Tuesday, May 22, 2012

PTA In Conversation With Robert Downey Sr. Part 2; Tom Cruise Has Seen ‘The Master'

Last Tuesday, Criterion premiered the first installment in a 4 part series capturing a candid discussion between PTA and filmmaker/iconoclast Robert Downey Sr. Today they've dropped the latest episode which you can watch above where the pair discuss the film "No More Excuses" (1968) which is featured in the Eclipse box set of Downey Sr.'s work.

In other news, according to The Wrap, Paul screened "The Master" for none other than Frank "T.J." Mackey himself, Tom Cruise. According to two anonymous sources (aren't they always?) Cruise “had issues” with some parts of the movie but the two have remained friends since "Magnolia." The article also indicates that The Weinstein Co. wants to show the film to John Travolta as well to head off any potential Scientology-themed controversy down the line. Possibly all nonsense, but time will tell. (via @ntwalker)

If you haven't read the scene-by-scene rundown of the 4 minutes of Cannes footage, you should probably do so. And then check out the photos from the teaser in our Facebook gallery and stay tuned to Twitter for the latest news and updates.


  1. That is such a considerate gesture on behalf of PTA to do what many would be afraid to do and lay it all out for Tom Cruise like that. I got chills just reading the headline of this post. I always knew deep down that "The Master" would not simply take cheap shots at Scientology. If you look at how PTA has portrayed the porn industry, or the oil industry, or people of questionable behavior or politics in general, it has always been with a balanced view and generous consideration towards the human struggles of each situation. It is an absolutely wise and essential decision to have an open dialogue with Scientologists as the publicity of this film gains steam.

  2. Am I the only one who kinda wishes the film has enough edge to make the Church of Scientology shoot their quills out? I mean, I don't want some Oliver Stone message-film (where the intent to provoke makes the film itself meaningless), but this subject matter sounds super relevant to me.

    Maybe it'll be like TWBB, where a lot of people wanted it to be this veiled attack on the Bush administration, and that element ended up being so subtextual, it was barely even noticeable (if at all).

  3. I think Laura Dern's comments from a while back (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2011/10/laura-dern-talks-master-working-with.html) are relevant here:

    "In terms of the subject of the film, and all of the films he makes, he dances so comfortably in the gray. When he takes on the subject matter, any subject matter, he is there to examine what it offers; not just take anything down. It’s funny when people think filmmakers are irreverent. It’s like, “Ooh, what’s he doing. I heard the movie’s about dot dot dot.” They go, “I bet he’s really going to attack it.” In fact, he tries to uncover what he loves. What the worth is in something."

  4. "I do many many things. I am a doctor, a writer, a nuclear physicist, a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man."

    That, right there, proves that the Hoffman character has at least SOME basis in L. Ron Hubbard. It doesn't prove anything else, but that is, at the least, a reference to the man.