It is currently Wed Jan 17, 2018 11:46 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 260 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
oldsheperd wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
The sex scene between her and Doc kind of killed the rhythm of the film

[Reveal] Spoiler:
For me, this scene is what the whole film is about: Doc is very turned on by Shasta's return and her willingness to reignite some sparks, but it soon becomes clear that she has given herself over to the dark side, the "cult" that is really the establishment. Doc takes her, but it is as much about hate and sorrow as lust. The scene is horrifying and grounds the film in something more substantial than the broader satirical strokes that make up the majority of the running time. The hurt felt in this scene is echoed in the closing moments as Shasta and Doc sit in his car. Doc warily watches in the rear view mirror as vehicles approach and pass by, not knowing which apparently straight, clean-living citizen might be his undoing.


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:41 am
Roger Ryan wrote:
oldsheperd wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
The sex scene between her and Doc kind of killed the rhythm of the film

[Reveal] Spoiler:
For me, this scene is what the whole film is about: Doc is very turned on by Shasta's return and her willingness to reignite some sparks, but it soon becomes clear that she has given herself over to the dark side, the "cult" that is really the establishment. Doc takes her, but it is as much about hate and sorrow as lust. The scene is horrifying and grounds the film in something more substantial than the broader satirical strokes that make up the majority of the running time. The hurt felt in this scene is echoed in the closing moments as Shasta and Doc sit in his car. Doc warily watches in the rear view mirror as vehicles approach and pass by, not knowing which apparently straight, clean-living citizen might be his undoing.


Well said! Half-formed early morning thought along those lines:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Shasta plays almost like a low-key riff on the femme fatale--she doesn't literally kill Doc, but his love for her does severely comprise his hippie cultural cache. She could be read partly as establishment agent designed to nullify and discredit Doc's conspiracy-tracing doper.

Quick addendum: I'm really boiling that down to make my point--if that's on Anderson's mind, it's part of far more shaded and nuanced whole.


Last edited by Feiereisel on Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:52 am 

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:52 am
Location: New York City
Feiereisel wrote:
Roger Ryan wrote:
oldsheperd wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
The sex scene between her and Doc kind of killed the rhythm of the film

[Reveal] Spoiler:
For me, this scene is what the whole film is about: Doc is very turned on by Shasta's return and her willingness to reignite some sparks, but it soon becomes clear that she has given herself over to the dark side, the "cult" that is really the establishment. Doc takes her, but it is as much about hate and sorrow as lust. The scene is horrifying and grounds the film in something more substantial than the broader satirical strokes that make up the majority of the running time. The hurt felt in this scene is echoed in the closing moments as Shasta and Doc sit in his car. Doc warily watches in the rear view mirror as vehicles approach and pass by, not knowing which apparently straight, clean-living citizen might be his undoing.


Well said! Half-formed early morning thought along those lines:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Shasta plays almost like a low-key riff on the femme fatale--she doesn't literally kill Doc, but his love for her does severely comprise his hippie cultural cache. She could be read partly as establishment agent designed to nullify and discredit Doc's conspiracy-tracing doper.



Agree with all the above, and wanted to add to Feiereisel's point by reminding that
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Shasta is the one who Coy briefly outs as having set him up with the Vigilant California/Informant gig, making some explicit yet indistinct link between her and the establishment


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 7:31 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hampshire, UK
For Londoners, Inherent Vice will be showing in 35mm at the Curzon Soho on Friday, Saturday and Sunday (30th-1st). So that's where I'll seeing it. If I read the listings correctly, it will then be showing as DCP (the Curzon has 4K facilities). The Curzon Richmond has 35mm showings on the Saturday and Sunday. I suspect other venues will be showing it in DCP or at least aren't specifying.

The UK won't be getting a 70mm print, it seems, but I'm less exercised by that as that would be a blowup from 35mm instead of having been shot in 65mm as The Master was. Also, the soundtrack would have been the same Datasat disc as might be being used with the 35mm print. According to in70mm.com, the film will be getting a commercial run in 70mm in Paris in March.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:38 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC
Geoffrey O'Brien's review in The New York Review of Books, and one of the few feature reviews that analyzes how Anderson adapts Pynchon's work in more detail.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2015 10:58 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
FYI, this is now available for digital HD rental/purchase on the usual suspects.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:23 am 

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia
And Warner Bros. has published the script online.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2015 1:56 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hampshire, UK
Has anyone identified Pynchon's apparent cameo in the film? I know PTA has denied it, but others have claimed he's there. If he is there, I was wondering about the health spa scene, about an hour and a half in. The camera follows Doc and tracks past two men sitting at a table, one balding with a white beard, the other clean-shaven and dark-haired, though clearly not young - I wonder if he's the latter. Then again, since there are very few pictures of Pynchon available - and most of them are from high school or his naval career - it's anyone's guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:10 pm 

Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 11:41 am
GaryC wrote:
Has anyone identified Pynchon's apparent cameo in the film? I know PTA has denied it, but others have claimed he's there. If he is there, I was wondering about the health spa scene, about an hour and a half in. The camera follows Doc and tracks past two men sitting at a table, one balding with a white beard, the other clean-shaven and dark-haired, though clearly not young - I wonder if he's the latter. Then again, since there are very few pictures of Pynchon available - and most of them are from high school or his naval career - it's anyone's guess.

I saw proof of it being some other actor a couple weeks ago. Can't seem to find the link anymore. If you look closely in one of the scenes with Owen Wilson and Joaquin Phoenix, you can briefly make out a face in the window. That's the general assumption from a lot of people I have seen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 5:17 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm
i watched it for a 2nd time, and i still didn't like it too much. phoenix is mezmerising as always, brolin is great, but none of the other actors are nearly as good (del toro seems to be doing just cameos lately).
except for punch drunk love, pta's films are too laboured. they go on for much longer than needed. even the last 3rd of boogie nights (and i absolutely hated all of magnolia).

[Reveal] Spoiler:
so, in this film, half of the hero's efforts are spent on finding the missing ex-girlfriend. when she finally shows up, and he asks her where she's been, she says - just been up north, family matters.
well, damn! that's not an impressive payoff.
this reminded me of miller's crossing (although the coens did it much better), where a character 'mink' is discussed throughout the movie, and we've seen him for just one little scene towards the beginning. and because of the accents, for a long time i didn't even know it was mink that i had watched!
and in the same vein, we finally find out why the character 'rug' was shot - 'it was just a misunderstanding'.


and to me, throwning 100 names at us to keep track of is just a false way of complicating a story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2015 1:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:39 pm
Location: Los Angeles
I was able to read the book right before seeing this and I still had problems keeping up with the plot. But like many of you I want to see it again.
In the novel Doc hears a film score in his head or refers to a coat like one in a movie and it is written as The Big Bounce (1969) and I thought PTA could've integrated that in somehow via subtitles or something like that. Also Doc enjoys watching horror B movies late at night and I thought it was a missed opportunity that PTA didn't stick footage of his dad's old show on the TV.
I suppose in the end the entire film was shot and paced as one long stoned adventure, calming observing while weird random shit seems to happened and simply reacting huh'... Maybe that's why I want to see it again :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:15 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm
i've thought about seeing it as a stoner movie. just watch stuff happen, take it as it comes, don't try to figure things out. but i don't think that it works as that either.
he's got characters with tiny parts marching in just to give a tiny bit of info to the hero.
maybe consolidating several characters into one would have been better. and the owen wilson plot line was useless (except to give a bit of info), but took up a big part of the movie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:20 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
Er - the Owen Wilson plot is the main plot of the film. It's literally the entire point; Doc may not be a do-gooder but he does do good, and does what little he can to make his life a lot better. It's the Golden Fang thing that's secondary.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:51 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm
if that's true (and i don't think it is), then they could have made the character a bit interesting. owen wilson/his character is like a wet blanket everytime he's on screen in this. doc is a good person. he seems to be liked by everyone who knows him. so he's done good things before we catch up with him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2015 2:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
copen wrote:
if that's true (and i don't think it is), then they could have made the character a bit interesting. owen wilson/his character is like a wet blanket everytime he's on screen in this. doc is a good person. he seems to be liked by everyone who knows him. so he's done good things before we catch up with him.


A term like "interesting" has as much merit to any actual criticism of anything as a term like "boring". It means nothing aside from a glossy overview of a totally subjective factor.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
The Golden Fang mystery never really comes together and is only partially resolved, but Doc is given the oppurtunity for functionally anything he wants and instead chooses to do what little he can do to help someone who needs it. The idea of the Inherent Vice - that things will ultimately go wrong, that all things must end - is challenged by the fact that despite the inevitable death of the hippie, counter-cultural movement that Doc and Owen Wilson's character epitomize, they can still make do, for a little while anyway.

To look at this film as "A-plot" and "B-plot" does seem to partially miss the point as the mystery is never the focus; the scene in the dentist's office where Doc (and the audience) begins to piece it together with the Flashback of his meeting with Wilson's wife epitomizes this, as we all think "Oh, it's finally all coming to a head!" only to slowly realize that no, it was a false lead, it means absolutely nothing. The mystery remains just that. It's about Doc and his relationship with Shasta, and Bigfoot, and Owen Wilson, and the larger movements/cultures they all form a part of.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2015 3:42 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
Wilson, like almost everyone we meet in Inherent Vice is dopey, venal, and basically unable to think through the consequences of his actions- by most people's defintions, he wouldn't really be worth saving. It is Doc's great virtue that he places saving him at such a high priority anyway- Doc is ultimately a Mr. Rosewater-like character as much as he is a Marlowe in The Long Goodbye, in that he is a man who no longer fits into his time because he actually gives a shit about people, and thinks they might be worth trying to help. The nightmarish conspiracy he's fighting is unbeatable, because it's ultimately only narrowly distinguishable from the entire system of government or capitalism or history or whatever else you want to call it- the allusion made to COINTELPRO at one point is a cutting one, as there's reasonable historical basis for some fairly incredible sounding conspiracies operating at high levels at the time- but ultimately he can find something worth doing and do it.

That, to me, is a big part of what the movie is about, and the multiplicity of characters (nearly all of whom are straightjacketed or morally compromised) with whom Doc interacts is vital to what is ultimately a desperately humanist work- were it Doc alone against the world, the whole thing would fall apart. Were it a straightforward conspiracy with clearly defined terms, the haziness of the resolution wouldn't fit. Were the world it's all set in to make perfect sense, the whole feeling of losing the thread and grasping at something wouldn't be there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:37 pm 

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia
US Blu-ray release scheduled for April 28th.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 8:27 am 

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia
Special features announced:
· Los Paranoias
· Shasta Fay
· The Golden Fang
· Everything In This Dream

No details on what they actually are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:49 am
Location: Transylvania
3-minute EPK featurettes, no doubt


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:37 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
The real special feature will be subtitles.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:01 am 

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia
Apparently, the special features are just three trailers, and a deleted scenes montage (like Back Beyond for The Master). From what I found on Youtube, these are two of the three trailers: Los Paranoias and Shasta Fay. Everything In This Dream sounds like it's the montage.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
I do hope we see the Thomas Jefferson scene in the deleted scenes - it was in the script sent out for the Oscars, so I'm thinking it was probably filmed and cut. It sounds delightful.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm
Ditto with the final Sortilege narration, which was my favorite part of the book and whose absence from the movie was my main disappointment with it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 12:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:34 pm
Location: Tativille, IA
Turns out the "Everything in This Dream" feature is a single 6 minute deleted scene :(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:19 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
The Blu-ray looks and sounds great though - Joaquin Phoenix is still a mumbler, but aside from that, it sounds a ton better than it did in the theater.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 260 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jindianajonz


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection