Boogie Nights

A gripping view into a community of alternative hippies who lead a relaxed and carefree life only at first sight. Anderson excels in long shots where the movement in the mise-en-scène is staged with precision and in the simultaneous connection of the emotionally overlapping lines. The characters are all caricatures, basically, and the story works best in their natural environment, when the director detaches himself from them and their “art”. In the middle I had trouble keeping full attention and relating to the characters, but the end balanced that with the bizarrely tense scene with a manic Alfred Molina. Boogie Nights felt more like a creative black-humour satire that wanted to be something more, and in those 150 minutes is not always successful at that. 80% (17.10.2019)

Until Wahlberg took out the rubber dildo, it was “just” kinda crazy. On the one hand, I didn’t really even expect anything else from Anderson as a director. As far as filmmaking goes, it’s a precise job that showcases itself in the best possible light in some of the scenes. I even feel like it might be his best-filmed movie ever. On the other hand, it’s incredibly crazy in a classic way, which is exactly the director’s signature, but I’m not really able to get through such craziness, bordering on pure madness. However, Wahlberg put on a show. He couldn’t have asked for a better role for the beginning of his movie career. But I could do without the singing. Good old Marky Mark; although, he also didn’t sing in that... but he was pretty cool. (29.06.2015)

Paul Thomas Anderson obviously gave a look at Martin Scorsese’s best nineties work, because those long handheld camera shots without a single cut are a carbon copy of the legendary camera mapping of the restaurant in Goodfellas, or the period hits and haunting seventies atmosphere of Casino. It's full of top-notch actors, but they are unfortunately pretty underused in places. At the same time, Boogie Nights is a sinfully narrative film that doesn't say too much. Fine in mosaic form, but to put it simply, the director, with a few exceptions, goes about it through 5-10 very long steadicam sequences, with one at a pool, one during a shoot, etc. Fine and fresh, properly downbeat and noisy in places, but the running time is way too long. (25.05.2017)

Once in a while it doesn't hurt to catch up on an old film and this is just the ticket. Mark Wahlberg, then a budding actor, gets the opportunity to break into the porn industry and his life changes radically. Along with a fancy house, a car and fucking beautiful women, there are also parties full of booze and drugs and a personality change. Very funny, exciting and educational. 85% (17.11.2019)

It’s hard to believe that a behind-the-scenes look at the pornography industry of the 1970s could be so entertaining. P.T. Anderson's second great film, despite its lengthy three-hour runtime, makes such a holistic impression, without a single plot hiccup, that I bow to him. Inventive cinematography, irresistibly cynical humour and a perfect soundtrack make this film the ultimate experience. Credit must also go to Mark Wahlberg, who grabbed his first big acting opportunity by the balls. And Burt Reynolds, as a director trying to bring a little bit of art to porn, has probably never played a better role. (17.07.2002)