"Boogie Nights" discussion: 3/31/02 - 4/6/02

[Morticia]

Click here to see what this is all about.

In brief: this is a thread to discuss the technical and/or thematic merits of Boogie Nights.

The purpose being to foster intelligent discussion of films without resorting to "It's a piece of crap." or "It's the greatest film ever." (And so that we all can gain a bit of a film education from everyone.)

We'll discuss a new film each week. Either slade or I will post the film in this forum in advance, and lock the topic until the first day of discussion.

If you want to make any comments about this idea, that don't directly pertain to this movie, please make them in the thread linked above.

Thanks everyone. Slade and I are excited and we hope this works (we're open to any ideas of how to make it better).

****SPOILER WARNING**** of course this entire thread is going to be full of spoilers.

[Underpants]

To me, Boogie Nights is a modern classic. A rich ensemble of characters existing in a world that is seldom exposed in cinema. Whether these characters' stories are or could be considered realistic is beyond the point. We are treated to a wonderful mix of comedy and tragedy which is presented without prejudice. The two and a half hours we choose to spend with this extended family of lost souls never fails to entertain, in my opinion.

Some have complained that the film gets too sad, or too violent. I disagree. To me, everything that happens in this film could have happened in real life, and I'm not one to shy away from realistic films, especially when they are peppered with comedy and wonderful musical choices that make the bad parts tolerable. ( Much like real life itself )

I'm not a technical analysis type of guy. To me a film either works or it doesn't, and delving into the ins and outs of camera moves, cinematography, lighting.. is something I simply can't do. Boogie Nights works because whatever is being done is apparently the right choice.

I would however like to point out one of my favorite scenes, which speaks to me a brilliance without being too obvious of it's message:

(Chapter 9 on DVD) "Lonely Boy" / Maggie - First of all, the choice of music simply couldn't be more appropriate. Dirk has left home in search of his dreams. He is indeed a 'lonely boy' in his current situation, getting to know his newfound 'family'. But at the same time, Maggie's son is lonely and missing his mom, who has been forced to abandon him for her own search for a dream.

This scene has it's moments of comedy and irony, but there is a very sad truth underscoring everything. Maggie (now as 'Amber Waves') has supposedly found her dream but misses having a son, and we see her staring lovingly at Dirk, fresh from doing a line of coke. Her gaze could be taken two ways.. but I think only those who 'don't get it' would see her as lusting after Dirk. Then again, who knows? Note the use of slow-motion and the allowance of silence between musical selections as we see Dirk diving into the pool, which could be seen as diving into his new life while Maggie/Amber similarly sees Dirk as diving into her world.. a new 'son figure'.

That's a very short scene and only one example of the brilliance in this film.

For me Boogie Nights is a boarderline great movie that is held back by one scene- the drug buy towards the end. For me this goes on for an excrutiating long time and weighs the movie down. Now, admitedly, I haven't rewatched the picture since I first sw it in the theaters, so I may have a different take on it if I were to rewatch it now.

Did this scene work for others of you here?

[Underpants]

frulad, I certainly understand your feelings about that scene. It doesn't bother me because it's so humorous. Cosmo setting off firecrackers, Rahad waving the gun around, Dirk totally out of it (that shot of him where he looks so spaced out wasn't scripted according to the commentary.. it just happened that PTA held the shot).

In truth, yes maybe the whole scene goes on too long, but.. it just works for me. The music and the humor keeps it interesting.

[DrDetroit]

I have mentioned this complaint somewhere else on the thread. I happen to think Paul Thomas Anderson is a tad over-rated as a director. I think he has a lot of strengths, some of which have been mentioned by Underpants, like his use of music, and his camera angles etc.

I think he just borrows too freely. He just pillages Scorsese, Altman, Truffaut, and Mamet far too much for his own good. You could say that this is "homage" or "tribute" or something.. but I think it's just plain stealing. To take an ending of a great film like Raging Bull and to paste it on to your own is just blasphemy as far as I'm concerned.

[SolidSnakeASS]

posted by underpants:
This scene has it's moments of comedy and irony, but there is a very sad truth underscoring everything. Maggie (now as 'Amber Waves') has supposedly found her dream but misses having a son, and we see her staring lovingly at Dirk, fresh from doing a line of coke. Her gaze could be taken two ways.. but I think only those who 'don't get it' would see her as lusting after Dirk. Then again, who knows? Note the use of slow-motion and the allowance of silence between musical selections as we see Dirk diving into the pool, which could be seen as diving into his new life while Maggie/Amber similarly sees Dirk as diving into her world.. a new 'son figure'.

Why not go all out and call Dirk's jumping into the pool a figurative basptism into the porn culture and family?

I love Boogie Nights. I would go as far as to say it is at least my second favorite movie. Why is this? It just all gels; the acting is impeccable, with Hoffman's performance of Scotty being the cast's best in my opinion; the direction is wonderful, their is not one shot in this film that I would call 'boring.' Sure, a lot of those shots are extremely derivative of the likes of Scorsese, whose Casino is the film I would site as the greatest influence on PTA (I could find at least 10 identical shots between Casino and BN/Magnolia) but PTA nows who to 'borrow' from, and does an amazing job creating his own signature style by combining the visual flair and maverickness of those great filmmakers. The music, as Underpants already stated, is an extension of the story, in fact, it completely incapuslates the film becoming an amply creative narrative device. While some might say the film, excuse the pun, climaxs to early with the party branching the 70s and 80s togther, by the time it happens you are so emotionall envolved with the characters you can't help but want to see it through with them. The falling action preceeding that crucial scene is so enjoyable that one can not fault the filmmaker for adding another hour and a half to it.

While it's derivations are extremely obvious, one can not ignore it's originality, in character specifically. While the rags to riches to rags to 'happiness' story has been done to death, the fact that a filmmaker had balls big enough to adapt it into the porn industry is fascinating, and it pays off. Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character is extremely original, and while underdeveloped still creates a strong bond with the audience. Most of the characters come off as extremely human, and faliable, and even the briefest character, such as Dirk's father, strikes a powerful chord.

edit: I just wanted to note this thread has 150 views and 5 replys! Lurkers beware, start posting!

[MrTony]

I would agree that Anderson's style of shooting is not exactly original, but that doesn't really bother me. Don't forget that Boogie Nights was only his second feature. All artists have influences, and they're more obvious early in their careers. To draw an analogy, I am a guitar player. If it weren't for Jimi Hendrix, Carlos Santana, B.B. King and so forth, I'd be lost, and so would a lot of other players. So anyway, my point: Anderson wears his influences on his sleeve, and I don't have a problem with that.

Boogie Nights is easily in my top 10 movies of all time. After multiple viewings, I still find myself alternately laughing my ass off and squirming in my seat. Every performance is terrific. Don Cheadle as Buck Swope in particular is better every time I watch it, and as an A/V gear geek, I love hearing him stumble through an explanation of how something works, as if he knows what he's doing. I can relate to this because I've heard other people do it, and I've done it myself.

The drug deal scene is one that I found a little extraneous, until I found out it was based on something that actually happened to John Holmes. (I found a web page about the Holmes "documentary" Exhausted that talked about it: I'll try to find it and post a link.) After that, it made a little more sense to me. Anyway, I do like the scene because you know from the start it's going to end badly. And it does, but it takes forever, and the buildup is almost unbearable. It's three or four minutes of firecrackers and bad music before they finally get to the point. The first time I saw it, I almost couldn't take it.

I'm glad Snake mentioned Dirk's father. I can remember two shots he's in: one, where he tries to kiss Dirk's mom, who rebuffs him; and another, where he just looks sad when Dirk and Mom have their huge falling out. I love it when the story implies background like this instead of just dumping it in our laps. All we know is that something led to Mom being the dominant figure in the house. Could this tie in with the Amber-Dirk/mother-son theme mentioned earlier? Hmmm...

[slade]

I just finished watching this movie and haven't forumlated too much about it. So, pardon if this is somewhat stream of consciousness stuff.

It was difficult for me to get into, but I think that is primarily due to the realistically harsh nature of the story. I think I like movies becuase they make human suffering look so glossy and surreal that I can escape into it and forget about the real pain in the world.

this movie, however, didn't gloss over the pain of these people's lives. In fact, the third act was very brief, so, while they get redemption, we don't really get to share much of it with them, and the final scene really points out the reality of their redemption--it isn't upward from where they started, but just back to where they started.

If I want to see real human suffering I just go to work. I don't want to watch it for entertainment. Again, with most films this isn't an issue because they do such a bad job of portraying the suffering. Boogie Nights, however, was just too well done for me to enjoy.

I did appreciate the great use of music to help tell the story. I had no idea what this film was about when I put it in my player, but I instantly knew the type of relationship Eddie (Dirk) and Jack were going to have just by the lyrics in teh song playing in the background--somehting about giving me your true love.

What also impressed me was how well they made it look like the period. I'm not sure what it was. some of the costumes were cheesy and they almost went overboard with the 70s styling, but nonetheless, I was constantly reminding myself that this film was jsut made a few years ago, and not 20 years ago. Is it that the film had that 70s/early 80s grainy look to it? Perhaps it was even teh older style cover art on the disc packaging. Any ideas?

Another thing I wondered about was teh 16 mm footage. Why do you think Anderson choose to show some of teh scenes from the movies this way? How did it help or detract from the story? I currently can't formulate an opinion about it?

Snake: I agree, definatetly a baptism in the pool. What is interesting is that he is able to immerse himself into the water better than the competition (the diving), just as he immersed himself into the culture/industry better than everyone else. Also interesting that Anderson uses such a religious symbol for his immersion in such an "immoral" industry.

[SolidSnakeASS]

The 16mm film was used to differentiate between their lives on film and their real lives. I think it works well in Boogie Nights.

[Morticia]

Originally posted by slade
If I want to see real human suffering I just go to work. I don't want to watch it for entertainment. Again, with most films this isn't an issue because they do such a bad job of portraying the suffering. Boogie Nights, however, was just too well done for me to enjoy.

slade : I warned you my post was gonna be a lot of "me toos", but here goes.

I totally agree with you here....I enjoy films for entertainment, to take me away from reality. I guess that's why my list is filled with B-movies, sci-fi, and William Castle films (subtle distinction I know). Anyway, while I recognize the film was well done, it was hard to watch in parts. The 70s were happy-go-lucky, but the 80s was all downhill from there. The drugs, the loss, all of it. In fact, I'm surprised the film didn't touch on the advent of AIDS. While not 'rampant' in 1983, I'm pretty sure it was starting to become evident...Rock Hudson died in 1985, his was one of the first public figure AIDS death. By the nature of the job, porn stars were very hard hit.

I watched this last week, and wanted to 'sleep on it' before posting. The one thing that still stays with me is.....Is anyone in this film truly happy? Jack is upset that video and amateurs have taken over his beloved films, and Dirk and Reed get steeped in drugs. Little Bill's unhappiness leads to intense tragedy. Amber is kept away from her child. Scotty is, well, spurned by his crush. It seems the only people who end up happy is Buck and his girl, but only after the donut shop incident....and Buck spends most of the movie looking for his 'look' (which is an incredibly funny running joke, and really pinpoints the fads of the time). Yes, at the end Dirk is making a comeback, so maybe there's hope for him yet....

OK, slade, I think I beat you on the 'ramble' factor, but it's the best I could do.

(edit: Our very own Resident Dorothy, "Underpants", let me know he submitted this thread to the ptanderson website. Check out the announcement at
PT Anderson

No wonder this has gotten so many reads! Thanks Jeff!)

[Indyphantom]

I'm major confused. You guys didn't find Boogie Nights entertaining. Too me, this is as much fun as you can have watching a great movie. I don't think is based in "hard" reality...movie reality, sure. But Anderson never gets too heavy, there is so much comic relief, music and great acting that I never felt this film was heavy.

Great great film, and still my favorite from PTA, I think....

[DoubleDeuce]

Just wanted to dig this one up and throw in my two cents.

My favorite scene is the one that most on here mention as extraneous--the drug/firecracker scene. I agree with fruland that the first time I saw the scene it dragged on. Then after a couple of more viewings I began to appreciate that it is the heart of the movie.

It may not have been scripted but the moment where Dirk stares blankly into the camera encaptures the entire movie. Of course there is the dramatic build-up with random firecrackers popping off. The unease is apparent. The danger imminent. Then the music changes to Rick Springfield's Jessie Girl. A pop song that expresses the desire for someone elses girl. Just as Dirk realizes he wants someone elses life. Anything to change the hole he has dug himself. He's in over his head and he finally realizes it. A moment where music and visuals synchronize in perfect symetry.

[Dr. Evil]

I remember this film mainly because all three of us Canadians in the office of MCS in Dallas, TC had to see it, and I mashed my finger in my desk drawer just before I left for the show.

By the nature of the job, porn stars were very hard hit.

The list of gay male porn stars felled by AIDS is as voluminous as that of the USS Arizona Memorial, but I think only one prominent female performer (Lisa de Leeuw) suffered that fate.

I believe the film is a toned-down, loosely-based fictionalization of the life of the late John C. Holmes (who died of AIDS), the famous XXX star who was an institution in the 1970s and early 1980s.

RD

[CrazyComet]

Originally posted by Indyphantom
Great great film, and still my favorite from PTA, I think....

I couldn't agree more. This is easily one of my top 5 films of the 90's.....

[3DMan]

For me, I get teary every time I watch the Mother/Dirk scene. It just feels so "real" to me. I wish there were more of it.

Is it me, or is Mark Wahlberg a shitty actor with the exception of Boogie Nights and Three Kings? He is a piece of wood in everything else I've seen.

[Heckalaska]

3DMan, it's not just you. Everything he's been in besides these two flicks just have laughable "performances" in them. Don't know how someone who seemed to be a natural turned out to be such a piece of driftwood...

[slade]

has anyone seen the Itallian Job? How did he do in that?

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by slade

has anyone seen the Itallian Job? How did he do in that?

I thought he was good in the Italian Job (Mark Wahlberg that is).

Back to Boogie Nights.... I watched this movie again recently and was just amazed at how well it's made. I think the movie is very well cast, I think the material is well presented, the score is awesome, and the pace of the movie moved along nicely.

There is one scene I don't get and maybe you all can help me understand it. The scene at Rayhad Jackson's house where they went to sell him the faux cocaine. There is a part where the camera comes in close on Dirk and he's just looking at Jackson (I presume). He's just sitting there looking and then he closes his eyes and holds his head and then gets up and says it's time to go.

Was he just "zoning out" or something? Why the closeup of his face like that?

Peace...

[larphillips]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

There is one scene I don't get and maybe you all can help me understand it. The scene at Rayhad Jackson's house where they went to sell him the faux cocaine. There is a part where the camera comes in close on Dirk and he's just looking at Jackson (I presume). He's just sitting there looking and then he closes his eyes and holds his head and then gets up and says it's time to go.

Was he just "zoning out" or something? Why the closeup of his face like that?

Peace...

I read it as the magnitude of the situation and the trouble that could (and will occur) was finally sinking in. Once it all finally hit him, he realized that his 'flee' instinct was kicking in hard and it was time to go.

[Anti-Hero]

Im not really in this part of the forum that much but I'd like to pop in and say also this is easily one of my favorites of all time.

[Morticia]

Originally Posted by Anti-Hero

Im not really in this part of the forum that much but I'd like to pop in and say also this is easily one of my favorites of all time.

That's cool, and Welcome -- but can you tell us why you like it so much? Especially if you were to say, explain 'why' to someone like me, who didn't like it. I won't argue, I'm just curious as to why you like it and I don't. Am I missing something or ???

[Marq]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

There is one scene I don't get and maybe you all can help me understand it. The scene at Rayhad Jackson's house where they went to sell him the faux cocaine. There is a part where the camera comes in close on Dirk and he's just looking at Jackson (I presume). He's just sitting there looking and then he closes his eyes and holds his head and then gets up and says it's time to go.

Was he just "zoning out" or something? Why the closeup of his face like that?

Peace...

Easily one of my favourite scenes. I found it to work well in a few ways:
1. Shows the tension of the situation. Dirk is so overwhelmed by how much he is over-his-head. He can't believe his life has come to this. From innocent kid making minumum wage; to superstar; to doing anything for another snort. He is indeed "zoned out" and can't seem to be able to register all of his surroundings. Instead, he just blankly stares until his mind finally tells him what to do.

2. Shows just what the drugs have done to him. He's completely worn out. He's desperate despite knowing he's digging his own grave. The drugs, and the never ending cycle of needing more are constant.

3. Shows the uneasiness of the circumstances. While his partner is gung-ho and the dealer is a loose cannon, his nervous stare shows that he knows just how bad this moment can get at any moment, and as lar mentioned, he needs to finally flee the moment.

It's a great, tense moment that the diretor has certainly mastered over his career this far.

[tomdkat]

That's make total sense... thanks guys!

Peace...