Does Paul Thomas Anderson realize that most of that so-called "help" occurred on the intro courses or early auditing? It was just the bait to hook them into the cult. In most cases there really were no "gains" afterwards, just hypnosis and illusions and putting in time. If PTA does understand this then he sure isn't admitting it.
MIND CONTROL WORKS AND IT "HELPS" PEOPLE. PTA is either deluded or playing some kind of Hollywood type mind games. It isn't.... then it is. Now it works. And next......(child abusing murder espionage cult?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_control
Or maybe he just wants to enjoy life without having to deal with a lawsuit from the cult. He's done his share.
It's probably not necessary for him to say Scientology works and helps people to not be sued by Scientology these days.
He seems to be trying to walk the line between it is and it isn't, with us on one side and the cult on the other. I guess if it helps get people to see and discuss the film, there's no real basis for criticizing him for that. That is his job, annoying as it might be to us (and Wee Davey).
Heads Up: The Master There will be a cult following: Phoenix rises in 'The Master' http://tinyurl.com/8h9pg46 (From The UK's Independent) What are we talking about? A film telling the story of a Second World War veteran who, on returning home, gets drawn in to a cult known as The Cause …. Elevator pitch There will be a cult following: Paul Thomas Anderson, as writer and director, proves he's the master of arthouse movies. Prime mover Anderson, the Oscar-winner behind There Will Be Blood, Magnolia and Boogie Nights. The stars Philip Seymour Hoffman plays Lancaster Dodd, the charismatic cult leader known as "The Master"; Joaquin Phoenix is Freddie Quell, the damaged vet who falls under his spell. Early buzz Rapturous, frankly. It has already broken arthouse box-office records on it's opening weekend in the US, and was a huge hit at film festivals; at Venice, it won Anderson best director, while Phoenix and Hoffman shared the best actor prize. A O Scott in The New York Times called it, "imposing, confounding and altogether amazing …. It is a movie about the lure and folly of greatness that comes as close as anything I've seen recently to being a great movie. There will be skeptics, but the cult is already forming." That cult looks set to encompass most critics, although the venerable Roger Ebert was less convinced, calling The Master, "fabulously well-acted and crafted, but when I reach for it, my hand closes on air. It has rich material and isn't clear what it thinks about it. It has two performances of Oscar caliber, but do they connect?" Insider knowledge The cult is partly inspired by Scientology – when developing the role of Quell, Anderson took one of their personality tests, in character, which got him interested in Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard. Risky move: according to studio boss Harvey Weinstein, Hollywood Scientologists put them under "a lot of pressure" to stop or change the film. It's great that … Phoenix is back on form, reportedly giving a star-making, career-defining performance in his first role in two years, after freaking everyone out with the is-it-isn't-it real documentary I'm Still Here. It's a shame that … while the film is, unusually, filmed in the wide-gauge 65mm format, giving greater richness and depth, few cinemas still have the appropriate projectors to screen it in such a format …. Hit potential Bound to be a hit. Has "Oscar winner'" written all over it. The details The Master is released across the UK on 16 November.
'The Master' May Win Awards, But It's a Box Office Loser So Far | The Wrap Movies “The Master” may turn out to be a big winner come awards season, but after five weeks in theaters it’s clear that Paul Thomas Anderson's Scientology-inspired movie is set to lose a lot of money for its billionaire producer, Megan Ellison. “The Master” was financed by Ellison’s Annapurna Pictures for $40 million last year, a staggering sum for an independent film paid entirely by the daughter of Oracle’s Larry Ellison, who stormed Hollywood with a checkbook and very good taste in film a couple of years ago. “I couldn’t believe it was not getting made,” 26-year-old Ellison told The Wrap in Cannes earlier this year of the film, noting that Anderson’s landmark opus “Magnolia” was one of the most important movies of her adolescence. But the film is winding down its initial run in theaters with about $14 million in box office. Even with the marketing clout of The Weinstein Co. behind it, which will spend $20 million in prints and advertising, the film is estimated to lose about $15 million for its producer, one executive close to the film told The Wrap. Weinstein will recoup its marketing costs from the box office grosses and take a distribution fee. “The Master” is a very difficult film to sell,” Jeff Bock, senior analyst at Exhibitor Relations told The Wrap. "It is very obtuse, and in almost every way, a dreary arthouse film. The fact that it went into wide release and made what it has is a triumph in itself, and is a testament to the drawing power of Anderson within the cinephile community.” Despite Bock’s verdict, the movie has received strong critical reviews, especially for the intense, interior performance of Joaquin Phoenix as drifter Freddie Quell and the powerful, charismatic take of Philip Seymour Hoffman as Lancaster Dodd, the “master” leader of the cult. It is expected to do well in the acting categories during the awards season. More at www.thewrap.com/movies/article/master-may-win-awards-box-office-loser-so-far-60791
They'll baaaw when the Oscars are televised around the world and then after that when people are inspired to by the DVD. /popcorn/lulz
Joaquin Phoenix Hates The Oscars.... And Some Carrots | Dlisted Joaquin Phoenix is getting Oscar buzz (slap me with a dry carrot the next time I type "Oscar buzz" for his performance as a young Suri Cruise in The Master, but he let everyone know that he's not playing the Oscar game, because it leaves a gross taste of carrot caca in his mouth. During a talk with film critic Elvis Mitchell for Interview (via HuffPo), Elvis brought up the Oscar talk and it made Joaquin get on the floor and heave out pieces of rotten carrot bits. Joaquin was nominated for Walk the Line and he says the entire experience made him want to knee the Oscar trophy in its b-hole. Joaquin and Elvis' Oscar talk went like this: MITCHELL: So what are you going to do when they put you on the awards circuit for The Master?PHOENIX: You're out of your mind, dude. You're out of touch with what has happened.MITCHELL: I think we've established that you're the one who's out of his mind. [Phoenix laughs] You don't think that's going to happen?PHOENIX: I'm just saying that I think it's bullshit. I think it's total, utter bullshit, and I don't want to be a part of it. I don't believe in it. It's a carrot, but it's the worst-tasting carrot I've ever tasted in my whole life. I don't want this carrot. It's totally subjective. Pitting people against each other . . . It's the stupidest thing in the whole world. It was one of the most uncomfortable periods of my life when Walk the Line was going through all the awards stuff and all that. I never want to have that experience again. I don't know how to explain it—and it's not like I'm in this place where I think I'm just above it—but I just don't ever want to get comfortable with that part of things. I know how Joaquin feels, because watching I'm Still Here was like going through the most uncomfortable period ever. But that Oscar crap is not that serious! GOOPY Paltrow, Crash, Helen Hunt and Al Pacino (for Scent of the GD Woman) all won Oscars, so it's obviously just one, big long joke. Joaquin doesn't have to get all melodramatic about it. More like JoaQUEEN Phoenix. Joaquin really hates the Oscars, because it's the only time he's forced to take a shower and wash his pits. That's the real reason. And speaking of worst-taking carrots, Joaquin needs to stop acting like he wouldn't stick his tongue out if somebody dangled this worst-tasting carrot in front of him: Yes, Joaquin, you DO want this Carrot. From www.dlisted.com/2012/10/18/joaquin-phoenix-hates-oscars-and-some-carrots
Sources that any of his contemporaries found him charming in anything more than the short term? L. Sprague de Camp was very less than complementary, such that Hubbard's goons did the whole slander-pack operation on him, later used on old-guard critics: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/elron.html Also, from Strange Angel, The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientist John Whiteside Parsons, by George Pendle.
You are right about the later times for many of them, but Heinlein, at least, seemed to carry their friendship into the 1980s. RAH wrote the forward for Godbody, by T Sturgeon in which he mentions Hubbard fondly. It's been many years since I read it so I don't remember details.
Scientology film hypnotizes audience http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2012/10/scientology-film-hypnotizes-audience "The Master is an enthralling account of Scientology’s beginnings, with spectacular performances that drive home the compelling force one man can have not only on a large group of followers but also on a confused man searching for answers. The film will leave you captivated and will also remind you not to drink the punch just because the leader tells you to."
So far as I can tell, opinion of LRH in fandom has always been good. His peers liked him and while they knew he was a serious bullshitter, they took their bullshitting seriously and it seemed to me a lot of people viewed saying you're going to start your own bullshit religion to make money and then actually doing it was quite a lark. Before Scientology started attacking the Internet in 1994 and pissed me off, that was basically my impression of LRH and Scientology, that it was a rather clever lark played on suckers. There was also a running gag after LRH died in 1986 that he seemed to be writing more books since he died than before, and that he was only dead for tax reasons. (This joke was also trotted out for PKD who also had a lot of books published right after his death, and may be from the same source as the joke about Hotblack Desiato in HGTTG.)
LOL! No. Search "Conspiracy Worldcon scientology". http://ansible.co.uk/writing/hubbard.html The Ad Astra SF convention in Toronto awarded Hubbard a Woodie Award for Most Prolific Dead Author in the late 1980s. (No one from Bridge showed up to accept it, tsk!)
Really? When I think of science fiction greats from the 40s through the 80s, I think of Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, Arthur C. Clarke, Kurt Vonnegut, Michael Crichton (before he became a climate change denier and asshole), Frank Herbert, Philip K. Dick, Ursula K. LeGuin (a proper adaptation of Earthsea should be done yesterday; the previous ones sucked), Robert Heinlein, and William Gibson. I don't think of some pulp fiction hack whose works sucked and whose shitty garbage was later used to found a cult. Even before I gave two thoughts about Scientology, I hated LRH's crap.
What about the people it has damaged or those who have lost a lot through it, sometimes even relatives? What about all the tragedies and deaths? If he knows about it but doesn't say it then he shouldn't say anything positive about it either, he should just decline to comment and say something like "Sorry, I'm scared." Or "Sorry, I won't answer that." If he really knows as little as he claims about it then he has no business making a film based upon it. As a director you should know your subject. What a poor reply. Or maybe there is some clever idea behind it that I just don't get. Disappointing.
Me too. I remember the "drekalogy" Mission Earth was an incredible joke. Just the fact that it explained what "dekalogy" meant on the jacket cover was a joke. I'm just saying I never met anyone who said "I met him and he was a total dick." However, I did meet a few people who said they met him and he was a pretty cool guy. I was a low information LRH opinion-haver, I guess.
That response is total bullshit. Virtually everything PTA and PSH have said about Scientology and the film has been utter, absolute bullshit. Not only is it about Scientology but PTA even did shit like read The Aberree that absolutely nobody who isn't completely obsessed with the subject is even aware exists. Groups of long-term ex-Scientologists who watch this film in mixed company are constantly busting out laughing at references only long-term ex-Scientologists would even recognize. Other audience members are confused by this. So just disregard that bullshit. It's about Scientology. Everyone knows it.
Agreed. But I do not understand the motive for the response he gave if he doesn't believe in it himself. Does he want to motivate Scientologists who are on the fence about seeing the film to go and watch it? Is it a weird (or clever) PR strategy to keep it all vague? Is he scared? Something else? PTA strikes me as someone who thinks about what he's doing and saying, so I would like to understand his motives. Because it just seems like such an irresponsible thing to say if you don't believe it and actually know about the dangers, but don't mention them.
I'm actually not sure. It is getting so over the top that I'm half-suspecting they're trolling. So many things are exact analogs to early Scientology things that it isn't remotely plausible that it is not inspired by Scientology. It actually may be to put Scientology in a really unenviable position on how to respond. If they openly attack PTA, it does nothing but confirm it's about Scientology. If they react to the movie to criticize it at all, they have to basically say something like but hey, it's about a megalomaniacal con artist who made up a religion to get rich, who ELSE could it be about? I think they could knock it off a little though, they're laying it on a little thick.
maybe it is a way to avoid litigation, kinda like the disclaimer "this film/book/tv series is purely fictional and any semblance to persons, living or dead, is coincidental" all cults and their leaders have much in common and he doesn't want to focus on one particular one and lose the message (especially in the future when Co$ is gone. he says no, the rest of the media keep trying to make it yes and then discuss it more. More wogs get educated due to continued publicity and discussion. Film gets more publicity and hopefully more seats on bums Scilos on the fence about seeing it would be less likely to go see it if he came out and said "yes it is $cilontology". They are more likely to see it if he doesn't - not soo overtly Suppressive then! the dangers are well documented on the web already for those the film intrigued enough to find out more he trusts his audience to be able to think and discover without being spoon fed. Those who need spoonfeeding won't survive watching till the end of the film, if they even go in the first place. Doesn't strike me as weird or irresponsible
^^^^^^ Over on the Underground Bunker today, SkipPress mentioned in the comments that he thought he saw Giovanni Ribisi & his wife at The Master. I wonder if he would have gone (if he did indeed go) if PTA had confirmed it was about Scilons. And, I always wonder if TC is experiencing any, even slight, "awakening" after seeing this film. How could he not?
He may be playing a slow game of trying to get TC out. If so, I wish him success. It was certainly fascinating that he invited him to a private screening, and I seriously doubt DM would have approved.
The Master: Philip Seymour Hoffman on his 'Scientology' movie. Philip Seymour Hoffman tells Robbie Collin about his role as an L Ron Hubbard-style spiritual leader in The Master. snip from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Seymour-Hoffman-on-his-Scientology-movie.html "Hoffman relied on Anderson’s own research into Hubbard’s background. He didn’t read the Scientologists’ holy text, Dianetics, nor did he submit himself for auditing."
I wonder why any research was necessary about Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard in a movie that has nothing to do with Scientology.
Paul Thomas Anderson: The Master, Scientology and flawed fathers The director talks about making this year's most controversial Oscar contender Snip: (PTA)"The Master really isn't about the current state of Scientology at all. Instead, it takes its lead from the ideas expressed in Hubbard's 1950 book Dianetics. "And the ideas in Dianetics are fucking beautiful. The idea of recalling past lives is so hopeful, so optimistic, and it's something I would love to go along with." (XB)I'm sensing a "but" coming up. (PTA)"No, of course there's a but, there's a huge but. I don't even want to get into the buts..." http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/oct/25/paul-thomas-anderson-master-scientology?newsfeed=true
Philip Seymour Hoffman: 'You're not going to watch The Master and find a lot out about Scientology' - The Independent Philip Seymour Hoffman reveals how he’s already attracting Oscar buzz for what he claims is most emphatically not a film about Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard. If you have heard anything about The Master, it's most likely one of two things. That Hoffman, along with his co-star Joaquin Phoenix, walked away from the Venice Film Festival with a share of the Best Actor prize. Or that it is about Scientology, the ever-controversial religion whose famous Hollywood followers include Tom Cruise, Hoffman's former co-star in Anderson's Magnolia and Mission: Impossible III. But, while Dodd has been modelled on L Ron Hubbard, the founder of the Church of Scientology, Hoffman is adamant that The Master veers away from this. "It's quite clear that the movie is not about that," he says. "It's the groundwork. But it's not about it. You're not going to watch that movie and find a lot out about Scientology. We take a lot of liberties. I would not send somebody to this movie as a way of studying that." More at www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/philip-seymour-hoffman-youre-not-going-to-watch-the-master-and-find-a-lot-out-about-scientology-8227235.html
I think I'm beginning to see what PTA and PSH are talking about, with this ridiculous this is not Scientology line. I still am not buying it. I don't think anyone else should. However, I see a justification for it. The film is about very early Scientology, not what we currently see. In fact, it's so obviously about the organization at that time that it is packed with things that long-term old exes remember clearly. It doesn't move forward, though, and it really isn't about the dwarf's version. It shows pretty clearly the abusive strain of what comes later, but I think they can justify this bullshit to themselves with this distinction. They're telling "an acceptable truth," and probably aware of the irony of doing that.
yep telling an acceptable truth for sure - but not for scieno's benefit, purely for his and the film's own benefit. I think it is important to remember that Co$ isn't the only cult out there currently and there will be more formed in the future. All cults have much in common, especially in the psychological make up of the founders, leaders and followers. Just as Chaplin's Dictator was about Hitler, but now is often more viewed about any dictator.
It's not about Hubbard, says Master filmmaker http://www.theage.com.au/entertainm...ard-says-master-filmmaker-20121025-28886.html And it's not about Dianetics or Scientology either. It's really about nothing, but cigarettes and wine!
