For me, Magnolia is much more visually rich and interesting, which is important to me in a film of substantial length. Second, the movie uses music in amazing ways. Last, and definitely not least, I love the characters in Magnolia.
Fair enough. I used to be over-the-moon for
Magnolia when I first saw it, that's for sure. I've seen it maybe 5 times, and that last watch I did I found myself picking it apart quite a bit, and it really came across as contrived in places. Still powerful in some sections, though, and that doesn't seem to diminish with subsequent viewings.
Thinking about it, I do like the screenplay a whole hell of a lot, but I guess some of the execution and structuring bug me a bit now, and as I said, some of it seems really contrived.
The cop in Magnolia is the polar opposite to the cop in Short Cuts. Singing in unison sequence is entirely original to Anderson. Anderson's camerawork is mostly unlike Altman's. Anderson works mostly in the dark, where Altman worked in the day.
The cop jumped to mind for me, but then I discarded it because yes, it's basically a study in opposites. However, compare Anderson's camerawork to that of Scorsese...
The singing in unison... I guess I didn't like that idea (love the tune, though), but I know many just adore it. To each their own and all that.
Magnolia is clearly an achievement, one that gets plenty of respect around the globe, but for me, my adoration of the film just sort of fell off after the novelty wore off, while
Short Cuts, a film I didn't immediately warm to, grew on me with time as the subtleties emerged.
Anyway, even though PN and I tend to crack horns a lot, I have a tremendous respect for his analytical skills, and I guess now I want to sit down and watch these films back-to-back, something I have yet to do. You folks have given me some fresh perspective on both pieces, so I think visiting them again is the next step. Deadite is clearly no slouch, either.