Reviews of Phantom Thread and All the Money in the World

**** out of five stars for both

Currently on video (check your local library for these and many other videos)

by Walter G. Tarrow

In the book “Outliers”, author Malcolm Gladwell says that it takes roughly ten thousand hours of practice to achieve mastery in a field. When does such “practice” become obsession? If and when can “mastery” become a problem?

Two very exceptionally literary stories of obsession, or more so, self-absorption, were among the 2017 Oscar nominees, and you’ve probably never seen, let alone heard, of either. Phantom Thread from the mind of Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, There Will Be Blood) and All the Money in the World courtesy of Ridley Scott (Alien, Gladiator, The Martian) told tales of a “Master of His Domain.”

Phantom Thread starring the ever amazing Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln, There Will Be Blood) as Reynolds Woodcock, a fictional dressmaker, in 1950s London, to royalty, to the rich and famous, who is so rigid, so compulsive, so needing to be in control, in his craft that his life has no room for the risk of honest human relationships. Anderson visuals are meticulous, even to the point of being ponderous, in detailing every fabric, every thread of Reynolds’ artful world. His dresses are rightfully works of haute couture fashion and, as such, he commands the admiration of the elite.

Into his otherwise passionless life he brings a waitress he picks up from a countryside restaurant who serves him his requested huge breakfast with a note on the receipt “For a hungry boy.” Food becomes a metaphor for the passion, the love, that enters his life with her becoming his model, his employee, his sometime companion, but with her wanting to be more, and simply wanting to make him dinner. Her bizarre solution to consummating their bond is the phantom thread, their dark secret, that violently disrupts his ordered world and brings him, although definitely in a perverse manner, a more fulfilling life.

All the Money in the World, notorious for the eleventh hour post production replacement of the ostracized Kevin Spacey with Christopher Plummer in the central role of billionaire J. Paul Getty, is based on the real life incident of the kidnapping of Getty’s grandson. Implored to pay the ransom by his daughter-in-law, he unwaveringly says he cannot, all the while the film intercuts to harrowing scenes of his grandson in peril. The theme of obligation to family, strong amongst the kidnappers, is insignificant to Getty in his worship of acquisitions. Surrounded by priceless objets d’art, Getty’s ironic last words are “beautiful child.” But what child is this? The answer to that is the crux of the story.

Both films, Phantom Thread much more so, are layered with themes and metaphor. Phantom Thread is woven slowly, deliberately, with close attention to setting, costume, and design. All the Money in the World uses Scott’s penchant for dramatic tension, for action and suspense, to frustrate all involved, including the audience, with Getty’s seemingly cold and uncaring refusal to use just a pittance of his “all the money in the world” fortune to save the life of his beloved grandchild. 

Both reach their own conclusions, Reynolds’ being freed from his OCD by a secret shared perversion, and Getty, still trapped, not by his obsession with wealth, but in a private materialistic compulsion to exchange all the money for all the stuff. Yet the question remains. 

“What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?”