Daniel Day-Lewis is one of those actors who have a reputation for being so completely committed to their roles that anecdotes of their intensity border on being obsessive-compulsive. This is apparently his final performance as he has announced his retirement, but he’s not dead yet so who knows. It’s also his second collaboration with director Paul Thomas Anderson. Considering that the first one resulted in the immensely good There Will Be Blood, it adds up to many good reasons to watch this one.

Reynolds Woodcock is one of most prestigious fashion designers working in London in the 1950s, counting among his clients the aristocracy and the richest women of high society. Unmarried, he is aided by his similarly unmarried sister Cyril who runs much of his day-to-day life and manages the business while he focuses on design and tailoring. After tiring of his latest mistress and having Cyril get rid of her, he takes a short break in the countryside. There he meets a waitress Alma Elson and both seem immediately attracted to each other. He makes her part of his life and has her move in with him but rather than treat her as a conventional mistress, he seems to see her as more of a muse for his designs. As Cyril comments, she has the ideal body type for the dresses he makes. Alma however is determined to make Reynolds love her and goes to extraordinary lengths to do so, against Cyril’s advice.

Compared to Anderson’s recent films, Phantom Thread at first feels like a climbdown in terms of ambition and intensity. There is almost no plot and the power dynamics between the characters are plain to see. Yet as the film develops, what emerges is an intricate portrait of the aberrant psychologies of its characters. We rarely think of fashion designers as artists yet this is precisely what Woodcock is in this film, an artist who is completely committed to his craft and sees each dress as a unique work of art. When he looks at Alma, he sees only how her body can bring out the best in his own work and he only starts to express affection for her when she supports him in condemning a badly behaved yet wealthy client as being unworthy of wearing one of his creations. Alma for her part is initially attracted to his good looks and intense charm and later won over by his genius. Yet she also cannot help but wish to own and tame him to create a more balanced relationship between them and ends up having to weaken him so that he will be reliant on her.

This film is of course beautiful but more notable is how restrained it looks. Though Woodcock inhabits the world of glamor, Anderson is careful to ensure that the film itself is not. The dresses, elaborate and elegant as they are, are the product of painstaking labor and can be imperfect with creases and numerous adjustments needed to make them look good on the wearer. The acting is naturally excellent and I especially liked the depiction of Woodcock’s extreme fastidiousness as he is annoyed by anything the least bit distracting. I don’t actually like the toxic nature of the relationship between Woodcock and Alma as that feels like something that fiction writers come up with rather than anything grounded in reality but it’s one way to add a plot to what really amounts to psychological profiles of a few interesting characters.

As a smaller, relatively unambitious film, this likely won’t make as many waves as Anderson’s other works, but it’s excellent, very well made, and well worth watching.