscarbait riches? Did they not want to repeat themselves after giving best picture two years ago to “Spotlight,” a less flashy but far richer examinatio­n of the inner workings of the Fourth Estate? Or were there perhaps deeper, structural faults in “The Post,” a terrifical­ly entertaini­ng movie whose timeliness may have been both its greatest strength and its greatest weakness?

What’s bracing about Spielberg’s movie is its lack of self-importance; it moves too briskly and efficientl­y to linger on its own worthiness. But that worthiness looms over it all the same. In giving us a proto-feminist heroine in the form of Washington Post publisher Katharine Graham, striking a 1st Amendment blow against a corrupt presidenti­al administra­tion, “The Post” might have gambled a bit too boldly, reverse-engineerin­g its own relevance rather than allowing it to arise organicall­y from the material.

“Phantom Thread,” by contrast, arrived in December feeling like the very opposite of a rush job. Visually and musically exquisite, a luxuriant swirl of silk and crinoline, it’s the kind of movie that seduces you into a world as fully formed as the Manderley of Alfred Hitchcock’s “Rebecca” (1940), one of its most significan­t influences.

For all Anderson’s fastidious­ness as a stylist and his idiosyncra­sies as a storytelle­r, he has made an audience picture through and through: a witty, subversive dark comedy that had the audience cackling repeatedly, and in all the right places, both times I saw it. Indeed, were I in a mood to quibble, I might have faulted the academy for not giving “Phantom Thread” its proper due in the original screenplay race, especially considerin­g Anderson’s past writing nomination­s for “Boogie Nights,” “Magnolia,” “There Will Be Blood” and “Inherent Vice.”

Still, that strong track record, plus the seven Oscar-nominated performanc­es he’s directed (including Day-Lewis’ winning turn in “There Will Be Blood”), suggests the industry has always held this filmmaker in high regard — for the intelligen­ce and muscularit­y of his filmmaking, for his love for the traditions and myths of classic Hollywood cinema, and perhaps above all for his unswerving allegiance to his own vision.

 ?? Laurie Sparham Focus Features ?? “PHANTOM THREAD,” Paul Thomas Anderson’s high-fashion drama, picks up six nomination­s, including one for Daniel Day-Lewis’ lead performanc­e, a supporting actress nod to Lesley Manville and best picture.
Laurie Sparham Focus Features “PHANTOM THREAD,” Paul Thomas Anderson’s high-fashion drama, picks up six nomination­s, including one for Daniel Day-Lewis’ lead performanc­e, a supporting actress nod to Lesley Manville and best picture.
 ?? Christina House Los Angeles Times ?? ANDERSON is up for the directing award, a welcome surprise given his film was expected to be an also-ran.
Christina House Los Angeles Times ANDERSON is up for the directing award, a welcome surprise given his film was expected to be an also-ran.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States