Magnolia superior to Short Cuts?

Personally I think Magnolia is the far superior film. They are both about various peoples lives in the Los Angeles area that somehow intersect. I like both films, but I think Magnolia is way more engaging, intense, and excellently crafted. Also I find the characters much more interesting.

I find it funny how they both end with some strange anomoly interrupting everyone of the characters.

Anyway, which one do you prefer?

I’m partial to the Carver stories myself and thought the characters in “Short Cuts” to be far more believable – ones you could really empathize with, whereas Magnolia, while agreed it’s an exceptional film with some pretty wonderful performances, seemed more contrived – like P.T. Anderson’s attempt at emulating Carver.

Although Magnolia bears some resemblance to Altman, I have to say I don’t see much of any resemblance to Carver, though neither film really approaches Carver’s minimalism.

Altman has plenty of superior work to choose from, so I’ll take Magnolia.

You do know Short Cuts is based on Carver’s writings, right?

I agree with Lester—Magnolia’s stories and characters feel so much less natural to me than Carver’s/Altman’s. Granted, I’m an Altman fan and tend to balk at PTA’s “grander” efforts, so I have my biases.

And Matt brings up a good point (if one immaterial to the way I choose to answer the OP’s question). Short Cuts might take stories from Carver’s oeuvre, but it certainly doesn’t employ anything resembling Carver’s style.

-You do know Short Cuts is based on Carver’s writings, right?-

Yes, but how does that make Magnolia like Carver? Magnolia is somewhat Altmanesque, but even Altman’s Carver isn’t very Carveresque.

@ Matt: Good point. Still, I found the characters in Short Cuts to be more real, and the characters in Magnolia to be a little more exaggerated. I get that exaggerated feeling with the characters in most of Anderson’s films, even though I’m a big fan of his work.

Hard to say.

I can’t pick between them, they both do the same thing in different ways but I love them both.

Why does one have to be better than the other?

I don’t think either film is particularly successful: both far too long, meandering, with extraneous plotlines.

the characters in pt anderson’s film have more of a narratively defined and therefore plastic quality about them.altman’s on the other hand are as unknowable as we are

They are about the same…..

I prefer Magnolia to Short Cuts as it packs more of an emotional punch. I also found the characters in Magnolia more interesting. I wish there had been more Chris Penn and Robert Downey Jnr in Short Cuts.

I also wish there was more RD jr and Chris Penn in Short Cuts. I found their stories the most interesting.

-Still, I found the characters in Short Cuts to be more real, and the characters in Magnolia to be a little more exaggerated.-

Yeah, I agree with that.

I agree with virtually everyone here.

I love both films. I see their similarities. A couple contrasts: I felt like Short Cuts locked into its soundtrack better which helped it to have such a beautiful flow to it, despite its choppy editing. The ending of Magnolia brought a strange Biblical feeling to the film that redefined the whole story, whereas the ending of Short Cuts didn’t change the whole viewing process. In fact the end of Short Cuts can barely be called an ending. Still love it though.

I love Magnolia and I hate Short Cuts, so I’d have to go with Magnolia.

The characters in Magnolia are more exaggerated, but that doesn’t make the characters in Short Cuts real. They’re all a bunch of midwestern stereotypes with a complete lack of self-awareness.

More accurately, the characters in Short Cuts resemble real people more.

Anderson is exaggeration. I’d say Magnolia is over the top hyperbole. Bore me later with the frogs.

Short Cuts has much more substance.

By forging connections where there are none in Carver, “Short Cuts” is hardly Carveresque. It’s a decent movie, but hardly memorable. “Magnolia” is, at least to me.

The only thing I found memorable in Magnolia was Macy

The only thing I found memorable in Short Cuts was Moore and Lewis

it may hardly be Carveresque but its all Altman, and since PTA takes from Altman himself. lets give this one to the old master

@ Z. Bart & Dennis: I found both films VERY memorable. Each has moments that, while improbable in reality, spoke to me and made me think, or at least feel. That’s what I look for in a movie, not whether the charaters could exist in our frankly boring world.

@ Jirin: is a lack of self-awareness not real? I swear I see that in most real people I meet.

If short cuts had been applied to MAGNOLIA to make it about half its running time, it might have been a more tolerable movie.

I like Anderson, but Magnolia is more like a thesis. The characters are mostly exaggerated types that don’t have any function. I’m moved by the death in the hospital and the suicide in Short Cuts. Can’t say that I’m moved by anyone in Magnolia. All the characters are pretty despicable. That’s kind of the point and I do like Magnolia, it just seems pretty much one note to me.

Anderson also lets some of his actors (Like Julianne Moore) go way over the top. Altman exercises control over a huge cast and gives them each a strong scene. Hell, even Huey Lewis is really good.

Two of my LEAST favorite films. But Short Cuts must take the rap because it set the template for the glut of multi-story films that followed in its wake.

Nadafingah – I’m glad to hear someone else bring up Julianne Moore’s performance. It’s one of her worst, imo. I know that she’s trying to play this on the edge of suicide character, but the scene with her lawyer where she basically just says “fuck” and “fucking” over and over is downright grating. You’d think Anderson could have found a better way for his character to express herself. Dialogue, in Magnolia anyway, is not his strong point. It’s a real shame, because she’s an amazing actress.

Magnolia without a doubt. I didn’t even enjoy Short cuts

I wasn’t crazy about either. Magnolia — that way over the top thing just doesn’t do it for me. Plus, too much sobbing and hysteria toward the end. I found it much too theatrical in a bad sense. Frogs were ridiculous. Whenever I go to Burbank (to Magnolia Boulevard) or see a magnolia tree, I try to forget the association with that movie.

@Elvis

“But Short Cuts must take the rap because it set the template for the glut of multi-story films that followed in its wake.”

Altman did that multi-story format at least once before in Nashville. I think the more filmmakers adopted the multi-character/story thing around that time. (I think the first film I recall doing this was Soderbergh’s Traffic—or did that come after Magnolia?)