I thought this was incredible. I'm a huge fan of everything PTA except perhaps Inherent Vice which was way too long and unshaped for me, but this hit all the right notes for my sensitivity. I think it's amazing how the movie keeps us at bay or perhaps only half informed about the characters and their motivations at times, yet they come alive like few characters do in modern cinema. By the closing scenes their relationship has a complexity that's not easy to communicate in 120 minutes. And by the way, was it even explicitly stated that Cyril and Woodcock were brother and sister? I have to watch it again but I think we got that piece of information through the actors and not a specific line of dialogue.
There are too many great aspects or scenes in this film to mention. I love the ambience because it manages to make a period and a setting that have been explored to death seem new and exciting and it's the same feat Anderson managed with There Will Be Blood and The Master.
As usual I don't understand the lame pseudo-feminist inquisition, specially applied to a film that depicts a certain opressive attitude towards ladies. For me feminism is a struggle for equality and against injustice. It doesn't mean movie plots should be rendered stupid and inoffensive. I don't go to the cinema to learn life lessons from the exploits of virtuous heroes. I've enjoyed movies about gun-wielding sociopaths (Taxi Driver), obsessive dreamers (Close Encounters of the Third Kind) and hopeless addicts (Trainspotting). Why couldn't any human find traces of themselves in flawed characters like Woodcock and Alma? I find that line of criticism arrogant and hypocritical.
I think with a rewatch this could become my new favorite Anderson.