Culture One Battle After Another Review - Paul Thomas Anderson and Leonardo DiCaprio finally team up, and the result is a 10/10 masterpiece.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
One of Leonardo DiCaprio’s biggest career regrets, and one of the biggest casting “what ifs” of all time, was the actor’s near-miss playing Dirk Diggler in Paul Thomas Anderson’s Boogie Nights. One Battle After Another, the latest film from PTA, and one which finally teams the writer-director and actor, may not be a time machine. But like Boogie Nights, it goes hard.

Boogie Nights is one of my favorite movies of all time. My dad recorded it off of HBO in the late ’90s, and when he and my mom went to sleep, I would sneak downstairs, snag the tape, and quietly watch in my room over and over. I’m not sure what came first – my love of movies, or my love of Boogie Nights.

Now, PT Anderson is back with One Battle After Another—a film I’m so excited for, I rewatched most of his back catalog and read the book it’s loosely based on. (Time well spent.) Despite the absurdly high expectations I set for this movie, Paul Thomas Anderson’s first $100M+ budget delivers an S-tier PTA flick about a stoner ex-extremist trying to reunite with his daughter before a Colonel with a penchant for martial law and secrets to hide can get to her first.
IMG_0866.webp

One Battle After Another: The Plot​

The film follows DiCaprio’s Bob Ferguson, a former lefty revolutionary, who is raising his daughter Willa (Chase Infiniti). He’s been living in hiding ever since things went bad with his revolutionary group, the French 75, years earlier.

One Battle opens with the group’s back story, with one of its leaders, Perfidia Beverly Hills (Teyana Taylor), exclaiming, “Free borders. Free choices. Free from fear,” before they forcibly release all the detainees in a detention facility near the Mexican border. That line pretty much sums up the French 75’s politics, who spend the rest of the first act robbing banks and blowing up buildings as a means to that end.

Things move pretty quickly here. Think Bonnie & Clyde, Wild at Heart, Queen & Slim: the old romantic outlaws plot on fast forward. There’s a lot of sex and violence, but with a twist.

Perfidia may be hot and heavy with Leo’s Bob, but there’s also a simmering Dom/Sub sexual tension building between her and Col. Steven J. Lockjaw (Sean Penn), who has had the hots for her ever since he got a massive erection while she held him up during the detention liberation scene.

Paul Thomas Anderson has hit another high point of his career.


That sexual tension ultimately pays off in one of the strangest sex scenes I’ve seen in a while. (It’s kind of like that sex scene in The Sopranos between Richie Aprile and Janice, but the roles are reversed. You know the one. I’ve actually got a lot to say about this scene, but we’ll get to that later.)

Anyway, the freewheeling rebellion of the French 75 ultimately comes to an end after a botched bank robbery and Perfidia’s arrest, which sends everyone into hiding. Sixteen years later, Lockjaw is back on the hunt for Bob and his daughter. But when Willa goes missing, Bob has to battle with his past and years of substance abuse in his quest to reunite with his daughter.

The Performances​

Perfidia​

I’m trying not to give away the whole movie here, just enough for context and to highlight what really makes this plot sing: the performances. We need to start with Teyana Taylor’s Perfidia Beverly Hills, who owns the first act and is the kind of femme fatale that would make Faye Dunaway and Sharon Stone blush.

Taylor’s performance goes far deeper than just being a smokeshow who brings out the worst in Bob and Lockjaw. This especially true after she has Willa, as the actress does an incredible job of externalizing Perfidia’s struggles with depression, guilt, and the loss of the individual autonomy that comes with starting a family. When she tells Bob, “I put myself first,” and storms out, you understand why. And when she regrets her decisions later in the film, you feel for her then, too.

The end of One Battle – and how it tugs on your heartstrings – wouldn’t be nearly as effective if it weren’t for Taylor’s performance.

Willa​

You know what they say: Like mother, like daughter. Chase Infiniti’s Willa is the heart and soul of the film. Unfortunately, for the purposes of this review, some of Infiniti’s best scenes are really spoiler-laden. But one that isn’t is Infiniti’s first moment onscreen with Leo.

You know the scene – the responsible child scolding the irresponsible parent – but this one is written by PTA. One of the biggest laughs in my theater came when Bob responds to Willa’s grilling with, “I know how to drink and drive. I know what I’m doing.”

They bicker, for sure, but it’s clear they care for each other, which Bob shows by threatening her friends in that fatherly way, while also casually insulting them, as they pick her up for the high school dance. It’s moments like these that give One Battle After Another its soul. This is a very politically-charged film, but it can also transcend the politics and remind the audience that this story, at its core, is about a father trying to connect with his daughter.

Bob​

Bob Ferguson is an odd mix of Leo’s previous characters. Think of Bob as a cross between The Wolf of Wall Street’s Jordan Belfort and his love of drugs, and Killers of the Flower Moon’s Ernest Burkhart and his stupidity. Bob genuinely loves his daughter, but he’s not the brightest bulb, dimmer now thanks to decades of drugs and alcohol, which is unfortunate because he’s being hunted.

There’s a great ongoing bit throughout the film that’s heavily featured in the trailer, with Bob on a payphone talking to someone from the resistance. But he can’t remember the super secret password. After multiple interactions with the mysterious voice, Bob goes full Karen, essentially demanding to speak to a manager. This all ends up being a very funny button to his plotline.

But Leo’s performance as a degenerate fuck-up revolutionary isn’t all about laughs. It’s got heart too, especially when he connects with Benicio del Toro’s Sensei Sergio.

Sensei Sergio St. Carlos​

In the production notes for the film, Leo refers to Sensei Sergio St. Carlos as Bob’s Obi-Wan, and it’s kind of true in a PTA way. And while he does help Bob out, and is a rebellious do-gooder himself, del Toro’s character isn’t in the film as much as the trailers would lead you to believe. There’s one scene where he and Bob are sharing some road sodas, while Bob is being really vulnerable about Willa, that continues to elevate the story above today’s contemporary political environment. But just because it’s heartfelt doesn’t mean it’s not funny. It's the scene that culminates with del Toro’s “Means no fear, like Tom Cruise!” moment. Great line.
IMG_0867.webp
PTA DIRECTS LEONARDO DICAPRIO AND BENICIO DEL TORO.

Col. Stephen J. Lockjaw​

If this film has an Obi-wan, it must also have a Darth Vader, so enter Sean Penn. Like the Sith Lord, Penn as Lockjaw is also despicably evil and absolutely captivating.

Part pervert, part right-wing military psychopath, Penn plays Lockjaw kind of like a mix of A Few Good Men’s Col. Nathan R. Jessep and General Jack D. Ripper from Dr. Strangelove. But instead of being obsessed with “our precious bodily fluids!”, he’s more concerned with the semen demon.

There’s a scene where he’s being recruited to join a cabal of ultra-rich white nationalists. He’s clearly nervous, so the colonel decides to comb his hair by awkwardly licking his comb. It’s a moment that shows some of the insecurities bubbling under the surface of Col. Stephen J. Lockjaw.

The Pynchon and Politics of It All​

The Christmas Adventurers club – what kind of goofy club is that? It sounds like something out of a Thomas Pynchon novel. Well, it’s not – but it sounds like it could be.

It’s no secret that this movie is a loose adaptation of Pynchon’s 1990 novel Vineland. This would be PTA’s second Pynchon movie after 2011’s Inherent Vice, but One Battle feels more along the lines of how There Will Be Blood is an adaptation of Oil! by Upton Sinclair (even while being a looser adaptation than that work was).

PTA’s adaptation preserves most of the ways that the characters connected, but strips away all the novel’s sociopolitical context. Vineland’s Brock Vond and his war on drugs at the behest of the Reagan administration is replaced with Col. Lockjaw’s war on immigration and his willingness to enact martial law at the behest of a secret society of rich, white Americans who are pulling the strings of the government in an attempt to keep the U.S. “safe and pure.” And Vineland’s 24fps collective has been replaced with the French 75 revolutionaries, who believe in “Free borders. Free Choices. Free from fear.”

One Battle After Another draws a clear line in the sand, politically – there’s no such thing as a neutral bystander, and every character in this film has picked a side. They’re either part of the revolutionaries, trying to help the downtrodden, or they help the secret elite cabal trying to bring about a racially pure America. But having heavy stakes like that doesn’t mean PTA doesn’t try to adapt some of Pynchon’s absurdist humor. (There’s an order of nuns called Sisters of the Brave Beaver who train revolutionaries and grow weed.)

As for the Christmas Adventurers club, that’s the guild of calamitous intent that Lockjaw is trying to join. How fun! And they greet each other by saying “Hail St. Nick” – an almost childish auditory take on “Hail Satan.” But you know what? It works.

PTA’s instinct to take only the parts he liked from Vineland and fill in the rest is definitely the right move – especially for a $100M-plus movie. A straightforward adaptation of Vineland probably wouldn’t have netted a better film, and certainly wouldn’t have made for a more accessible one.

One Battle After Another draws a clear line in the sand, politically – there’s no such thing as a neutral bystander.


And for those of you who, like me, read Vineland to prep? Good news! Your time wasn’t wasted. This movie will make much more sense right from the jump. For those that haven’t, you might get a little lost with everything going on in the first act – it sets up a lot – but it’ll all make sense, especially on repeat viewings.

The Man of the Hour​

And now, for the man of the hour – the writer, the director, Paul Thomas Anderson.

To be blunt, I’m still in awe that this film actually exists. It’s so much fun to watch, while also telling a timeless story about what a father would go through to protect his daughter. And PTA does all this while making an incisive commentary on America’s current political climate. Let us not forget that he does all of this while managing to make his most expensive movie to date, of original-ish IP, no less. One Battle After Another is estimated to have cost between $130M and $175M. PTAs biggest earner, There Will Be Blood, which only brought in $70M+ at the box office, cost $25M.

And you can see that budget on the screen. There’s not one, but two car chases! And each is distinct, with the climactic one proving particularly memorable. I can’t recall hills used in a car chase to such dramatic effect, and the filmmaker creates a whole chase out of oscillating roads, building tension in a way that would make Alfred Hitchcock proud. The oscillating rhythm as the car goes in and out of sight is an incredible visual foreshadowing of how Willa will ultimately fight back. I won’t say more.


IMG_0868.webp
LEONARDO DICAPRIO’S BOB IS A WASHED-UP FREEDOM FIGHTER WHO’S DRAWN BACK INTO HIS PAST LIFE.

But it takes more than a car chase and some fat stacks to hold my attention for not quite, but almost, three hours. We’re so lucky that PTA decided to make his blank-check movie 30 years into his career. This movie’s pacing relies on narrative tricks he developed on his older, cheaper movies like Magnolia and Boogie Nights. As with those movies, One Battle After Another also starts in a frantic burst of exposition. Scenes are short and the camera basically never stops moving, allowing PTA to cover a lot of narrative ground quickly. However, as the plot thickens, with Anderson spending time letting layers of character drama peel away, scenes take longer. He thus has to rely on editing to convey a juxtaposition of thematic elements to keep audiences enticed.

Look at Magnolia. The film starts with a rapid telling of three unrelated deaths to convey its focus on coincidence, before setting up the plotlines of all the characters and how all their seemingly unrelated stories will eventually affect each other. PTA employs these speedy narrative hacks in One Battle After Another – albeit this time with more expensive stunts and action – to set up the French 75’s history. But once the group disbands, he uses the Magnolia editing technique to create interesting juxtapositions. For example, take the contrast of Bob’s parent-teacher conference with Lockjaw’s conditional acceptance into the Christmas Adventurers – both are moments of pride for the men.

To be clear, this is what a director working at his peak looks like. One Battle After another is, without a doubt, amazing. But is it a masterpiece?

Verdict​

Frankly, when trying to come up with my final score for this movie, I’ve spent an absurd amount of time trying to figure out the difference between a 9 out of 10 and a 10 out of 10. What does an abstract “one better” mean?

Then it hit me: Who says our review scale is linear, with each number being equally spaced from the other? We’re “measuring” art with numbers, for Christ’s sake; it’s all a construction we’ve collectively made up. So let me ask: What if the gaps between the numbers in the middle of the spectrum – 5 to 6, 6 to 7, etc. – are larger than the quality gap between the numbers at the end of the spectrum? We may not care much about the nuanced improvements between an “Unbearable” 1 and a “Painful” 2, but we can probably agree they are slight. And if the differences are slight at one end of the spectrum, then logic reasons that the differences are also slight on the other.

The point I’m trying to make here is that the elements that separate an “amazing” film from a “masterpiece” are minor. Know that this 10 I’m about to drop does not come lightly. There are so many subtle things that make this film just that much better.

Take that sex scene that I hinted at earlier. PTA uses a Scorsese-esque needle-drop of “Soldier Boy” by The Shirelles as Perfidia holds Lockjaw’s own gun to his back as she pleasures him. The director then smash-cuts to an extremely pregnant Perfidia shooting a machine gun. At first glance, you could argue that the sequence is vulgar, but it’s not. It’s PTA in perfect control of his characters and the tone.

The same could be said for the Steely Dan “Dirty Work” needle-drop as we’re introduced to a teenage Willa and her dad’s parent-teacher conference prep of smoking dope in the car. Steely’s easy listening, yacht rock-tone perfectly embodies the vibe of their exile, but the lyrics hint at something else.

Even the things PTA whole-cloth invented for the film, like the harmony transponders, Bob forgetting the code words, the Christopher Reeve Superman poster in Sensei Sergio’s dojo, semen demon, the car chases, the stunt fall off a building down a tree… There are so many little details, seemingly inconsequential touches – the filmmaker’s style, if you will – that all add up bit by bit to turn this amazing movie into a masterpiece.

IMG_0869.webp
L/A
 
I had no idea Paul Thomas Anderson was such an ardent fan of race mixing, Duly discarded from directors I consider worthwhile seeing. I did hate his last film too though.
I actually re-watched There Will Be Blood after all this, and I don't think it holds up as the masterpiece most of us remember it being. Day-Lewis's over-the-top performance carries the movie. It's like Gangs of New York, he's what people actually remember.
 
I actually re-watched There Will Be Blood after all this, and I don't think it holds up as the masterpiece most of us remember it being. Day-Lewis's over-the-top performance carries the movie. It's like Gangs of New York, he's what people actually remember.
how'd that meme go again? "There Will Be Blood is two hours of cinematic brilliance that i hope to never have to sit through again"
 
Curtis Yarvin, AKA Mencius Moldbug, weighs in with a film review in The Spectator. I don't know if he's done one before?

spect.JPG

One Battle After Another may be the worst movie ever made. Not in the petty and obvious way of a normal bad movie, though. It is a grand, multifaceted masterpiece of badness. It is dramatically bad, morally bad, historically bad and even erotically bad. And to cram in all this badness, it is an hour too long. But you won’t be bored – it is even entertainingly bad. This film is so bad that most people will think it is good, and it will probably make a lot of money. Proving only that America is the kingdom of Cain. But we knew that.

But why not start with praise, eh? The film has a beautiful celluloid look. I saw it from the second row of a baby IMAX, centered like a potentate amid my intrepid team of Urban Tigers (Jeff Goldblum’s team of chads in The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou). Wow! It had been way too long since I saw such a film in the theater. My sensorium was thrown into total global overload, like a Tasaday tribesman before his first television. Will digital ever be able to match this? Yeah, probably, with artificial intelligence. Sad.

Paul Thomas Anderson remains a brilliant visual director. One Battle is a film-school masterpiece. Most bad films are boring. But PTA, while often bad, is never boring. Perhaps that makes him the perfect director for the eternally bored 21st century.

But! But! Let’s get back to the dramatic badness of One Battle. Like all of PTA’s badnesses, it passes as great. Great dramatists can mix the tones of drama. Tragedy flows smoothly into comedy into romance. Thomas Pynchon, from whom PTA is stealing in One Battle, has this in Vineland (1990). Pynchon can master every tone without being cringe.

One Battle is completely off the rails. Melodrama swings abruptly to tragedy to slapstick to romance to action to erotica. These transitions are unnerving and harmful to the soul. They do not naturally cause the audience to engage with the work, but to be thrown off it like a cowboy off a bull. Pynchon, of course, has an element of this – but Pynchon is under control.

PTA is just random. The first rule of classical drama is: action must be necessary. Randomness creates detachment. You know what else is random? AI slop is random. Expect 21st-century art to move away from anything that AI can do well. Gratuitous randomness will come to feel dated and 20th-century. It’s bad, and it disengages the audience.

Only when the audience then feels some ulterior attraction (such as political or sexual energy), a complicated structure of tension is created. I, of course, came to One Battle with an ulterior repulsion – creating a completely different vibe. So take this review with a grain of salt.

Speaking of repulsion: let’s go straight there. In Vineland, the revolutionary heroine, babe and mother Frenesi Gates, is the blue-eyed, stunning child of mid-century Hollywood communists. Her beauty enables her to win the love of the evil chad-prosecutor Brock Vond and of the stoner-hero Zoyd Wheeler.

One Battle opens with an action sequence in which Bob Ferguson (Leonardo DiCaprio), the stoner leader and technical mastermind of an American revolutionary cell (of mainly women of color? Set in what looks like 1990?), storms an ICE detention center and frees women and children from cages.

Ferguson’s beautiful revolutionary partner in crime has become Perfidia Beverly Hills (Teyana Taylor). Even PTA’s character names are AI-slop Pynchon. Perfidia captures the evil ICE villain, Colonel Steven J. Lockjaw (Sean Penn). At gunpoint, she forces him to flexcuff himself and, in a timeless Western trick, trap himself in his own spotlit cage. But on the way, excited by this bondage moment and by her stunning beauty, Lockjaw springs a boner! This allows Perfidia to sexually torment him, which is cool. Lockjaw is a mix of the stock villains from Avatar, American Beauty, Dr. Strangelove, etc., with a touch of Leslie Nielsen. This slapstick dick moment, which would have seemed heavy-handed in a Leslie Nielsen film, is also the inciting incident of the plot.

While this is bad enough, the real problem is that Taylor, given a three-hour, $4,500 stage makeup job which involves stitching actual eagle feathers to her temples, might pass as a five. PTA sometimes shoots her with makeup. But generally not. She and all the other glamorous women of color who make up Ferguson’s unit, the “French 75,” (a) have feminist body types, and (b) tend to elocute in those dialects of English to which Hollywood refers as “street.”

When we feed these traits into the Tinder simulator, it doesn’t look good. It’s not clear why PTA did a cross-racial casting. Maybe Hollywood antifa has dirt on him – a Hail, Caesar effect? Maybe he thought it would work at the box office. Still, Penn and DiCaprio are among our great leading men, and have at least remained so. But they’re only human. (Don’t get me started on Benicio del Toro as Chuck Norris meets Harriet Tubman.)

Imagine Sean Penn planting a deep, hot kiss on Snoop, the lesbian gangster girl from The Wire. While Taylor is not quite Snoop, she is also not Naomi Watts. Penn can’t quite vibe it – and PTA has already put us in the domain of implausibly perverse eroticism. The result is that, for the first 45 minutes of the movie, we are treated, both with Penn and DiCaprio, to some of the worst romantic chemistry ever shown on screen. The vibe is so bad that it forces us to confront a trope sometimes seen in the work of Julius Streicher, but seldom in a major Hollywood motion picture: interracial romance as a paraphilia. It does not help that Lockjaw’s cartoonish fascist cabal, the “Christmas Adventurers,” see it just this way.

So it is almost a physical relief when Perfidia’s place on the screen is taken by her homely, biracial teenage daughter, Willa (Chase Infiniti, with a real-life Pynchon name). Eros is wisely avoided in the world of Willa. Infiniti would make an excellent character actress but will no doubt be abused, Zendaya-style, as a leading woman.

Fundamentally, One Battle is a religious film. It is entirely set in the fantasy landscape of the great American religion, progressivism, the 20th-century evolution of our ancient Puritan tradition. If you are a true believer, imagine watching Battlefield Earth without being a Scientologist. For non-progressives, One Battle may be necessary viewing. It displays the interior landscape of the narcissistic narrative of our world’s dominant cult of power. We seldom get to strap a GoPro to the inside of a lib’s forehead.

Let’s take the approach to leftist violence. In the 1930s, a real communist terrorist was part of a genuine global revolutionary organization. His 1960s equivalent was at least part of a genuine revolutionary cell, and of course could take liberating sugarcane-harvest tours of Cuba (as did Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles). This was still real power. Evil, communist, murderer Joanne “Assata Shakur” Chesimard, perhaps the closest thing to a real-life Perfidia, just died in Havana. Venceremos!

Take a moment to think about the first time you heard about the Weather Underground – and the emotional context in which you received it. You probably thought it was cool. This was an organization that got its greeting, a four-fingered salute, from Bernadine Dohrn, who for all her faults was genuinely hot. Before becoming a law professor at Northwestern University, she praised the Manson Family for sticking a fork in the uterus of a pregnant woman they had just murdered in an attempt to start a race war. And you thought the Weather Underground was cool! I thought it was cool. The name was certainly cool. The power of 20th-century marketing. What a product! What a cunning humiliation of a whole society!

Feminists speak of “body betrayal” when a woman feels involuntary sexual excitement while being raped. The journalists who taught us to revere Dohrn and the other allies of Charles Manson and Jim Jones raped our brains. They corrupted us with the satanic joy of evil. We will never get our innocence back, not even by killing them. It’s important not to fantasize about killing journalists. We shouldn’t stoop to their level. It’s fine to picture them spending the rest of their lives harvesting sugarcane – I’d start sweetening my coffee for that.

Even by the 1980s, though, all this homegrown terrorism was in the past. One Battle is a fantasyland where the 1930s and 1960s are still alive in the 1990s and the 2000s. And in the 2000s, they are even still the 1930s. Reality has voted differently. Yes, there is real-world 21st-century leftist violence. I estimate that this movie will probably inspire between one and ten murders – maybe even my own. Stuff happens. But the leftist murderers of the 21st century are all lone nuts. They are actually just like the rightist murderers, except that their murderous ideas come from Whole Foods, not the dark web. At most, they might have a few equally deranged accessories on a Discord server. They are as likely to form a new revolutionary state as Jacob Chansley, the QAnon Shaman. Horseshoe theory as murderous farce. Again: America is the kingdom of Cain.

So this film is out there – recruiting damaged people by presenting them as romantic heroes in a propaganda fantasy. Few will kill. But many will clap. When bad movies succeed, as One Battle will, they diagnose something bad in the audiences they entertain. Corrupt art is the pathognomonic mark of a corrupt society. Shitty people will watch this shitty film, and love it. Shitty journalists have already given it a standing ovation – the politics makes them hard, like Lockjaw. This evil is at the very heart of our culture.

As Leonard Cohen noted: “I have seen the future, brother. It is murder.” Murder is as old as Cain. The anonymous internet is young. Nobody asked for the combination. But they’ll get it.

L / A

In this Kiwi's opinion, guy really needs an editor.
 
Shame American Psycho 2 was ruined by that roastie.
There was never an American Psycho 2 planned in the first place. The so-called "American Psycho 2" is just some unrelated movie starring Mila Kunis that they slapped the American Psycho title onto in order to boost DVD sales.

That's like getting the latest CoD slop game and labeling it "Metal Gear Solid 6" because it vaguely involves soldiers and espionage.
 
Watching it right now. It pretty much is. Someone should make a mod for Dustborn and make it a One Battle After Another game.
OBAA had a crossover event with Fortnite so not that far-fetched. :story:

Predicted right now to win at least 5 Oscars including Best Picture btw, unless Vampireniggers from the South manages to unseat it.
 
I tried my best to like this movie. I think leo and PTA are generally great. This was one of the most heavy handed, creatively bankrupt films ive watched. It's essentially portraying what I gather to be a fictional version of the weather underground (one battle after another is a quote from one of the founding weatherman.)

The way they portray those literal terrorists left a bad taste in my mouth.. incompetent, idealist but misguided. IRL they were a bunch of antiwhite communists, constantly high and violent. They had meetings where they discussed how its a revolutionary act to kill every white child and baby, because they'd grow up to be oppressors. They publicly extolled the virtues of the Manson murders, saying how dope it was they killed a pregnant Sharon Tate and her unborn child.

Not only do the films treat the leftist revolutionaries in this way, so did the feds and academia. That's why you have ex weather underground members lecturing in universities, on the board of charities and getting lenient sentences. Fuck I hate these people.
 
Back
Top Bottom