XIXAX Film Forum

The Director's Chair => Paul Thomas Anderson => Topic started by: cronopio 2 on December 02, 2010, 09:51:28 AM

Title: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: cronopio 2 on December 02, 2010, 09:51:28 AM
Extremely long URL that was killing the page formatting (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/paul_thomas_anderson_looks_to_adapt_thomas_pychons_inherent_vice_with_rober/)



holy crap.


this could be so good.  while reading it i was thinking that the book was like the equivalent of boogie nights in the sense that it takes a person with the memory of an elephant to do a proper period piece in a time and place that the author actually existed in. read the book.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: MacGuffin on December 02, 2010, 09:51:43 AM
Paul Thomas Anderson Looks To Adapt Thomas Pychon’s ‘Inherent Vice’ With Robert Downey Jr.
Source: The Playlist

Adapting the work of reclusive literary genius Thomas Pynchon seems like a fool’s errand. His novels—“Gravity’s Rainbow” and “The Crying of Lot 49”—among others, feature dense plotting, allegorical whimsy, and are stuffed so full of characters that any screenwriter stupid enough to attempt an adaptation must be suicidal. Unless that book is his latest “Inherent Vice” and unless the person adapting it is Paul Thomas Anderson. Acquired just over a year ago by CAA, “Inherent Vice” is now headed to the big screen. Vulture reports Anderson is hard at work adapting the book and while it’s not quite clear how far he’s gotten so far, apparently a treatment might already be done and he may be in the first stages of penning the script. And certainly, any Anderson project is a hot one and CAA who are repping the project “has been pondering the idea of trying to attach Robert Downey Jr. as Doc Sportello.” So, that’s basically a fancy way of saying he’s on a wishlist and as Vulture notes, Robert Downey Jr’s schedule is pretty much crammed for the next year as work on two major tentpoles, “The Avengers” and “Oz The Great And Powerful” (and that packed calendar recently forced him to drop out of Alfonso Cuaron‘s “Gravity”). Certainly, “Inherent Vice” is the most filmable of any Pynchon book. The 384-page “novella” follows a private detective uncovering a plot to kidnap a billionaire land developer in drug-kissed 1960s Los Angeles. Many reviewers have even drawn comparisons to the psychedelic noir of “The Big Lebowski.” Downey Jr is being eyed for the leading role of the blissed out investigator, but obviously, these are very early stages. No word yet on what this means for Anderson’s gestating Scientology/religious cult drama “The Master.” Last we heard, the project was postponed indefinitely with Jeremy Renner hinting that Anderson was still getting the script and story to a place he liked, but we hoped that one hasn’t fallen to the wayside. “Inherent Vice” will mark the second project based off a previously published work and it remains to be seen if Anderson will stick to the pages of Pynchon’s work or, like he did with “Oil!” by Upton Sinclair (which was turned into “There Will Be Blood”), spin it into something uniquely his own.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Reelist on December 02, 2010, 09:54:39 AM
This is the kind of PTA film I want to see next.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Fernando on December 02, 2010, 10:02:35 AM
good news this week, first trailer of life and now this.

 :multi:

let's just hope he doesn't hit a wall this time.

 :brickwall:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on December 02, 2010, 10:14:16 AM
That sounds amazing.  But please don't bury The Master.   :yabbse-cry:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Kellen on December 02, 2010, 12:49:40 PM
Hell yeah!  Best news i've heard all day.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on December 02, 2010, 01:36:04 PM
Trailer for the book (narrated by the author): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjWKPdDk0_U

Now I'm kinda skeptical that PTA would do this.  It seems like it would belong more in his 90's output, lets see if CigsNDeadVines can weigh in on it's validity...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Stefen on December 02, 2010, 01:44:56 PM
New PTA is always exciting but I'm with Mod. It seems like a definite step backwards after TWBB. It points to him going back to his Scorcese/Altman phase, which I was kind of happy he had behind him.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: SiliasRuby on December 02, 2010, 02:34:50 PM
I really want to read this. When I do I'll fill you guys in...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Pas on December 02, 2010, 06:45:49 PM
The Master > Inherent Vice in terms of one-sentence synopsis BUT Robert Downey >>>>>> Jeremy Renner*1000

Also, Pynchon is not some random dude. This project has inherent value.

This is very exciting and awesome.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Marty McSuperfly on December 03, 2010, 03:12:29 AM
It seems like a definite step backwards after TWBB. It points to him going back to his Scorcese/Altman phase, which I was kind of happy he had behind him.

I dunno about that. PTA always seems to be stretching himself with each project: When Magnolia was announced  no one could have guessed the style and tone of it from the logline released to Variety ("six interwoven stories dealing with families, love and lonliness"). The same with Punch-Drunk Love - who in their right mind could have predicted that a 90-minute Adam Sandler romantic comedy would turn out like that? I even read Oil to try to get a handle on what CMBB might turn out like. I wasn't even close.

What I'm trying to say (in an admittedly clumsy manner)  is that trying to speculate about the tone or style of the finished film is pointless, given that PTA has proven time and time again that his mind simply doesn't work the way ours do.

For all we know he could be using Inherent Vice as a jumping off point for a sci-fi thriller set on a space station.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Gold Trumpet on December 03, 2010, 05:33:18 AM
I don't know if it's a step down for PTA. It isn't a Thomas Pynchon epic. It's a pretty light book for him so in the pantheon of recent filmmakers trying to take on huge novels, PTA would be downsizing compared to the Wachowski Brothers taking on Cloud Atlas and Ang Lee adapting Life of Pi. Those are big books. However, it will be how he adapts this book. He will have numerous ways to go about it and at least I believe would be different than anything he has ever done before. For a filmmaker who is still relatively young, that is important.

Still, I will wait for more confirmation before believing this report. Even if it's true, it could fall through very easily.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: RegularKarate on December 03, 2010, 10:22:43 AM
Let's also not for get CMBB was an adaptation too.  There's no way to tell what this will be like based on the book.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Derek on February 20, 2011, 10:54:21 AM

The Hollywood Reporter is confirming an earlier report that Robert Downey Jr. is in talks for Paul Thomas Anderson‘s big screen adaptation of Inherent Vice. After dropping out of Disney’s Oz, the Great and Powerful, Vulture reported last week that Downey was “interested in the lead role.” And now Risky Business confirms that the actor’s “commitment to Anderson’s movie has recently grown serious” and that he is “making plans to fill the fall hole in his schedule.”


We learned last week that Megan Ellison, the daughter of Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, was reportedly close to co-financing both of PTA’s upcoming films, the Scientology project referred to as The Master and the Thomas Pynchon adaptation Inherent Vice. PTA apparently also has the blessing of Inherent Vice author Thomas Pynchon, and is partway through a second draft of the script, with the author being a frequent consultant on the project. As Russ pointed out in his earlier report, “that blessing is no small thing, given that no significant films have ever been produced directly based on Mr. Pynchon’s novels, and that the author is among the most reclusive major creators alive today.”

The novel based on this drug-addled detective story is already drawing comparisons to The Big Lebowski. Here’s the Amazon description of Inherent Vice:

Part noir, part psychedelic romp, all Thomas Pynchon— private eye Doc Sportello comes, occasionally, out of a marijuana haze to watch the end of an era as free love slips away and paranoia creeps in with the L.A. fog. It’s been awhile since Doc Sportello has seen his ex-girlfriend. Suddenly out of nowhere she shows up with a story about a plot to kidnap a billionaire land developer whom she just happens to be in love with. Easy for her to say. It’s the tail end of the psychedelic sixties in L.A., and Doc knows that “love” is another of those words going around at the moment, like “trip” or “groovy,” except that this one usually leads to trouble. Despite which he soon finds himself drawn into a bizarre tangle of motives and passions whose cast of characters includes surfers, hustlers, dopers and rockers, a murderous loan shark, a tenor sax player working undercover, an ex-con with a swastika tattoo and a fondness for Ethel Merman, and a mysterious entity known as the Golden Fang, which may only be a tax dodge set up by some dentists.

http://www.slashfilm.com/robert-downey-jr-talks-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice/#more-98473
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 20, 2011, 12:48:12 PM
And now Risky Business confirms that the actor’s “commitment to Anderson’s movie has recently grown serious” and that he is “making plans to fill the fall hole in his schedule.”

This does sound serious!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Reelist on February 20, 2011, 01:12:37 PM
does that mean he's gonna shoot the Master all year and then start this or is this one gonna come first? Either way, it's cool he's doing stuff back to back. God knows we need it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on February 20, 2011, 01:45:55 PM
It doesn't say anything about back-to-back. It means, if this works out, he'll be doing Inherent Vice this fall and then hopefully at some indetermined future date would get back to The Master, but who knows?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 20, 2011, 03:54:00 PM
Remember when we thought Adam Sandler being in PDL would bring PTA greater mainstream popularity? And then it didn't really happen?

With Robert Downey Jr, this could be the one.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Stefen on February 20, 2011, 04:31:21 PM
I was listening to sports radio the other day and they were talking about how funny Adam Sandlers new movie was and they said, "Yeah, this isn't one of those stupid movies where he tries to act. Remember that movie where he wore that blue suit? AWFUL. This movie is actually funny."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Reelist on February 20, 2011, 04:38:31 PM
 :drool:

I think he has to act waay more in those other movies. The Sandler of PDL is a lot closer to the version you see of him in interviews. well, less jokey than that but still funny as hell.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: squints on February 21, 2011, 09:26:51 AM
I was listening to sports radio the other day and they were talking about how funny Adam Sandlers new movie was and they said, "Yeah, this isn't one of those stupid movies where he tries to act. Remember that movie where he wore that blue suit? AWFUL. This movie is actually funny."

Sports radio generally isn't the place where i get well informed thoughtful discussion of the cinema.
its where i go to get my masturbatory thunder fix.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: P Heat on December 08, 2011, 10:26:47 PM
1, 2, 3, 5, 5, 3, 2, 1

... 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, etc.

It's hard to resist this temptation, but if He deems that more time is needed I shall trust in Him.

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2011/12/08/robert-downey-jr-says-paul-thomas-anderson-collaboration-is-probably-true/

he said " a variety of projects including" :ponder: including Inherent Vice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on December 08, 2011, 11:31:41 PM
You're missing a word there. He said "variety of potential projects," (also didn't say "including") and from the context it sounds like they'd probably end up picking just one. For God's sake, be careful with those quotation marks!

Sorry, just trying to be a downer.

But this is still good news.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Champion Souza on September 03, 2012, 10:19:11 AM
Paul Thomas Anderson Now Writing 'Inherent Vice,' Hopes To Get It "Going Soon"

via The Playlist

With "The Master" making its world premiere at the Venice Film Festival over the weekend, we can now start obsessing over Paul Thomas Anderson's next movie, right? Indeed, given his patient output and increasing space between films (it has been five years each between "Punch-Drunk Love" and "There Will Be Blood," and "There Will Be Blood" and "The Master") it can be a tough wait for fans of the director's work, but the good news is he's already at work on what will hopefully be his next project.
"I’m hoping we can get 'Inherent Vice' going soon. That’s what I’m writing now," he told Screen Daily in Venice. But as folks already know, this one has already been brewing for a while. An adaptation of Thomas Pychon's novel, the project first dropped on the radar in 2010, and shortly thereafter, found financing via Megan Ellison's Annapurna Pictures who also backed "The Master" after Universal bailed out. The picture also seemed to gain a lead in Robert Downey Jr., who as recently as last December, was hinting very strongly at working with Anderson.

The 384-page "novella" is a bit more straightforward than usual Pynchon fare, and follows a private detective uncovering a plot to kidnap a billionaire land developer in drug-kissed 1960s Los Angeles. Many reviewers have even drawn comparisons to the psychedelic noir of "The Big Lebowski." Downey Jr. is eyeing the lead role of the blissed-out investigator, and it will seemingly be another genre detour for Anderson...into stoner comedy?

"[It's] like a 'Cheech and Chong' movie. Adapting Pychon's work is] just gonna be great and, hopefully, fun" he told Empire, while also revealing he's tackling the author's opus "Gravity's Rainbow" as well. “Hopefully not long. I'd like to have a few years of being more productive. But we'll see,” he said about progress on that one.

As for the visual look of the film, and his recent embrace of 70mm for "The Master," he's keeping options open for "Inherent Vice." "It would depend on the story. It would be tempting to do it again. It’s a lovely format. The camera is as big as a table. It’s loud, too. You can hear it in the movie. It’s like a fan at times," he explained to Screen Daily.

So all this to say, "Inherent Vice" is very much in the cards. Let's just hope we don't have to wait until 2017 to see it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: P Heat on September 07, 2012, 01:36:57 AM
edit: fuck the playlist. piece of shit site
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Just Withnail on September 07, 2012, 08:36:20 AM
Cool news. Didn't expect the interest of doing an adaption of Gravity's Rainbow as well.  2 possible P.T movies in the works. I feel like I ate a big lunch and am satisfied about it

He isn't, that's just Playlist not reading the original article (http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35060) properly. Only mention of Gravity's Rainbow is this:

Quote from: Empire
But although Anderson has been working on bringing the Gravity Rainbow author's most accessible work to the big screen for several years, it's not clear exactly when it will happen: “Hopefully not long. I'd like to have a few years of being more productive. But we'll see.”
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on September 09, 2012, 05:20:49 PM
It was the confusing wording of the Empire article that they went back and updated.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Kellen on October 13, 2012, 01:36:41 AM
Paul Thomas Anderson talks adapting 'Inherent Vice' (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2012/10/pta-talks-challenges-of-adapting.html)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on October 13, 2012, 09:36:09 AM
Linking to the Slashfilm repost of our story? Bad form!  :yabbse-grin:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 13, 2012, 10:30:38 AM
Indeed! Fixed.

This does sound exciting. I'm torn on whether to read the book.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Reelist on October 13, 2012, 11:11:40 AM
I have the book. It's the one novel I'm most excited about reading. I just don't know what it has in store for me since I haven't read Pynchon and am not familiar with his writing style, but if PTA is adapting it I know I'm in for a treat, so I must prepare for that. I think I'll save it for a winter read, it seems like the type of thing I could tear through in a few snowy days...


DON'T SPOIL THE BOOK!!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: BB on October 13, 2012, 11:50:48 AM
This does sound exciting. I'm torn on whether to read the book.

I've read the book and it only made me more excited for the film. Spoilers-schmoilers.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: DocSportello on October 13, 2012, 01:42:41 PM
The book is one of the most entertaining I've ever had the pleasure of reading. But I'm the main character so I guess I'm biased.  :wink:

All kidding aside though I can't wait to see who will play Bigfoot. Any guesses from those who have read it? Needs to be someone tall and intimidating with a large personality but they need to be sufficiently older than Downey Jr. (assuming that's who gets cast as Doc). John Goodman seems the most obvious choice to me. Bill Murray could work maybe. That'd be dope.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Ghostboy on October 13, 2012, 02:07:46 PM
When I read it, I couldn't imagine anyone other than Bob Einstein (Marty Funkhauser on Curb Your Enthusiasm) as Bigfoot.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: DocSportello on October 13, 2012, 03:44:16 PM
That could work, but please, call the man by his real name:




(http://www.kncgolf.com/images/celebrity-thumbnails/Osborne_Dave.png)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: velociraptor on October 13, 2012, 09:27:24 PM
I saw James Gandolfini as Bigfoot, despite it being completely against Pynchon's description.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: picolas on October 13, 2012, 11:30:38 PM
SOMEONE POST THE TOWN HALL DISCUSSION MP3 THX!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: BB on October 14, 2012, 10:53:02 AM
Bob Einstein would be awesome. I can see Ron Perlman playing Bigfoot. Or the brother from Everybody Loves Raymond...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: KJ on January 08, 2013, 01:39:41 PM
Robert Downey Jr. Still Attached To ‘Inherent Vice'; Charlize Theron Possibly Joining As Film Gears Up
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.se/2013/01/robert-downey-jr-still-attached-to.html

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MF0irzpKoiA/UOxzxHhvmwI/AAAAAAAABYo/_uGHWHQ7oeY/s1600/Untitled-1.jpg)

Wow, well this certainly comes as a surprise. According to Showbiz 411 (via The Playlist) things are already gearing up for "Inherent Vice." The article states the obvious (that 'Vice' will be PTA's next film & Annapurna are once again financing), the unconfirmed (that Robert Downey Jr. who had originally been pegged to star is still attached) and drops one new casting rumor: that Charlize Theron may be joining the film as well. See below:

    There were a lot of internet rumors and some clues over the last week. Now I can confirm that Paul Thomas Anderson’s next film will be an adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s novel “Inherent Vice.” And also, it does like Robert Downey, Jr. and perhaps Charlize Theron will be the stars, with more names coming. After disappointing box office on “The Master,” PTA is said to be interested in having a moneymaker.

    I can tell you that the brilliant and relatively young Megan Ellison is going to produce via her Annapurna Productions. Ellison is also busy prepping David O. Russell’s next one, “American Bullshit,” with Bradley Cooper and Christian Bale and, obviously, a new title.

    Pynchon is notoriously reclusive. The legendary author of “Gravity’s Rainbow” and “V” has lived for years right here in New York, married to literary agent Melanie Jackson. He’s our J.D. Salinger, meaning no one ever sees him. (Other writers like this include Thomas Harris, the creator of Hannibal Lecter, who lives in Sag Harbor, and Harper Lee, who used to be in New York and is now down south in what I’m told may be assisted living.)

    Pynchon did narrate a video for “Inherent Vice” which can be –and has been–found on You Tube. I’m told he thinks very highly of Anderson, who’s met with him a lot. “Pynchon only wants Paul to make this movie,” says a source. And we do too. More: “It’s closer to Boogie Nights than any of his other films.”

Back in December PTA named Charlize as one of the actors/actresses he'd most like to work with so this doesn't really come as a surprise. "Charlize Theron I think is dynamite.  She's so great," he told Sirius. Pretty thrilling that "The Master" hasn't even opened in certain territories yet (or landed on Blu-ray) and we're already talking about the next one. Any readers who have read the novel want to guess on who Charlize might be playing? Sound off in the comments but no spoilers please.

Pre-order "The Master" on Blu-ray or DVD.
Stay tuned to Twitter and Facebook for the latest news and updates.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on January 08, 2013, 02:24:35 PM
I said this already but seriously, how amazing is it that "The Master" isn't even out on Blu yet and not only do we know what his next project is, but it's already gearing up with financing and casting in place?

Maybe the 00's dark ages of the 5 year waits are over.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: polkablues on January 08, 2013, 02:31:27 PM
Finally someone figured out how to put their trust fund to good use.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Kellen on January 08, 2013, 03:43:28 PM
Another p.t. flick done and another one in the works already. 

Does this mean Paul has been cured of his Kubrickitis?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Alexandro on January 08, 2013, 06:31:07 PM
wasn't kubrick actively looking for a moneymaker after barry lyndon and hence made the shinning?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: HeywoodRFloyd on January 08, 2013, 06:40:53 PM
wasn't kubrick actively looking for a moneymaker after barry lyndon and hence made the shinning?

I think Kubrickitis is a symptom in which an auteur has massive 5 year gaps between their films.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: MacGuffin on January 08, 2013, 07:26:57 PM
Does this mean Paul has been cured of his Kubrickitis?

No, it means he got a vasectomy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Fernando on January 08, 2013, 07:43:41 PM
to be fair, when Kubrick was in the same age range as PTA he made three films in the 60s. Lolita, Dr. Strangelove and 2001, that's two and four years apart from each other.

he then was ready to make Napoleon and the studio didnt bank the project, which led him to make ACO and four years later Barry Lyndon.

it's after The Shining when he took the longest (at that time), right now cant remember if he had another project before FMJ.

a few years after FMJ he was ready to film Aryan Papers and Spielberg RUINED that for all mankind....


having said that, im ecstatic too that PTA is ready to make another film.  :multi:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on January 08, 2013, 09:52:32 PM
I think it's 'round about time to finish the book before any clues about the film version color my imagination...although, so far, RDJ is perfect for the lead, and I'm okay that my brain is using him to represent Doc Sportello.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Pubrick on January 08, 2013, 10:40:59 PM
i think this time it's perfectly fine to read the book. with Oil i don't think PTA actually gave a shit about the actual story of that snoozefest. this time it looks like he's really invested in the book and he has reverence for the author. i want to read it cos all i've ever heard is that it's MINOR pynchon. so why make a movie about it?

i think PT wanted to do a detective story on one level (for the reason listed in the primer) but he jumped on the chance to also explore an even bigger mystery that is Pynchon himself. what's there to talk about so much that they've been meeting all these times? they're not just talking about the book. PTA set out to make friends with one of the most elusive authors of our time. he always seems to set himself this kind of challenge.. observe:

he wrote Frank TJ Mackey for Cruise. he stalked him out, of all the actors we've heard about in that film, the most intestesting pre production bit that we never got to see in the making of doco was when he went to the set of freaking EWS to talk to Cruise.. was mark rance there? he must've at least tried. but they don't even mention it! of all the preproduction madness from script writing to rehearsal to shooting post production and everything else he covered in That Moment, that has to be the most juicy bit in the legend that is the making of magnolia. to say nothing of the fact PTA was also seeking to encounter that certain Pynchon of directors, maybe befriend him too.

the fact it emerged as such a memorable event highlights the specific focus he had put on Tom Cruise as a pivotal part of this film. Cruise is himself one of the most elusive big name actors around. and PTA made a huge effort to win him over. what's next.. Sandler is not so much inaccessible as he is hard to take seriously, he is arguably on the same celebrity status as Cruise which grants him special "outsider" status in society by virtue of being so rare, but i think the real elusive character he was hoping to befriend in PDL was Sean Penn who passed on the role of mattress man.

during this time we have come to learn that he also was trying to court Joaquin Phoenix in some unknown capacity. this dude is ALSO famous for being inaccessible. but i'm skipping ahead. after PDL he decides to go after this amazing actor who has all but retired into a farm somewhere save for indulging his wife in that one film of hers and helping his buddy Marty make some money. i'm talking about DDL of course. and the way i described in the primer that he talked to DDL is very similar to the kind of affection he showed for Sandler in that clip where they ate gummy bears that one time (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoWea5RYYFk). PTA LOVES to befriend the outsiders in his world.

Downey Jr is no longer an outsider but he definitely has been, regardless of how much the teenagers making him rich these days are unaware of it. he spent years in the wildnerness. clearly he's well suited to the role of some pot smoking detective on the hunt for who knows what, some woman probably, but the real star of this film i think will be the phantom presence of the author. he's continuing to bring the outsider to light.

this is why PTA loves character actors so much, as far as to transform them into leads through sheer force of will. his early films are populated almost exclusively by actors who have no reason to believe they are the centre of the world. PDL was an interesting experiment because sandler was indeed that, but that's another topic, i'll just briefly say that was a perfect way to show someone who gets no respect in some circles playing someone who gets no respect in his familial circle finding his inner strength through a lifelong fan. With DDL and JoaqP he summoned the KINGS of the fringe (of sanity?). this is different to what Tarantino does when he shoehorns random forgotten actors into his films and revives their careers that should have in most cases stayed dead. he's a fanboy, nothing more.

what PTA is doing is much more sophisticated than what that hack does, PT is putting things in their proper place, showing us things as they were meant to be, actors in roles they were meant to play. not some stupid gimmick that only trash-loving neckbeards really care about. so read the book, read ALL of Pynchon's books.. they deserve to be read, and you have PTA's blessing.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on January 09, 2013, 04:49:59 PM
the observations about PTA accessing the inaccessible really hits the nail on the head about what he does as a filmmaker, and one can only assume as a person. He tries to pay respect to the misunderstood, even painting Dodd, who could be an evil, selfish guy, as someone trying to find his way as much as Freddie.
In the case of adapting this novel, respecting the vision of an author who's alive and well, there's a lot less wiggle room than in the case of "Oil!", and I think PTA has the right idea getting to know the source of his inspiration one-on-one.

As for the book, anyone else look up the names of bands/songs mentioned on YouTube while reading? And then maybe realize that some of them are just made up?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Cloudy on January 24, 2013, 03:18:23 PM
THE PLAYLIST: Robert Downey Jr. Out, Joaquin Phoenix In For Paul Thomas Anderson's 'Inherent Vice'

Joaquin Phoenix may come off as somewhat mercurial, perhaps even unapproachable, but his talent is unassailable, and it seems he forges strong creative connections. One need look no further than the four film he's made with James Gray, and now it looks like he's ready to re-up with his "The Master" director Paul Thomas Anderson.

THR reports that Robert Downey Jr. has passed on the upcoming "Inherent Vice," and Phoenix is now in talks to join. Damn. While this is exactly the kind of role we were hoping RDJ would take after basically playing Tony Stark for the past few years, it's hard to argue with Phoenix slotting in for what could be a total gear shift. Based on the book by Thomas Pynchon, the story follows a private detective uncovering a plot to kidnap a billionaire land developer in drug-kissed 1960s Los Angeles.

Earlier in the month, Charlize Theron was tipped as a potential co-star with the promise of more big names to come in rounding out the cast, but obvoiusly, things are still coming together. But it does seems as if this is quickly coming together in what might be the fastest turnaround between pictures for PTA. But as always, we'll see how it shakes out. But Anderson and Phoenix back together to tackle a "Big Lebowski"-esque crime tale? Um, yeah, that works. And yes, Megan Ellison's Annapurna Pictures are producing.

Wowowowowowowowow.

Reelist:
Quote
*should get a new title soon
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: picolas on January 24, 2013, 04:19:49 PM
damn. i thought rdj and pta would be a perfect combo. i wonder if rdj wanted too much money or something.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: matt35mm on January 24, 2013, 04:26:51 PM
It may just be a scheduling issue.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: polkablues on January 24, 2013, 04:33:40 PM
I'm fine with this.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Neil on January 24, 2013, 05:15:38 PM
if JP can channel the character he played in, "I'm still here," this may be just right.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: socketlevel on January 24, 2013, 05:44:30 PM
he can do it, dude's a chameleon.

too bad no RDJ, cuz then he worked with junior and senior.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: jenkins on January 24, 2013, 08:23:49 PM
i wonder if rdj wanted too much money or something.
nfw. or like, maybe. only in the way that anything's possible. green is everywhere.

i saw rdj sing pt's praises at cinefamily's telethon -- rdj said he saw the master at the arclight in la and that he was blown away by people's reactions to the movie. he said iho pt was making masterpieces. the subtext was that rdj and pt were right. you know rdj. he sings praises with total conviction. and rdj appreciates pt's reverence for rds, in public.

just saying there are certain accusations i wouldn't make and this is one.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: DocSportello on January 24, 2013, 08:55:49 PM
I'm stoked on this.

After the Cannes press conference and Joaquin's animosities towards the Oscars and awards in general, a part of me worried that PTA may have felt a tad burdoned by JP. I wondered if perhaps he was thinking something like, "we made a movie, and there was magic, but maybe we should leave it at that and let The Master be my time with Joaquin." I'm glad to hear that PTA and company are unfazed by all that has been discussed in the press about Joaquin. Although, I should have knowned that would be the case. Mr. Phoenix, Ms. Elisson and Mr. Anderson are the film industries' true punk rockers!

I hope they make this movie together. There is obviously a great bond between these two men. One might say not unlike Dodd and Freddie. JP will be a great Doc. Full steam ahead.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: BB on January 24, 2013, 09:00:58 PM
To recap:

nfw rdj pt's rdj la iho pt rdj pt rdj rdj pt's rds

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: jenkins on January 24, 2013, 09:04:12 PM
gj bb ;)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: BB on January 25, 2013, 01:16:46 AM
thx
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on January 25, 2013, 05:39:11 AM
I don't care who the main actor is. We're only have to wait probably until 2014 for the next PT Anderson picture, and that's the best news ever.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Pubrick on January 25, 2013, 07:27:47 AM
still, it would have been nice to see PTA turn a profit.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on January 25, 2013, 08:20:30 AM
Yes, you're right. My first thought was "They're both good actors and I'm sure the movie will be fine with either of them", but thinking in terms of box-ofice, you have a point. Downey is huge at the moment and that can make a difference.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Fernando on January 25, 2013, 04:00:37 PM
IMO, RDJ or any other movie star doesn't guarantee shit...

PROOF:

The Soloist
$31,720,158

Charlie Bartlett
$3,951,699

Zodiac
$33,080,084

Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus
$223,202

A Scanner Darkly
$5,501,616

Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang
$4,243,756


another huge box office ''magnet'' that has had the same results with lesser movies is Johnny Depp, with movies like The Libertine and The Rum Diary...


anyway...like Pandaroyal, im just happy that (apparently) we (you USA fucks) wont wait long to see the next PTA film.

we Mexicans are still waiting for a release date of The Master, and it doesnt look like we're going to get it soon (soon = the next 6 months)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on January 25, 2013, 04:17:48 PM
You're talking (mostly) about PRE-Iron Man RDJ which meant nothing. POST-Iron Man RDJ is:

Iron Man $318M
Tropic Thunder $110M
Iron Man II $312M
Due Date $100M
The Avengers $623M
and yeah, The Soloist but even $31M is almost twice "The Master" grosses, so he definitely wouldn't have hurt.
Plus, he's big overseas.
That said, It'll be super interesting to see what Joaquin does a second time around as I can only assume it will be 180 degrees different.

Listen to Duplass (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/01/mark-duplass-s-master-shouts-out.html) on this.
"The Master is going to lose money, and [Megan Ellison] doesn't give a shit. She's going to make more movies like that. And that sort of punk-rock spirit with the power that she has is exactly what we need in cinema right now."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Ulivija on January 25, 2013, 10:08:25 PM
I was reading "Inherent Vice" during the period when I watched "The Master" seven times, and the lead character of "Inherent Vice" totally reminded me of Freddie Quell.

I was unhappy with the choice of RDJ for "Inherent Vice". He's too old and too successful (with the Iron Man/Sherlock Holmes franchises) to play Larry "Doc" Sportello.

I had hoped Joaquin would play Sportello, but never even dreamed it could happen. The reunion of PTA and Joaquin Phoenix makes me so happy!

Here's a paragraph from Pynchon's book that made me think of Freddie Quell - the guy who sleeps through the date with the department store model, and the guy who sleeps in a movie theater:

Doc's history with Bigfoot had escalated with the Lunchwater case, one more of the squalid matrimonials that were occupying Doc's time back then. The husband, a tax accountant who thought he'd score some quality surveillance on the cheap, had hired Doc to keep an eye on his wife. After a couple days of stakeouts at the boyfriend's house Doc decided to go up on the roof and have a closer look through a skylight at the bedroom below, where the activities proved to be so routine - hanky maybe, not much panky - that he decided to light a joint to pass the time, taking one from his pocket, in the dark, more soporific than he had intended. Before long he had fallen asleep and half rolled half slid down the shallow pitch of the red-tile roof, coming to rest with his head in the gutter, where he then managed to sleep through the events which followed, including hubby's arrival, considerable screaming, and gunfire loud enough to get the neighbors to call the police. Bigfoot, who happened to be out in a prowl car nearby, showed up to find the husband and the b.f. slain and the wife attractively tousled and sobbing, and gazing at the .22 in her hand as if it was the first time she'd seen one. Doc, up on the roof, was still snoring away.

I have to confess I haven't finished the book yet -I'm reading it slowly and enjoying every single page. The number of characters is daunting. If I were PTA, I would just film the whole book as an HBO mini-series. The book is wonderful - so full of sex and humor that I believe PTA's adaptation will be his first blockbuster!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on January 27, 2013, 06:59:17 AM

Doc's history with Bigfoot had escalated with the Lunchwater case, one more of the squalid matrimonials that were occupying Doc's time back then. The husband, a tax accountant who thought he'd score some quality surveillance on the cheap, had hired Doc to keep an eye on his wife. After a couple days of stakeouts at the boyfriend's house Doc decided to go up on the roof and have a closer look through a skylight at the bedroom below, where the activities proved to be so routine - hanky maybe, not much panky - that he decided to light a joint to pass the time, taking one from his pocket, in the dark, more soporific than he had intended. Before long he had fallen asleep and half rolled half slid down the shallow pitch of the red-tile roof, coming to rest with his head in the gutter, where he then managed to sleep through the events which followed, including hubby's arrival, considerable screaming, and gunfire loud enough to get the neighbors to call the police. Bigfoot, who happened to be out in a prowl car nearby, showed up to find the husband and the b.f. slain and the wife attractively tousled and sobbing, and gazing at the .22 in her hand as if it was the first time she'd seen one. Doc, up on the roof, was still snoring away.


This was the point early on in the book where I knew I would enjoy the heck out of reading it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Frederico Fellini on January 29, 2013, 02:40:35 PM
You guys seen this?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjWKPdDk0_U



Narrated by Pynchon himself.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on January 29, 2013, 03:15:32 PM
EXCLUSIVE: Producer JoAnne Sellar Says ‘Inherent Vice' Hoping To Shoot In Late April/Early May
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/01/exclusive-producer-joanne-sellar-says.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: KJ on January 29, 2013, 03:18:10 PM
This is crazy. I haven't even seen The Master yet.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: velociraptor on January 30, 2013, 12:31:24 PM
.

Listen to Duplass (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/01/mark-duplass-s-master-shouts-out.html) on this.
"The Master is going to lose money, and [Megan Ellison] doesn't give a shit. She's going to make more movies like that. And that sort of punk-rock spirit with the power that she has is exactly what we need in cinema right now."

God this makes me so happy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on February 01, 2013, 02:05:46 PM
Considering the "dream casting" of Phoenix, and the large, expansive cast of characters in the book, do you want to see any PTA alum in particular roles?
Of course, the fresh talent is still always something awesome to behold in a PTA film. And some of the parts would be fleeting for known actors if translated to cinema. Still, any opinions?

Personally, I could see Paul Dano easily returning as one of Doc's stoner friends.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: polkablues on February 01, 2013, 02:35:53 PM
I just want Paul F. Tompkins to get the big role he's spent two PTA films paying dues for.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Frederico Fellini on February 01, 2013, 02:45:50 PM
Considering the "dream casting" of Phoenix, and the large, expansive cast of characters in the book, do you want to see any PTA alum in particular roles?
Of course, the fresh talent is still always something awesome to behold in a PTA film. And some of the parts would be fleeting for known actors if translated to cinema. Still, any opinions?

Personally, I could see Paul Dano easily returning as one of Doc's stoner friends.



LUIS GUZMAN as SAUNCHO.  I would also love to see John C. Reilly in AT LEAST a cameo.

Make it happen.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 01, 2013, 03:41:04 PM
Phillip Baker Hall as Mumbles O'Malley.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: BigSock on February 01, 2013, 09:22:14 PM
With Charlize Theron reportedly working on that Seth MacFarlane western comedy that is slated to shoot around late spring/early summer, good chance she won't be in Inherent Vice after all...

Wonder who is going to end up doing the score? I know PTA's mentioned that he will work with Greenwood as long as Greenwood wants to work with him, but the material seems so much up Jon Brion's alley.

Also, with Annapurna financing, I wonder who'll distribute it. I don't think Weinstein will. It could have more mainstream appeal than anything PTA has done in quite some time, maybe Sony?

FYI: One of my 1st time posting! Exciting!  :yabbse-grin:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on February 04, 2013, 06:49:00 PM
Phillip Baker Hall as Mumbles O'Malley.

About damn time
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE WITH ROBERT DOWNEY JR?
Post by: modage on February 06, 2013, 09:41:18 AM
No Hoffman.
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/02/philip-seymour-hoffman-says-as-of-now.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on February 10, 2013, 02:31:14 AM
Luis Guzman  said he is totally down with doing this film in a video interview a while back. Philip Baker or even Julianne Moore would be nice (yes they are old). Pynchon's voice is really good. I wouldn't be surprised if Paul uses that voice in something.

One more thing. Cheech & Chong (or at least Chong) would be awesome for this. lol I'd love to see that happen.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on February 12, 2013, 12:10:00 PM
I was reading this thing Pynchon did for David Foster Wallace after his death, and he speaks VERY BRIEFLY about INHERENT VICE:


" I have some vain hope that my latest, Inherent Vice, will be made into a movie, something, perhaps, along the lines of Altman’s The Long Goodbye, a kind of meta-detective film, maybe directed by the Coen brothers; there was some talk of Kubrick filming Gravity’s Rainbow back in the day, but that talk died with Stanley.) "   

Kubrick directing Gravity's rainbow?  Damn.



If you're a fan of Pynchon or Wllace, You can read the whole thing here: 

http://open.salon.com/blog/robert_brenner/2011/04/01/pale_kings_thomas_pynchon_on_david_foster_wallace
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on February 12, 2013, 12:37:12 PM
This text is a parody of Pynchon; Pynchon never wrote that. It loooked like a text of a person who really knew his Pynchon, and the confirmation is in the comments at the end.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on February 22, 2013, 01:35:08 AM
Weird. Just finished the master and in the end credits I saw "Jackson Pynchon" as a production assistant.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on February 22, 2013, 02:00:14 AM
Quick internet search tells me that is indeed Thomas Pynchon's son's name.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on March 08, 2013, 02:27:41 AM
Seems like the script diverges quite a bit from the book.

(http://testing.klmnop.ph/inherent-vice-script.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on March 08, 2013, 02:49:24 AM
I haven't read the book.  Is it not "Knight Rider" slash-fiction?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on March 08, 2013, 04:57:34 AM
Yeah, just disappointed that he changed the names of all my favorite characters.  :yabbse-sad:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on March 08, 2013, 09:01:02 AM
That's not okay.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Sleepless on March 08, 2013, 11:12:31 AM
There's no way PTA wrote that. Or am I just stating the obvious here and everyone else is in on the joke?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on March 08, 2013, 11:21:51 AM
I can't be bothered to verify this, but I'm assuming it's from the "Unfinished Scripts" twitter account.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on March 08, 2013, 11:37:54 AM
It's actually a page from the Metal Gear Solid script.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: BigSock on March 08, 2013, 02:55:32 PM
I doubt PTA wrote that page or whatever it is. If you've ever looked at any of his scripts before, his style is nothing at all like that.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on March 08, 2013, 03:26:15 PM
That's where you're wrong. I think this could be a harkening back to his Boogie Nights days.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on March 08, 2013, 04:25:54 PM
just e-mailed aicn and they said it's for sure the real deal. they're 100% on this
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: BigSock on March 08, 2013, 05:08:15 PM
The twitter account of unfinished scripts said all scrips written by gavin speiller...

PTA doesn't write lazy dialogue like this-Inherent Vice or Metal Gear Solid.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: BB on March 08, 2013, 05:58:02 PM
There's no way.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on March 08, 2013, 07:51:03 PM
OH MY GOD EVERYONE THIS HAS GONE ON TOO LONG IT'S A RANDOM PAGE FROM THE JOKE TWITTER ACCOUNT CALLED UNFINISHED SCRIPTS AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PTA OR INHERENT VICE AND THAT WAS THE JOKE AND WHY IS ANYONE TAKING IT SERIOUSLY I DON'T EVEN....

I'm sorry.  I've become agitated.  Let's all go take a deep breath and reconvene at a later date.  If you'll excuse me, I have to go wash my lungs out with drain cleaner.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on March 08, 2013, 07:59:55 PM
you're fucking non believers
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on March 08, 2013, 08:04:12 PM
who else but pt would have the attention to detail required to put the seed in the interior. polka throwing maj shade, for whatev reason. this is real, it's front page la weekly today
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on March 08, 2013, 08:19:05 PM
Vincent Froio's playing the car.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on March 08, 2013, 10:32:10 PM
I'm hearing talks of Shia Labeaoughfph as Ace, but I'd be happy with Vincent.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: BB on March 09, 2013, 01:02:50 AM
 :oops:

I only glanced at it and was responding more to the formatting. I just now actually read it and feel like such a sap. Please don't let this sully whatever meager reputation I have around here.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Sleepless on March 09, 2013, 04:23:19 PM
:oops:

I only glanced at it and was responding more to the formatting. I just now actually read it and feel like such a sap. Please don't let this sully whatever meager reputation I have around here.

Ah yes... Talking car... Ahem.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on March 10, 2013, 09:34:07 AM
https://twitter.com/UnfinishedS/status/309427439929540611   


Now we can all move on to more important things.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on March 10, 2013, 10:45:29 AM
Haha, sorry for derailing this thread, I really thought everyone would get the joke. I've been searching The Master thread to find the old posts from the guy who said that Shia Labeouf was being considered for The Master and then threw a fit and basically told everyone to go fuck themselves when nobody believed him, so I could just copy the gist of his final response and paste it here as my own, but I can't find it.

Trashculturemutantjunkie, you're hilarious, though.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on March 10, 2013, 03:18:04 PM
You can't underestimate the gullibility of people who are starved for information.

And for the record, the Shia Labeouf guy was an April Fools joke; all his posts were actually written by myself.  And his sign-off post was a verbatim quote of a previous member who had an epic flame-out and had to be banned.  I think that was a lot more fun for me than for anyone else.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on March 10, 2013, 03:32:01 PM
The best part of that joke was when everyone became excited for the possibility of Robert Pattinson playing Freddie.

On another note, I just called Paul and he confirmed that the car is played by Hoffman and looks like this:

(http://www.saabsunited.com/upload/images2009/11/wednesday_snippets_-_too_slick_edition/WhiteSaab99GL-1.JPG)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: BB on March 11, 2013, 09:08:21 PM
:oops:

I only glanced at it and was responding more to the formatting. I just now actually read it and feel like such a sap. Please don't let this sully whatever meager reputation I have around here.

Ah yes... Talking car... Ahem.

You know something, I hope there IS a talking car in it! That'll show you! That'll show ALL OF YOU!!!!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on March 19, 2013, 09:41:38 AM
who do you want to see cast??

my wishlist........
Michael Shannon


Oh man...as Bigfoot I'm assuming?

That's too good of an idea for words

especially the part of the book where he *spoilers* his *spoiler* at the end of *spoiler* and also im*spoiler*ates the main character's former *spoiler*
...or is that not part of Inherent Vice?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on March 20, 2013, 11:00:23 PM
I love how this Doc Sportello just took the other ones place
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on March 20, 2013, 11:01:55 PM
THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on March 22, 2013, 02:20:27 AM
I'm hearing Bigfoot will be played by Chris Colfer.

Just kidding, I've learned my lesson. I own a copy of the book but haven't read it yet, so I don't know who should be cast. But I'd love to see PTA work with Jillian Belk again (she was the woman who was in The Master briefly, recalling back to a time before she was born). I just love her face and her ability to deliver the most ridiculous lines in a perfect deadpan. I'd also like to see him work with Elizabeth Olsen, perhaps. He's so fucking great at getting powerful dramatic performances from comic actors, so maybe Danny McBride or Paul Rudd? I don't know so much if I want to see them in a PTA film as much as I just think they'd be a lot of fun to work with and have on set, if I were in PTA's position.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on March 22, 2013, 02:39:07 AM
I wasn't into PTA back then but I imagine people gave a good old scoff when he said he wanted Adam Sandler in his movie.

But I would probably at least inflict some form of self-harm with those folks present.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on March 22, 2013, 03:19:00 AM
maybe Danny McBride or Paul Rudd?

If any of those two show up, I WILL off myself.

But what would our reactions have been to hearing John C. Reilly in one of his movies if Reilly had only been known for fare like Anchorman and Step Brothers?

You don't think he could pull a good PTA-calliber performance out of Danny McBride? Maybe I'm just stuck on the fact that I like McBride's face, and some of the emotions he's surprised me with on Eastbound and Down.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on March 25, 2013, 07:00:39 AM
with PTA recently saying he "misses Twin Peaks" in that interview with CigsAndRedVines, maybe he'd be into recruiting Kyle McLachlan for something

...Okay, I wouldn't expect this to actually happen, but watching the show these past couple months I am impressed by the performance chops of a guy that I only knew as the male antagonist in "Showgirls". And find him incredibly entertaining. So it'd simply be cool to have him in a PTA flick.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 02, 2013, 01:26:37 AM
OH MY GOD!!! I follow Cheech on twitter and just happened to click on one of his picture links from the other day ( which I never do ) :

(http://xixax.com/images/Cheech%20tweet.jpg)

I AM SO EXCITED ABOUT THIS!!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on April 02, 2013, 02:46:15 AM
Let's not jump to conclusions, maybe Paul just wanted to buy some weed.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 02, 2013, 05:40:56 AM
one in a series of attempts to lower his sperm count ( Doctor's orders )
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on April 02, 2013, 02:48:04 PM
Open question to whoever's read the book: are there any characters that would make sense for him?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 02, 2013, 03:30:03 PM
I have not read the book, but if he takes the Mumbles O'Malley part, I will be furious.

On a serious note, if Luis Guzman fits in a PTA movie, I don't see why Cheech doesn't. He would have to do more character acting than he did on Lost, though.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ©brad on April 02, 2013, 04:13:28 PM
The last time I had this feeling of "what? why?" to a PTA casting choice was Adam Sandler, and that turned out well. So I'm good with it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 02, 2013, 05:38:55 PM
with Don Johnson being so good in Django and now this, I think we're due for a Nash Bridges movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on April 02, 2013, 07:23:30 PM

Just realized this was an April Fools- that tweet doesnt even exist ...... nice photo-shop work
Cheech would have made a killer Sauncho Smilax


I been looking at  https://twitter.com/CheechMarin  for the past 10 minutes... Hoping the tweet/picture is in there... Nope, it ain't there. Reelist fucked us all in the ass.   I kinda wanna take my +1 back, but I'll let him keep it cuz he's my friend. (even though he's a fucking asshole).  God, I hate April fools.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 02, 2013, 07:26:27 PM
I did the same thing.

Bravo Reelist, you fuck. That was great/awful.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on April 02, 2013, 07:35:45 PM
I still believe.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 02, 2013, 08:13:00 PM
Just realized this was an April Fools- that tweet doesnt even exist ...... nice photo-shop work
Nope, it ain't there. Reelist fucked us all in the ass.
Bravo Reelist, you fuck. That was great/awful.


I suck at Photoshop. (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=11479.msg302051#msg302051) This was obviously the work of Cheech Marin. If you follow him on twitter he does shit like this every april fool's day and then takes it down before the press see it. Kind of a desperate attempt to stay relevant, last year he posted a pic of him with Joss Whedon saying he was gonna be an Avenger. It's sad.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on April 03, 2013, 01:31:59 AM
Well, that was fun while it lasted. Happy belated April Fools, everybody, and thanks to Reelist.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 03, 2013, 01:47:17 AM
Damn it, I've actually seen that PTA one too.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 03, 2013, 02:52:26 AM
Damn it, I've actually seen that PTA one too.


(http://img708.yfrog.com/img708/1175/645734.jpg)"You snooze, you lose."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on April 03, 2013, 06:40:10 PM
It's a better photoshop job then they ever did with their huge budget on "Lost"
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on April 04, 2013, 12:27:37 AM
I was really afraid the giant old-man hand was going to give it away.

(http://xixax.com/images/Cheech%20tweet.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 04, 2013, 02:55:05 AM
Unpredicted Prediction time:

This film will be closer to Punch Drunk Love than Boogie Nights.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on April 04, 2013, 04:37:36 AM
that's an easy prediction to make.

if this is anything like Boogie Nights then you can put a fork in him, he's fucking done. boogie nights is amateur hour compared to what he's doing now. if he went back to that era in any way beyond a slight nod then we would be witnessing the decline and creative stagnation of a once great artist.

people who either wish he'd go back to an older aesthetic or can even conceive of such a thing happening have absolutely no idea what the hell PTA is doing. this isn't like David Lynch who has gone off the rails and urgently NEEDS to be reeled back to a former coherent space where his films actually made sense (it seems ridiculous to say, but compared to the mess that was INLAND CHUMPIRE, mully d feels like a beautiful children's book.)

No, this is someone who is progressing exponentially into unexplored realms of his own ability. fuck boogie nights, it's the best movie a 27 year old PTA could have made and it's a masterpiece that is still better than 95% of anything made my anyone else.. but this is two decades later, he could fart something better than boogie nights in his sleep.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 04, 2013, 04:45:37 AM
Damn straight. PTA's going into a completely different place, I'm of the opinion that the second half of his career destroys the first. And that's not even a diss, because the first half is damn good.

A lot of folks seem to be making the inference that the setting and the potential for a large ensemble must mean a return to a Boogie Nights kind of thing. Like I've thought about it too at some point.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 04, 2013, 04:58:20 AM
There Will Be Drugs.


what movies outside of PTA's filmography do you predict it'll be like? Ever since the speculation about RDJ starring, I haven't been able to get the image of him in 'Zodiac' out of my head. Now that he's out, it still stands as the film I most compare it to in my mind- Late 60's detective story set in California. That's the only thing I can relate it to, I've read 5 pages of the book. People who've finished it, how do you see the movie turning out without being too specific about things?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Just Withnail on April 04, 2013, 06:10:25 AM
Small spoilers for the mood of the book



The Zodiac comparison isn't really apt, as that's intensely focused on the mystery, whilst this one isn't really concerned with it. The characters are concerned with it, but it's never really a priority of the book to tie things together and wrap things up. Thank God.

The in's and out's of the mystery are so convoluted and twisted that figuring it out really plays second fiddle to everything else. The details of the mystery is sorta being dragged like a tail behind Sportello, and both we (at least I) and him only manage to keep the most recent details of it in our heads. But in a reductive "you can never really figure out the truth"-message-y way, then I guess this and Zodiac use mystery movie tropes to sort of a similar end. But other than that I can't really see too many similarities. Same time-period, yes, but completely different environments.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on April 04, 2013, 10:58:11 AM
It will be shot exactly like "Angels Live in My Town"
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on April 04, 2013, 11:34:58 AM
THE BIG LEBOWSKI + KISS KISS BANG BANG + THE LONG GOODBYE + ZODIAC + ALL The CHEECH And CHONG MOVIES + SOME REFERENCES TO VERY OBSCURE STONER MOVIES AND FILM NOIR + THE CAMERA WILL MOVE A LOT MORE (I HOPE).

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 04, 2013, 03:42:53 PM
The Big Lebowski + Punch Drunk Love with a dash of the first half of Chinatown. And that's not even approaching it visually.


There's so much hilarious dialogue in the book (and I'm very much aware Paul himself is a master of the stuff), I hope some of it remains intact.

EDIT:

Yes, I see a little potential for Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on April 05, 2013, 01:08:43 AM
There Will Be Drugs.


what movies outside of PTA's filmography do you predict it'll be like? Ever since the speculation about RDJ starring, I haven't been able to get the image of him in 'Zodiac' out of my head. Now that he's out, it still stands as the film I most compare it to in my mind- Late 60's detective story set in California. That's the only thing I can relate it to, I've read 5 pages of the book. People who've finished it, how do you see the movie turning out without being too specific about things?

RDJ's character in Zodiac definitely reminds me of Doc.
As far as movies go: The Long Goodbye, Chinatown, The Big Sleep, Up in Smoke......not quite sure what else. After reading some interviews from The Master, its clear that PTA loves his film noir

The book is mysterious enough to make a crime thriller, yet whimsical enough to be a stoner comedy
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 05, 2013, 10:50:04 AM
After reading some interviews from The Master, its clear that PTA loves his film noir

yeah, he talked about wanting to do it in B&W early on to make it noirish and 'of the period' but decided it wouldn't fit (it wouldn't). He must've just been anxious to try a different film technique and I'm glad he discovered 70mm.

I love film noir! It's been waaay too long since I've checked out a good one. I haven't even seen 'The Big Sleep' and most of the classics. See, this is why I love PTA- With every movie he makes I'm introduced to different types of films:

Sydney- Phillip Baker Hall's body of work ( and he also suggests that Sydney is an over the hill noir character )
Boogie Nights- Classic Porn
Magnolia- Multi-Narrative Films
Punch Drunk Love- Jacques Tati
There Will Be Blood- John Huston
The Master- Cult Films ( the kind that are about cults )

and I've read enough of Inherent Vice to know that this is his stoner film noir. I have a question- has weed ever been in one of PTA's movies? I don't think it has, in Boogie Nights I'm sure there's some joint passing going on in the party scenes but it's never a focal point ( and it really shouldn't be- weed's not cinematic like coke is. ) Call me out if I'm wrong about this... I'm just excited to see PTA portraying the BEST DRUG IN THE WORLD after he's done all the worst ones to death (Nicotine, Alcohol, Cocaine, Opiates)

So again he switches the style up and if they hate then let 'em hate and watch no money pile up.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 05, 2013, 12:25:11 PM
I love KOOLS
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on April 05, 2013, 12:37:09 PM
I love KOOLS

That minty flavor.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 05, 2013, 04:58:21 PM
Speaking of Tati- have you seen Playtime? That is an incredible film

Now, that's an unforgettably unique experience.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on April 05, 2013, 06:11:42 PM
The Big Sleep is fantastic, so is The Maltese Falcon. Bogart was a maverick.
...those aren't great movies, i don't think. imo they suck, tbh. pt has claimed to be a john huston fan and said nice things about treasure of the sierra madre, and i think in a lonely place is pretty good, but big sleep and maltese falcon don't strike me as examples of great or "maverick" film noirs.

saying this 'cause there are certain film noirs i do love -- detour, kiss me deadly, postman always rings twice, out of the past, scarlet street, crime wave, angel face, 5 against the house, the long night, pickup on south street, narrow margin -- and they have nothing to do with bogart. strange necessity imo. hmmm
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on April 05, 2013, 06:18:17 PM
Completely with you on The Maltese Falcon and The Big Sleep. I'm not really a fan of The Narrow Margin, either. I love In A Lonely Place, Double Indemnity, Niagara (if you count that), Sweet Smell of Success, The Naked City, Cape Fear, the underrated Murder By Contract, Blast of Silence, etc. Still tons I need to see. It's the one genre I keep coming back to when I feel I've exhausted other avenues.

Also, I'll take Mitchum over Bogart any day.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on April 05, 2013, 07:13:30 PM
ok random conversation. funny you dislike narrow margin, better not tell wim wenders! sweet smell is not a noir. omg random, nvm :))
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on April 05, 2013, 07:23:48 PM
The Big Sleep is fantastic, so is The Maltese Falcon. Bogart was a maverick.
...those aren't great movies, i don't think. imo they suck, tbh. pt has claimed to be a john huston fan and said nice things about treasure of the sierra madre, and i think in a lonely place is pretty good, but big sleep and maltese falcon don't strike me as examples of great or "maverick" film noirs.


that's too bad, because they are great movies. And sure, you could even call them maverick- but I was specifically referring to Bogart
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on April 05, 2013, 07:25:32 PM
I know, I know. Most of my favorite "noirs" fall on the outskirts of the the genre. NotH, Melville's stuff, etc. It's all been talked about to death.

This is probably a conversation Xixax had in 2003 or something. Everyone else: how do you guys deal with the repetition of topics? It must drive you insane.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on April 05, 2013, 07:29:40 PM
I know, I know. Most of my favorite "noirs" fall on the outskirts of the the genre. NotH, Melville's stuff, etc. It's all been talked about to death.

Which Melville films would you recommend? only ever seen Army of Shadows. Recently downloaded Bob le Flambeur
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on April 05, 2013, 07:51:37 PM
I know, I know. Most of my favorite "noirs" fall on the outskirts of the the genre. NotH, Melville's stuff, etc. It's all been talked about to death.

Which Melville films would you recommend? only ever seen Army of Shadows. Recently downloaded Bob le Flambeur

Most of them. Bob is great. Definitely Le Samourai, Le Cercle Rouge, Le Doulos, and Le Deuxieme Souffle. After those, Leon Morin, Priest, Le silence de la mer and Un Flic, although a lot people seem to be iffy on the latter. Magnet of Doom was kind of forgettable from what I recall. Les enfants terribles also didn't have much of an impact on me, but I haven't seen it for a long time.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 05, 2013, 08:35:57 PM
Everyone else: how do you guys deal with the repetition of topics? It must drive you insane.

We are old now and can't remember anyway. 2003 was a long time ago.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 05, 2013, 09:38:54 PM
ok random conversation. funny you dislike narrow margin, better not tell wim wenders! sweet smell is not a noir. omg random, nvm :))

Wait, why?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on April 05, 2013, 09:55:22 PM
it's from 57, directed by alexander mackendrick, based on ernest lehman's writing, and stars a variety of people who are pretty cynical but not very criminal characters. it's about city and business, not film noir material

no good reason to think of it as a film noir
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 07, 2013, 12:55:13 PM
Don't start with Robert Pattinson...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on April 07, 2013, 01:38:58 PM
In reference to THIS (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=10940.msg289883#msg289883)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Sleepless on April 08, 2013, 10:26:27 AM
http://www.popsugar.com/Robert-Pattinson-Vince-Vaughn-Joaquin-Phoenix-29131380 (http://www.popsugar.com/Robert-Pattinson-Vince-Vaughn-Joaquin-Phoenix-29131380)

Can you imagine Vince Vaughn as Bigfoot and Robert Pattinson as Coy?
simply speculation

I would be happy with that.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on April 16, 2013, 12:38:23 PM
http://www.gq.com/entertainment/movies-and-tv/201305/robert-downey-jr-profile-may-2013?printable=true
 (http://www.gq.com/entertainment/movies-and-tv/201305/robert-downey-jr-profile-may-2013?printable=true)

It was also through his father that Downey became close with Paul Thomas Anderson: "He was actually friends with my pop first. And then finally the three of us got together for a meal, and then we kind of branched off. P.T. and I like ribbing each other. He goes, 'How does it feel to be the shortest superstar in the world?' And I say, 'It's amazing. And who tagged on that other act in the movie after Joaquin drove off on the motorcycle? Because the movie ended there, right?' He just laughs. We live to rib each other, because he is as far on one side of the scale as I am to the other, presently, in people's perception, and yet we could finish each other's sentences all day." They discussed the possibility that Downey might be in Anderson's next movie, an adaptation of Thomas Pynchon's Inherent Vice, and Downey says that he was into it but that Anderson ultimately wanted to make the movie with Joaquin Phoenix. "I think he told me I'm too old," says Downey, amused. "Which I love when people tell me."

via Cigarettes & Red Vines©
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on April 16, 2013, 02:07:59 PM
cool. we might see him in the next one then.

and i guess pta doesn't consider tom cruise a superstar anymore.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 29, 2013, 02:49:00 AM
You know, because of my Radiohead bias, I'd love to see Jonny back on board again. He could do his paranoid, shifty jazz thing and chuck in some wah and fuzz drenched surf guitar riffs. Or whatever, it'll be good.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fernando on April 30, 2013, 11:13:55 PM
from: http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.mx/2013/04/exclusive-warner-bros-financing.html

EXCLUSIVE: Warner Bros. Financing ‘Inherent Vice' Which Begins Shooting This Month; Robert Elswit Returning As DP

Lately we've been inundated with requests to find out what exactly is going on with Paul Thomas Anderson's adaptation of Thomas Pynchon's "Inherent Vice." The project -- which was first announced back in 2010 -- centers on a pothead private eye named Doc Sportello and his hazy adventures in late 60's Los Angeles. PTA had supposedly been interested in Robert Downey Jr. for the lead but ultimately decided to reunite with his "The Master" star Joaquin Phoenix instead and those who have seen the actor lately know that he's certainly been looking the part these days. But other than Phoenix's impressive sideburns, we had no real indication as to whether the film was still on track for the "late April/early May" dates pegged by producer JoAnne Sellar during our interview earlier this year. Since production has been so quiet recently we decided to do a little digging and have some great news to share with you all. What have we learned so far? Read on.

Warner Bros. Will Be Financing The Film
A few weeks ago The Wrap reporter Jeff Sneider caused a minor stir online when he tweeted that contrary to reports, Annapurna Pictures -- who were the saviors of "The Master" -- were not involved with 'Vice.' Well, this turns out to be completely true as a source close to production has revealed to us that "Inherent Vice" will be financed by Warner Bros. This will mark PTA's first time working with the studio (though they absorbed New Line who produced "Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia"). Our source also told us things were "completely amicable" between Annapurna and PTA and both parties hope to work together again in the future.     

Shooting Will Begin This Month
With financing in place, shooting is indeed scheduled to start this month. Though we imagine most of the major roles have been locked down but not announced at this point, we have learned that PTA is still meeting with actors for some of the smaller roles. As with "The Master" cast, expect a flood of announcements to come just prior to shooting. We hear the script is "amazing" so it should have no problem attracting talent.

Robert Elswit Will Return As Cinematographer
This one is may seem obvious (and we speculated that this would likely be the case) but we can now confirm that cinematographer Robert Elswit -- who shot all of Paul's films except for "The Master" and picked up an Oscar for his work on "There Will Be Blood" -- will return to shoot "Inherent Vice." For those curious, "Inherent Vice" will shoot on 35mm film. (No digital, no 70mm.)

So the film is financed and will begin shooting in the next few weeks. Is there any better news than that? We certainly can't think of any. Stay tuned for much more very soon. And if you're involved with the production, why don't you drop us a line?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 01, 2013, 12:20:00 AM
Modage you da man.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on May 01, 2013, 05:17:20 AM
Fuck yeah! So, now the first thing that comes to mind: should I read the book before I see this?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 01, 2013, 05:26:35 AM
I've been thinking about it, because if you don't then there will never be a time that you can read it without PTA's interpretation of it taking over.

Also, since production will probably wrap in July...when do you guess it'll release? Early 2014? Before Oscar season ends? No clue.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 01, 2013, 05:34:46 AM
It's a good read but hardly a masterpiece. I think PTA will have to cut a fair bit but he'll most definitely make it shine.
If you're looking for something relaxing/fun/mysterious and don't have any other pressing stuff to read, go ahead.
If you don't like big, twisty mysteries being spoiled...well, obviously avoid it. Cloudy makes a good point too.


Also, here's where I admit that I have yet to read Oil!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on May 01, 2013, 05:41:16 AM
I also haven't read Oil!, but mostly because it seems like it's not that great of a book as much as it is about an interesting subject.

On the other hand, I love these types of pulpy novels which Inherent Vice seems to be, but PTA is one of the few guys whose movies are real events to me, and going into it knowing as little as possible about the plot seems to be the way to go, if only because there is nothing standing between me and the movie when I watch it for the first time. I'm not sure I want to watch it and have the book on the back of my head and start comparing both. I think I've just decided, while writing this, that I'm going to go to the theatre as a virgin.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on May 01, 2013, 05:43:00 AM
As for a release date, considering Paul takes his time editing and whatnot, I'd say we'll hear about it a year from now at Cannes 2014.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on May 01, 2013, 08:26:27 AM
are we doomed to repeat this non-dilemma every few pages? if so let's all just repost what we said the first time around, here's my take on it from page 4:

i think this time it's perfectly fine to read the book. with Oil i don't think PTA actually gave a shit about the actual story of that snoozefest. this time it looks like he's really invested in the book and he has reverence for the author. i want to read it cos all i've ever heard is that it's MINOR pynchon. so why make a movie about it?

i think PT wanted to do a detective story on one level (for the reason listed in the primer) but he jumped on the chance to also explore an even bigger mystery that is Pynchon himself. what's there to talk about so much that they've been meeting all these times? they're not just talking about the book. PTA set out to make friends with one of the most elusive authors of our time. he always seems to set himself this kind of challenge.. observe:

he wrote Frank TJ Mackey for Cruise. he stalked him out, of all the actors we've heard about in that film, the most intestesting pre production bit that we never got to see in the making of doco was when he went to the set of freaking EWS to talk to Cruise.. was mark rance there? he must've at least tried. but they don't even mention it! of all the preproduction madness from script writing to rehearsal to shooting post production and everything else he covered in That Moment, that has to be the most juicy bit in the legend that is the making of magnolia. to say nothing of the fact PTA was also seeking to encounter that certain Pynchon of directors, maybe befriend him too.

the fact it emerged as such a memorable event highlights the specific focus he had put on Tom Cruise as a pivotal part of this film. Cruise is himself one of the most elusive big name actors around. and PTA made a huge effort to win him over. what's next.. Sandler is not so much inaccessible as he is hard to take seriously, he is arguably on the same celebrity status as Cruise which grants him special "outsider" status in society by virtue of being so rare, but i think the real elusive character he was hoping to befriend in PDL was Sean Penn who passed on the role of mattress man.

during this time we have come to learn that he also was trying to court Joaquin Phoenix in some unknown capacity. this dude is ALSO famous for being inaccessible. but i'm skipping ahead. after PDL he decides to go after this amazing actor who has all but retired into a farm somewhere save for indulging his wife in that one film of hers and helping his buddy Marty make some money. i'm talking about DDL of course. and the way i described in the primer that he talked to DDL is very similar to the kind of affection he showed for Sandler in that clip where they ate gummy bears that one time (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoWea5RYYFk). PTA LOVES to befriend the outsiders in his world.

Downey Jr is no longer an outsider but he definitely has been, regardless of how much the teenagers making him rich these days are unaware of it. he spent years in the wildnerness. clearly he's well suited to the role of some pot smoking detective on the hunt for who knows what, some woman probably, but the real star of this film i think will be the phantom presence of the author. he's continuing to bring the outsider to light.

this is why PTA loves character actors so much, as far as to transform them into leads through sheer force of will. his early films are populated almost exclusively by actors who have no reason to believe they are the centre of the world. PDL was an interesting experiment because sandler was indeed that, but that's another topic, i'll just briefly say that was a perfect way to show someone who gets no respect in some circles playing someone who gets no respect in his familial circle finding his inner strength through a lifelong fan. With DDL and JoaqP he summoned the KINGS of the fringe (of sanity?). this is different to what Tarantino does when he shoehorns random forgotten actors into his films and revives their careers that should have in most cases stayed dead. he's a fanboy, nothing more.

what PTA is doing is much more sophisticated than what that hack does, PT is putting things in their proper place, showing us things as they were meant to be, actors in roles they were meant to play. not some stupid gimmick that only trash-loving neckbeards really care about. so read the book, read ALL of Pynchon's books.. they deserve to be read, and you have PTA's blessing.


TL;DR: Oil was a piece of shit that meant nothing to PTA and had barely anything to do with the final product. Inherent Vice the book is perhaps just another excuse to get to know a weirdo but at least he's consistently praising the text and the author. PTA is obviously a huge fan of Pynchon, this whole thing is an endorsement of his work and an attempt to make the definitive Pynchon adaptation.

do we have any Pynchon experts in the room? i mean, people who really know what they're talking about? the dude is not just any old author, he's like JD Salinger + Joseph Heller + William Gaddis or something, am i right? he's as good in his field as PTA is in his. Upton Sinclair was a prolific pulitzer prize winning hack compared to these guys.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on May 01, 2013, 09:54:08 AM
like you said, pubrick, asking someone to explain pynchon here is like someone here being asked by a literature person to explain pta -- mm-hmm. no but seriously. pynchon is a modern knight of literature, and he lived in manhattan beach (a lil south of la) for several years, is talked about in la sometimes (in order to talk about la)(and he has ucla/usc classes of course), and i've heard mark danielewski say pynchon was against movies in the 70s, and danielewski complained about inherent vice being made (i became frustrated irl, and danielewski probably google tags his own name, sorry dude, true story).

pynchon is reclusive like sallinger was, provides comedy like heller does (wait, is heller dead? i should google), and he has intellectual densities that would make him a good topic with gaddis. so pubrick threw down good pubrick names. and like them, pynchon has his individual rep

most of his life is a secret, but a story i've heard is that one day, while living in manhattan beach, he went into the street in a party way and handed everyone in the street a pie and there was a pie throwing party. it's the only classic pynchon irl story i know and like
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on May 01, 2013, 03:05:30 PM
Fuck yes!  Reading that they're about to shoot this made my day. 

I'm curious to hear your guys thoughts are you glad that Robert Elswit is back on board or would you rather see what Paul and Mihai Malaimare Jr could do for a couple of pictures?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 01, 2013, 03:16:13 PM
Can't wait to get some official casting news. If Cheech turns out to be in it, I'm quitting my job and starting a cult based around my prophetic abilities. You're all invited. Bring chicks.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Tictacbk on May 01, 2013, 04:19:06 PM
Incase anyone is looking for someone to troll today:

(http://i42.tinypic.com/m797k.png)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 01, 2013, 05:00:12 PM
Seriously, fuck that guy. Incidents like this are all the proof you need that old-school entertainment media is rotting outside its grave.

EDIT: Trolling the dude like crazy, by the way. Who cares to join me?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 01, 2013, 05:23:09 PM
What a douche-canoe.

I'm curious to hear your guys thoughts are you glad that Robert Elswit is back on board or would you rather see what Paul and Mihai Malaimare Jr could do for a couple of pictures?

Elswit is fantastic but I'd really like to see PTA work with Mihai again at some point. Seriously, I struggled to believe how good The Master looked when I first watched it.


Also, I think old Paulie could do a good job of adapting Vonnegut. I would like to see that.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 01, 2013, 05:31:33 PM
Also, I think old Paulie could do a good job of adapting Vonnegut. I would like to see that.

Oh good god, yes. A PTA version of God Bless You Mr. Rosewater, or Jailbird, or Cat's Cradle, or (though George Roy Hill's version is pretty much fantastic and definitive) Slaughterhouse-Five... my pants are already coming off.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on May 01, 2013, 05:35:01 PM
EDIT: Trolling the dude like crazy, by the way. Who cares to join me?

Reelist, you need to get in on this.

Time to redeem yourself after the debacle in the drunk tank.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on May 01, 2013, 05:49:05 PM
Also, I think old Paulie could do a good job of adapting Vonnegut. I would like to see that.

Oh good god, yes. A PTA version of God Bless You Mr. Rosewater, or Jailbird, or Cat's Cradle, or (though George Roy Hill's version is pretty much fantastic and definitive) Slaughterhouse-Five... my pants are already coming off.
i can golden bridge this with a recent link to an article from a young hollywood actor whose first book comes out soon (i've read it, it's good, good publisher too):

http://thoughtcatalog.com/2013/the-6-most-intense-experiences-ive-had-with-art-so-far/

i'd like pt to aim back at pt alone, but vonnegut has supporters, definitely
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 01, 2013, 06:40:58 PM
Do you folks want Jon Brion back or Greenwood or someone completely new?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on May 01, 2013, 07:51:15 PM
EDIT: Trolling the dude like crazy, by the way. Who cares to join me?

Reelist, you need to get in on this.

Time to redeem yourself after the debacle in the drunk tank.


I have a secret account made especially for trolling. This dude's fucked.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Neil on May 01, 2013, 10:31:11 PM
Reelist's post made me laugh out loud.

if I knew what trolling was, I would be all over it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on May 02, 2013, 05:03:19 PM
Can't wait to get some official casting news. If Cheech turns out to be in it, I'm quitting my job and starting a cult based around my prophetic abilities. You're all invited. Bring chicks.

Cheech would be the best... we should be finding out the cast within the month  :yabbse-grin: :bravo:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on May 04, 2013, 07:52:39 PM
Pynchon has a new novel, Bleeding Edge (http://www.amazon.com/Bleeding-Edge-Thomas-Pynchon/dp/1594204233/ref=reg_hu-rd_add_1_dp), coming out September 17.

Bleeding Edge is set in New York City, “in the lull between the collapse of the dotcom boom and the terrible events of September 11,” and concerns Silicon Alley, New York’s community of high-tech companies. It centers on Maxine Tarnow, “your average working mom” who runs “a nice little fraud investigation business on the Upper West Side, chasing down … small-scale con artists.” She’s had her license revoked, and “now she can follow her own code of ethics—carry a Beretta, do business with sleazebags, hack into people’s bank accounts.” Maxine “starts looking into the finances of a computer-security firm and its billionaire geek CEO,” and “soon finds herself mixed up with a drug runner in an art deco motorboat, a professional nose obsessed with Hitler’s aftershave, a neoliberal enforcer with footwear issues, plus elements of the Russian mob and various bloggers, hackers, code monkeys, and entrepreneurs, some of whom begin to show up mysteriously dead. Foul play, of course.”

The book’s publisher, Penguin, calls it “a historical romance of New York in the early days of the internet, not that distant in calendar time but galactically remote from where we’ve journeyed to since”. First page below.

(http://i.imgur.com/Djv3Vdv.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on May 06, 2013, 09:58:59 AM
EXCLUSIVE: Kevin J. O'Connor To Re-Team With ‘The Master' Co-Star Joaquin Phoenix For ‘Inherent Vice'
Source: Cigs and RV

Chicago-born character actor Kevin J. O'Connor has been kicking around Hollywood for quite some time and along the way has racked up an impressive resume working with the likes of Francis Ford Coppola, Robert Altman and of course, Paul Thomas Anderson. PTA cast the chameleon-like O'Connor in his last two films as a character who is eventually beaten mercilessly by the leading man (alternately Daniel Day-Lewis and Joaquin Phoenix). Why do we bring this up? Well, we have received word that O'Connor is set to re-team with PTA once again to film an as yet unspecified role in "Inherent Vice" where the actor will join the esteemed ranks of John C. Reilly, Philip Baker Hall and Luis Guzmán in the PTA Three-Timers Club. For those who have read the book, do you have any guesses for who O'Connor might be playing (and does that character at some point get beaten within an inch of their lives)? Leave your guesses in the comments. Filming on 'Vice' is set to get underway later this month so there should be lots more casting announcements to come.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 06, 2013, 10:06:11 AM
Yes, yes. I am so happy that Kevin J. O'Connor gets to work with PTA again.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on May 06, 2013, 01:15:49 PM
the dude is now officially a motif.

brb, writing ten thousand words on his ten minutes of screen time.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 06, 2013, 02:08:35 PM
Has anyone been curious about the quiet shift from Annapurna to Warner Bros? That's a huge deal.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on May 06, 2013, 02:17:45 PM
Has anyone been curious about the quiet shift from Annapurna to Warner Bros? That's a huge deal.
It's not really. I think AP wanted to make the movie but WB prob just made a better offer. Def no bad blood or anything.

Bigger question is: What's in this script (and/or who's in the cast) that made WB want to fork over the dough? Cause you know PTA still has final cut and approval over all the marketing. So with Joaquin in the lead, they must see something in this project that they can use to get people into theatres but having not read the book I have no idea what that might be.

The coolest part of this is that everyone thinking that post-'The Master' box office PTA will never be able to get anybody other than AP to finance his weird shit is immediately silenced by this news. WB stamp of approval = huge sign of confidence for the movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 06, 2013, 04:50:06 PM
I never was thinking bad blood either. Exactly, I'm more curious about how the project got Warner to take over. Should be a really tight script. I feel like when he recently named his favorite screenplays (pulp fiction, sweet smell of success, network, dr.strangelove...etc) there may have been something there. He could be hitting that sort of feel, but in his own trajectory.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fernando on May 06, 2013, 04:58:37 PM
Has anyone been curious about the quiet shift from Annapurna to Warner Bros? That's a huge deal.
It's not really. I think AP wanted to make the movie but WB prob just made a better offer. Def no bad blood or anything.

I was wondering exactly the same, glad to hear that there's no bad blood about AP not producing Vice, one question...

so AP didn't have a signed deal to make Vice? I mean, did WB made the deal directly with PTA camp or did they bought it from AP?


Bigger question is: What's in this script (and/or who's in the cast) that made WB want to fork over the dough? Cause you know PTA still has final cut and approval over all the marketing.

I think WB finally realized that PTA is the one.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 06, 2013, 06:02:34 PM
I know we always think it's going to happen, but could this one actually be PTA's first taste of commercial success?

On the one hand, WB wouldn't have fought off Annapurna if they didn't think so. On the other hand, he's already flushed away a sizable chunk of box office by not casting RDJ in the lead.

There's only one man who can guarantee this film becomes the runaway hit that it deserves to be. And that man is Cheech Marin. (no offense to Kevin J. O'Connor)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: md on May 06, 2013, 06:43:53 PM
Boogie Nights was PTA's first 'big hit' in that it grossed tripled its budget (roughly 45mil on a 15mil budget) not including home video, which at the time of VHS and DVDs, was a huge profit margin.  It gave him leverage to make any movie he wanted and that film was Magnolia.  AP was probably turned by the Master underperforming.  Its the black sheep out of the bunch as its the only film AP has financed that hasn't made its money back, so on a business front it makes complete sense not to take the risk.

And yes!, Cheech would be a great addition as this film will play well as a 'serious' stoner comedy/drama/thriller.   
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 06, 2013, 08:35:15 PM
[quote

I think WB finally realized that PTA is the one.
[/quote]

This could definitely be it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on May 06, 2013, 08:55:51 PM
I know we always think it's going to happen, but could this one actually be PTA's first taste of commercial success?

We were saying that before PDL, and it turned out to be his weirdest movie.

For those who have read the book, how much flexibility is there here? Is it likely to be near either end of the commercial/weird spectrum?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 06, 2013, 09:16:27 PM
With anyone else, it could really go either way.

But I hope PTA squishes all the weird he can out of it.

Like I can imagine David Gordon Green's Inherent Vice (douchebag comedy David Gordon Green) without too much difficulty but really, it'll be hard to pin down where Paulo takes is.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 06, 2013, 09:22:39 PM
Benicio Del Toro in talks to play...Sauncho, I guess.

Quote
Well, it looks like we aren't the only ones dropping "Inherent Vice" casting news today. The Wrap is reporting that Benicio Del Toro may be joining the film as well (though the studio has yet to confirm his involvement). According to the report Del Toro will be playing "an attorney who's always trying to help the protagonist out of trouble, though he's not an actual criminal lawyer. The character isn't a major role but is expected to be a potential scene-stealer" which would seem to indicate he'll be playing Doc's lawyer, Sauncho Smilax. His leading role in the underrated "Che" aside, it's been a while since we've seen Del Toro really tear into a really great role like his brilliant late 90s/early 00s streak ("Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas," "Traffic," "21 Grams," "The Usual Suspects," etc.), so this is definitely exciting news. Filming on 'Vice' is set to get underway later this month so there should be lots more casting announcements to come. And if you're involved with the production, why don't you drop us a line?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 06, 2013, 09:49:14 PM
WOW, this is looking official. Holy shit. That's HUGE.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/benicio-del-toro-may-join-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-20130506
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on May 07, 2013, 07:29:36 AM
Joaquin's comeback to Cannes this month will be with...this head... :yabbse-grin:


(http://24.media.tumblr.com/79d6943a8b806b6743308a6f7a9157ce/tumblr_mmeusgec3g1qzwhzyo1_500.jpg)

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 07, 2013, 04:29:41 PM
He's got a little Danny McBride going on...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Derek on May 07, 2013, 05:45:16 PM
He looks like Tony Clifton.


Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: classical gas on May 07, 2013, 10:32:53 PM
Chester A. Arthur
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 07, 2013, 10:56:56 PM
Nailed it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: malkovich on May 09, 2013, 06:59:17 PM
Owen Wilson in Negotiations to Join Paul Thomas Anderson's 'Inherent Vice'

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/owen-wilson-negotiations-join-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-exclusive-90591

"Wilson's role is being kept secret, but TheWrap has learned he will play one of the leads."

Woah. I've never even considered the prospect of Owen Wilson in a PTA film, but him opposite Joaquin sounds kinda awesome. Those familiar with the book, who do you think he'll be playing?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ono on May 09, 2013, 07:42:01 PM
Wow.  He's been out of it both figuratively and literally since his suicide attempt a few years ago.  Leave it to PTA to bring him back.  Anticipation rising!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on May 09, 2013, 08:16:58 PM
I can't remember the last time Wilson was in something decent.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on May 09, 2013, 08:44:42 PM
Glad to see him upgrade..... Anderson-wise.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on May 09, 2013, 08:59:29 PM
Update: We have spoken with a source close to production who informs us that Wilson will be playing the character of Coy Harlingen, a surf-saxophone player for a band called The Boards. In the book, Coy was rumored to be dead of a heroin over-dose but is indeed a central character that appears throughout the entire story.

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/05/owen-wilson-in-talks-for-inherent-vice.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 09, 2013, 09:56:37 PM
Good times. More, I need more cast and crew news.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on May 10, 2013, 03:42:34 AM
If I'm not mistaken, Owen said a few times that Punch-Drunk Love was a huge inspiration to him and made him want to get back to writing, so this is great, I'm sure he'll give it his best working for a director he admires so much, and I'm sure Paul will work wonders with him. Very nice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on May 10, 2013, 04:17:08 AM
wow. Owen Wilson under the tutelage of a director known to get the most visceral performances out of his cast. I suddenly feel loopy with interest.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Sleepless on May 10, 2013, 09:37:22 AM
Awesome. This more than cancels out the 50 Shades of Grey news. This is getting more exciting every time there's news!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Derek on May 11, 2013, 01:22:56 PM
Hasn't Elswit just started shooting Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? And he is still scheduled to shoot Vice later this month? I'm not 100% certain I'm correct on these schedules, but if true, how is it possible?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on May 11, 2013, 02:29:15 PM
didn't know what you were talking about so i looked it up. elswit is shooting tmnt, which is called tmnt, and is being directed by jonathan liebesman. liebesman wtf, right, but he's south african so that's chill. gavin hood, the ender's game director, is also from south africa, and i'm sure everyone is aware that neil blomkamp is from south africa. fun to see that country doing well for itself, cinematically

idk the elswit answer
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 11, 2013, 05:31:58 PM
IMDB says Lula Carvalho is handling TMNT.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on May 11, 2013, 05:44:42 PM
madness
first, by accident i searched "teenage mutant junkie turtles" and think that's kind of funny
second, i'm on my laptop now and lula is indeed listed. i double-checked on my phone and the imdb app still lists elswit, which i think is funky. someone would have to explain apps to me

i bet elswit switched over, and it's not even really a large question as to why he did
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on May 11, 2013, 06:40:23 PM
They might have pushed IV back a bit to accommodate Elswit but I know he will be 100% shooting IV.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 11, 2013, 06:50:38 PM
IMDB says Lula Carvalho is handling TMNT.

The IMDB listing literally just changed in the last few hours. I looked earlier today and it said Robert Elswit.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Derek on May 11, 2013, 07:36:42 PM
They might have pushed IV back a bit to accommodate Elswit but I know he will be 100% shooting IV.

Thanks
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 11, 2013, 10:43:51 PM
Modage, you know if Fisk is designing/art directing for IV? For now it just says Crank is.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 11, 2013, 11:05:22 PM
Modage, you know if Fisk is designing/art directing for IV? For now it just says Crank is.

Fisk said in his C&RV interview that he'll likely be too busy with a film that his wife, Sissy Spacek, is directing.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 12, 2013, 01:08:56 AM
Ah, didn't remember that bit. Thanks. I'm sure he'll do the job. It's crazy how much crew crosses over between PTA/Malick films.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on May 12, 2013, 08:54:27 AM
Yep, what polka said.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on May 12, 2013, 01:57:20 PM
I'm sure there are. Just hoping to break some of them before the trades...  :yabbse-lipsrsealed:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fernando on May 15, 2013, 07:36:37 PM
Reese Witherspoon Finally Gets To Work With Paul Thomas Anderson As She Signs For 'Inherent Vice'

It's lost to the mists of time now, but when the project first emerged, there was talk that Reese Witherspoon was going to appear in Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master," as Peggy, the manipulative wife of Lancaster Dodd. For whatever reason (let's hope it wasn't a scheduling conflict with "This Means War"), it didn't come to pass, but it seems like Witherspoon and PTA are still mutual admirers, as Deadline bring news that the actress has just signed on to the director's new project, "Inherent Vice."

The actress -- who's had a flurry of activity of late, after making tabloid headlines for her recent arrest -- joins Joaquin Phoenix, Benicio Del Toro, Owen Wilson and Kevin J Anderson as the signed cast so far. There's no confirmation as to who she'll playing, but our guess is that she'll be Shasta Fay Hepworth, the ex girlfriend of Doc Sportello (Phoenix), who sets the plot in motion, though she could also be Hope Harlingen, the supposed widow of missing musician Coy.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/reese-witherspoon-finally-gets-to-work-with-paul-thomas-anderson-as-she-signs-for-inherent-vice-20130515
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 15, 2013, 07:47:48 PM
Ah, goodie.

Walk the Line reunion?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on May 15, 2013, 07:50:45 PM
She's an American citizen!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 15, 2013, 09:17:47 PM
Annnnd Jena Malone and Martin Short.

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/reese-witherspoon-joins-inherent-vice.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 15, 2013, 09:32:05 PM
More into that than the Reese news.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 15, 2013, 09:54:08 PM
More into that than the Reese news.

My thoughts exactly.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 16, 2013, 04:26:48 AM
Witherspoon as Shasta seems like a logical casting choice. But who else would have made a good Ms Hepworth?
Michelle Williams? Her younger clonal copy, Carey Mulligan? And so on.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: HeywoodRFloyd on May 16, 2013, 08:01:08 AM
Martin Short, fuck yeah
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on May 16, 2013, 03:00:34 PM
short hair is la popular, detective
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 18, 2013, 10:04:00 PM
Sean Penn in talks to join.

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/exclusive-sean-penn-in-talks-for.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: DocSportello on May 19, 2013, 05:45:21 PM
That's such great news. The Sean Penn scoop makes the Jim Carrey-as-Bigfoot rumors that have been floating around feel like a soon-to-be reality. I'd say midway through this week we'll be seeing a post from Modage confirming it.

It's funny that it may also bring truth to what C&RV were speculating about over twitter a few weeks ago, suggesting Mr. Carrey was very cleverly hinting at his involvement in the film when he showed up to the Letterman show like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24tE-V8bAoA (ftp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24tE-V8bAoA)

Extremely excited about all the fresh faces in PTA'S universe for this one. My favorite part of anticipating a new PTA film has always been not having the slightest clue what it will look/feel like when I see it. Having read the book, I find it all that much more amazing that this time around is no exception. I have no idea how he's going to pull it off. And it's a great feeling.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 19, 2013, 06:22:04 PM
My favorite part of anticipating a new PTA film has always been not having the slightest clue what it will look/feel like when I see it. Having read the book, I find it all that much more amazing that this time around is no exception. I have no idea how he's going to pull it off. And it's a great feeling.

Yep, that's definitely how I feel about it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on May 19, 2013, 07:40:37 PM
welcome back to the REAL Doc Sportello
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on May 20, 2013, 03:52:16 AM
She's an American citizen!

LOL!! 

FUUUU ...... P.T is killing me with this choice though...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on May 20, 2013, 09:08:32 AM
we may be going back to ensemble here folks.

this many "name" actors, it'd be a shame for him to waste them with minor lines or background roles. this is gonna be some kind of showcase. more than a revisiting of his previous ensemble work, or an extension of his recent intense single character focus, it seems like it could be some kind of hybrid we haven't seen from him before.

where is PTA going with this? just when i thought his trajectory made perfect sense.. could this be an EWS-prototype? in the sense that this doc character will be made to be a passive/reactionary type who travels from scene to see absorbing and reflecting interesting characters, under the guise of a drug fueled hazy dream in search of a mysterious woman?

QUESTION TO THOSE WHO HAVE READ THE BOOK: Is there a mysterious woman?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on May 20, 2013, 11:40:11 AM
All we can really hope for is something more Altman than "Towering Inferno", which I'm sure is what's going to happen. We know the choices aren't being made to star-stud the piece into commercial territory, even with a few A-listers in the roster, and that these are people PTA knew would be good for this adaptation.

I remember the first ensemble piece I was disappointed with as a kid was "Mars Attacks"...(even though I find it kind of fun to watch now). However I watched "Gosford Park" recently for the first time in about 5 years and saw all these great actors that I'm now familiar with being utilized brilliantly.

Not sure how the movie will turn out, but the dry, straight-foward and trippy nature of Doc informs the atmosphere of the book as well as the environment and surrounding characters. PTAs myriad influences always produce a hybrid that seems natural. One can only hope to stay excited and unaware as to the final product until we see something.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 20, 2013, 07:14:38 PM
It will depend on exactly how close PTA wants it to the book, no doubt Shasta's (and perhaps Bigfoot's) will get meatier roles than in the book. There are a whole bunch of interesting characters that get only like a scene or two each. Some characters will be cut out all together.

There's always that chance that great actors may end up 'underused' but I won't really care that much if they are utilised memorably within the few scenes they're in.

I think people will definitely complain about the plot when the film gets released, they'll say it's aimless and with a handful of coincidences happening. But yeah, really, really interesting characters with awesome names (that is one of my favourite things about the book, a link back to PTA anyway). PTA himself could certainly tighten up the plot if he felt like it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: socketlevel on May 21, 2013, 11:38:16 AM
I read the book last summer in anticipation for this film, and I found it really boring. I'm sure PTA will do something substantial with it, and hopefully improve upon it, though I am a little bewildered why he chose it above others. Anyone got a link to an interview where he discusses how this came about?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Garam on May 21, 2013, 12:02:15 PM
Pynchon's peeps was shopping around Inherent Vice almost straight after it was published as a movie project since it's cross-over friendly, and PTA snapped it up. I don't know about Pynchon's older books, i'm assuming the rights to those were sold back in the 70s.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: DocSportello on May 23, 2013, 11:03:34 PM
Quote
The Sean Penn scoop makes the Jim Carrey-as-Bigfoot rumors that have been floating around feel like a soon-to-be reality


WOMP WOOOOMP!

No matter. Whoever it ends up being will of course be incredible. PTA aint gonna fuck that character up.

I would speak further but my current internet source is that of a PS3 browser, sans keyboard, so it literally takes a decade to write anything. Until I'm near a comp, I'm bumpin'.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on May 24, 2013, 04:18:41 AM
The idea of Michael Shannon for Bigfoot is pretty great, isn't it? I'm praying God.

And I read this :

Quote
Joaquin Phoenix not here for THE IMMIGRANT. He's shooting the new PT Anderson. "Believe it or not he wanted to come," sez dir James Gray.

So...It begins.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 24, 2013, 04:55:53 AM
Yeah, Shannon has been on my wishlist but David Warshofsky would be cool too.

And I always finish with that Hoffman could pull it off too (another role besides Wolfmann).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on May 24, 2013, 12:04:28 PM
Yeah, Shannon has been on my wishlist but David Warshofsky would be cool too.

And I always finish with that Hoffman could pull it off too (another role besides Wolfmann).

Shannon's at the top of my wishlist. Warshofsky would be good, but he probably won't be cast in such a major role
Dodd vs. Quell in the next life sounds fascinating
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: DocSportello on May 25, 2013, 06:37:09 PM
Quote
Dodd vs. Quell in the next life sounds fascinating

MY GOD! I've been secretly hoping it would be PSH so when you put it that way....


Also, we're, like, total name-bros or something. So, hey Doc!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on May 26, 2013, 10:34:13 PM
Quote
Dodd vs. Quell in the next life sounds fascinating

MY GOD! I've been secretly hoping it would be PSH so when you put it that way....


Also, we're, like, total name-bros or something. So, hey Doc!

Hiya there, Doc! I feel like this week is gonna be a good one....
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 27, 2013, 10:03:56 PM
I know we're all looking for news, but someone from the 'IV' IMDB boards posted this segment of the book with the song Pynchon wrote in for it. This kinda stuff gets me excited.

Quote
I'm not even expecting this scene to be actually included in the film, but two nights ago I was re-reading this part while listening to this http://youtu.be/4VtrG6yyS1Q, and imagning Joaquin and Owen... kinda blew my mind.

    When the set ended, a curious sort of hippie chick approached the piano, her hair short and tightly permed, her outfit including a Little Black Dress from the 1950s and interestingly high stiletto heels. In fact, now that Doc looked closer, maybe she wasn’t really a hippie chick after all. She seated herself at the keyboard the way a poker player might at a promising table, ran a couple of A-minor scales up and down, and without much more introduction than that began to sing the Rodgers & Hart lounge classic “It Never Entered My Mind.” Doc was not a great admirer of torch material, had in fact been known to discreetly withdraw to the nearest toilet if he even suspected some might be on the way, but now he sat confounded and turning to Jell-O. Maybe it was this young woman’s voice, her quiet confidence in the material—howsoever, by the second eight bars Doc knew there was no way not to take the lyric personally. He found shades in his pocket and put them on. After an extended piano break and a repeat of the refrain, Doc on some impulse turned, and there was Coy Harlingen at his shoulder, like a parrot in a cartoon, also wearing shades and nodding. “I can sure relate to that lyric, man. Like, you make these choices? you know for sure you’r e doing the right thing for everybody, then it all goes belly-up and you see it couldn’t have been more wrong.”
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on May 28, 2013, 03:00:21 PM
Josh Brolin Joins P.T. Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’
BY MIKE FLEMING JR | Deadline

EXCLUSIVE: Josh Brolin is the latest star to join the killer cast of Inherent Vice, Paul Thomas Anderson‘s adaptation of the Thomas Pynchon detective novel. Brolin has been set for a key role, and will star alongside Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Martin Short, and Jena Malone, with Sean Penn reportedly eyeing a role as well. The film shoots this summer for Warner Bros, and PTA is producing through his Ghoulardi Film Co. along with JoAnne Sellar and Daniel Lupi.

Brolin will finish that film and promote the three films he has coming out in the fall. He stars in the Robert Rodriguez/Frank Miller-directed Sin City 2: A Dame To Kill For, for The Weinstein Company. After that comes Oldboy, the remake he stars in for director Spike Lee, and then the Jason Reitman-directed Labor Day, opposite Kate Winslet. That film opens in limited release at Christmas. CAA-repped Brolin was last seen in Gangster Squad at Warner Bros.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on May 28, 2013, 03:11:11 PM
Damn!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 28, 2013, 07:27:11 PM
He was picked because he is intimidating and likes Western stuff like Bigfoot. My theory anyway.



Anyone feel that this movie will be a fair bit like The Long Goodbye?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Ghostboy on May 28, 2013, 10:14:04 PM
I wonder if the movie will have as much pussy eating as the book.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 28, 2013, 11:37:13 PM
Of course, The Long Goodbye will be an inspiration.. but that's only one film, man. There are obvious plot/character connections, but PTA will be pulling from (thematic, aesthetic) sources more obscure than Robert Altman

IV will be something completely different: a psychedelic film-noir caper, acid lighting, groovy vibes, star-studded cast....

Just the way how Marlowe goes from place to place and person to person and his whole 'okay with me', reminds me of Doc, except Doc is more likely to say 'groovy' instead. The atmosphere and what not. And I certainly can't lose the Lebowski image either.

Yeah, I'm very much interested in where he'll draw inspiration from on this one. Who knows, maybe The Master was the end of PTA mark II and the dude will start on his next 3-film cycle.
His PDL-TWBB-The Master streak is just so very, very perfect and brilliant.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: classical gas on May 29, 2013, 12:27:27 AM
I wonder if the movie will have as much pussy eating as the book.

So Pynchon is a dirty old man?  I always thought of him as an egghead.  If the former is true, well, he's a dying breed for god's sake.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 29, 2013, 01:01:39 AM
I wonder if the movie will have as much pussy eating as the book.

So Pynchon is a dirty old man?  I always thought of him as an egghead.  If the former is true, well, he's a dying breed for god's sake.

I really hope they keep the tie-rack scene for those who haven't read it. That was so weird and awesome.
There is a character who literally asks others if they like eating pussy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 29, 2013, 02:31:15 PM
Don't forget "Ted".
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on May 29, 2013, 02:45:46 PM
6/29/12 we will never forget
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 29, 2013, 06:23:48 PM
I wonder if he will try to make this film as audacious as he originally wanted Punch Drunk Love to be. If I remember correctly, that film was intended to be a lot more risque with tone and different levels of craziness but Anderson kept dialing things back until he got to the simplistic medium PDL currently stands at. Haven't read this novel, but I kind of wonder if a missed opportunity may be finally met with Inherent Vice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 30, 2013, 03:55:11 AM
Did anyone else catch this?

I was on IMDB and saw that Jeannie Berlin is playing Aunt Reet. Mistake or sneaky casting?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1791528/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on May 30, 2013, 12:30:25 PM
The latest tweet from  https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines   is that Modage is moving on to "bigger and better things"?   Modage, you're leaving cigs and red vines?? 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on May 30, 2013, 01:25:44 PM
Inherent Vice' To Begin Filming Today
Source: Cigs&RV

Almost 2 years to the day after "The Master" began shooting back in 2011, "Inherent Vice" is ready to go before cameras today. The 7th film by Paul Thomas Anderson centers on a pothead private eye named "Doc" Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) and his hazy adventures in late 60's Los Angeles among a large cast of eccentric characters.

'Vice' is the first authorized adaptation of any of author Thomas Pynchon's work and PTA (in performing his second adaptation after "There Will Be Blood") has stated that this time he'll hew much closer to the source material, which is an embarrassment of riches. ("It's like somebody dumped bags of gold in front of me and I can only take so much with me. What do I do?")

PTA has described his vision for it as being like "a 'Cheech & Chong' movie" but those who know his work can probably guess it'll end up a million miles from there. This will easily be his starriest cast since "Magnolia" featuring a mix of PTA veterans and first-timers with many more major roles yet to be announced which reveals he may also be taking inspiration from the star-studded satires of the late '60s.

After a 5 year gap between his previous 3 features, a 2014 release would make 'Vice' will be the shortest window between PTA films since "Boogie Nights" (1997) to "Magnolia (1999). To help you keep track of all the latest news on the project we've launched our "Inherent Vice" info page which we'll continue to update throughout production.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on May 30, 2013, 01:40:26 PM
The latest tweet from  https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines   is that Modage is moving on to "bigger and better things"?   Modage, you're leaving cigs and red vines??

Yep, decided after 2.5 years & 250+ posts that it was time for me to move on. Not an easy decision but I'll still be writing for The Playlist and possibly elsewhere. Thanks for the support dudes.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on May 30, 2013, 02:04:02 PM
That'll teach us to take you for granted. :(
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on May 30, 2013, 08:32:03 PM
Katherine Waterston Gets Lead in Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’
BY MIKE FLEMING JR | Deadline

EXCLUSIVE: In a real coup for a young actress, Katherine Waterston has landed a lead female role in the Paul Thomas Anderson-directed adaptation of the Thomas Pynchon novel Inherent Vice. I’ve heard she’ll play Shasta, the ex-girlfriend of Joaquin Phoenix’s character, Doc. She is a free-spirited hippie chick who turns straight for real estate mogul Mickey Wolfmann. Doc’s main task is, at first, to help Shasta Fay protect her current love, Mickey Wolfmann, from his wife and her lover. She joins Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Josh Brolin, Martin Short, and Jena Malone, with Sean Penn reportedly eyeing a role as well. The film shoots this summer for Warner Bros, and PTA is producing through his Ghoulardi Film Co. along with JoAnne Sellar and Daniel Lupi.

The daughter of Sam Waterston, Katherine has been working consistently in New York Theatre and supporting roles such as Ang Lee’s Taking Woodstock, Tony Gilroy’s Michael Clayton, and she recently wrapped Ned Benson’s The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby, Kelly Reichardt’s Night Moves and stars in Manhattan Romance opposite Chris Messina. Waterston also just wrapped an arc on HBO’s Boardwalk Empire. She’s repped by UTA, Silver Lining Entertainment and attorneys Robert Kock and Marcy Morris.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 30, 2013, 08:55:39 PM
(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d179/polkablues/katherine-waterston5_zpsd12d97fc.jpg)

I know nothing of her work, but she kind of looks like a hybrid of Brie Larson and Mary Elizabeth Winstead. She's like a one-woman Scott Pilgrim reunion.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on May 30, 2013, 10:15:40 PM
haha, I'm with you Polka loved her in Scott Pilgrim!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Champion Souza on May 31, 2013, 01:27:19 AM
OT but is someone going to take over for Modage over at C&RV? There is a need for tweeting/blogging during shooting, right?  Someone has to pick up the slack.   
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on May 31, 2013, 11:01:18 AM
OT but is someone going to take over for Modage over at C&RV? There is a need for tweeting/blogging during shooting, right?  Someone has to pick up the slack.   

CJ's been picking up the slack so I wouldn't be too worried. He's been involved at C&RV since the site's creation

in other news.... wtf?

Philip Seymour Hoffman Treated for Snorting Heroin
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20704909,00.html?xid=rss-fullcontent (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20704909,00.html?xid=rss-fullcontent)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: bluejaytwist on May 31, 2013, 02:43:23 PM
i will be doing updates and mr. bryan tap has volunteered his services.
we will attempt to keep the ship righted as it, mostly, always has. x :doh:  :oops:  :shock:  :yabbse-grin:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on May 31, 2013, 04:09:31 PM
Quote
Philip Seymour Hoffman Treated for Snorting Heroin

That's really so sad to hear. After 23 years of sobriety.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on May 31, 2013, 05:08:57 PM
Quote
Philip Seymour Hoffman Treated for Snorting Heroin
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20704909,00.html?xid=rss-fullcontent (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20704909,00.html?xid=rss-fullcontent)

 :yabbse-sad:  I hope he can bounce back.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 31, 2013, 06:38:03 PM
Wasn't aware of this earlier but Leslie Jones is editing this (according to IMDB). Good choice.


Poor Hoffman.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: punchdrunkboogie on June 03, 2013, 07:50:16 PM
Hi there, friends.

I will be available on here for questions/comments/concerns/news as well as CJ now, so feel free to shoot me a line if you need anything.

Bryan
C&RV
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on June 03, 2013, 07:56:33 PM
At first, I thought you where Paul. My heart stopped.

Welcome to the site.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 03, 2013, 08:13:40 PM
Welcome!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on June 03, 2013, 11:04:30 PM
Hi!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on June 04, 2013, 06:28:13 AM
So, Maya is also in this (http://thefilmstage.com/news/first-look-joaquin-phoenix-dons-mutton-chops-for-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-as-maya-rudolph-joins-ensemble/)  :)

EDIT: Also, welcome punchdrunkboogie!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on June 04, 2013, 06:42:30 AM
"on a woman, a potbelly is very sexy."

(http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/inherent_vice_4-620x937.jpg)


Damn. Like all of their kids have been moviestars in the womb.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on June 04, 2013, 09:27:47 AM
Oh yes! Oh yes. Groovy.


(http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/inherent_vice-620x880.jpg)


So Maya is Petunia Leeway perhaps?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Sleepless on June 04, 2013, 09:33:29 AM
Those photos got me very excited. Joaquin's look - particularly in the first photo - is awesome!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: md on June 04, 2013, 03:16:46 PM
Hmm makes sense he would recommend this:

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6iIIIt9W3NU/T6RyOA9d8NI/AAAAAAAAB2I/KfUBDgLN9bA/s1600/waging-heavy-peace-cover.jpg)

It is a great read and seems to be an inspiration on the era. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on June 05, 2013, 11:42:07 AM
link to where he recommended it?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on June 05, 2013, 11:49:04 AM
link to where he recommended it?
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2012/11/interview-aero-q-magnolia.html (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2012/11/interview-aero-q-magnolia.html)


AUDIENCE MEMBER: What book are you reading right now?

PTA: What book am I reading right now? Well, I’m spending a lot of time reading Inherent Vice… and I just finished reading, and I’m going to read it again, Waging Heavy Peace which Neil Young’s book which is so great. Yeah – high recommendation. Go get it – it’s great. And it’s this thick but it’s so easy to read. I read it so fast.



more pics..
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/768a9433c05e2c0165b8e9f8e637ff25/tumblr_mnw6m21oiW1qcs4zto1_500.jpg)
(http://cdn02.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/04/joaquin-phoenix-060413-600x450.jpg)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/05/article-2336052-1A264E95000005DC-56_634x773.jpg)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/05/article-2336052-1A264DFA000005DC-828_634x813.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on June 05, 2013, 12:56:43 PM
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2012/11/interview-aero-q-magnolia.html (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2012/11/interview-aero-q-magnolia.html)

oh i see, thanks. i stopped checking the site after it jumped the shark, ie. when they killed off modage.  RED vines indeed. :shock:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on June 05, 2013, 01:23:38 PM
HAHA these are hilarious! YES. The last one he's doing his Freddie pose!

*Btw: Does Modage wanna talk about why he's not gonna be working the site anymore? It's sort of sad, really enjoyed his updates. They had a distinct personality to them that was always great to read. RIP Modage.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 05, 2013, 01:27:37 PM
So... he's barefooted?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on June 05, 2013, 06:31:19 PM
Now let's all welcome Topher Grace as Denis, Laura Prepon as Penny, Wilmer Valderrama as Sauncho's illegitimate child, etc. etc.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on June 05, 2013, 06:34:31 PM
HAHA these are hilarious! YES. The last one he's doing his Freddie pose!

I think that's just been assimilated into his real-life mannerisms.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: bluejaytwist on June 05, 2013, 11:24:59 PM
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2012/11/interview-aero-q-magnolia.html (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2012/11/interview-aero-q-magnolia.html)

oh i see, thanks. i stopped checking the site after it jumped the shark, ie. when they killed off modage.  RED vines indeed. :shock:

 :yabbse-thumbup: nailed it as always
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on June 06, 2013, 08:18:45 AM
Different outfit:


(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/05/article-2336052-1A264D99000005DC-855_634x850.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on June 09, 2013, 05:00:51 AM
Let the pussy eating begin:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BMS648ECUAEN4nO.png:large)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on June 09, 2013, 12:40:30 PM
You're not allowed to post pics of genitalia on the site, clood.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on June 12, 2013, 06:59:49 PM
The Church of PTA

http://www.themovingarts.com/the-church-of-paul-thomas-anderson/

This analysis is fucking beautiful.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on June 15, 2013, 07:48:32 PM
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-b6LCeGwLmeY/UbzQSvWWKgI/AAAAAAAAAIY/rz05E5Xv3_w/s1600/iv+set+photos+part+two+Number+4.jpg)


(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rvcVKi-H3-U/UbzQSijmOpI/AAAAAAAAAI8/iBdoGAAviqE/s1600/iv+set+photos+part+two+Number+5.jpg)


(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cKwSK5aUJJ8/UbzQS8m3L8I/AAAAAAAAAIk/mLbODv8ywV8/s1600/iv+set+photos+part+two+Number+6.jpg)



EDIT:  More pics from the set...

PTA:

(http://www.joaquinphoenixdarkroom.com/albums/userpics/10003/normal_15~30.jpg)



Anyone recognize her?


(http://www.joaquinphoenixdarkroom.com/albums/userpics/10003/normal_19~30.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on June 16, 2013, 04:31:29 PM
The shirt.
(http://joaquinphoenixdarkroom.com/albums/userpics/10004/normal_48185852.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 16, 2013, 08:59:17 PM
We need to find out once and for all who sells crates of those shirts.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on June 16, 2013, 10:20:58 PM
hmmm....maybe Jena Malone ISN'T Japonica Fenway?...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on June 17, 2013, 01:07:42 AM
Yeah, that scene certainly looks like Doc, Denis, Japonica and Dr Blatnoyd go for a ride. Who's the hunk-like Denis? I like that he looks kinda confused and paranoid.





SPOILS

I love how at near the end of the book, Crocker Fenway says that Blatnoyd 'perished in a trampoline accident'.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on June 22, 2013, 02:57:30 PM
for real man. the word spoilers is already tempting.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on June 22, 2013, 08:20:53 PM
Oh calm down, it's only...wait, where was that tag? Oh well, apologies.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 22, 2013, 08:47:14 PM
You marked the spoiler, I just made it red. No harm done, really.

I did read the spoiler, but it seemed minor.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SeanMalloy on June 26, 2013, 12:09:25 PM
Happy Birthday P.T.A.!  Hope the cast and crew get you a cake shaped like the sand lady!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on June 28, 2013, 01:41:18 PM
Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’ Gets Its Adrian Prussia
BY DOMINIC PATTEN | Deadline

EXCLUSIVE: Peter McRobbie has joined the killer cast of Inherent Vice as loan shark Adrian Prussia. A recurring presence on the Law & Order franchise as Judge Walter Bradley, the actor also played The Great Emancipator’s congressional nemesis Rep. George H. Pendleton in last year’s Steven Spielberg-directed Lincoln. McRobbie also has appeared on several episodes of the first season of Boardwalk Empire and in Oliver Stone’s 2006 film World Trade Center.

Taking on the violent underworld role that there had been whispers Sean Penn was eyeing, the actor will appear in Paul Thomas Anderson’s adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s 2009 detective novel with Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Josh Brolin, Martin Short, Katherine Waterston and Jena Malone. Inherent Vice shoots this summer for Warner Bros, with Anderson producing through his Ghoulardi Film Company along with JoAnne Sellar and Daniel Lupi. McRobbie is repped by the Abrams Artists Agency.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on June 28, 2013, 03:02:36 PM
Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’ Gets Its Adrian Prussia
BY DOMINIC PATTEN | Deadline

EXCLUSIVE: Peter McRobbie has joined the killer cast of Inherent Vice as loan shark Adrian Prussia. A recurring presence on the Law & Order franchise as Judge Walter Bradley, the actor also played The Great Emancipator’s congressional nemesis Rep. George H. Pendleton in last year’s Steven Spielberg-directed Lincoln. McRobbie also has appeared on several episodes of the first season of Boardwalk Empire and in Oliver Stone’s 2006 film World Trade Center.

Taking on the violent underworld role that there had been whispers Sean Penn was eyeing, the actor will appear in Paul Thomas Anderson’s adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s 2009 detective novel with Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Josh Brolin, Martin Short, Katherine Waterston and Jena Malone. Inherent Vice shoots this summer for Warner Bros, with Anderson producing through his Ghoulardi Film Company along with JoAnne Sellar and Daniel Lupi. McRobbie is repped by the Abrams Artists Agency.

 what if Penn is playing Puck Beaverton?  :ponder:  still got faith that hes in ...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on July 02, 2013, 03:27:43 PM
Jonah From 'Veep' Joins Paul Thomas Anderson's 'Inherent Vice'
Source: Playlist
 
While we've had our issues with "Veep" there is no denying that the show features an unbelievable murderer's row of comic talent, and probably the hardest job falls to Timothy Simons. He plays the monstrously tall Jonah, the White House aide who is often the target of Armando Ianucci's deadly one liner insults, while also being saddled with playing awkward, unlikeable and yet sympathetic all at once. But it seems he's found a fan in Paul Thomas Anderson.

Simons has joined the continually growing cast of "Inherent Vice." The movie, based on the novel by Thomas Pynchon, is a 1970s set story set in Los Angeles, that follows the inept, pot-smoking private detective Doc Sportello as he investigates the case of a kidnapped girl, who also happens to be one of his ex-girlfriends. No word yet on Simons' role, but he adds to a couple of folks who have joined in recent weeks including Peter McRobbie (as loan shark Adrian Prussia) and Sasha Pieterse (as runaway Japonica Fenway).

The trio add to the sprawling ensemble that includes Benicio Del Toro, Owen Wilson, Reese Witherspoon, Josh Brolin, Martin Short, Jena Malone, Kevin J. O'Connor, Katherine Waterston and Sean Penn (possibly maybe). Shooting is now underway.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on July 02, 2013, 04:07:17 PM
"You guys, are we seriously going to let the guy with the police sketch face of a rapist tell us what to do?"
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ©brad on July 02, 2013, 09:44:30 PM
Worlds are colliding! In a good way.

While we've had our issues with "Veep"...

Playlist you like to have sex and travel? Then fuck off.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on July 07, 2013, 09:18:17 PM
More names added to cast......
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 09, 2013, 07:21:32 AM
Woah, this is the first ever role for the dude playing Denis.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on July 09, 2013, 10:19:49 AM
yep, there's something going on with this casting situation.

PTA is doing something he's never done before.. he's working with a LOT of new people. and maya! i feel an analysis coming on..

basically what we can surmise is it will probably be a return to ensemble. this is significant. otherwise why have so many casting announcements? it would be a waste. i don't think any of his other films had this much of the pre release buzz generated by every single person who got a role in the film. we still don't know how significant these no-name actors roles will be, but there's enough actual name people that he will have to give them at least a scene to make it worth their while. how long have they been shooting now? it feels like every day they add a new actor to the film.

that may be the only relation this has to boogie nights, having such a big cast set in a fun loving era. i think a more interesting comparison can be made to PDL. that being his only other film aimed for the general "comedy" genre, which this most certainly will be. it will have to have some correlation to The Master cos JP is in it, but what is his BABY MOMA doing there? i'd be interested to see what role she's playing. the only other time she has appeared in his films was as the blurry red figure in the background of the supermarket in PDL.

the other PDL like thing i will go on a limb to say is Joaquin is wearing Barry's blue suit under his own perma-jacket:

(http://cdn02.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/04/joaquin-phoenix-060413-600x450.jpg)

Barry Egan was known for taking special notice of the small details, so while he may not have been a detective he definitely had some of the skills required. in the way that Maya was in the background and out of focus in PDL and here her presence is inverted, she's suddenly in focus, a similar inversion might be made with Joaquin playing a detective who does NOT notice the finer details, also the fact he is in a drugged up haze will add to the blurry effect which is the antithesis of Barry's clear sober vision (except when he got mad! ...does larry ever get mad?).

i've always felt there was a connection between private eyes and comedians. barry to larry (woah) might not be such a strange transition. i've also never really been able to satisfactorily explain the connection between comedians and detectives but believe me it is strong. i think about Conan's shortlived sitcom that he made with Adam West, i think of my friends uncle who was both a comedian and a detective, i think about the fact that bachelors make the best comedians (it's basically a requirement) and also the best detectives.

that's all for now.

PS. i'm gonna read the book. if Larry doesn't have a girlfriend or significant love interest then this is going to be just awesome, and another Barry inversion. i feel like PTA has explored love so much in all his films that with The Master it basically imploded/exploded into a million pieces at the end. the sandwoman is the embodiment of a million little pieces that can never be held together permanently. that may be what we're seeing here, with the myriad cast members, he wants to spread the love, those grains of sand are now actual people. he's had so many tortured characters who want to connect, in Boogie Nights the love connection was real and external, but ultimately artificial and drove them all to internal angst, the love corrupted and then little pieces reformed at the film's conclusion as part of their shattered and tattered foster family. Here in the 60s we have a climate of free love, where the world is a real life porn set.. the love was real for that moment, maybe, but it could only be real for a suspended moment in time and in a suspended moment in space between people. so bring in someone who can tie all those moments together!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wiped_out on July 10, 2013, 08:46:29 PM
I am reading the book and the character of Sancho the lawyer strikes me as a youngin' I saw someone like the kid from The Master( master's son in law playing the part)  anyway its funny because it will be like fear and loathing, a lawyer with a yerba habit 

I just saw a movie called Darker Than Amber starring Rod Taylor and William Smith and man if we could go back to the 70s and do a casting for this movie, William Smith would be the perfect Bigfoot, especially in Darker than Amber considering his hair was dyed blonde.

Pynchon nods the author of Darker than Amber within Inherent Vice. One of those books needs to be made into a movie!

I didnt know maya was the blurred figure in PDL,cool.

Do we know who is playing Wolfmann? Cookie and Lourdes? Joaquin( there is a character called Joaquin the book)
Owen Wilson as Coy interesting....he went there kinda in Teneabums

I Hope its 3hours plus! 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on July 11, 2013, 02:20:47 AM

Do we know who is playing Wolfmann?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034398/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034398/)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780653/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780653/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on July 11, 2013, 05:42:16 AM

Do we know who is playing Wolfmann?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034398/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034398/)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780653/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780653/)

hey, look at this guy! it's AntiDumbWolfQuestion.



(http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/brett-ratner-getty.jpg)
hahHAHAHAhagaghahA!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on July 18, 2013, 09:07:21 AM
^ is that Dirk Diggler on the left?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Neil on July 23, 2013, 02:36:38 PM
Yesterday when I was heading to the laundry mat I saw a sticker on this guys busted up back truck window that said, "my other car is a pychon novel."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on July 23, 2013, 02:57:24 PM
I don't get it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on July 23, 2013, 03:00:36 PM
(http://home.comcast.net/~dougmillison/cgdrive.gif)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pwaybloe on July 23, 2013, 10:29:19 PM
I don't get it. 

However, I do get the lazy ass Calvin & Hobbes reference.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on July 23, 2013, 10:35:41 PM
i get it. it was good

do you explain the explanation? idk
Quote
The prison of reason, the need for transcendence, the yearning for an absent meaning: these have been the stuff of literature and philosophy and theology for centuries.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113387/peter-sloterdijks-philosophy-gives-reasons-living
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: punchdrunkboogie on July 26, 2013, 03:08:41 PM
INHERENT VICE SET VIDEO

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/07/video-from-set-of-inherent-vice.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 26, 2013, 04:39:59 PM
Can someone tell us what these commenters are talking about?

Quote
I have had the soundtrack to Inherent Vice as its listed on amazon on my ipod for months now and I have been listening to it over and over... and over. I hope Paul keeps it all because the music is soo good and fitting

Quote
I'm sure he will keep some of it but music selection has often been a big way for PTA to express himself. Betting he will have at least a few less commercial songs of his own choosing from the era in there.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jerome on July 26, 2013, 04:47:29 PM
From the IV IMDb message boards (http://"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1791528/board/nest/214692118?ref_=tt_bd_6"):

Quote
I remember thinking that it was a really cool idea for Pynchon to release a soundtrack to a book. Very clever idea. Some are real songs by real bands, some are fake songs by characters in the novel. Here it is as listed on amazon.com.

"Bamboo" by Johnny and the Hurricanes
"Bang Bang" by The Bonzo Dog Band
Bootleg Tape by Elephant's Memory
"Can't Buy Me Love" by The Beatles
"Desafinado" by Stan Getz & Astrud Gilberto, with Charlie Byrd
Elusive Butterfly by Bob Lind
"Fly Me to the Moon" by Frank Sinatra
"Full Moon in Pisces" performed by Lark
"God Only Knows" by The Beach Boys
The Greatest Hits of Tommy James and The Shondells
"Happy Trails to You" by Roy Rogers
"Help Me, Rhonda" by The Beach Boys
"Here Come the Hodads" by The Marketts
"The Ice Caps" by Tiny Tim
"Interstellar Overdrive" by Pink Floyd
"It Never Entered My Mind" by Andrea Marcovicci
"Just the Lasagna (Semi-Bossa Nova)" by Carmine & the Cal-Zones
"Long Trip Out" by Spotted Dick
"Motion by the Ocean" by The Boards
"People Are Strange (When You're a Stranger)" by The Doors
"Pipeline" by The Chantays
"Quentin's Theme" (Theme Song from "Dark Shadows") performed by Charles Randolph Grean Sounde
Rembetissa by Roza Eskenazi
"Repossess Man" by Droolin’ Floyd Womack
"Skyful of Hearts" performed by Larry "Doc" Sportello
"Something Happened to Me Yesterday" by The Rolling Stones
"Something in the Air" by Thunderclap Newman
"Soul Gidget" by Meatball Flag
"Stranger in Love" performed by The Spaniels
"Sugar Sugar" by The Archies
"Super Market" by Fapardokly
"Surfin' Bird" by The Trashmen
"Telstar" by The Tornados
"Tequila" by The Champs
Theme Song from "The Big Valley" performed by Beer
"There's No Business Like Show Business" by Ethel Merman
Vincebus Eruptum by Blue Cheer
"Volare" by Domenico Modugno
"Wabash Cannonball" by Roy Acuff & His Crazy Tennesseans
"Wipeout" by The Surfaris
"Wouldn't It Be Nice" by The Beach Boys
"Yummy Yummy Yummy" performed by Ohio Express

Hopefully some or most of it ends up in the movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on July 26, 2013, 04:48:34 PM
pynchon himself made the playlist, to portray the atmosphere of the book. the book talks about music and creates lyrics, which is a thing pynchon likes to do

i don't remember where it was. it looks like it was on amazon and isn't on amazon anymore
http://www.theindependentpublishingmagazine.com/2009/08/pynchons-soundtrack-to-inherent-vice.html

edit -- oh it's listed above. nice
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on July 26, 2013, 09:47:35 PM
INHERENT VICE SET VIDEO

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/07/video-from-set-of-inherent-vice.html

That tank-top at 1:16 was stolen from Scotty J's old closet.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on July 26, 2013, 10:29:14 PM
I might be drunk (or gay or both, I don't even know anymore) but that dude at he left of phoneix is a fucking sexy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: HeywoodRFloyd on July 30, 2013, 08:43:09 AM
If anyone is interested, go on instagram and hashtag inherentvice, because there are a couple of 10-15 second behind the scenes clips on there from folks who were on set. A notable one is some dude right behind PTA as they're shooting a steadicam shot
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 30, 2013, 09:05:43 AM
Bunch of good photos of miscellaneous IV stuff too. Cool.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on July 30, 2013, 09:34:10 AM
can you link for those of us not cool enough to be on instagram?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 30, 2013, 09:36:54 AM
I googled something along the lines of 'instagram #inherentvice' or something, can't remember.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on July 30, 2013, 10:27:46 AM
For those that don't have instagram: 


(http://distilleryimage0.s3.amazonaws.com/0c4ccc4ef66b11e2819022000a1f99d8_7.jpg)



(http://distilleryimage10.s3.amazonaws.com/00dbb3c2f66911e28c8422000a1f931c_7.jpg)


(http://distilleryimage9.s3.amazonaws.com/7148aae4db8d11e298bc22000ae80f0b_7.jpg)



The other pictures on there are either super blurry or very far away, but if you still wanna see them, just google:  "Instagram #inherentvice", like Lottery said.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on July 30, 2013, 12:54:07 PM
here is a longer behind the scenes video without the music http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3dP5NkTrCU
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: mogwai on July 30, 2013, 02:49:02 PM
I'm going to wait for the finished result in 2017.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 30, 2013, 07:27:53 PM
Nooo, it will be out next year.

The AD looked like Nic Refn in that video.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: HeywoodRFloyd on August 08, 2013, 08:33:59 AM
3) A few have inquired, and we can now confirm through a source on the ground: Inherent Vice WILL, like The Master, have an aspect ratio of 1.85:1. Many of you already know what this means, but for those not interested in technical gobbledygook, the size of the frame that the shots are being composed for will be less wide than the first five PTA films, which all preserve 2.35:1.

I'm kinda shocked this is the case to be honest, in my head I definitely thought the material lends itself to be shot in cinemascope.

Interested if he's shooting anamorphic, but framing for 1.85:1 or if he's shooting spherical. I'm guessing it's anamorphic considering his infatuation with the lens flares and all, but you never know
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on August 08, 2013, 08:37:06 AM
He's shooting 1:85:1.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: HeywoodRFloyd on August 08, 2013, 09:11:14 AM
So he's not doing a Master job and cropping the frame later to 1.85:1 from an anamorphic negative? That makes sense as the 'source on the ground' probably realised they were using spherical lenses rather than anamorphic
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on August 08, 2013, 09:52:00 AM
i think this is going to be an actual funny movie. very few such films have ever been shot in 2.35.

PDL was a reluctant comedy, i think the ratio was partly why the film was not a big hit. and i mean that because the movie was more concerned with filling out the frame with hilarious gags in the background than bringing the humour to the front. look at Luis Guzman smashing the plungers in the background in that one shot after Barry takes a phone call in his office. it's funny but it's still about the phone call and there's really nothing else to focus on other than barry and his plight.

there's nowhere to hide in 1.85. in my mind this fits right in with the OBSESSION with cast announcements on this film. has a film's production ever been so concerned exclusively with the introduction of new cast members? this has been so odd to me that i just can't get over it and i'm pretty sure this is partly PTA's intention. the movie is almost finished shooting and we're still getting weird news articles saying so and so has "joined" the cast of Inherent Vice.

why so many faces? this movie will make ALL of them memorable. yes like his old ensemble films, but with a difference. except for JP every single one of these people are new to the PTA world, he has never before embraced a new group of people so openly. don't dismiss this aspect of the film. i think it'll be a major factor in understanding what he's trying to do.

1.85, comedy, new faces.. this feels like a release of tension after the epic single-character shit he's been doing. it's a strong punctuation on a long journey of amazing bullshit still to come.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on August 08, 2013, 10:04:50 AM
Good point. I think it's also because the films of that era were mostly in this aspect ratio.

Also: so and so (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/singer-joanna-newsom-joins-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-20130808) has "joined" the cast of Inherent Vice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on August 08, 2013, 11:36:53 AM
20 kilos of movie heroin

and

470 feet of dolly track

behind the scenes pics from inherent vice

(attachments below)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on August 08, 2013, 01:56:47 PM
Joanna Newsom looks a bit like Fiona apple.


Just saying.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on August 08, 2013, 02:34:34 PM
stoked for the joanna news!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ono on August 08, 2013, 02:56:56 PM
Joanna Newsom looks a bit like Fiona apple.


Just saying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ9jsFwEtDM
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on August 10, 2013, 12:44:38 AM
The Joanna Newsom news to me is amazing....   Didn't even think PTA listened to her music before. If you don't know who she is, Ms. Newsom is really good at remembering some really long lyrics, so it would seem she would be good at some short script lines if she does indeed do some acting here. I think she'll be a music cameo like the blank tapes band.

here's some pictures of her on the set apparently - http://ezrakoequeen.tumblr.com/post/57709781336/joanna-newsom-on-the-set-of-inherent-vice
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jim Steele on August 10, 2013, 04:40:15 PM
with the backing of a major studio, our man got things rolling in a matter of months. this is a fucking dream


that may be the only relation this has to boogie nights, having such a big cast set in a fun loving era. i think a more interesting comparison can be made to PDL.

love the comparison. check the lighting here
(http://oi43.tinypic.com/2mfno83.jpg)

what video is that, did I miss something? is that a the behind the scenes one that that one guy uploaded to Youtube? Looks like a different angle or sumthin'. Link?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: mogwai on August 11, 2013, 02:32:54 AM
The Joanna Newsom news to me is amazing....   Didn't even think PTA listened to her music before. If you don't know who she is, Ms. Newsom is really good at remembering some really long lyrics, so it would seem she would be good at some short script lines if she does indeed do some acting here. I think she'll be a music cameo like the blank tapes band.

here's some pictures of her on the set apparently - http://ezrakoequeen.tumblr.com/post/57709781336/joanna-newsom-on-the-set-of-inherent-vice

She's engaged with Andy Samberg who used to be on SNL. And Paul's better half also used to be on the same show. So that's probably why she got the gig.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on August 16, 2013, 01:30:06 PM
On Cigs Twitter they said IV will be in the 2014 Oscars race. Is that actually possible? Are they going to do a quick edit?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: punchdrunkboogie on August 16, 2013, 04:56:55 PM
Misunderstanding. Interpreted 2014 oscar race as end of next year, not this year.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on August 19, 2013, 03:18:16 PM
filming wraps. any guesses on runtime? im gonna go with (just under) ~2 hours
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on August 19, 2013, 06:46:19 PM
Wrapping up already. Crazy.

If it's roughly 2 hours, it should be satisfying. But even then, a fair chunk of the story would be missing (or rushed).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on August 20, 2013, 12:35:47 AM
Does anyone else have the weirdest feeling knowing a PTA film wrapped? It's just such an odd concept. That sort of finitude for a PTA film doesn't feel right.

*I haven't gotten to listening to Joanna Newsom's stuff until that IV tidbit, and I'm completely blown away. This one's been on constant replay in the past couple of weeks of my life. Her music is so alien and unique and full of every mood, especially this song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_47_CHdzHI
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Rooty Poots on August 23, 2013, 05:55:13 AM
Totally off topic, but my best friend did a cover of Joanna Newsom's "Sprout and the Bean" in my house several years ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rZXyvTIsEo
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on August 26, 2013, 05:44:42 PM
Definitely the most informed article on Pynchon's history I've found.

http://www.vulture.com/m/2013/08/thomas-pynchon-bleeding-edge.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on August 27, 2013, 02:11:44 AM
lit chat:

informed as any other article. that's the known info

been in bookstore discussions and around people who treat the topic with seriousness to know there isn't a rule about how to say his last name, which begins the article, but it's true that what's offered will impress your group of reading friends or idk. barthelme is the same way. in movie land it's like kieslowski or haneke -- knowing how to say those names will impress people i guess, but if the person cares most about how you say it, drop the conversation anyway

the tragic death of fariña is a story you'll always hear

a dfw quote, of course. famous quote, 'cause dfw said it

puns, yes. pynchon is well-known for his puns. so well-known you gotta mention them again and again, and get ready for your closing paragraph

movie chat:

best part for understanding inherent vice

Quote
The poet Bill Pearlman, who knew him in those days, once wrote that he “got the impression Pynchon wanted no part of the middle-class adult world”—that he “got more pleasure and information from the young, and was in some ways childlike himself.” There grew around Pynchon, by the beach, something that looks from the distance of years like a cult—a cult of privacy, at least, which paradoxically helped cement the legend of Tom the Recluse. “He was surrounded by a group of people that protected him fiercely,” says Jim Hall, a peripheral member, “and you either were accepted on some level or you were not.”

the way the article tells movie news, and the way that surprises you, compares the lit/movie info

Quote
Inherent Vice, for instance, starring a perma-stoned “gum-sandal” detective, owed a lot to the characters Pynchon knew in Manhattan Beach. Maybe it speaks to his special fondness for the book—or just the bucket-list dreams of a movie-mad author—that it’s soon to become his first novel adapted for the screen. It’s currently being directed in L.A. by the “imperial” auteur Paul Thomas Anderson, with Joaquin Phoenix in the lead.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on September 16, 2013, 11:40:27 PM
Josh Brolin DP/30, Cigs Post
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/09/josh-brolin-talks-inherent-vice-calls.html?m=1

Has anyone realized by now how PTA has this "method" approach to directing? If you listen to actors/crew speak about his sets, for each film I hear a completely different vibe (making constant left-turns obviously helps too). It's honestly brilliant. And completely necessary. What Josh Brolin just described is the feeling of reading a Pynchon novel.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 17, 2013, 12:46:07 AM
Yeah, does anyone know what he's had going on for his last few films. I've seen bits and pieces of his method and all the behind the scenes stuff is beautiful. I just wish I kid spend a few weeks on a shoot with him. Just spying on him. Just to see how he gets 'it' and gets it on the screen.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on September 17, 2013, 04:04:22 AM
Josh Brolin DP/30, Cigs Post
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2013/09/josh-brolin-talks-inherent-vice-calls.html?m=1

Has anyone realized by now how PTA has this "method" approach to directing? If you listen to actors/crew speak about his sets, for each film I hear a completely different vibe (making constant left-turns obviously helps too). It's honestly brilliant. And completely necessary. What Josh Brolin just described is the feeling of reading a Pynchon novel.

enjoy your pynchon wave. i think ending your post that way shows a perception of the pynchon process and accentuates a shared pta and pynhcon commitment to characters creating their narrative's waves. pynchon uses writing rhythms to mirror the pop of his characters, and i don't think anyone in the room would disagree that pta uses cinematic rhythms to pop his characters

thing i cherish about cinema is you get the writing with the cinema,

so another reason i enjoy your pynchon wave is there's more literary excitement to this conversation, than there was when the conversation was about upton sinclair. this time, like i've said, pta is using the pta of literature

if you know pta better, it's like this: oil is by sinclair, who wrote enduring social and political realism that's so stonecold classic pta chopped into the book, but here the difference is pynchon morphed the possibilities of literature as an art form

my guess is pta fans will be happy to know the very reasons iv didn't upon-release magnetize the literature crowd are related to pta's attractive qualities. qualities that seem too mellow as a literary execution are capable of being perfectly understood and portrayed by pta. i agree with cloudy the linked discussion highlights shared traits between the two

i went through an la reading phase and landed on iv when i wasn't sure i wanted to land on iv. i have frustrations from adaptations. translating literature to cinema -- tough. pynchon into cinema -- touuugh. so tough you'd love to see it. as an artist, pta is being tough. having read iv, i know pta knows what's necessary. this is where pta can pull off pynchon. i'm excited to see how he pulls this off,

as a movie person i'm excited to see how pta uses cinema to do this
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on September 22, 2013, 11:43:02 AM
Inherent Vice
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 22, 2013, 12:14:18 PM
WHAAAAAAAT!   Does that mean that PTA finally watched the wire?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on September 23, 2013, 05:31:59 PM
(http://media.247sports.com/Uploads/Assets/688/929/929688.gif)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on November 12, 2013, 10:55:43 PM
Josh Brolin & Mark Protosevich Talk Their Vision Of 'Oldboy', Steven Spielberg's Version & 'Inherent Vice'
On IV:
“My dad said recently, and I really appreciated it, 'There's a lot of directors out there but there's very few storytellers.' And working with these extreme geeks like myself who are very much these film fanatics is so nice. You're in this kind of iconic awe, and then you get to the set and you go, 'Okay, I actually have to work, we actually want to make this as good as I can be.' Like with Paul: he was taking stuff out of 'Inherent Vice', whittling away at what was in the book, and I was saying wouldn't it be great if we could bring some of what was in the book back," Brolin said. "Who the fuck am I to say that, you know what I mean?”

He added, “But then we start collaborating and putting stuff in there, and realizing, 'Okay…let's take it out, let's colorize it even more with something else, and then how are we going do this on set?' You realize all the work you've done around a table was meaningless, but it fed something. You don't know what it was, but you're always looking for that elusive thing.”

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/josh-brolin-mark-protosevich-talk-their-vision-of-oldboy-steven-spielbergs-version-inherent-vice-20131112?page=2#blogPostHeaderPanel
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on November 13, 2013, 03:16:39 AM
Like with Paul: he was taking stuff out of 'Inherent Vice', whittling away at what was in the book

 :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on November 27, 2013, 08:07:57 PM
Brolin discusses working with PTA/Joaquin & how he was cast

http://collider.com/josh-brolin-oldboy-inherent-vice-interview/
 (http://collider.com/josh-brolin-oldboy-inherent-vice-interview/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on December 12, 2013, 11:57:13 AM
Here's Jennie Berlin who plays Aunt Reet in Inherent Vice  giving a reading from Pynchon's newest book Bleeding Edge at the National Book Awards (she also read the audio-book). Just thought it was a nice connection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3p4C0Z8GYM

Please tell me, and I'm sorry, if this is completely irrelevant to this thread.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on January 08, 2014, 05:08:42 PM
Guise! Guise! I'm not sure how accurate this is but Jonny G's name popped up on the Inherent Vice IMDB page. Apparently this happened like a month ago so I'm like 'whhaaa?'
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1791528/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
Fingers crossed this is true but you know this could be wrong and PTA actually hired fucking Hans Zimmer or someone when we wren't watching.
There is uncertainty.
https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/407959960572555264
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on January 08, 2014, 05:33:59 PM
PTA actually hired fucking Hans Zimmer

ummm sorry bud but hans zimmer is working extensively with christopher nolan on developing spotless music for fucking interstellroaaaaaar. he's busssssy!! eat it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on January 08, 2014, 05:59:57 PM
I desperately tried to ask the question (twice) to Greenwood (with Twitter) but (duh) he didn't answer. Buf if he's not doing it, Santa Claus is doing it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on January 08, 2014, 06:10:54 PM
I desperately tried to ask the question (twice) to Greenwood (with Twitter) but (duh) he didn't answer. Buf if he's not doing it, Santa Claus is doing it.

You should have baited him with something like 'Wow Jonny have a listen to this obscure Polish composer!are you doing inherent vice?'
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on January 09, 2014, 08:40:55 AM
PTA actually hired fucking Hans Zimmer

ummm sorry bud but hans zimmer is working extensively with christopher nolan on developing spotless music for fucking interstellroaaaaaar. he's busssssy!! eat it
Not that this would ever happen but Zimmer scored 5 films last year, I think he can handle the workload.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: N on February 02, 2014, 03:24:46 AM
(http://home.comcast.net/~dougmillison/cgdrive.gif)
I love that.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on February 06, 2014, 01:44:00 PM
Jonny Greenwood Scoring Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’ (http://filmmusicreporter.com/2014/02/06/jonny-greenwood-scoring-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice)

Quote
Greenwood’s score will be recorded this month with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra in London
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on February 18, 2014, 07:09:05 PM
Some interesting stuff that Jonny Greenwood is saying about electric guitars and strings which might be connected to Inherent Vice or not.

Quote
NME: Sunday's concert (February 23) in Wapping with the LCO will include new material written by you. What can we expect?

Jonny Greenwood: A few short pieces - hopefully one with guitar and strings, if it's sounding OK in rehearsals. Nothing soloistic, I'm just trying to write some guitar music that sits with the orchestra. It's strange how little music was written for strings and electric guitar when it first came out in the 1930's - or later, even. Eventually, things did get written - but there's usually a wall of guitar effects involved. I've tried to go back to the idea of an un-effected guitar as part of an orchestra. Most of the concert will be the film cues from There Will Be Blood, Norwegian Wood, and The Master. In addition, we'll hear some new (and very old) music by other people.

Read more at http://www.nme.com/blogs/nme-blogs/radioheads-jonny-greenwood-qa-blending-classical-music-with-rock?recache=1&t=1231316&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=johnnygreenwood#0LfcDpGFAyYQ6GTg.99
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on February 18, 2014, 07:48:07 PM
God damnit I wanna be there.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on February 20, 2014, 02:25:35 AM

Ok so the score's finished recording (http://sinfinimusic.com/uk/features/interviews/composer-interviews/jonny-greenwood)

Quote
I finished recording a soundtrack last week for Paul Thomas Anderson's next film Inherent Vice. We recorded with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, led by Clio Gould - they were fantastic. Other than that, I'm just writing orchestral things, doing some nerdy programming, and waiting to see what the band feel like doing.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on February 20, 2014, 02:33:27 PM
From @rpoonline

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgDZQJ5IYAARrN3.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on February 20, 2014, 08:27:56 PM
Context?

Other than that he's becoming Russell Crowe.

And Jonny's head is about to explode. Wait is that even him?

Who the fuck are these people?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on February 20, 2014, 08:47:22 PM
In London with the Royal Philharmonic.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on February 21, 2014, 12:00:26 AM
Other than that he's staying true to his habit of being a fashion repeat offender.

(http://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/IMG_0992.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on February 21, 2014, 07:10:05 AM
 jonny cazale

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4EdkqeI0guA/UC7ay9LD9hI/AAAAAAAAAK0/WTWrohp3ZJE/s1600/JohnCazale-dogdayafternoon1.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on February 24, 2014, 11:13:47 AM
Jonny Greenwood "Loop" (New Material) from last night @ Wapping Project...could guess this and the other "new material" pieces may be somehow related to IV.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSipfGtbf20

Set-List:
Jonny Greenwood Prospector’s Quartet (There Will Be Blood)
Purcell Fantasia a 3 in G minor, Z. 734
Edmund Finnis Sister
Jonny Greenwood Reiko (Norwegian Wood)
Jonny Greenwood Miniature (new material)
Edmund Finnis Brother
Jonny Greenwood Fight with Cudgels (new material)
Xenakis Kottos
Jonny Greenwood Prospectors Arrive (There Will Be Blood)
Parsons In Nomine III a 5
Jonny Greenwood Application 45 Version 1 (The Master)
Messiaen Vocalise-Étude
Jonny Greenwood Microtonal Sketches (new material)
Jonny Greenwood There Will Be Blood (There Will Be Blood)
Jonny Greenwood Mata Aini Kuru Kara Ne (Norwegian Wood)
J.S. Bach Cello Suite. 5 in D minor: III Courante
Jonny Greenwood Future Markets (There Will Be Blood)
Jonny Greenwood Loop (new material)
Jonny Greenwood Self Portrait with Seven Fingers (new material)
Jonny Greenwood (electric guitar / ondes Martenot / tanpura)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on February 24, 2014, 01:47:16 PM
Any chance that this is from Inherent Vice? Regardless, it sounds amazing.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on February 24, 2014, 05:21:16 PM
Sounds fantastic. He's really taken to that Golden Les Paul, I wonder if he'll start using that as one of his main guitars for Radiohead. He's been using for about 8 years but not that prominently.

By the way, you folks should check out Edmund Finnis, he's pretty geat.

Any footage of Miniature,  Fight with Cudgels,  Microtonal Sketches, Self Portrait with Seven Fingers?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 24, 2014, 06:07:44 PM
Any footage of Miniature,  Fight with Cudgels,  Microtonal Sketches, Self Portrait with Seven Fingers?

Or, to book readers, do any of those titles appear to reference the book? You'd think "cudgels" and "seven fingers" should be giveaways.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on February 24, 2014, 06:22:56 PM
I'm not sure I remember those titles from the book. But yes, titles would be the most obvious clue. I do however know that Fight with Cudgels is a Goya painting from his dying and insane period (seriously, some incredible stuff, check it out). And I just did a search and Seven Fingers is an artwork by a dude called Marc Chagall.

(http://www.artchive.com/artchive/g/goya/cudgels.jpg)
(http://phavisualart.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/chagallfingers_l1.jpg?w=420&h=478)

But yes, titles would be the most obvious clue.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on February 24, 2014, 06:57:37 PM
These might have been pieces that were made parallel with the making of the IV score. Just like when JG made 48 Responses to Polymorphia/Popcorn Superhet Reciever with Penderecki before/after TWBB.

The fact that he's using his guitar and other non-western classical instruments like a Tanpur makes it seem like IV is definitely where this is going to...since guitar is essential to the story.

Btw Lottery, Edmund Finnis is great! I'm pretty sure JG and him just made a record together.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on February 24, 2014, 07:14:02 PM
The tanpura stuff is possibly from a commision he did for the Australian Chamber Orchestra. It's a strongly Indian influenced piece called Water.

But it hasn't been properly premiered yet, here are the upcoming performance dates:

October 26 - Melbourne, AU @ Melbourne Arts Centre
October 27 - Melbourne, AU @ Melbourne Arts Centre
October 29 - Perth, AU @ Venue TBD
November 1 - Canberra, AU @ Venue TBD
November 2 - Sydney, AU @ Sydney Opera House

So yeah, back to square one.
But you know, maybe I should go see that. That's just after my birthday, hell what if IV is playing around the same time? That would make for a great birthday.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on February 24, 2014, 09:15:10 PM
i think everyone is hoping (new material) are from inherent vice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: N on February 25, 2014, 01:56:09 AM
I'm starting to get that pta excitement.
This would be an awesome score track.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on February 25, 2014, 03:08:36 PM
Release Date: December 12, 2014.

via The Internet
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on February 25, 2014, 03:46:00 PM
Well. Only Lovers Left Alive was at Cannes last year. I've got hopes for Cannes. (And then it's at Cannes but they don't show it at Paris and I go insane and wait for february.)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 25, 2014, 03:50:49 PM
A source to back up modage:

Warner Bros Dates Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’ For December 2014

http://www.deadline.com/2014/02/inherent-vice-release-date-december-12-2014/

Paul Thomas Anderson‘s next film Inherent Vice has been given a plum awards-season release date. Warner Bros said today that the pic starring Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Josh Brolin, Katherine Waterston and Jena Malone will come out December 12, 2014. The adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s 2009 detective novel will be Anderson’s first film since 2012′s The Master, which was nominated for three Oscars. The studio has spent the past week setting its release slate, especially for early 2015, finding spots for Man From U.N.C.L.E (January 16), Run All Night (February 6), Focus (February 27) and Get Hard (March 27).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on February 25, 2014, 09:03:59 PM
Awwww shit, need a trailer to drop.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on February 26, 2014, 01:15:03 AM
*I'm gonna stop posting these, since we're not sure if they completely relate to IV. If you want more go to Jonny Greenwood's FB page. They have Miniature (using the Tanpura), and Microtonal Sketches up

Self-Portrait With Seven Fingers (new material) @ Wapping
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgxftTZGUvY
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on February 26, 2014, 02:24:03 AM
I don't follow movie news much, but what's with the Oscar obsession in every announcement. It's like non-blockbuster movies exist solely to have a chance at winning an Oscar. Or is it just the time of the year?

If WB is hoping that this has any chance at the Oscars, they've misjudged the material.

Unless PTA moves unrecognizably far from the source material, this is going to be his weirdest movie yet.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on February 26, 2014, 06:02:03 AM
December is a big month for movies because it's the last time of the year you can qualify for those awards. I agree, it's stupid how much they whore out for the oscars,  but with the limited box office PTA's films bring in, the oscar attention is the best thing they have going for them to get people watching ( who aren't us ). This will be nominated, with Paul's films it's become a given,  but I'm so sick of those dumb gold statues and I wish they would die.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on February 26, 2014, 07:04:15 AM
Agreed. Jeez Louise, you don't you just make it a 2015 film, ya bastards.
Still happy that there's something that's confirmed

Yeah, it may be his most bizarre yet but it should pick up a nom or three (cinem, costumes, hairs, maybe J Grizz's first and maybe best Joaquin). But hell, we've only seen like 2 non-official photos.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on February 27, 2014, 10:41:52 AM
"Self Portrait" is so, so good, if anyone has still yet to listen to it. These tracks definitely give off a PTA/Inherent Vice vibe.
Title: How long do you think Inherent Vice will be?
Post by: TheImaginator16 on March 06, 2014, 04:28:44 PM
Do you think it will be closer to PDL or Magnolia in terms of length? I'm personally hoping for something around the 150 mins mark. I've started reading the book and I'm only about a third through. Seems like a lot of content and I would not want PTA to skim over a lot of it, so the longer the better! :D

How long do you guys think it will be in terms of running time?
Title: Re: How long do you think Inherent Vice will be?
Post by: polkablues on March 06, 2014, 04:36:12 PM
Do you think it will be closer to PDL or Magnolia in terms of length? I'm personally hoping for something around the 150 mins mark. I've started reading the book and I'm only about a third through. Seems like a lot of content and I would not want PTA to skim over a lot of it, so the longer the better! :D

How long do you guys think it will be in terms of running time?

I would be amazed if we ever see another PTA film as short as PDL or as long as Magnolia. His wheelhouse seems to be right around 2 1/2 hours, give or take 15 minutes.

That said, I haven't read a word of the book, so it might be a story that demands a five-hour adaptation for all I know.


EDIT: Merged into main IV thread.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on March 06, 2014, 05:38:53 PM
Hard to say, depends how much Paulo wants to keep. It would be incredible if this was his most streamlined movie considering the content of the book. 130-160 makes sense. Half-hour difference but yeah, depends how faithful he is to the story.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on March 06, 2014, 10:47:05 PM
Hope he goes balls deep like Scorsese and makes it 3 hours
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: N on March 07, 2014, 01:33:31 AM
There's just no tellin'. There's just no tellin'.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: KJ on March 07, 2014, 01:57:18 PM
I hope it's a short film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: TheImaginator16 on March 08, 2014, 03:09:56 PM
I wonder if he will completely follow the films narrative or whether he'll just use the premise of Inherent Vice as the basis of his version of the story. Or if it will remain very similar until the ending. I kind of hope he changes the narrative a bit, although keeps much of the stuff the same. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on March 10, 2014, 12:06:48 AM
One of the main departures from all of his previous films will be in how he treats the Pynchon maximalist clusterfuck of real-world references/locations/brands/media/politics/science there is in it. His previous films always tended to treat the world outside of itself as very abstract. I'm wondering how close he'll stay to the material in this sense. Reminds me a bit of how in Lebowski where for example you'd see an In-N-Out in the back (which also is rare for the Coen's to do), but x1000000.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on March 15, 2014, 04:39:22 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/mar/13/josh-brolin-labor-day-interview-heroin

Quote
These days, it seems, he is clean and straight and enjoying his life. Brolin recently completed work on Inherent Vice, a black comedy from director Paul Thomas Anderson, who made Magnolia and The Master. It's a film that reunites him with Del Toro, his onetime rival from the Hollywood dunce class. "Yeah, well," he says, with a wolfish grin. "We did a lot of bad acting on this movie as well."


Also I mirrored a photograph I found on instagram so you can just barely make out the first page of the script
(http://i.imgur.com/2QwzT60.jpg?1)

Those who've read the book can see he's taking a lot of the dialogue and descriptions verbatim from the first page of the book. It also has slow rising boner on the first page which is not in the book so we know this page at least is even more Pynchonian than the book.

Another really interesting thing I discovered when I recently found the set photos was that Guaqueen is reading from or holding the book in a lot of the pictures, and the book...
(http://i.imgur.com/jgz4jd7.jpg?1)

...gets progressively more tattered...

(http://i.imgur.com/ipKLkVO.jpg?1)

...as the shoot progresses

(http://i.imgur.com/kU2SMNx.jpg?1)

(http://i.imgur.com/ajXbK3X.jpg?1)

This is not going to be another OIL! if anyone still had doubt.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on March 16, 2014, 09:05:26 AM
Did anyone figure out what that first page says?   Aside from the part about Doc covering up his "slow rising BONER". (lolz)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: DocSportello on March 16, 2014, 02:53:45 PM
Has anyone considered the possibility of voice over narration? I mean I doubt he'd use it but how do you film Pynchon without the words - much of which would have to be lost without narration? I can just make out from the photo the line from the first page of the book where it decribes Shasta as (and I'm paraphrasing) "showing up looking just like she always swore she'd never look" or something along those lines. It just sounds like something a narrator would say. It is a detective story after all. And he used some in Magnolia. Something to ponder. Either way, this movie is going to be fucking wacky.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: TheImaginator16 on March 16, 2014, 04:03:40 PM
Yeah I really would quite like some form of narration. In the book the narrator often leaps back in time to tell a story or describes a certain character with a story and I think it would be quite difficult to do this without a narrator in the film. I can see PTA using a narrator similarly to how he used one in the opening of Magnolia, like you mentioned. But hopefully in IH it will be not overly prominent and frequent but always present. I would quite like the narrator, if there is one, to be Doc rather than some all knowing narrative voice. Similar to the narration in Goodfellas or Wolf of Wall Street. The main character narrates and explains things, describing characters, telling stories and stuff.  :yabbse-smiley: i mean there would be ways of telling those stories more "subtly" like through dialogue with loads of exposition and visually but I reckon  a narrator would be good here.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on March 27, 2014, 10:59:55 AM
Josh Brolin talking about PTA's method on Inherent Vice yet again.
Quote
“Joaquin and I would do these scenes together and Paul would say, ‘This time do it with the table upside down, and you guys get under the table and I’m going to put a blanket over you, and I want you to whisper your lines. And now this time, no lines and no dialogue at all, and I want you to just dance your dialogue. Whatever that next line is, I want you to create a movement that’s going to be what that line of dialogue was going to be if you spoke it.’

Quote
“It was just craziness, you know, but really fun. After that, we’d go back to the scene and it would be fed by all those other things that you can create something magical. But you have to do some pretty weird things.”
What Josh Brolin just described is the feeling of reading a Pynchon novel.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: TheImaginator16 on March 27, 2014, 11:15:10 AM
When do you guys think we can expect a teaser trailer or a preview or something? I think pretty soon, although I can imagine JG's music still needs to be edited and stuff. Any of you know when the first teaser for The Master came out?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on March 27, 2014, 11:20:35 AM

Any of you know when the first teaser for The Master came out?



May 21 2012.

The other trailers where released on the 19th of the subsequent months.

May 21 was one hell of a day, I still remember it vividly. PTA even sent the trailer to Cigsandredvines with a note. I hope he does the same this time around. But Paul is pretty unpredictable.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on March 28, 2014, 01:42:58 AM
Josh Brolin talking about PTA's method on Inherent Vice yet again.
Quote
“Joaquin and I would do these scenes together and Paul would say, ‘This time do it with the table upside down, and you guys get under the table and I’m going to put a blanket over you, and I want you to whisper your lines. And now this time, no lines and no dialogue at all, and I want you to just dance your dialogue. Whatever that next line is, I want you to create a movement that’s going to be what that line of dialogue was going to be if you spoke it.’

Quote
“It was just craziness, you know, but really fun. After that, we’d go back to the scene and it would be fed by all those other things that you can create something magical. But you have to do some pretty weird things.”

Is he being serious? This is incredible insight into his process. I love this stuff. It's the best we're gonna get now that he hardly talks about his films in this much detail.

And what is it with him and flipping tables? I remember cruise telling a story about making Magnolia when frank mackey loses his shit at the seminar and he hesitated for a moment when he felt he wanted to flip the table that's up on stage with him, I think it had refreshments and stuff, then PTA walks up to the table and just puts his hand on it and nods to cruise, as if to say, "yes flip this fucking table", which he did.

I think this film will see a lot of his conventions flipped on every axis possible, yes like in a Pynchon novel, but to me it feels more like a highly refined ecstatic spin, like Sufi worshippers in a trance. PTA must be flipping in his bed.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on March 28, 2014, 12:29:48 PM
I think this film will see a lot of his conventions flipped on every axis possible, yes like in a Pynchon novel, but to me it feels more like a highly refined ecstatic spin, like Sufi worshippers in a trance. PTA must be flipping in his bed.
It's interesting you say this because you said previously you haven't read the book. The book is always knocking on the door of pure spiritualism ("Sacrilege"), but always in a consciously borderline pseudo way. It's completely obvious after the master(magnolia, PDL, even TWBB) and through reading IV, that PTA is indeed flipping in his fucking bed. And I love it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on March 29, 2014, 02:12:29 PM
Continuing his work with august filmmakers, Brolin has just wrapped on a film with Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, Magnolia, There Will Be Blood), a dark comedy drama called Inherent Vice, based on the novel of the same name by Thomas Pynchon.

"I just did a movie for P T Anderson that I didn't understand," he says of the experience. "The writing of Thomas Pynchon is so Shakespearean. It was crazy, chaotic but really, really gratifying.

"We took it I think in a direction that the book doesn't necessarily go, hoping it will work." The film represents something of a risk, but Brolin is okay with that; after all, if you don't try, you won't know.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pubrick on March 29, 2014, 02:35:47 PM
Can you at least mention the name of the site/publication your getting these quotes from?

Provide a link if you can.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on March 29, 2014, 02:47:11 PM
It's the goddamn Playlist
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on March 29, 2014, 02:52:00 PM
my fault got it from http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/movies/brolin-after-all-if-you-dont-try-you-wont-know-30128406.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on March 29, 2014, 11:11:02 PM
Can you at least mention the name of the site/publication your getting these quotes from?

It's "you're," goddammit.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on March 30, 2014, 04:46:18 PM
8 minutes of new JonnyG stuff, "Self Portrait With Seven Fingers", great recording with a Tascam...if you scroll down you'll find a link to a torrent of the entire show:
https://soundcloud.com/funk-it-blog-1/jonny-greenwood-wordless-music

*edit* link to a couple others from the same recorder:
https://soundcloud.com/funk-it-blog-1
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on March 31, 2014, 08:36:55 AM
^ i have these in 320 mp3 if anyone wants them
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on March 31, 2014, 09:25:31 AM
^ i have these in 320 mp3 if anyone wants them


Yes!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on March 31, 2014, 12:08:05 PM
http://www.mediafire.com/download/dc665mk5ysxvvme/jgwo.rar
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on March 31, 2014, 09:24:00 PM
Guise!

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1.0-9/p180x540/1656001_698604283525784_1282122389_n.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on April 01, 2014, 10:19:44 PM
I hope it's back to 2.35:1 aspect ratio....  :?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on April 03, 2014, 01:12:54 PM
Word is they've been doing their post in a sweet ass house in the Encino hills with a swimming pool and shit.

I remember hearing they rented a house in the valley for magnolia's post as well. That's such a cool way to do it, if you can convince the producers to hook it up, to be able to roll downstairs in your PJs or the one brown shirt you own or whatever and pick up where you left off last night, to live in the same house as the thing you're crafting.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Dr_Chile on April 08, 2014, 01:23:25 PM
Timothy Simons had this to say about INHERENT VICE on the Veep Facebook page....

"It was the most nervous I've ever been and also the most fun I've ever had. PTA was amazing to work with."

https://www.facebook.com/veep/photos/a.276955355715290.66119.270240406386785/624617367615752/?type=1&comment_id=2030796&reply_comment_id=2030830&offset=0&total_comments=82&notif_t=photo_reply (https://www.facebook.com/veep/photos/a.276955355715290.66119.270240406386785/624617367615752/?type=1&comment_id=2030796&reply_comment_id=2030830&offset=0&total_comments=82&notif_t=photo_reply)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on April 09, 2014, 12:49:10 PM
I hope it's back to 2.35:1 aspect ratio....  :?
I think we've already been informed that it's 1.85 again. I like that he's playing around with that, and think the results from The Master are an amazing use of the aspect ratio. Kubrick shot his work to fit a television screen, and shooting on 1.85 is essentially doing that for the modern age. It means that the image will fill the screen of most every device/tv. It also frames up close-ups a lot better, and the close-ups in The Master were incredible.
Of course I have no clue why he chooses whatever aspect ratio and am just guessing.

And just to reiterate, Greenwood's 'Loop' is insanely good.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on April 12, 2014, 09:14:02 PM
Now it’s all but certain that Paul Thomas Anderson‘s Inherent Vice won’t be going there either. This morning I spoke to an industry friend who’s seen Vice (and who thinks it’s brilliant and mesmerizing in an atmospheric, non-linear sort of way) and says that Anderson, currently doing the sound mix, doesn’t really want to subject Vice to Cannes and would rather take his time and tinker around over the summer and then unveil it in Telluride/Venice/Toronto.


This follows what a friend told me a week or two ago, which is that Cannes topper Thierry Fremaux “has been courting and wooing PTA like mad to get Inherent Vice to Cannes, and that PTA has been telling him since January that it would be very tight for him to get post-production done in time and that he wouldn’t show it to Thierry until then. Perhaps PTA would privately like to go to Cannes, but I’m also told that Warner Bros. is against the idea, considering it too early given its December release date. If PTA insists and finishes the film to his satisfaction over the next couple of weeks, he could probably prevail over Warner Bros, but the latest I hear is that everything is still very much up in the air.”


http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2014/04/double-downer/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_term=Daily/Hourly+Hollywood+Meditation&utm_content=Opinion,+wisdom,+tin+foil,+attitude
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 12, 2014, 09:59:56 PM
Quote
...It’s brilliant and mesmerizing in an atmospheric, non-linear sort of way.

Niiice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on April 14, 2014, 04:56:53 PM
Quote
Mix together The Big Lebowski and Altman‘s The Long Goodbye, turn it into a two-and-a-half hour PT Anderson epic and you’re getting close to the awesome experience of Inherent Vice. Even Joaquin Phoenix‘s performance has echoes of 70′s Elliot Gould with a touch of The Dude. But don’t get me wrong, this film is its own animal. A drug-fueled detective story filled with great psychedelic music and beautiful, grainy cinematography, it’s both hilarious and confounding at times. But Anderson does an incredible job of making the incredibly complex plot both comprehensible and entertaining. Even though he’s apparently said he’s still tinkering, it felt like a finished film and will definitely go down as one of my favorites of his.

http://thefilmstage.com/news/first-impressions-from-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-which-will-skip-cannes/

So the movie is done? Eight months to wait? It's fine if he wins Oscars, but Oscars should consider to kill themselves.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: squints on April 14, 2014, 09:49:32 PM
You had me at...

Quote
Mix together The Big Lebowski and Altman‘s The Long Goodbye, turn it into a two-and-a-half hour PT Anderson epic and you’re getting close to the awesome experience of Inherent Vice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 15, 2014, 09:19:55 PM
Some words from Keith Jardine.

Quote
Since that time and his subsequent break from fighting, Jardine has stayed busy with stunt roles and even landed a sizeable part in the upcoming movie 'Inherent Vice' where he shares the bulk of his screen time opposite Academy Award nominated actor Joaquin Phoenix.

"I did a couple stunt roles in Transcendence and A Million Ways to Die in the West, but what I'm most proud of, I did a deal with P.T. Anderson and Joaquin Phoenix. P.T. Anderson's the director of directors.  He wrote and directed 'Boogie Nights', 'There Will Be Blood', a lot of Oscar winning movies so that was a true honor for me," Jardine said.

"That's up there with the proudest things I've ever done, along with my best fights and everything.  My manager called me and said they're having trouble casting this role, do you want to come down here? I had to fly to LA on my own dime and I walked in on a cold reading, talk about nervous, but I didn't know it was for Paul Thomas Anderson.  I walked in and I did this cold reading with some pretty sick dialogue, it was a few pages, and we went over it for about two hours and I went home and about a week later I got a call that I got the role."

The reality of that casting process was Jardine landing the role in spite of being a fighter instead of because of it. As it turns out being a professional fighter turned actor was actually a hindrance to his new career because some casting directors tend to pigeon hole fighters in a type cast role, and even then, if they wanted a professional mixed martial artist, why not go for a bigger name like Chuck Liddell or Jon Jones? So it was refreshing when Jardine found out on his first day as part of the cast of 'Inherent Vice' that no one had any idea that he used to be one of the top fighters in the UFC.

"Until the day I arrived on set, they had no idea I was a fighter.  It was just because of the look and being able to do the look," Jardine revealed.

The filming for the movie was a real experience for Jardine, who had been a part of some pretty serious projects previously, but mostly as a stunt actor and not in speaking roles.  This time he had a script, actual lines, and even some back and forth with the star of the movie.

"All my action was with Joaquin, such a great guy. Super humble, super sweet, just a great guy," Jardine said.  "I could tell you stories.  Like we were at lunch and he was like there's this one part in the book where this happens and he'd say 'go read this and see what you think' and next thing you know I'd be over in my trailer and they'd bring me a bunch of lines from that part of the book.  It was crazy."

http://msn.foxsports.com/ufc/story/keith-jardine-one-more-round-040214
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on April 16, 2014, 03:11:14 AM
Ahah. As soon as I searched his name on Google and saw his face, I immediately thought he could only be Puck.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on April 24, 2014, 07:29:22 AM
Mix together The Big Lebowski and Altman‘s The Long Goodbye and Who Framed Roger Rabbit, turn it into a two-and-a-half hour PT Anderson epic and you’re getting close to the awesome experience of Inherent Vice
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 25, 2014, 06:56:44 PM
Maybe it's post April 20th fatigue, but I feel like if PTA manages to make all of this not annoying it will be a cinematic miracle.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on April 25, 2014, 08:13:28 PM
It'll be groovy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on April 25, 2014, 09:45:50 PM
Maybe it's post April 20th fatigue, but I feel like if PTA manages to make all of this not annoying it will be a cinematic miracle.
I hate stoner culture as much as the next guy, but that pic is not at all a good representation of  the book or that scene. So it won't be annoying unless you think The Big Lebowski is annoying because the Dude smokes weed.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 25, 2014, 09:54:35 PM
Alright. The Big Lebowski is definitely not annoying.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Alexandro on April 26, 2014, 11:16:26 AM
so, there's a possibility that an animated rabbit lights up a joint to a handcuffed joaquin phoenix and we're worrying?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on April 26, 2014, 01:40:50 PM
now im worried its not going to happen
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on April 27, 2014, 02:41:59 AM
It won't. but don't worry about it. have y'all ever felt worried about a PT Anderson movie? I think he pretty much quells those sensations as soon as the first frame hits...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 27, 2014, 10:49:38 AM
Right, most of us were worried about Adam Sandler for a minute.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on April 27, 2014, 02:18:19 PM
Only thing that's still a bit off-putting for me is Greasy Reesey. He's been hung up on that broad since his love for FEAR for some reason. Not sure if she's still cunty behind the scenes but have never had any interest in her.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: md on April 27, 2014, 05:55:47 PM
Watch Election you pig fuck.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 08, 2014, 08:35:54 AM
Ahh, I really hope a trailer or a teaser drops soon. Hopefully around Mid may. Even just a poster will do it for me.

Just a question, are spoilers from the book allowed on this thread or shall i start a new thread where those who have read the book can discuss that kind of shit?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on May 08, 2014, 08:44:05 AM
Just use a spoiler warning if you're going to talk about the book.


WELCOME!

Introduce Yourself (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=2.1005)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 08, 2014, 12:42:50 PM
Thanks Reelist.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/josh-brolin-says-inherent-vice-goes-in-a-direction-that-the-book-doesnt-necessarily-go-20140329 I found this article really interesting.

While we know this wont be like Oil! , where PTA used the book as a foundation to do his own thang, now we know that it also wont be an absolutely straight adaptation. For those that have read the book, what different direction do you lot reckon this will be? I wonder if its something as big as a whole new branch of the story or or just an atmosphere or feel that the film will portray differently.

Personally I'm expecting the film to be more noticeably non-linear than the book. For example, like how The Master feels like a dream, IV will feel like a big fluid tour guided puzzle of scenes in the past and present. The dude that described it as a mix of the long goodbye and the big lebowski made it seem like it was prominently nonlinear. The book has a framework that has many flashbacks and stuff but still feels like a pretty linear tale. Perhaps that could be the new direction that Brolin talks about. 

What do u lot think?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 09, 2014, 10:34:18 AM
Ive got a question for you guys, and im not sure if i belongs here but here it goes. How many more films do you think PTA has in him? IV will be his 7th. I personally can't see him going beyond 12 films.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on May 09, 2014, 11:32:00 AM
That's impossible to say right now.  He's at an interesting stage of his career, he's seemingly broken out of that five year gap thing but who knows what may fellow. He can be as prolific as he wants as long he's making the good stuff.

But just for fun...14.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on May 10, 2014, 11:10:06 AM
Remember to factor in the detour into electro pop music in his late 60s.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on May 10, 2014, 11:12:27 AM
I can't wait for when he joins a Transcendental Meditation pyramid scheme.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on May 10, 2014, 11:19:44 AM
http://inherent-vice.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Songs_mentioned_in_Inherent_Vice

Curious if we'll hear any of these in the film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 10, 2014, 12:41:09 PM
 That would be one hell of a soundtrack, if all those were included.

https://www.youtube.com/user/lumumbaz/playlists

this is a pretty good playlist that includes a big chunk of the songs mentioned. it's good to put you in that IV mood, as is fun to read the book to. I think some of the songs that play at the parties, cafes, in peoples houses, or just on the radio during important scenes or moments in the book will be in the film. Similar to how Boogie Nights used it's soundtrack at the parties etc. Most of the time the music, save a few moments like with "God Only Knows", was playing inside the world WITH the characters rather than externally. I reckon it'll be some of these songs that are mentioned playing inside the film's world, mixed with Jonny Greenwood's soundtrack playing externally. Gonna be killer.

NGL I really think this could be PTA's best film yet. From what im speculating so far, it's: Got the ensemble massive cast and groovy yet also dark and twisted vibe of Boogie Nights. It's got the large scale quirkiness of Magnolia. The epic narrative scope of There Will Be Blood. The non-linear hazy dreamlike style of The Master. A soundtrack that will seemingly be a mix of every PTA film so far (variation of pops songs [BN and Magnolia] , romantic Greenwood score [magnolia, PDL mixed with Master and TWBB]) . All this as well as its own character and fresh originality that will surely impress us when it comes out.  Never been so excited for a film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 18, 2014, 02:41:08 PM
http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/inherent-vice-will-not-get-a-wide-release-until-january-2015/

Maaaaaan
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: N on May 19, 2014, 01:32:51 PM
So are we going to count it as 2014 for the awards or not?
Cause I wan't 3 years of JP.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on May 19, 2014, 01:40:43 PM
We'll burn that bridge when we come to it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on May 19, 2014, 02:52:57 PM
If it gets a limited release in 2014, I can't imagine how it would not count for 2014.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 19, 2014, 04:00:35 PM
Yeah, Her had a similar type of release, and it pretty much was in limited release until early 2014... it came here, in the UK, in march-april. Same with Inside Llewyn Davis. And Her won best film for 2013 here, so Inherent Vice will be the same, i can imagine.

I think it's pretty safe to say that unless IH is total shit, it will win best film here too. 3 year streak for JP :) i wonder if anything will come out in 2015 that will continue it?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on May 21, 2014, 07:58:42 AM
we should be expecting a trailer or a teaser pretty soon right?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: greenberryhill on May 21, 2014, 09:20:24 AM
Yeah! Today is may 21  :yabbse-smiley: It´s been two years since The Master´s teaser trailer was released! I´m really excited  :)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on May 21, 2014, 09:27:20 AM
But The Master was released in september. We can expect a teaser for august.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: greenberryhill on May 21, 2014, 10:25:08 AM
That´s right, and if we compare "Her" with "Inherent Vice", "Her" trailer was realesed in early august 2013, so maybe that´s when will´s see a trailer for IV. But i still hope we get some teaser from ALRosePromos sometime around june  :)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on May 21, 2014, 10:51:41 AM
You guys are giving me a headache
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on May 21, 2014, 02:05:21 PM
Yeah, there should be a separate thread titled IRRELEVANT VICE so I won't continue to be let down in this one.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on May 21, 2014, 10:26:36 PM
Or bide your time with SailoroftheSeas newly thought of thread: Top Five PTA trailers While We Wait For The IV Trailer.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on May 22, 2014, 03:16:50 AM
i love you guys
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Stefen on May 22, 2014, 11:02:10 AM
Fuck you guys.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on May 22, 2014, 12:51:08 PM
i... GODDAMNIT [kicks a glass door]. i need a doctor
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on June 17, 2014, 01:14:51 AM
Hope i'm wrong but dont think were gonna see any youtube teasers this time
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on June 17, 2014, 01:34:12 AM
Goddammit, Larry.

But you made me google if something came up in the last 24 hours and I found this(it's Jillian Bell):
Quote
You're going to be in Inherent Vice, your second movie with Paul Thomas Anderson and Joaquin Phoenix [Jillian played Phoenix's girlfriend in The Master]. What's your role? I confess I haven’t read the book, so I don’t have any guesses.

I’ve read just parts of it too. I haven’t read the whole thing. It’s pretty amazing, though. I need to get through it. I have such a small part in the movie — I loved doing it, I would do anything for Paul Thomas Anderson because he’s Paul Thomas Anderson — but they just flew me in just to do a small part as this weird waitress. But I got to do a scene with Benicio Del Toro, who is honestly my favorite actor of all time.
 
And what about Joaquin Phoenix?

It was him and Benicio.
 
Why has Paul Thomas Anderson take such a liking to you?

He saw me in Workaholics. He is a huge Workaholics fan, I guess. I mean, his wife is Maya Rudolph, so of course he loves people who do comedy. But I guess he watches Workaholics and, actually, Anders Holm is in Inherent Vice as well and he’s in Workaholics. So I think [Paul]’s trying to get all of us in there.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: greenberryhill on June 19, 2014, 10:27:01 AM
Two years ago exactly Al Rose Promotions uploaded this teaser! It seems that Warner Bros have a very different marketing plan for IV.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGyj4pbfWfo
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on June 20, 2014, 03:04:30 PM
YES, ITS REAL

FROM C & RV

Warner Bros' Sue Kroll Says "Inherent Vice" Is A Masterpiece



In keeping with the early buzz Inherent Vice has received from industry insiders -- and perhaps not all that surprising given she is a representative of the company bankrolling the film -- Warner Bros' President of Marketing and Worldwide Distribution, Sue Kroll, has spoken to Deadline about the company's suite of upcoming projects and included some highly complimentary words about PTA's next:
Warners has a pretty full Academy slate after two very successful years in a row with 2012 Best Picture winner Argo and 2013's Gravity which picked up seven Oscars, along with an Original Screenplay win for Her and two other Oscars for The Great Gatsby. Kroll says the year looks good, including Paul Thomas Anderson's much-anticipated Inherent Vice.
"You're gonna love it. It's the most wonderful movie," says Kroll. "So entertaining, so smart, so fun. I think [it's] different for him but it's a masterpiece. I love it - I think it's my favorite movie of his except Magnolia."

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2014/06/warner-bros-sue-kroll-says-inherent.html (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2014/06/warner-bros-sue-kroll-says-inherent.html)


I love how she claims that its "different" for him...PTA always taking left turns; Joaquin goes from Drifter to fucking Private eye
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fernando on June 20, 2014, 03:11:33 PM
Quote from: Sue Kroll
"You're gonna love it. It's the most wonderful movie," says Kroll. "So entertaining, so smart, so fun. I think [it's] different for him but it's a masterpiece. I love it - I think it's my favorite movie of his except Magnolia."

so she's an old school PTA fan...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on June 20, 2014, 08:19:05 PM
Prez of marketing and distribution eh? Give us a trailer Kroll, instead of rubbing it in our faces.

Normally I would be wary of what a marketing exec would say, but the Magnolia mention adds an element of honesty.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 20, 2014, 10:49:48 PM
She's just Krolling us.

Someone delete this post.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on June 21, 2014, 06:14:32 PM
She's just Krolling us.

Someone delete this post.

(http://i.imgur.com/zcwHLB9.png)

Yep. she is... with the workaholics guy.
Found on reddit lol. It was one of you wasn't it?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on July 05, 2014, 12:14:55 PM
Could you imagine a teaser poster like this? Without the captions haha. More purple and green

(http://images.sequart.org/images/The-Long-Goodbye-poster-660x1002.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on July 05, 2014, 04:05:17 PM
Goddammit, Larry.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: mogwai on July 06, 2014, 05:21:14 AM
YES, ITS REAL

FROM C & RV

Warner Bros' Sue Kroll Says "Inherent Vice" Is A Masterpiece



In keeping with the early buzz Inherent Vice has received from industry insiders -- and perhaps not all that surprising given she is a representative of the company bankrolling the film -- Warner Bros' President of Marketing and Worldwide Distribution, Sue Kroll, has spoken to Deadline about the company's suite of upcoming projects and included some highly complimentary words about PTA's next:
Warners has a pretty full Academy slate after two very successful years in a row with 2012 Best Picture winner Argo and 2013's Gravity which picked up seven Oscars, along with an Original Screenplay win for Her and two other Oscars for The Great Gatsby. Kroll says the year looks good, including Paul Thomas Anderson's much-anticipated Inherent Vice.
"You're gonna love it. It's the most wonderful movie," says Kroll. "So entertaining, so smart, so fun. I think [it's] different for him but it's a masterpiece. I love it - I think it's my favorite movie of his except Magnolia."

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2014/06/warner-bros-sue-kroll-says-inherent.html (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2014/06/warner-bros-sue-kroll-says-inherent.html)


I love how she claims that its "different" for him...PTA always taking left turns; Joaquin goes from Drifter to fucking Private eye

So this means Paul will finally win an Oscar for Best adapted screenplay? That's like him compared to Kubrick who only won an Oscar for best special effects.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on July 06, 2014, 07:41:35 PM
Hey, guys, finally a real thing!

The framing chart during production, from Cigarettes & Red Vines.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Br5tXskCYAAmgUQ.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on July 08, 2014, 07:10:48 AM
MORE FRIEND OF A FRIEND OF A FRIEND WATCHED "INHERENT VICE" CHATTER, WHICH I CANNOT HELP BUT EAT UP IN SPADES...

FROM HOLLYWOOD ELSEWHERE

"Last night I spoke to a friend who knows a woman who recently saw Paul Thomas Anderson‘s Inherent Vice (Warner Bros., 12.12). Her initial nutshell reaction was that she “didn’t get it” because…well, how could I know? But one of the apparent blockages was that it doesn’t adhere to a precise narrative through-line that led anywhere in particular (i.e., no third-act payoff). But then she started to understand it a bit more when she began to think about it the next day. A film that’s more about the journey than the destination. I told this guy that three months ago an industry friend who’d seen Vice had described it in a similar way, calling it “brilliant and mesmerizing in an atmospheric, non-linear sort of way” as well as “Lebowski-esque.”

As reported on 7.2, I’ve heard “convincing chatter” that Vice will debut at the New York Film Festival."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on July 18, 2014, 09:45:15 PM
ok folks. bout that time for a trailer. with possible viewings at major festivals just a couple months away, I can feel something big is going to drop in the coming days. I can just feel it! whose with me?

EDIT:

Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘Inherent Vice’ to World Premiere at New York Film Festival (EXCLUSIVE)


“Inherent Vice,” writer-director Paul Thomas Anderson’s adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s darkly comic 2009 crime novel, has been selected as the centerpiece gala at the 52nd annual New York Film Festival, Variety has learned.

The Oct. 4 bow will mark the world premiere of Anderson’s highly anticipated seventh feature, a 1970s Southern California-set detective yarn starring Joaquin Phoenix, Josh Brolin, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson and Benicio Del Toro. Warner Bros. has slated the film for a Dec. 12 theatrical release.


http://variety.com/2014/film/news/paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-to-world-premiere-at-new-york-film-festival-exclusive-1201264784/ (http://variety.com/2014/film/news/paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-to-world-premiere-at-new-york-film-festival-exclusive-1201264784/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: greenberryhill on July 19, 2014, 12:52:24 AM
Two years ago, today, "The Master" trailer was released! I can feel "Inherent Vice" trailer is closer.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on July 19, 2014, 12:00:35 PM
New York Film Festival Director and Selection Committee Chair, Kent Jones said:

“Every new Paul Thomas Anderson movie is an event, an experience – when the lights come up, you feel like you’ve been somewhere, and come back with your mind altered. Inherent Vice is a journey through the past, bringing the texture of the early 70s SoCal counterculture back to full blown life. It’s a wildly funny, deeply soulful, richly detailed, and altogether stunning movie.”
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on July 19, 2014, 09:32:07 PM
New York Film Festival Director and Selection Committee Chair, Kent Jones said:

“Every new Paul Thomas Anderson movie is an event, an experience – when the lights come up, you feel like you’ve been somewhere, and come back with your mind altered.”

I've never known it to be put any better
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 20, 2014, 11:17:48 PM
Quote
Paul Thomas Anderson’s film There Will Be Blood opens with barren mountains and what sounds like a swarm of bees. It’s Greenwood’s “microtonal string music”, and it unsettles before, for six minutes, we watch Daniel Day-Lewis prospecting for oil. The opening ends with the same mountains, noise and weirdness. The duo’s second collaboration — The Master — is even stranger. Rolling Stone says Greenwood is “redefining what is possible in film scores”, but I don’t expect him to agree when I tell him so. “Paul just has his music very loud in his films,” he says. “It’s a dream job for a composer. I was sending him music that was too long, and he was extending the scenes to fit the music. Which is insanity.”

Next month, There Will Be Blood is being screened at London’s Roundhouse, with a live score by the LCO. Bring an expanded mind. Next year, Inherent Vice — the third film this quietly eccentric duo have made — hits cinemas. How does it work? “Back and forth for months,” Greenwood says. He misses it when they don’t work together. The new film is based on a Thomas Pynchon novel. “I was sending him this 1960s pop thing I did, because the film is set then, asking, ‘Is this of any use?’ Then I flood him with different approaches until we find the right one.” One bonus is that he gets to see eagerly anticipated cult films early. “Inherent Vice is funny,” he says. “But there’s a strange, dark seriousness going on throughout.”

Full interview/article here:
http://the-king-of-ponytails.tumblr.com/post/92333715524/ten-minutes-out-of-didcot-parkway-in-a-leafy
From:
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/culture/music/article1434796.ece

"Inherent Vice is funny...But there’s a strange, dark seriousness going on throughout.”
Similar to the book in that regard at least.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: convalescent_k on July 23, 2014, 02:16:21 PM
Quote
Friend who saw Inherent Vice: "It's BONKERS. For reals, it tips into like Zucker Bros. level gags and broad humor. Strange, beguiling tone."

Source:
https://twitter.com/kristapley/status/491991693646782464
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 24, 2014, 11:29:01 AM
Also:

Quote
It's also completely finished. Credits and all. Has been for a hot minute.

https://twitter.com/kristapley/status/491992107419049984
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on July 25, 2014, 01:26:49 AM
A bunch of reactions summed up (http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/expect-a-very-different-paul-thomas-anderson-experience-from-inherent-vice)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on July 25, 2014, 02:19:29 AM
where is the trailer though
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 25, 2014, 11:21:24 AM
"It's BONKERS — weird, weird, weird" and "stylistically somewhat more restrained than his other films." I understand how that can work, but still... strange.

So, definitely not PDL.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on July 26, 2014, 07:39:16 AM
His camera moves even less but people do wackier shit on-screen than usual. One of the cool things about the camera work in The Master was that there was this sort of stateliness to it (if that makes sense).

Quote
The music is more all-over-the-place than usual, and he uses a few songs of the era. The score is much more Radiohead-sounding, just by way of having actual guitar and drums thrown in. There's some atmospheric electronic stuff in there, too.

This is a rather odd way of describing the music, really confuses things. Jonny G's interviews have him saying it's 'romantic' sounding and that he first tried like a 60s pop approach and then kept sending stuff until it matched. There was a sense of consistency on the last two films in terms of music- hopefully that will remain. I'm totally psyched to hear how Jonny G's style has evolved and I'd be a little disappointed if it actually is 'all-over-the-place'. But I have faith in the dude. I was/am expecting IV to have a Greenwoodified Bernard Herrmann approach- supported by wonky, creepy psychedelia (similar to the contrast of the grandness of Back Beyond and the wonky, unsettling jazz of Able-Bodied Seaman). That just makes sense in my head. Also, The Master's score is still very, very awesome.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on July 26, 2014, 08:12:00 AM
Moving the camera is overrated
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on July 26, 2014, 04:28:33 PM
im going to light this topic up again and freak everybody out who thinks it might be actual news since you guys do that to me all the time.

i rewatched boogie nights last night with my girlfriend, and recently finished the pynchon book and all i could think of is that IV is going to be very very similar to BN.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on July 26, 2014, 05:02:34 PM
im going to light this topic up again and freak everybody out who thinks it might be actual news since you guys do that to me all the time.

I'll follow suit.

The shot that consistently pops into my brain when imagining what the aesthetic of this film could be as it relates Paul's prior work is this one:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zBXzbqCsYMo/UGkOWizDPJI/AAAAAAAAGYI/zxfA_ZOoqyE/s1600/The-Master-Quell-brandishing-a-gun.png)


I haven't finished the book yet, but I got a free copy of 'Against The Day' helping my friend move his stuff the other day. I'll never read it, you have to pick your battles with these guys.



Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: idk on July 26, 2014, 09:36:58 PM
Paul posted the IV teaser on his vine account but the studio found out and made him delete it. So now you have to text him and he will snapchat it to you.

BTW the studio changed his youtube password so thats why he cant use his Al Rose channel anymore
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on July 26, 2014, 09:40:22 PM
dude can't catch a break
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on August 06, 2014, 01:28:51 AM
Karma has been adjusted accordingly.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on August 12, 2014, 03:58:44 PM
based on the marketing for The Master, I'm guessing/hoping we get our first look at a trailer in the coming days

https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/499290257364639745
 (https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/499290257364639745)
-----------------------------------------


MONDAY, MAY 21, 2012: ‘The Master' Teaser Trailer Has Arrived

[4 months later]

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2012: ‘The Master' Is Now Playing In Theatres Everywhere
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Cloudy on August 13, 2014, 01:07:43 AM
Just remember this is Pynchon at work for this one, like that Pubrick post from a while back. It'll be some time before anything comes out. (I hope....)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Dr_Chile on August 13, 2014, 10:35:20 AM
Inherent Vice is officially 148 minutes according to the NYFF website.

Centerpiece – World Premiere           
Inherent Vice
Paul Thomas Anderson, USA, 2014, 148m
Paul Thomas Anderson’s wild and entrancing new movie, the very first adaptation of a Thomas Pynchon novel, is a cinematic time machine, placing the viewer deep within the world of the paranoid, hazy L.A. dope culture of the early ’70s. It’s not just the look (which is ineffably right, from the mutton chops and the peasant dresses to the battered screen doors and the neon glow), it’s the feel, the rhythm of hanging out, of talking yourself into a state of shivering ecstasy or fear or something in between. Joaquin Phoenix goes all the way for Anderson (just as he did in The Master) playing Doc Sportello, the private investigator searching for his ex-girlfriend Shasta (Katherine Waterston, a revelation), menaced at every turn by Josh Brolin as the telegenic police detective “Bigfoot” Bjornsen. Among the other members of Anderson’s mind-boggling cast are Reese Witherspoon, Benicio Del Toro, Martin Short, Owen Wilson, and Jena Malone. A trip, and a great American film by a great American filmmaker. A Warner Bros. Picturesrelease.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on August 13, 2014, 12:00:54 PM
excellent.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Dr_Chile on August 14, 2014, 01:06:38 PM
This appears to be the first photo from Inherent Vice!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvBHcPECYAAeEOz.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on August 14, 2014, 01:13:22 PM
^ been a minute since we've had a relevant update this good.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on August 14, 2014, 04:39:42 PM
Holy shit, an actual thing!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on August 14, 2014, 04:55:40 PM
Joaquin's head looks photoshopped.



this must be polka's work.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on August 14, 2014, 04:59:49 PM
His head looks slightly shrunken as if the guy from Beetlejuice sprinkled some head shrinking dust on it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on August 14, 2014, 09:47:16 PM
IV
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Korova on August 15, 2014, 04:20:17 AM
A question to the book readers: Is Inherent Vice a musical in the way like Gravity's Rainbow is? Would be nice to have an Anderson musical.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Dr_Chile on August 15, 2014, 10:57:07 AM
There are a lot of original songs in it. "Soul Gidget" by the first black surf band Meatball Flag stands out. Doc even sings a few. There's a great lounge number as well. I hope we get to see some of these in the film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Korova on August 16, 2014, 12:34:41 AM
Can't wait: http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/08/16/inherent-vice-josh-brolin-katherine-waterston/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Garam on August 21, 2014, 09:56:52 AM
Josh Brolin AMA

[–]YeezusChristSupersta 12 points an hour ago
Love your work. What can we expect from Inherent Vice? Do you know when a trailer is coming out? I'm dying to see it.


[–]Josh_Brolin 22 points 41 minutes ago
Me too!
I don't know when a trailer is coming out, I hope soon. I'm very proud of that movie. And I think Joaquin Phoenix has reached an alien level of talent.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on August 21, 2014, 11:09:19 AM
“Wild movie. You know, it’s the first [Thomas] Pynchon film adaptation, and it really catches his tone,” New York Film Festival director and Selection Committee Chair Kent Jones says, discussing Inherent Vice. “It really catches the antic nature of him: the crazy names of characters, the nutty behavior, and then also the emotional undertone. It has the flavor of Pynchon. It has this Big Lebowski element to one side of it, but the emotional undertone, the desperation, the paranoia, and the yearning in the film… [Paul Thomas Anderson's] an absolutely amazing filmmaker and it’s incredible to see him responding to someone else’s creation and then building his own creation out of it. He sort of did that with There Will Be Blood, but not really. It’s his own movie, inspired by the novel Oil!”
Along with sharing the photo below, featuring star Joaquin Phoenix, Jones went on to discuss his personal reaction to the film, saying, “I was born in 1960, but I certainly remember 1971 very well and I gotta say, from the minute the movie started to the minute it ended, I was back—way back—to the point where I was thinking “Gee, my son was born in the ’90s.” So it’s a different kind of relationship that he would have. It’s an amazing piece of work, and at this point Joaquin Phoenix and Paul have something so rare between them as an actor and director, and Sam Waterston’s daughter, Katherine, is in it, and she’s riveting every minute she’s on screen. It’s quite a film.” It sounds like we’re in for something truly special, and as we await the first trailer, one can see the new image below.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on August 21, 2014, 07:45:46 PM
From the AMA.

We all are looking forward to see "Inherent Vice". How would you describe working with Paul Thomas Anderson?

After Goonies and the Coens, one of the greatest experiences of my life. He creates an ambience of creative insanity. It felt like swimming in a Ralph Steadman drawing. Whoa, deep. Heavy.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Find Your Magali on August 23, 2014, 11:26:05 PM
It's really hard to get a grip on IV from the comments I've read so far. The cliched comparisons seem to be The Long Goodbye and The Big Lebowski. But they don't seem to have as much relevance to the film as the impressions I've read so far would suggest. I'm still trying to get a handle, too, on how *funny* it's going to be. Of course, funny is a generic and subjective word. Dunno.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on August 24, 2014, 07:40:29 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/t1.0-9/s720x720/1510778_907060255989775_5672156308425587036_n.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on August 30, 2014, 01:20:11 PM
They should have changed the character's name to Big Head.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Dobbs on August 31, 2014, 04:15:01 PM
Brolin is a big man.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 02, 2014, 06:57:56 PM
Goddamit C&RV, I thought they were about to post a trailer.

Anyway, rated R.

http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/inherent-vice-receives-r-rating.html

Quote
Inherent Vice has been Rated R, and if the description is any indication, the film has something for everyone: drug use throughout, sexual content, graphic nudity, language, and some violence.

Classic PTA.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 03, 2014, 11:46:03 PM
via Rolling Stone

(https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/l/t1.0-9/p526x395/10646831_10152776037239369_6420691583679986107_n.jpg?oh=9a54436b5a265a0ec8209d76de66345c&oe=545BFED0)


EDIT:
Interview with Sasha Pieterse on IV
http://fillermagazine.com/culture/film/celebrity-news-interviews-sasha-pieterse-of-pretty-little-liars-and-inherent-vice/ (http://fillermagazine.com/culture/film/celebrity-news-interviews-sasha-pieterse-of-pretty-little-liars-and-inherent-vice/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 04, 2014, 12:20:22 AM
Craziness:

Quote
And actually, what I respected most about Joaquin is that he would have the book and the script side-by-side, so basically he would say, “what do you want out of either?”
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on September 04, 2014, 01:05:18 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/movies/fall-arts-preview-teyonah-parris-katherine-waterston-and-others-break-through.html?src=twr

(http://i.imgur.com/xwa4rBn.jpg)

Quote
In Mr. Anderson’s narcotic noir, “Inherent Vice,” set in Los Angeles in 1970 and based on the Thomas Pynchon novel, Ms. Waterston plays Shasta, right, the free-spirited, sensual ex-girlfriend who wakes the mutton-chopped private investigator Doc Sportello (Mr. Phoenix) from his stoner haze. Like a beacon shining through the counterculture’s druggie fog, Shasta bristles with the kind of wild-eyed, visceral energy Doc has self-medicated into oblivion: a romantic embodiment of what might have been, and what might be lost.

“Certainly, this whole film is sort of the smoke clearing after the ‘60s and everyone coming to, wondering what the hell happened,” she said. “There’s a lot of uncertainty on every page of the novel. Is it all in her head? Or not? Is she as afraid as she needs to be? Or not?”

Figuring it out by doing all of her scenes with the mercurial Mr. Phoenix was more relief than challenge, she said. “Working with a scared actor is scarier than working with a brave one.”
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Punch on September 04, 2014, 06:00:10 AM
http://fillermagazine.com/culture/film/celebrity-news-interviews-sasha-pieterse-of-pretty-little-liars-and-inherent-vice/ 

Japonica fenway
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Just Withnail on September 04, 2014, 09:03:19 AM
Here we go.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 04, 2014, 11:35:10 AM
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/first-look-at-katherine-waterston-benicio-del-toro-in-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-20140904

"we've heard some whispers that PTA is already planning a new project with Megan Ellison's Annapurna Pictures, marking their third collaboration together."
(It would actually be their second, no?)

This picture of Waterson doesn't appear to be from the film itself, but rather a production still, no? Also, I am digging the choice to avoid the trailer thus far. It seems to be a very intentional approach and I'm curious how far they'll push it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on September 04, 2014, 12:25:33 PM
Pretty certain everything we've seen so far have been production stills, not actual movie frames.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 04, 2014, 12:26:38 PM
Pretty certain everything we've seen so far have been production stills, not actual movie frames.
Interesting!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 04, 2014, 08:06:31 PM
I bet my weight's worth in pudding that the frame on top of the page ends up in the movie
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ono on September 06, 2014, 04:42:21 PM
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2014/09/pta-to-host-masterclass-at-nyff.html

Oh, I hope some of you are able to go.  To be a fly on that wall.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 09, 2014, 02:23:38 PM
Owen Wilson too thinks Paul was "chaotic". In a good way.


Quote
Ok, we’ll let it drop, reluctantly. Can you tell us about working on “Inherent Vice”?
Wilson: Oh sure, I got along great with Paul [Thomas Anderson] and Joaquin [Phoenix]. The way that Paul worked I thought was kind of unusual -- it almost seemed kind of chaotic. Very loose and I was surprised at that. I thought it was going to be very regimented. I don't know if that was just for this one or if that's typically how he works.

Did Phoenix mention if it was very different from working on “The Master,” perhaps?
Wilson: Hmm, we never talked about it.  But that was even there in the script. I hadn't read the book, have you? [We have] Did you like it? I thought it was very dense. This was more accessible.

Yes, it is dense, though less so than others of his...it does have a pretty gonzo, chaotic vibe.
Wilson: Right, the film has a bit of a gonzo vibe too.

From The Playlist.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 09, 2014, 03:40:36 PM
If I remember the interviews, The Master was in fact made in a similar way, right? Kind of a workshop thing going on.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 09, 2014, 05:51:22 PM
its coming alive!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 10, 2014, 10:44:38 AM
Wow! Several frames that move like a moving picture show!

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/09/10/the-new-york-film-festival-now-has-a-trailer/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 10, 2014, 11:45:17 AM
Oh I missed the one at :40 where Phoenix is rammed into! Good catch!

EDIT- and Owen Wilson eating pizza.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 10, 2014, 11:59:35 AM
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 10, 2014, 12:00:34 PM
I didn't even consider the last one because it looked so much like an Indian film. Sweet 'Where's Waldo?' spotting.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 10, 2014, 12:01:54 PM
I didn't even consider the last one because it looked so much like an Indian film. Sweet 'Where's Waldo?' spotting.

I agree, the one with the pizza is weird. Looks more Wes than Paul. Plus the cinematography doesnt seem to match up with the first 2 pics.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 10, 2014, 12:03:34 PM
Just look at all those dirty sweaty hippies.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on September 10, 2014, 12:10:28 PM
The Last Hippie Supper. Owen is JC!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 10, 2014, 12:13:21 PM
The Last Hippie Supper. Owen is JC!

He's even forming Da Vinci's visual pyramid in that freeze frame.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 10, 2014, 12:33:25 PM
Question for everyone: are we at the point that the lack of a trailer is notable? With its debut less than 25 days away and select city release in 3 months, are there any (hyped, studio) movies that come to mind from the past decade that held off on a trailer/providing footage for so long?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 10, 2014, 12:38:49 PM
Question for everyone: are we at the point that the lack of a trailer is notable? With its debut less than 25 days away and select city release in 3 months, are there any (hyped, studio) movies that come to mind from the past decade that held off on a trailer/providing footage for so long?

The difference between PTA and Fincher and Tarantino and Nolan and Wes Anderson is, maybe, that big, yes. That's definitely strange.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 10, 2014, 01:02:35 PM
I'm not sure if this relaxed my cravings or intensified them tenfold. Give us the muthafuckin trailer. Any day now.
I had a giggle at Doc being knocked over.


Someone comment on the different approach to the cinematography in these few frames.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 10, 2014, 01:22:36 PM
Trailer of...?



(http://i.imgur.com/NmUxBCg.gif)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 10, 2014, 01:55:56 PM
Based on the aspect ratio and description of the shooting style from those on set/those who have seen the early screenings, I think it'll be more similar to The Master than his previous movies. Simple camera setups without a lot of coverage- I think PTA likes this shooting style because it keeps his sets 'light' and experimental. Allows camera department and actors to get into a groove and try new shit.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 11, 2014, 10:19:30 PM
The only shot Coy seemed to be in was a Last Supper-type grouping around a long table in the kitchen, with everybody in eated discussion over a number of pizzas. Coy was saturated in a funny vibrant blur* that didn't match any other part of the space, and watching the camera a little too intently, with an expression forever about to unfold into a smile.

-IV

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10678861_918417181520749_2260683743849609462_n.jpg?oh=a76beba1587a7b6dcccb7cf47273bca8&oe=54882EE4&__gda__=1418036060_4311125e2ec9ef76d584985e106941c9)



Da Vinci's The Last Supper
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/%C3%9Altima_Cena_-_Da_Vinci_5.jpg/1280px-%C3%9Altima_Cena_-_Da_Vinci_5.jpg)


from Altman's MASH

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10636101_10100552806792884_3231701925929322337_n.jpg?oh=cb1fc92963b074dfb4a4f5a4ff1b4c56&oe=549EF760&__gda__=1418825781_c4abeaad119d2eb1fcc6b36e1f8a9e5e)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: samsong on September 15, 2014, 01:47:35 AM
there's also bunuel's viridiana

(http://madamepickwickartblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/bunuel9-1024x565.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ono on September 15, 2014, 02:44:20 PM
Iono where else to put this.

Paul's a hippie now!  https://twitter.com/vigiledelfuoco/status/511529518104715264/photo/1
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 15, 2014, 03:02:04 PM
Yikes. Not a good look for him.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Mel on September 15, 2014, 04:19:24 PM
Yikes. Not a good look for him.

No cameo theory yet?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on September 16, 2014, 03:08:11 AM
I like it. Looking forward to seeing if he will do interviews and appearances for the movie with the "long hair don't care". Seems like it will fit in with the movie's era.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 18, 2014, 04:16:34 PM
there's also bunuel's viridiana


I wonder what Paul's favorite Bunuel film is!?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on September 18, 2014, 08:27:49 PM
Look, Larry. . . have you ever heard of Vietnam? You're going to enter a world of pain, son.
You're gonna KILL your FATHER, Larry!.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 19, 2014, 02:27:58 AM
lol I rewatched Lebowski this week. couldn't help it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 19, 2014, 12:54:56 PM
Look, Larry. . . have you ever heard of Vietnam? You're going to enter a world of pain, son.
You're gonna KILL your FATHER, Larry!.


He's a pederass dude.

And the actual quote is "You're killing your father, larry!"... But you can't be worried about that shit.. life goes on man...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on September 19, 2014, 06:53:03 PM
*pederast
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 20, 2014, 10:21:44 AM
Trailer is imminent (https://twitter.com/KetchumAtMovies/status/513152670388191232).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Neil on September 20, 2014, 10:57:49 AM
^
omg irl
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 20, 2014, 11:40:25 AM
https://twitter.com/KetchumAtMovies/status/513365333739327488
Welp...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 20, 2014, 12:05:22 PM
You didn't quite Ketch this one, Dave
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ono on September 20, 2014, 12:22:16 PM
Ketchup!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 20, 2014, 01:22:18 PM
Yep, false alarm. Variety recanted (https://twitter.com/KetchumAtMovies/status/513367239261958144).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fernando on September 20, 2014, 09:38:01 PM
you're imminent new spoilatar will have to wait a little more...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 20, 2014, 11:30:47 PM
Ha thought about that, but I'll try to wait till the movie opens in December so the images from the trailer doesn't imprint itself on everyone's subconscious before then.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 21, 2014, 08:55:27 AM
I actually think what they're doing is brilliant, though. What's the point in sharing a trailer 8 months before the movie comes out when it already has two built-in audiences (Pynchon readers and fans of the filmmakers)? Honestly, I would not be totally against the idea of either having only one trailer or just using posters until they decide they need TV Spots. There's no mystery to the promotional side of movies anymore, it's kind of nice to see this route be taken.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 21, 2014, 12:58:02 PM
via Cigarettes&RedVines
‏@cigsandredvines (twitter)

Little birdie says #InherentVice had a press screening in New York today, and it was presented in 35mm.

4:33 PM - 20 Sep 2014

[https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/513470920858828800 (https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/513470920858828800)]


edit: also, TWBB with Live Orchestra was performed in NYC earlier this week. PTA must be in Nueva York already
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on September 21, 2014, 01:05:35 PM
There's also a 35mm screening of Boogie Nights at Lincoln Center (http://www.filmlinc.com/films/on-sale/boogie-nights) tonight
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 21, 2014, 01:57:51 PM
Damn, Paul's the King of New York!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 22, 2014, 04:40:45 PM
fairly scattershot article with Brolin

Josh Brolin Lends Clarity in Inherent Vice
 (http://www.dailynews.com/arts-and-entertainment/20140922/josh-brolin-lends-clarity-in-inherent-vice)



edit: International Release dates for IV

(http://33.media.tumblr.com/9743bce60173467a58cc752b6f718f78/tumblr_nc7tac5Uf51tf5wtuo1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 23, 2014, 01:19:12 AM
were gettin' close!!

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/p526x296/1972547_624255797693871_2741876095428058764_n.jpg?oh=f8cdbad3dbfa10c265acbd4e623e80bd&oe=5489AEB8&__gda__=1422447215_ccb06add9ae3e0e30b178a9ee909f34d)


in retrospect, I feel like the marketing campaign for the Master was such because he wanted to defuse the myths proclaiming the film was about Scientology. He has usually kept to the classic Scorsese/Cassavetes adage of protecting the film "with your life"
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on September 23, 2014, 01:32:26 AM
Benicio Del Toro wearing a Seattle Supersonics hat is the image I never knew I needed to make my life complete.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 23, 2014, 01:45:18 AM
If you look deep into his eyes you can imagine what he'll look like at 60.

He even got a trim to look (somewhat) presentable for the festival.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 24, 2014, 06:50:44 PM
(http://oi60.tinypic.com/30ml2tl.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 25, 2014, 04:25:43 AM
Freddie and Doris all growed up!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on September 25, 2014, 01:39:00 PM
Cigs and Red Vines confirm trailer is an actual thing that lasts an actual length of time and should be arriving "today or in the next couple of days"
https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/515199185155809280 (https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/515199185155809280)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on September 25, 2014, 01:50:30 PM
tomorrow works best for me
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 25, 2014, 01:51:54 PM
http://www.albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

Interesting.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on September 26, 2014, 07:39:10 AM
Pynchon’s Cameo, and Other Surrealities (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/28/movies/paul-thomas-anderson-films-inherent-vice.html?_r=0)
Paul Thomas Anderson Films ‘Inherent Vice’

NYT
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 26, 2014, 08:17:40 AM
^^^
Great first interview with PTA for Vice by NYTimes.

Favorite bit:

After all, Mr. Pynchon’s novels have a reputation for difficulty, but they are jam-packed with lowbrow references and gags, dirty jokes, goofy song lyrics, shameless puns, ludicrous anagrams and absurd acronyms. Mr. Anderson said he tried to cram as many jokes onto the screen as Mr. Pynchon squeezed onto the page.

“I thought,” Mr. Anderson explained, “What’s something I’ve seen that can get close to that amount of great visual information and all these things going on in the frame?”

“ ‘Police Squad!’ and ‘Top Secret!’ are what I clued into,” he said, referring to collaborations by the slapstick maestros David and Jerry Zucker. “We tried hard to imitate or rip off the Zucker brothers’ style of gags so the film can feel like the book feels: just packed with stuff. And fun.”

Mostly, Mr. Anderson relied heavily on his actors’ comedy chops. Mr. Brolin noted that they initially considered simplifying the colorful Los Angeles police detective Bigfoot. “On most movies, you play with different levels and there’s a foundation and a ceiling,” he said. “Here, there was no ceiling. It was no holds barred. Paul would say: We want to go Tom and Jerry on all this.”
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 26, 2014, 08:28:03 AM
Today has to be trailer day. It just has to be, right? ....
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 26, 2014, 09:56:31 AM
If joaquin wakes up and sees his shadow, we'll have to wait 3
more months
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 26, 2014, 10:35:26 AM
Greenwood about the movie:

http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/music/okay-composer-radiohead-s-jonny-greenwood-goes-classical-1.1941569?page=1

 
Quote
A new score for Anderson’s forthcoming Thomas Pynchon adaptation, Inherent Vice, will emerge later this year. “Such a funny film,” he smiles, “yet there’s some strange emotion in it, neither anger or sadness, which I couldn’t really pinpoint. It was a really peculiar tone.”

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 26, 2014, 11:01:30 AM
Another very interesting piece from the article: (SPOILERS?)


____________________________________

"Finishing his first draft without a narrator, he expanded the role of Doc’s “earth-goddess-like” buddy Sortilege from a bit part. Played by Joanna Newsom, she now narrates the movie, which also possesses “an outrageous new ending for the film that deviates significantly from the novel."

Joanna Newsom narrates the movie??
_____
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 26, 2014, 11:27:36 AM
PTA aint even playing with this new one

“... I was just trying to be a surrogate to his compassion and his concern for the American fate,” he said, using an earthy adjective for Mr. Pynchon’s attitude. “Has America really lived up to its potential? Let’s keep hoping.”

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 26, 2014, 11:31:19 AM
I know people are making a big deal of the slapstick aspect, but I think it's a pretty natural progression from PDL, TWBB, and The Master, which I genuinely consider 3 of the funniest/darkly silly movies of all time.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: convalescent_k on September 27, 2014, 08:23:43 PM
Quote
Despite having held a press screening in 35mm, PTA has not yet decided on whether to present #InherentVice on film or DCP.

https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/516032893165268993 (https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/516032893165268993)


And also,

Quote
Hints from Kent Jones at #GoneGirl's premiere last night that the trailer for #InherentVice might drop after its premiere next Saturday.

https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/516032332089004032 (https://twitter.com/cigsandredvines/status/516032332089004032)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 28, 2014, 12:21:49 AM
i dont understand why they wont even release a poster
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 28, 2014, 12:38:25 AM
They want to load it up with accolades and stars first.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on September 28, 2014, 10:05:30 AM
*****
"Best Trailer I've never seen!"
-Xixax
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: 03 on September 28, 2014, 10:34:53 AM
the trailer will only be released as a special feature on the two disc dvd. which will be released six months after the first dvd.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 28, 2014, 11:44:29 AM
The trailer is here:

(http://www.tagzzy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/great-sunset-view-from-the-airstream-trailer-with-wooden-patio-outside-kitchen-and-vegetables-by-the-beach-915x610.jpg)

You have to go to IT, that's the only way to experience the film before it opens
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 28, 2014, 11:51:36 AM
Sous les pavés, le trailer.

Under the paving-stones, the trailer.

Variation of Sous les pavés, la plage/ Under the paving-stones, the beach (EDIT : Yeah, not the bitch), a graffito during May 68 in France, which is Inherent Vice's epigraph.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on September 28, 2014, 11:57:18 AM
Pretty sure la plage=the beach, but spoken with a French Accent.... I can see the confusion.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 28, 2014, 12:00:40 PM
Wow, I guess I say the bitch instead of beach all the time, so I wrote it this way, yes.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: mogwai on September 28, 2014, 01:57:20 PM
It's been announced today via Paul's publicist that there will be no trailer as Paul wishes the movie to flop.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 29, 2014, 12:49:16 PM
Nothing new, but another reaction:


Quote
My buddy said this was unexpected in the best possible way, more of a cohesive "movie movie" than say The Master (more of a Boogie Nights), three focused acts and all about the characters. Joaquin was great and Jonnys score was different, like artsy 70s sounding. That's all I asked him about.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on September 29, 2014, 06:22:08 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ByvO0yIIEAE8hpy.png)


https://youtube.com/watch?v=wmK4uS8HaA8

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/inherentvice/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Sleepless on September 29, 2014, 06:44:05 PM
A good day to check in on Xixax. That helped kick the depression. I laughed. PDL meets BN?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on September 29, 2014, 06:53:29 PM
So happy. The trailer is pure joy, too. Wow. Worth the wait.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: N on September 29, 2014, 07:00:50 PM
So happy right now.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 29, 2014, 07:06:54 PM
Okay, I didn't have trailer fever, and I wasn't expecting anything in particular, but this is the best possible outcome I could imagine. It does feel like an explosion of cinematic joy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 29, 2014, 07:08:47 PM
Freddie's probably mid heart attack right now.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 29, 2014, 07:09:42 PM
PDL meets BN?

Yeah, lots of Boogie Nights in there, surprisingly. The gun content seems strangely similar... that out of control somewhat slapsticky menace feeling.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Stefen on September 29, 2014, 07:15:39 PM
it looks ok.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on September 29, 2014, 07:17:19 PM
Who else is gonna watch this 8 more times in a row?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 29, 2014, 07:29:43 PM
Who else is gonna watch this 8 more times in a row?
I watched it twice. Now I'm gonna wait till Saturday.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on September 29, 2014, 07:34:38 PM
There is no NYFF 52 in my future, so I'm going to do my best to not watch any more trailers until the movie comes out. It's tough, but I've done it for a few flicks as of late, and it's turned out to be quite rewarding when you're not constantly waiting for certain moments to occur in context.

....orrrrr maybe I'll just watch everything clip I can. yeah. I think that's more in line with reality.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 29, 2014, 07:36:56 PM
Good but not tremendous trailer. Looks really fun, Joaquin appears to be a perfect Doc.
I'm happy it's here.

Does anyone wanna comment on the cinematography? I think I asked the same question when the first images were released but now the question is a bit more valid, heh.



Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 29, 2014, 07:39:04 PM
I can die now........ okay maybe after december.


I love how happy it feels! 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ©brad on September 29, 2014, 07:44:18 PM
It definitely feels happy! Love the colors too. As PTA trailers go it's a little underwhelming. Feels more studio-made but I can't imagine PTA didn't have his hands all over it.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Axolotl on September 29, 2014, 07:48:11 PM
More in tune with the theatrical trailer for the Master(which i didn't think was good and misrepresented the movie). I can't imagine PTA not wanting to preserve some of the stuff that's in this trailer.

Looks fun though and does its job of selling the movie to the public.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 29, 2014, 07:52:02 PM
As far as cinematography, it just looks classic vintage PTA/Elswit, with a lot of "master" tight close ups. Shit is sexy as usual.

Bigfoot asking for pancakes cracked me the fuck up! lol keep repeating that part..
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on September 29, 2014, 08:35:00 PM
love it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Tictacbk on September 29, 2014, 08:41:02 PM
Huzzah!  Torn between watching it over and over, and never watching again.  Exciting stuff.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pedro on September 29, 2014, 09:00:20 PM
I watched it over and over. 

Whenever I see new PTA stuff, there's an adjustment period.  It feels strange to see anything at all from the man, and the first viewing is rather passive.  Nothing really registers.  Then I get to watch it again and actually experience it.  The same thing happens when I actually see his films.  There's too much shit floating around in my head for me to really experience it the first time.  Kind of a shame, but it requires me to watch the films multiple times and really dig deep.

Anyhow, I think this is likely a studio product.  Nothing exceptional, but it is enjoyable.  It shows some of the zaniness, but I bet the wildest stuff is too risque to include/spoil in the trailer. 

Brolin ordering pancakes is hilarious.  Joaquin reacting to the photo is excellent.  Martin Short looks insane.  PTA is using pornstars again.  Color me excited.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 29, 2014, 09:59:04 PM
Yep, FilmStage (https://twitter.com/thefilmstage/status/516749977352433664) uncovered the trailer house that made this. Imagine PTA definitely had approval over it (and could only include the stuff he was okay with showing) but he didn't edit it himself like usual. Imagine he had to bend a little for WB. Trailer def seems a little more disjointed and scattershot than usual but maybe that's also partially the film.

Also worth noting that Leslie Jones edited this, her 3rd collabo after PDL and Master.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on September 29, 2014, 10:08:57 PM
This will be a :crazyeyes: time at the movies! Joaq IS Doc

Shoulda snuck in Cheadle's VO at the end "Coming just in time for the Christmas."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: tpfkabi on September 29, 2014, 10:42:57 PM
Yeah, it doesn't quite feel like something PT would cut, so that makes sense.
The last song doesn't feel like his type either, but it may be from the book.
Not sure I will be crazy about that narration. I take it this was Joanna Samberg?
Though it kinda sounded like the lady in the trailer that was definitely not Newsome.

Hope Paul makes a trailer or clips like in the past.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 29, 2014, 10:57:37 PM
take it this was Joanna Samberg?
Though it kinda sounded like the lady in the trailer that was definitely not Newsome.
It's definitely Newsom narrating this trailer.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on September 29, 2014, 10:58:38 PM
Waited over 2 years to see this come to fruition. Feels like this
http://www.amk.cool/images/discussion/original/85cf924b69e6a71b7374c4d8067c89a58da9cc64.jpg

Anyway, Robert Elswit's work by viewing the trailer is phenomenal.  More Productions should really let him experiment like PTA does. Mihai's tight shots from The master may have influenced some scenes with the 1.85 ratio but Elswit's eye is simply more experienced. Some of the interior scenes reminded me of the beach house from The Long Goodbye. The graininess in those shots are no doubt from 1970's cameras and lenses. Such a cool technical look.  Lol how PTA  is clearly a friend of Belladonna's (she directs porn now. I think that's her in the trailer at one point) . He still likes the culture of porn he explored in the Boogie Nights days and the cross over actors.

Trailer was fun. PTA wants it to be as goofy as possible but I do hope we get some type of trailer directly from him.

"I'm not joking about the pancakes," he confirms. "Many, many pancakes. By the end of the day, you're shaking so much because you've eaten so many pancakes, you know you're going to be diabetic in the next 24 hours."  - Brolin .  I should of known pancakes would be in the trailer!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: DiamondX on September 30, 2014, 12:02:58 AM
Every fucking frame in this thing is blissful.

The trailers making it seem like an over the top slap-stick sort of comedy.

Very excited.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on September 30, 2014, 01:34:05 AM
This thing isn't cut well, especially the opening use of voiceover where they try and inter-cut what looks like the opening scene (handheld close ups?) with all the other stuff. The music choices FOR THIS TRAILER are also pretty dull. The movie will be different, I'm sure, and it looks funny as hell, but I'll be avoiding the promotion as it feels like a desperate attempt by the studio to force this one into the mainstream. This is the first PTA trailer that doesn't feel at all like a PTA trailer. Call me underwhelmed. It's an average trailer and the poster is horrible.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Tictacbk on September 30, 2014, 01:51:33 AM
Hey stop being so negative. There's new footage of a PT Anderson film for god's sake!  And only 2 years after his last one!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: samsong on September 30, 2014, 02:04:35 AM
fucking delightful trailer.  it made me laugh several times.  (MOTO PANUCAYKU.  HAI. HAI. HAI.)  presents something completely approachable and appealing for the layman while hinting at the outright zaniness that's in store. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Mel on September 30, 2014, 02:11:22 AM
Call me a troll, but this trailer feels a lot like Wes Anderson with Owen Wilson, lots of center framing (still different lenses are used) and slapstick. This could be fun.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on September 30, 2014, 02:23:08 AM
It feels like a desperate attempt by the studio to force this one into the mainstream. This is the first PTA trailer that doesn't feel at all like a PTA trailer. Call me underwhelmed. It's an average trailer and the poster is horrible.

PTA cuts beautiful trailers that we all love and the public at large has no idea what to do with. As much as I love them and respect him for trying to push boundaries in that area, I think that they are partially responsible for his films underperforming. I have no doubt that this is going to be a great movie, but I'm really hoping that it is also the big-dick hit he needs at this point to keep on making unique films with decent budgets. Letting the marketers do the marketing is a smart move. The peeps at Aspect Ratio know what they are doing; it's up to them and WB to get asses in the seats. Their trailer is joyous and wild and gets me so motherfucking pumped for this thing. Or as my girlfriend put it: "It looks like the movie American Hustle should have been."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Lottery on September 30, 2014, 02:42:29 AM
What's wrong with making a bit of dough though really, Paul's got like 12 kids to feed.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Drenk on September 30, 2014, 04:11:30 AM
The trailer wants to be fun and it is. That's fine! I love it. I don't want to see all the layers.

Oh, the legs on the poster are doing a V. Like Pynchon's first novel. You find V2 in Gravity's Rainbow. V everywhere. Or maybe legs just do V.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Find Your Magali on September 30, 2014, 09:09:23 AM
It feels like a desperate attempt by the studio to force this one into the mainstream. This is the first PTA trailer that doesn't feel at all like a PTA trailer. Call me underwhelmed. It's an average trailer and the poster is horrible.

PTA cuts beautiful trailers that we all love and the public at large has no idea what to do with. As much as I love them and respect him for trying to push boundaries in that area, I think that they are partially responsible for his films underperforming. I have no doubt that this is going to be a great movie, but I'm really hoping that it is also the big-dick hit he needs at this point to keep on making unique films with decent budgets. Letting the marketers do the marketing is a smart move. The peeps at Aspect Ratio know what they are doing; it's up to them and WB to get asses in the seats. Their trailer is joyous and wild and gets me so motherfucking pumped for this thing. Or as my girlfriend put it: "It looks like the movie American Hustle should have been."

I too hope this films makes boatloads of money and helps to green-light figure PTA movies. And, in general, I agree that you let the studios/marketers do their jobs. But they are not infallible. And there is a danger of backlash if what is presented by the trailer veers too far from the actual tone/content of the film.

WB, remember, gave us a trailer for a movie that appeared to be "Godzilla vs. Bryan Cranston"

Did it get people into the seats? Yes.  And that's good. But making a trailer too misleading is dangerous ground to tread.

I see this trailer and I think this is The Long Goodbye meets The Big Lebowski, by way of Cheech and Chong.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: ©brad on September 30, 2014, 09:13:53 AM
PTA cuts beautiful trailers that we all love and the public at large has no idea what to do with.

Boogie Nights, CWBB and hell even Magnolia had pretty mainstream trailers that any mouth breather could understand.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on September 30, 2014, 11:37:04 AM
The music choices FOR THIS TRAILER are also pretty dull.

That overlaid sting is definitely a bit awkward.

The Sam Cooke is an oddly obvious choice, like it was sitting at the top of the pile, yet still feels random... it kinda works, though. Reminded me slightly of God Only Knows in BN.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: I am Schmi on September 30, 2014, 12:39:03 PM
Oh come on guys! I for one think this is possibly the best modern trailer I have ever seen produced. It's fantastic, and reminiscent of trailers from the 60s and 70s. It was funny too!

I'm really grateful that Warner Brothers did not go their traditional route of inserting terrible rap/hip hop songs in a period piece too!

I feel like a lot of hate this trailer is getting is from people who are mostly upset about the way Warner Bros has gone about advertising, with a tinge of the hipster attitude of hating on the mainstream. :P

Chin up, this was amazing!  :yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on September 30, 2014, 12:40:08 PM
PTA cuts beautiful trailers that we all love and the public at large has no idea what to do with.

Boogie Nights, CWBB and hell even Magnolia had pretty mainstream trailers that any mouth breather could understand.

"BUT IN 1980....THE PARTY WAS OVERRR"
I don't think he cut the Boogie Nights trailer, that feels like a marketing department all the way. Its an interesting example bc it didn't really get into the darkness or the sadness at all. It totally glosses over the tragic elements and makes it look pretty much like a fun romp from beginning to end, even when its cutting to scenes like Jack stomping that guy or Rahad shooting up the place. And it was a huge hit, maybe the only one he's made that you could really consider a pop culture phenom.

"Anderson felt New Line's marketing on his last movie, "Boogie Nights," a thrilling film set in the porno world of the 70's, was not all that it might have been, and "Magnolia" is not an easy movie to sell. "This is their trailer," he spits. As Anderson jumps up and down and swears (and Tichenor smiles), the voice-over begins: "You can spend your whole life waiting for the truth. Today, for nine people, the wait is over. From Paul Thomas Anderson, the director of -" Anderson shrieks, "Don't say my name!" and throws himself onto the couch. He has cut together his own trailer -- less Cruise, better music, no pretentious narration -- and he is sending it over to New Line today."

The Magnolia trailer is probably my all-time favorite but its pretty out there. At the end when Mackey says "Was that unclear?" Its either a reference to it being "A P.T. Anderson Picture", or the fact that the trailer is so packed with different stories and images that its almost mocking the idea of trying to break the film down into a 3 minute ad. It really is a work of art unto itself and still gives me chills when I watch it. But most people hate not knowing exactly what a movie is about before they see it, especially complex 3-hour dramas. We'll never know if using New Line's version would have made a difference at the box office, but they probably would have pushed the movie harder in middle America if there had been more Cruise etc.

And the final CMBB trailer is pretty straight-forward, but that first teaser was totally batshit bananas.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Frederico Fellini on September 30, 2014, 01:08:02 PM
Everyone knows the CMBB and MASTURR teaser trailers are the GOAT teaser trailers...

IV tráiler 9.5/10, could've used some frozen bananas.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jumjum on September 30, 2014, 01:30:57 PM
Does anyone know the name of the boomshakalaka song?
That's a great trailer song! Boomshakalaka Boom!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on September 30, 2014, 01:36:48 PM
i don't give a fuck who cuts the trailer, i'm just hyped that a new p.t. flick is coming out!!! :yabbse-grin: :yabbse-grin: :yabbse-grin:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 30, 2014, 01:41:09 PM
Does anyone know the name of the boomshakalaka song?
That's a great trailer song! Boomshakalaka Boom!

Sly and the family Stone's "I Want to Take You Higher" and Sam Cooke's "Wonderful World" play in the background.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/videos/watch-the-smoky-mysterious-new-trailer-for-inherent-vice-20140930#ixzz3EpGMJKlf
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on September 30, 2014, 01:53:03 PM
Biopics and Noir Dominate a Festival - Stephen Holden, NYTimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/movies/at-new-york-film-festival-history-and-detectives.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/movies/at-new-york-film-festival-history-and-detectives.html?_r=0)

With three high-profile mysteries — “Inherent Vice,” “Gone Girl” and “Maps to the Stars” — it might seem as though film noir was the dominant flavor of this year’s New York Film Festival. But another theme runs through four selections: artist biographies. Call it a continental face-off between North America and Europe.

Starting this week, the festival brings biopics of the English Romantic painter J. M. W. Turner, the French couturier Yves Saint Laurent, the 18th-century German poet Friedrich Schiller, and the Italian filmmaker Pier Paolo Pasolini. In each instance, a rebellious artistic sensibility coincides with transgressive personal behavior to wreak emotional havoc.

That said, there is nothing in the festival remotely like “Inherent Vice,” Paul Thomas Anderson’s uproarious screen adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s 2009 novel. The festival’s official centerpiece, this comic noir-to-end-all-noirs is set in 1970, and is suffused with the paranoia of the post-Charles Manson era when the hippie dream had entered its terminal phase and American culture seemed adrift in a purple haze.

Joaquin Phoenix portrays Doc Sportello, a lackadaisical private investigator combing the underbelly of Los Angeles and its environs for two missing persons, one of them his ex-girlfriend Shasta (Katherine Waterston). Josh Brolin, in a cartoonish flattop haircut, portrays Bigfoot Bjornsen, a corrupt, bullying police officer with a hilarious oral fixation. And Martin Short has a small, juicy turn as a beady-eyed druggy dentist. Reese Witherspoon, Benicio Del Toro, Owen Wilson and Jena Malone also pop into view. Behind it all lurks the menace of a mysterious, perhaps imaginary crime cartel known as the Golden Fang.

The movie creates a surreal vision of a bygone Southern California dense with smog and reeking of marijuana, when every street seemed to have its own massage parlor. The atmosphere is so steeped in vintage psychedelia that it is impossible to distinguish reality from fantasy; it could all be a dream. The best approach to “Inherent Vice” is not to look for profundity but to lie back, inhale imaginary clouds of secondhand pot smoke, and go with the flow of a yarn so amusingly convoluted it makes “The Big Sleep” feel like children’s bedtime reading.

But while “Inherent Vice,” is one of the high points, the honor of the week’s best film belongs to Mike Leigh’s “Mr. Turner.” Its artistic title character, who describes himself as a “gargoyle,” is magnificently embodied by Timothy Spall. A Caliban-like grotesque who expresses himself in grunts and snorts and has a cavalier attitude toward women, Turner is so obsessed with capturing atmospheric detail that as part of his research, he lashes himself to the mast of a ship during a blizzard.

Mr. Leigh’s visual palette, which has tended toward artfully drab kitchen-sink realism, here explodes into grimy color in cinematography by Dick Pope that evokes the murky hues and textures of Turner canvases. The movie’s procession of gnarly faces and hunched postures suggests a gallery of Dickensian caricatures drawn by Hogarth.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: noyes on September 30, 2014, 03:03:54 PM
I know I shouldn't have spent $75 to watch this on Saturday, and I haven't, but I'm starting to think that maybe I should have... haha.
I can wait though. Fantastic trailer. Will certainly do its job and stay in the minds of people who don't even know who PTA is and just think it seems like a crazy wild ride with a great cast (and thanks to the great use of music in the trailer - Sam Cooke especially). As far as the fans go, it's great to see a harkening back to the comedic values of Boogie Nights and PDL, but of course this is something else entirely, as always. Can't wait.

Maybe he'll show some more clips this Sunday, or talk about some of the influences that went into it. Hope so.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on September 30, 2014, 03:28:30 PM
Is there anyone in NYC dying to see VICE that doesn't have tickets?

LMK, I might have some extras (for face value).
Wilder's got 'em.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: wilder on September 30, 2014, 03:42:07 PM
YES (please)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Pozer on September 30, 2014, 04:09:58 PM
modge (and now wilder!), cant wait to toke on your guyses secondhand smoke from the weekend.

a Sunday recap works best for me, fyi
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: jenkins on September 30, 2014, 04:30:27 PM
since all you're doing is imagining, i recommend snorting their vibes out of their assholes

up to you, tho
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on September 30, 2014, 05:18:16 PM
I've never heard jenkins<3 be so crass...


This party is Mcdonald's!!!







...I'm Lovin' It
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on September 30, 2014, 05:23:54 PM
The music choices FOR THIS TRAILER are also pretty dull.

WHAT?! that's the best part of the trailer!
well mostly the fact that I've never particularly FELT that Sam Cooke song until I saw it in some context like this.
Fuck it. Enjoyable musical choices.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: JG on September 30, 2014, 08:14:49 PM
excited to be going both saturday and sunday, see you there!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on September 30, 2014, 11:36:11 PM
Pay for my ticket there or shut up. :yabbse-grin:

The trailer has the front spot of youtube now...  A first for a PTA movie. I remember reading something up on vines & cigs that mentioned how PTA thought "The Dark Night" was the top example of artistic vision and mainstream appeal.. I'm paraphrasing. Thinking he kept this in mind while making the movie and letting WB promote it the regular route. After Boogie Nights was such a success (as it damn should be) I can't help but think he wants that Hollywood momentum affect again to make whatever he wants next. He kinda did that with The Master. Hope the next one is experimental as fvck. Altman style influence. lol that'd be great. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on October 01, 2014, 03:58:03 PM
I love how Paul put a legendary pornstar in the IV movie mix, nice Boogie Nights connection and classic Paul, not giving a fuck. Good to see Belladonna doing her thing in this...and yes, i'm a pervert...

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Kellen on October 02, 2014, 04:09:00 PM
Since Paul didn't do this trailer, does that mean we won't be seeing those little 30 snippet/teasers like Paul did with TWBB and The Master back in the day...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on October 02, 2014, 04:38:25 PM
I find that highly unlikely
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Larry on October 02, 2014, 06:25:12 PM
i think there will be some form of trailer cut by Paul before it gets a wide release. the twitter/facebook/website just launched, so there is lots to come.

I am really excited for the press/interviews for this film. There should be some great updates this weekend

ps- this is silly, but kind of funny

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/997c793b8f/inherent-vice-trailer-with-terrible-music (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/997c793b8f/inherent-vice-trailer-with-terrible-music)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: velociraptor on October 02, 2014, 06:41:42 PM
i think there will be some form of trailer cut by Paul before it gets a wide release. the twitter/facebook/website just launched, so there is lots to come.

I am really excited for the press/interviews for this film. There should be some great updates this weekend

ps- this is silly, but kind of funny

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/997c793b8f/inherent-vice-trailer-with-terrible-music (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/997c793b8f/inherent-vice-trailer-with-terrible-music)
This is wonderful.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: P Heat on October 02, 2014, 09:42:52 PM
Anyone else wondering why they didn't use no score music from Greenwood at all in the trailer?? There's talk that the clapping rhythm in the beginning is Greenwood's work but I'm not sure.   Also, hope the Sam Cooke song isn't actually used in the film. It's cheesy, but that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SeanMalloy on October 03, 2014, 12:22:59 AM
I put the clap beat connection together yesterday!

Watch the NYFF trailer then watch IV's trailer. It's the same music and must mean it's a Greenwood composition!

If I'm correct I'm very excited to see that music over some kind of ridiculous dolly track move.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on October 03, 2014, 12:43:26 AM
You're all wrong. That clap track was lifted from 'Ain't Them Bodies Saints'
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: polkablues on October 03, 2014, 01:10:53 AM
Crap, I can't keep track of this clap track claptrap.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: SeanMalloy on October 03, 2014, 07:50:49 AM
Only one way to find out!
See you at Alice Tully Hall tomorrow to confirm my suspicions.
Where did the NYFF get their trailer music?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on October 03, 2014, 09:37:15 AM
99% sure it's not Greenwood. NYFF basically does the same trailer every year with slightly different rhythmic music.

51st:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msko8dyx5Hs

50th:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBk4HByYVAc

Etc.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: modage on October 04, 2014, 09:01:04 AM
Tonight I will see "Inherent Vice" three times.

If the pattern of his last three movies follows, it will be something like this (on a highly accelerated timeline.)

The first I will spend reconciling with what it is not. Not like his other films, not like I expected, etc.
The second I will take on it's own terms. This is where I start to realize what it IS and appreciate that.
The third is a wild card. It's either the one where I've oushed it too far and needed a break or the one where everything snaps into place and it becomes a pure joy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: max from fearless on October 04, 2014, 11:56:21 AM
The gangs all there....
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: mogwai on October 04, 2014, 11:59:23 AM
Martin Short was recently on Kevin & Bean show, he could've squeezed the movie title in just to get some attention, yo.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Marty McSuperfly on October 04, 2014, 12:32:35 PM
The first review is in. The Telegraph in the UK gives Inherent Vice five stars: "What’s clear from a bleary initial encounter, though, is that the film is stupendous: as antic as Boogie Nights and Punch-Drunk Love, but with The Master and There Will Be Blood’s uncanny feel for the swell and ebb of history."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreviews/11131193/Inherent-Vice-review-blissed-out-bamboozlement.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on October 04, 2014, 02:37:14 PM
SOME SPOILERS (a few quirky delights are spoiled)


Biopics and Noir Dominate a Festival
At New York Film Festival, History and Detectives
By STEPHEN HOLDEN; NY Times
SEPTEMBER 29, 2014

With three high-profile mysteries — “Inherent Vice,” “Gone Girl” and “Maps to the Stars” — it might seem as though film noir was the dominant flavor of this year’s New York Film Festival. But another theme runs through four selections: artist biographies. Call it a continental face-off between North America and Europe.

Starting this week, the festival brings biopics of the English Romantic painter J. M. W. Turner, the French couturier Yves Saint Laurent, the 18th-century German poet Friedrich Schiller, and the Italian filmmaker Pier Paolo Pasolini. In each instance, a rebellious artistic sensibility coincides with transgressive personal behavior to wreak emotional havoc.

That said, there is nothing in the festival remotely like “Inherent Vice,” Paul Thomas Anderson’s uproarious screen adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s 2009 novel. The festival’s official centerpiece, this comic noir-to-end-all-noirs is set in 1970, and is suffused with the paranoia of the post-Charles Manson era when the hippie dream had entered its terminal phase and American culture seemed adrift in a purple haze.

Joaquin Phoenix portrays Doc Sportello, a lackadaisical private investigator combing the underbelly of Los Angeles and its environs for two missing persons, one of them his ex-girlfriend Shasta (Katherine Waterston). Josh Brolin, in a cartoonish flattop haircut, portrays Bigfoot Bjornsen, a corrupt, bullying police officer with a hilarious oral fixation. And Martin Short has a small, juicy turn as a beady-eyed druggy dentist. Reese Witherspoon, Benicio Del Toro, Owen Wilson and Jena Malone also pop into view. Behind it all lurks the menace of a mysterious, perhaps imaginary crime cartel known as the Golden Fang.

The movie creates a surreal vision of a bygone Southern California dense with smog and reeking of marijuana, when every street seemed to have its own massage parlor. The atmosphere is so steeped in vintage psychedelia that it is impossible to distinguish reality from fantasy; it could all be a dream. The best approach to “Inherent Vice” is not to look for profundity but to lie back, inhale imaginary clouds of secondhand pot smoke, and go with the flow of a yarn so amusingly convoluted it makes “The Big Sleep” feel like children’s bedtime reading.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: MacGuffin on October 04, 2014, 03:45:40 PM
SPOILERS

What We Learned About Paul Thomas Anderson's 'Inherent Vice' at the New York Film Festival
By Greg Cwik | Indiewire

Thomas Pynchon, the most heralded and iconic of the American post-modernists, has long been considered an unfilmmable novelist. His books are long, circuitous, densely-plotted and replete with allusions to physics, history, philosophy, culture, math, and classic literature, all penned in labyrinthine prose as playful as it is ponderous. But Paul Thomas Anderson ("There Will Be Blood," "The Master") attempts to grapple with the rarefied writer in his cinematic adaptation of Pynchon's "Inherent Vice," which screens as the Centerpiece of the New York Film Festival's main slate tonight.

A pot-steeped mystery with noirish leanings and (neon) shades of the Coen Brothers' "The Big Lebowski," the film depicts a paranoid stoner private eye named Doc (Joaquin Phoenix), who may or may not be entwined in a murder mystery.

Besides Phoenix (who was nominated for an Oscar for his searing work in Anderson's "The Master"), the vast cast includes Josh Brolin, Benicio Del Toro, Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Katherine Waterson, Jena Malone, Maya Rudolph and Martin Short.

After the Press and Industry screening in the Walter Reade theater this morning, the Film Society of Lincoln Center's Kent Jones moderated a panel discussion with the film's intimidatingly deep cast, and, of course, Anderson himself. Here's what we learned.


People love Martin Short

Martin Short, who plays a coked-out dentist-cum-syndicate-member clad in a deep, nearly ultra-violet suit, received the biggest applause of the 10-person cast. Sitting in the seat furthest from moderator Kent Jones, Short was the only cast member who wore a suit (Phoenix wore black jeans and a hoodie -- never change, Joaquin). One member of the press stood up and professed his love for Short, which spurred more applause from the audience, as well as a call of "about time!" When asked if anyone had actually read Pynchon's novel, some cast members peevishly held up hands; Short tersely stated, "I had my assistant read it to me. Same thing."

The shoot was loose and chaotic...maybe

Anderson faithfully adapted the spirit and tone of Pynchon's novel, but his brilliance, according to Joanna Newsom (who voices the film's narrator, whom Anderson described as Doc's always-right Gal Pal), comes from his "receptiveness to change." Newsom's first scene in the film, she said, was actually changed on the spot. Anderson decided to sit Newsom down in front of some jugglers at the end of a day's shoot. He asked the jugglers to stay put and they apparently complied.

Del Toro likened Anderson's directorial style to dancing, and Pieterse, who plays the drug-using daughter of a powerful syndicate representative, said that her scenes with Short could go on all day. She would banter with Short, trying out different ways of slamming car doors or saying lines while Anderson kept filming. (Impressive, given that "Inherent Vice" was shot on 35mm, not digital.)

Wilson described the shoot as "loose and chaotic," a sentiment echoed by several cast members, including Short and Pieterse. "Chaos comes down to something so simple, it's beautiful," Pieterse said.

However, Malone dissented with Short and Wilson, claiming that, with regards to her part, the focus on story and narrative and words was a "very structured process...chaos comes from a grounded logical base. You have to know where you're spinning from." Rudolph, Anderson's wife, has a minute role as Doc's assistant and she says that she was allowed to "improv a line about an afro, or something."


Actors love Paul Thomas Anderson

When asked about the film, almost every actor responded with fawning praise for Anderson. Michael Kenneth Williams mentioned that he's best known for his television work (ever heard of "The Wire?"), so he was concerned going into his audition and going on 48 hours without sleep. He "thought Paul hated [him.]" ("I did hate you," Anderson retorted.) Williams was shocked to learn that Anderson wanted to sit down with the performers and "talk," given how fast-paced things are on a TV set.

Anderson had faith in his actors, allowing Phoenix and Wilson to recite their sharp, rhythmic dialog in single takes; using two-shots and slow, subtle pushes, Anderson felt that the less editing he had to do, the better.

Since the cast was so large (a return to Anderson's earlier ensemble style), most performers were only around for a day or two, so "I had to spend all day with this guy," Anderson snarkily said, pointing to a stoic Phoenix.

Anderson doesn't care if the film is confusing

Howard Hawkes' classic adaptation of Raymond Chandler's "The Big Sleep" is notorious for its utter lack of resolution. Legend goes that Hawkes and William Faulkner (who contributed some whip-smart dialog) phoned Chandler one night to ask who the murderer in the story was. "I don't know," was Chandler's response.

"'The Big Sleep' is impossible to follow, but it doesn't matter," Anderson said. "You just want to keep watching it, seeing where it goes." That's what he wanted from "Inherent Vice."

Anderson loves "fart and poop jokes"

"Literary is a bad word," Anderson quipped while talking about Pynchon's ability to mingle profundity with immature humor. (The film is replete with dick and vagina jokes -- and features "graphic nudity," according to the prudish MPAA.)

Hong Chau read the book

Chau, who watched myriad films from the '50s to the Summer of Love in preparation for her role as Jade, read "Inherent Vice" before auditioning for her role (hers was one of the few classic auditions, as she didn't know Anderson previously). When asked about the book, she began to recite her favorite passages. Hopefully we'll see a lot more of Chau in Andersons future endeavors -- she has a sharp sense of comedic timing.


Joaquin Phoenix hates press conferences

By far the most notable occurrence, or rather nonoccurence of the 30-minute conference was Phoenix's silence. The actor is known for his reluctance to do interviews and press conferences -- last year, during the conference for "The Immigrant," Phoenix slumped into his seat, pushed a pair of sunglasses up the bridge of his nose and stared vacantly. Later, he was seen kicking a lamp post across the street (seriously, that happened -- I saw it).

This year, Phoenix gave the press the silent treatment. He literally said nothing the whole time. It's fine if you don't wanna talk about your art in depth -- last year John Goodman responded to every question during the "Inside Llewyn Davis" conference with a self-deprecating joke and it was glorious. But Phoenix's refusal to say anything was a little disappointing, especially since Anderson had to restrain himself from "geeking out" over tech questions.If Phoenix was restraining himself, he did it with exceeding persistence. Maybe some blame should fall on the press for asking pretty lame questions, or with the other actors for sharing anecdotes about how much they love Anderson. Maybe having eleven people on stage was a bit unwise, more of a publicity stunt since it clearly wasn't conducive to conversation, who knows. Phoenix, one of the most gifted and fervid actors of this or any generation, is a critical favorite, and everyone would love to pick his brain. Maybe next New York Film Festival he'll let us.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 04, 2014, 04:46:06 PM
That article looks a bit spoiler-ridden too. Should we post those in the other thread?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE
Post by: Reelist on October 04, 2014, 04:47:25 PM
Yes
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 04, 2014, 06:27:30 PM
https://www.facebook.com/NYFilmFest/photos/pcb.795567750500998/795567127167727/?type=1&theater
 (https://www.facebook.com/NYFilmFest/photos/pcb.795567750500998/795567127167727/?type=1&theater)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/65073_795567127167727_4988975871548899363_n.jpg?oh=ed87078cecaffdd3458778f687f21582&oe=54AEBBD6&__gda__=1422317483_21f13b9dd12a3f8028233cca27bab937)

can we get video for the press conference somewhere? lol
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on October 04, 2014, 08:05:37 PM

QUIRKY DELIGHT MINOR SPOILER.




watch?v=xHdnLJ6fnE4

Cool. But I wonder if Jonny G will be eligble for an Oscar nom this time round.
Woah, right, right sorry. I didn't even think that over properly. Was more concerned about Jonny.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/10/04/inherent_vice_features_new_radiohead_song_spooks_jonny_greenwood_s_contributions.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on October 04, 2014, 08:26:08 PM
I know that there are varying degrees of sensitivity involved with regards to what constitutes a spoiler and what doesn't. Everyone is different. In my view, Lottery, what you just posted is a spoiler. I'm sure you weren't intending to spoil anything, but you shouldn't show up in a non-spoiler thread and refer to details from the movie that ought to be a delightful surprise. I believe the thread's title was just recently amended to reflect its non-spoiler status, though, so I'm sure this was an honest mistake. Also, I'm not trying to reprimand you or anything; this is just meant as a friendly reminder. It's not a massive spoiler, to be sure, but there are people out there who are trying to "get as close to the bone as possible," to borrow Anderson's words from a 2007 interview (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.ca/2007/11/interview-entertainment-weekly.html):

Quote from:
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: With all this talk about the radical distribution model for the new Radiohead album, Paul, I wondered if what they did might have inspired you to think that maybe you should just put your new movie up on the web and let people pay whatever they want for it... I'm joking. I think.

ANDERSON: God, I mean, it's every person's dream, I suppose, to have ownership. Unfortunately, to make a film this size, it would be impossible to finance myself. I'd have to come up with something that I could do on a smaller scale so that I could do that. Because you don't get pride of ownership when you make a film. You get pride of authorship. And you get paid for it — that's the switch-off. But movies aren't far behind [music] in falling apart — I mean, the business itself. One of the films that I have the fondest memory of seeing is Gallipoli, because I knew absolutely nothing about it. My brother said, ''Let's go see this movie.'' And I said, ''What's it about?'' He said, ''I'm not going to tell you.'' And I hadn't seen the poster, I hadn't seen a trailer or anything, and it was such an amazing experience. [Talking about the Radiohead release] just made me think of it. To be able to just kind of get something as close to the bone as possible, without too much intrusion...

I've read the book, and I'm still trying to remain as spoiler free as possible, because, obviously, the film will offer its own distinct pleasures. At any rate, I also need to do my part and try to resist the temptation to peruse even ostensibly non-spoilery pieces of information/discussion. :yabbse-smiley:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Spoilers)
Post by: martinthewarrior on October 04, 2014, 08:41:33 PM
Gotta say, if the Lottery post is enough to constitute a spoiler for you, it's probably a decent idea to just stay out of Inherent vice threads until you see it? Pretty innocuous, bro.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 04, 2014, 09:03:11 PM
Yeah, I kind of agree. I tend to feel strongly about spoilers... in fact, were I not moderating the board I would probably stay out of both threads right now... but I think I consider Lottery's post a minor spoiler.

Which is, in fairness, still a spoiler. So I'm going to change this topic's title once again to reflect that.

Part of me genuinely wants to put the boot down and say this thread needs to remain pristine, but that's probably not realistic or constructive. I'm not sure what else can be said about the film that does not include shades of minor spoilage. So if you want to avoid all spoilers, I would avoid both threads.

It could change (asking what other admins think), but I think this is what we're doing now... this thread which can include very minor spoilers, and an all-out spoiler thread.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 05, 2014, 01:18:51 AM
I just read a bit of wilder's review in the spoiler thread. I almost want to quote parts of it here. That review has increased my anticipation for IV probably more than anything else, including the trailer.

Okay screw it, I'll quote something:

(No spoilers in this quote obviously)

Ironic that this is the film of PT’s that has big studio backing behind it — WB is out of their minds. Yeah it has humor, but it’s his least commercial movie by a mile, and I wonder what the fuck is going to happen come day one of its wide release when word of mouth spreads. The trailer is SO OFF — I don’t even know what to relate the movie to as I’ve never seen anything else like it. Long Goodbye this Big Lebowski that — not even close. I’ll say this - the movie makes you feel like PT is the only real filmmaker out there right now making anything new or pushing any boundaries to show you something you haven’t seen before. You realize how rote everything else is in comparison, how many patterns most movies follow even in terms of “art film” style.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on October 05, 2014, 02:45:40 AM
Wilder's post is pretty much the best thing that's been written about this movie yet by a huge margin. Bonus points for no pot puns.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on October 05, 2014, 09:55:12 AM
Wilder's post is pretty much the best thing that's been written about this movie yet by a huge margin. Bonus points for no pot puns.

It's also exactly the sort of thing I was looking for by traipsing into this thread: an unspecific but also highly evocative sense of some of the reactions.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on October 05, 2014, 11:39:18 AM
a BUNCH of reviews are out, very mixed reactions overall which is what I expected and wanted. most people who criticising it are calling at incoherency of the film, emotional detachment and "2D/negatively" portrayed female characters. None of this comes as much of a surprise or means much; critics called TM emotionally detached and its one of the most emotionally immersive films ever imo. the apparently "sexist" portrayal of female characters is just a mix of people being too sensitive and not understanding the fact that this film chronologically is a prequel and prelude to boogie nights, with ptas filmography chronologically commenting on gender and equality, which (SO FAR) culminates with mackey confronting his past to (slightly) overcome his warped as fuck perspective on women in magnolia, barry fuckin up the sexline mattress man shit and the two equals falling in love at the end of PDL. Whatever people complain is incoherence im sure is just bs first time viewing cynical bs

   This is one of the my favourites from what ive read so far, from hitfix. no major spoilers at all:
 http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/review-joaquin-phoenix-dazzles-and-delights-in-the-warm-and-woozy-inherent-vice

this and wilders reaction are getting me hella hyped
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Punch on October 07, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
Here are the reasons why "Inherent Vice" faces a tough slog ahead.

1. It helps if you've read the book.
Even the press kit supplies details and context from the book that are entirely missing from the movie. Clearly, Anderson struggled to adapt this complex, rich source material and expects his audience to be familiar with the Pynchon novel. Anyone who has not read it will be lost. As someone who has not read "Inherent Vice"--I caught up with his first chapter later--there are pleasures to be had from the movie, but comprehension is not one of them. Yes, I look forward to seeing the film again.

At the New York Film Festival after party at Tavern on the Green, I asked Anderson about an amazing shot where Doc is walking toward the dark entrance of a massage parlor in the middle of a wide open dusty construction site. As he enters, we see a glimpse in the deep background of camouflaged soldiers ducking down behind mounds of dirt. It's unexplained. Anderson said there was a long complicated sequence in the book that provided inspiration for this cool quick sight gag. (At the press conference, he explained that he wanted to shoot on 35mm with a boxy aspect ratio suitable for the period. He insisted on presenting the movie in 35mm at the New York Film Festival--although the sound was muddy at Alice Tully Hall. The movie looked and sounded just fine as a DCP for the press hordes who lined up in the rain.)

Except for the ending and the unreliable narrator --added to supply a much-needed female voice--the adaptation is faithful. Anderson also admitted that he gave up trying to make sense, using Howard Hawks and Jules Furthman's famous Philip Marlowe movie "The Big Sleep" as his touchstone. "I couldn't follow any of it," Anderson said at the press conference. "It didn't matter. I just wanted to see what happened next anyway. So that was a good model to follow."

2. It's no "Chinatown."
While PTA is a gifted writer-director, with Pynchon he has met his match. ("There Will Be Blood" was his other lit adaptation.) The first half hour satisfyingly resembles "Chinatown," as our latter-day pot-steeped Jake Gittes is pulled into an ever-deepening mystery over which he can't seem to wrestle any control. He's knocked out and implicated in a murder, there's a missing femme fatale with a romantic-sexual hold over him (see Faye Dunaway's Evelyn Mulwray), a corrupt and powerful magnate (Channel View Estates) who is overhauling California real estate (see John Huston's Noah Cross), the sympathetic but ineffective city detective (see Perry Lopez's Lieutenant Lou Escobar), a long-suffering office receptionist, etc.

As the film progresses, intricate plotting and endless exposition ensue. By contrast, Roman Polanski and Robert Towne's "Chinatown" was a masterpiece of concision and clarity. No one is ever in doubt about what is going on. In "Inherent Vice," while there are brilliant scenes--such as a five-minute single take talk-fest between Wilson and Phoenix as the camera slowly bores in--many long sections of declarative dialogue are tedious and overwhelming. There's no absorbing them. "I was trying to be as faithful to the feeling of the book as possible," said Anderson.

Another apt comparison for this movie is Robert Altman's countercultural valentine to Marlowe, "The Long Good-Bye," which also looks disciplined by comparison. At the press conference, 12 of Anderson's cast (Brolin was notably missing) except for the typically silent Phoenix explained how "chaotic" and "loose" the shoot was, describing a freewheeling improvisational atmosphere on set.

Del Toro said that after multiple takes of a three-page monologue, he knew his lines. "It was like dancing, in a way."

"I thought it was me," said Michael Kenneth Williams of his one scene. "I thought you didn't like me."

"The logic becomes the chaos, the chaos becomes the logic," said Jena Malone.

3. Anderson needs to work on his women.
In my notes on the movie: "lots of hot chicks." Sure, the movie is based on Pynchon, but just about every woman in the film -- except for Newsom, Malone's ex-addict mom, Anderson's wife Maya Rudolph in a throwaway receptionist role and telephone call Jeannie Berlin-- is a babe, an overt sex object, someone to lust after. 'Twas ever thus in movies, and Anderson breaks out discovery Waterston here, who delivers the most erotic femme fatale and climactic seduction scene in recent memory. Her parents were beaming with pride at the after party, but is that all she can do?

Anderson seems to have been somewhat aware of this issue as he added Newsom's narration late in the game--it's not in the book. At the press conference Anderson admitted he was trying to add a good female voice and "as I started doing it more and more, the more it worked." There's nothing wrong, gentlemen, with including deeper women characters who are not defined by their sexuality.

4. A studio is releasing this movie.
Departed Warner Bros. movie chief Jeff Robinov pulled this project into the studio, and current co-prexy Sue Kroll adopted it as a favorite child. She is the genius behind bringing to market several delicate movies including Oscar-winners "Argo" and "Gravity," but in both cases the films delivered to all four audience quadrants. This one is targeted to smart adult cinephiles only. Anderson should be grateful that Kroll is making it her mission to sell this film, starting limited December 12 and broadening January 9 based on how well it does in theaters.

But this is a limited arthouse play. Expectations are bound to be dashed even for a movie budgeted in the $20 millions--but still, that's before even modest marketing costs.

5. Oscar potential is limited.
First of all, this is a comedy. And will be submitted to the Golden Globes as such. And it's hilariously funny--I particularly love Doc's inane note-taking, as though writing things down in his haze will help. Certainly, Phoenix deserves a nomination for Best Actor, but he did even better work for his nominated role in "Her." That's the problem. The Best Actor race is seriously competitive this year. And none of the fleeting supporting roles will register with the Academy actors, I don't think. Critics will be passionately enthusiastic, and "Inherent Vice" will place on many ten bests lists. But if it's a box office disappointment, that will hurt.

I do see a possible nomination for Anderson regular, cinematographer Robert Elswit, who is also in the running for "Nightcrawler," but this studio-backed picture is more likely to get the nod. I could also see production designer David Crank and costume designer Mark Bridges in the mix. The look of the movie is unexpected and jammed with nifty details. The 70s inflected score is packed with period riches as well as anachronistic contemporary music--but there may not be enough new material to make it Oscar eligible.

via http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/five-reasons-why-inherent-vice-faces-a-tough-slog-20141006
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: ©brad on October 07, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
Well that's just like your opinion Indiewire.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Dr_Chile on October 07, 2014, 12:12:03 PM
Are they implying Anderson is a misogynist? Jeepers creepers, did this writer see any of Anderson's other films? I haven't seen Inherent Vice, though I've read the novel many, many times and I can tell you that the book is set in a fictional Los Angeles circa 1970 a mere two years after the summer of love. So not only were people hornier at the time, Pynchon heightens that kind of liberating sexuality to Goliath size levels.

If Anderson has any artistic integrity (and he does, in spades, something a lot of American filmmakers lack these days), he will stay true to this, and it sure sounds like he does.

Telling Anderson he needs to include "deeper female characters who are not defined by their sexuality" is redundant as I doubt this writer truly understands what he or she just saw.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on October 07, 2014, 04:44:56 PM
Are they implying Anderson is a misogynist? Jeepers creepers, did this writer see any of Anderson's other films? I haven't seen Inherent Vice, though I've read the novel many, many times and I can tell you that the book is set in a fictional Los Angeles circa 1970 a mere two years after the summer of love. So not only were people hornier at the time, Pynchon heightens that kind of liberating sexuality to Goliath size levels.

If Anderson has any artistic integrity (and he does, in spades, something a lot of American filmmakers lack these days), he will stay true to this, and it sure sounds like he does.

Telling Anderson he needs to include "deeper female characters who are not defined by their sexuality" is redundant as I doubt this writer truly understands what he or she just saw.

Welllllll, I dont know.  I've seen the movie.  It's definitely not PTA's most female friendly film.  It's clear from any of his movies he can write any kind of character of any kind of gender (though I can't recall a PTA film with any amount of racial diversity...), this movie is not exactly the best example of that.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: matt35mm on October 07, 2014, 05:46:45 PM
(though I can't recall a PTA film with any amount of racial diversity...)

HARD EIGHT, BOOGIE NIGHTS, and MAGNOLIA have a good amount of diversity. PDL has Luis Guzman, as well.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on October 07, 2014, 05:55:12 PM
(though I can't recall a PTA film with any amount of racial diversity...)

HARD EIGHT, BOOGIE NIGHTS, and MAGNOLIA have a good amount of diversity. PDL has Luis Guzman, as well.

Boogie Nights is due for a rewatch on my part, forgot about Cheadle. 

Magnolia tho?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on October 07, 2014, 06:12:25 PM
(though I can't recall a PTA film with any amount of racial diversity...)

HARD EIGHT, BOOGIE NIGHTS, and MAGNOLIA have a good amount of diversity. PDL has Luis Guzman, as well.

Boogie Nights is due for a rewatch on my part, forgot about Cheadle. 

Magnolia tho?


Marcie? Gwenovier? Dixon?
....scenes cut featuring Orlando Jones aka The Worm?

Ok, that last one doesn't cut mustard, and that's only three characters, none of them main characters...but there's some diversity fo' yo'' @$$
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on October 07, 2014, 06:25:36 PM
(though I can't recall a PTA film with any amount of racial diversity...)

HARD EIGHT, BOOGIE NIGHTS, and MAGNOLIA have a good amount of diversity. PDL has Luis Guzman, as well.

Boogie Nights is due for a rewatch on my part, forgot about Cheadle. 

Magnolia tho?


Marcie? Gwenovier? Dixon?
....scenes cut featuring Orlando Jones aka The Worm?

Ok, that last one doesn't cut mustard, and that's only three characters, none of them main characters...but there's some diversity fo' yo'' @$$

I personally wouldn't count that as diversity.  wasn't there a study that said like men are more likely to think that things are diverse to some degree as long as there are at least one woman for every 3 men or something like that?

I definitely wouldn't fault PTA like people fault Wes Anderson in terms of racial makeup.  It's pretty complicated.  Like Marcie and Jim both are pretty annoying and flawed in that scene, but the "angry black lady" and "rapping youth" portrayal, I don't know.  Those characters definitely aren't meant to be developed characters but not sure that them being that 1 dimensional feels all that good.  Not sure how I felt about those pseudo stereotypes being used to develop the whiter characters. On the other hand Gwenovier is clearly an intense dimensional character.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on October 07, 2014, 11:16:16 PM
I'm not gonna get too far into this, but I really wish The Worm had been left in Magnolia, only if to have some deep thoughts in that film voiced by the actor originally known as the "7-Up Yours" guy.

If anyone thinks this film is anti-female, or just not considerate of the "fairer sex", then they can take it up with Thomas Pynchon. If Sortilege narrates the tale, then there's a failure to notice that the scope of this film is all contained within a female character, and if you're too dumb to see that, then who cares.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on October 08, 2014, 02:06:57 AM
Dixon is like the one of the few fuckin characters who actually sees the bigger picture and gets it, which he expresses through his rap
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Alexandro on October 08, 2014, 10:08:02 AM
filmmakers are not supposed to be the united colors of benetton...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Punch on October 08, 2014, 10:27:06 AM
i dont get why that observation gets plp riled up, i can see something wrong with the angry black woman in magnolia & still loved the film or the misogyny at times in inherent vice which is in the book & still love the story. western criticism as of recent seems to just be interested in aesthetics & comparisons to other films. cinematography, story, character & material conditions of the characters, class, race, dialogue, sex, plot, mise en scene editing etc should all be apart of the discussion about any film no? as long as were not hacking away at one thing over & over again.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on October 08, 2014, 10:33:00 AM
^Yes. It's a totally valid point and it's important to make, particularly because it's part of a much larger trend in Hollywood that's always existed. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: ono on October 08, 2014, 12:10:56 PM
Quote from: Alexandro
filmmakers are not supposed to be the united colors of benetton...
Exactly.

i dont get why that observation gets plp riled up, i can see something wrong with the angry black woman in magnolia & still loved the film or the misogyny at times in inherent vice which is in the book & still love the story. western criticism as of recent seems to just be interested in aesthetics & comparisons to other films. cinematography, story, character & material conditions of the characters, class, race, dialogue, sex, plot, mise en scene editing etc should all be apart of the discussion about any film no? as long as were not hacking away at one thing over & over again.
Because 1) there's nothing wrong with Marcie.  There are many people like that, and it was one of the most real parts of the movie.  And 2) because saying something as empty as the politically correct claptrap that PTA doesn't write good female characters is a) wrong and b) empty.  I couldn't find my A-2-D here.  Biff was better at that.  Anyway, they're just looking for a fight when there's none to be had, wishing film portray their rose-colored idealized perception of reality rather than the truth of the situation: that yes, there are obese loud mouthed black crooked women in the world, that back at the turn of the century women weren't at the forefront of society, that chicks did porn, that some guys have abusive, overbearing sisters that make them a shell of a man until they find someone that treats them kindly.  By saying something about the kind of people you wish were portrayed, you aren't saying anything of value about what actually DID happen.  Go make your own film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Punch on October 08, 2014, 12:29:54 PM
the reason why I see it as wrong is becuase its a constant stereotype the obese angry black mammy but its a toss up if this is how you see negros then fine & i never said pta couldnt write woman characters i think he has. i said inherent vice the book is misogynist at times i didnt say this should be changed, this is the film he made, im not one to tell someone what kind of film they should have made, all i was saying is why can't one aspect of a film be critiqued just like anything else thats it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on October 08, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Alexandro
filmmakers are not supposed to be the united colors of benetton...
Exactly.

i dont get why that observation gets plp riled up, i can see something wrong with the angry black woman in magnolia & still loved the film or the misogyny at times in inherent vice which is in the book & still love the story. western criticism as of recent seems to just be interested in aesthetics & comparisons to other films. cinematography, story, character & material conditions of the characters, class, race, dialogue, sex, plot, mise en scene editing etc should all be apart of the discussion about any film no? as long as were not hacking away at one thing over & over again.
By saying something about the kind of people you wish were portrayed, you aren't saying anything of value about what actually DID happen.  Go make your own film.
Sure he is. The lack of women in TWBB, for instance, is meant to be noticed and felt. It's part of the story/message. Pointing out the same thing in a more critical manner has to be acceptable too, no? I don't think anyone here is calling any of his films racist or sexist. And I definitely don't think there's a need to throw out the "go make your own film" thing. Everyone is here because they're a fan of the same filmmaker and are simply discussing a component of his latest.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on October 08, 2014, 05:14:26 PM
I've got a question to people who've ventured into the OTHER iv thread. Are there proper actual spoilers on there now or is it still just more relatively unspoilery reactions and quirky delights being discussed? I wanna go hear more xixaxian reactions but dont want to spoil myself of anything like the changed ending or departures from th book
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on October 08, 2014, 05:24:48 PM
I've got a question to people who've ventured into the OTHER iv thread. Are there proper actual spoilers on there now or is it still just more relatively unspoilery reactions and quirky delights being discussed? I wanna go hear more xixaxian reactions but dont want to spoil myself of anything like the changed ending or departures from th book
I've been going there to check in. There's a vague explanation of what happens in the ending (what happens to Doc, and yes, the difference from the novel. It's a post by modage) and display of shots that aren't in the movie. I think it's worth reading the very first post by 'wilder', who has the best review I've read of the movie, major publications included.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: chere mill on October 08, 2014, 05:30:19 PM
punch is right. and he should not be attacked for merely stating what i think is pretty obvious. anyone who takes film seriously needs to consider it from a larger sociological perspective - the filmmaker's world view, the representation of minorities, the film's political implications, etc. i find it ridiculous how reactionary some people become (generally straight white guys) when these issues get mentioned. i consider pta one of the very best filmmakers working today and in fact magnolia was my favorite movie for a long time. but as i have gotten older, i have noticed some problems.

yes, pta has some problems in his representation of women. i don't consider him sexist, but he is fairly phallocentric. he tends to relate more to his male characters (emotionally and psychologically) than the female ones - the male's desires, ideas, problems, etc. while there are some exceptions,  many of the female characters have been the nurturing, motherly type for the leading man. lena in punch-drunk love is a bit of an enigma beyond that role. she seems to have had some problems, but emotional/psychological damage is only truly explored in barry egan. his emotions/thoughts are given much more weight while she is left with the traditional gender role for the woman (caregiver, nurturer, motherly). there are reasons one could give to justify these decisions, but as a love story it feels pretty one-sided. there will be blood's almost total absence of female characters is problematic, too. it could make sense when considering daniel plainview's isolation and lack of romantic interest in women, but this is a bit retrograde in its thinking (as if to say "well it's not a love story, so why should there be a woman?!"). the removal of all female characters in a dark story about greed and corruption seems to inadvertently reinforce the traditional role women have been assigned ("this is not a story about love or healing, therefore women do not belong."). but there are always options to have powerful, domineering female characters, and even in the case of twbb, to have them merely explored outside the major, all male, characters (daniel plainview, his son, eli sunday, henry). it's not overtly sexist in any way, but that doesn't stop it from being a bit of a boy's club. pta's obsession with father/son dynamics plays a role in these decisions, too.

and magnolia, yeah, i wish he would've kept the dixon story. on the magnolia documentary you can see pta extremely frustrated with that segment, seeming unsure where to go with it. it's a problem he never seemed to figure out and thus omitted it. for black characters we are left with marcie, who is, yeah, a bit of a stereotype (and i don't consider "that's real" convincing enough to justify it, as if pta had no responsibility as a writer/director, he was merely forced by "reality"). this stereotypical portrayal is a bit compromised however by the inclusion of the april grace character, the skillful, highly intelligent black woman conducting frank's interview. in terms of racial dynamics, i think the film improves here. still, i can't help but feel the dixon story might have improved it even more. i would never say magnolia is essentially white people whining about first-world problems for 3 hours, but its scope feels a bit limited and unfulfilled.

of course all of this is part of a much larger problem in the film world, which is not pta's fault. perhaps these issues would not stand out as much if we had more diversity in filmmakers - more women, gays, racial minorities telling stories. it's not a shame when a straight white male filmmaker tells a story from their point of view, it's a shame when we get that so often and not much else. it places too much emphasis on one point of view at the expense of everyone else. if our patriarchal system evolved into something more inclusive, more welcoming of people from different economic backgrounds/genders/races/sexual persuasions, we would all be better off - both the filmmakers and the audience.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on October 08, 2014, 05:48:28 PM
yes, pta has some problems in his representation of women. i don't consider him sexist, but he is fairly phallocentric.

agreed.  I dont think agreeing though takes away at all from his general immeasurable talent, as others have kinda suggested.

Quote
there will be blood's almost total absence of female characters is problematic, too. it could make sense when considering daniel plainview's isolation and lack of romantic interest in women, but this is a bit retrograde in its thinking (as if to say "well it's not a love story, so why should there be a woman?!"). the removal of all female characters in a dark story about greed and corruption seems to inadvertently reinforce the traditional role women have been assigned ("this is not a story about love or healing, therefore women do not belong."). but there are always options to have powerful, domineering female characters, and even in the case of twbb, to have them merely explored outside the major, all male, characters (daniel plainview, his son, eli sunday, henry). it's not overtly sexist in any way, but that doesn't stop it from being a bit of a boy's club.

I agree in some senses- Blood is definitely a Dudes story about Dudes.  Father/son exploration aside I think that masculinity is a big part of that movie.  Maybe not to a conscious degree but to a point where given the period, the location, and the themes of the movie the omission of female characters doesn't strike me as the biggest sin.  It just seems like a story about that generation of men, their ideals of masculinity and self, etc.  I think people gravitated towards Amy Adams in The Master precisely because she was in that masculine environment but was so clearly defined and, at least to me, extremely empathetic.   

Quote
still, i can't help but feel the dixon story might have improved it even more. i would never say magnolia is essentially white people whining about first-world problems for 3 hours, but its scope feels a bit limited and unfulfilled.
I don't disagree either.  I think that big markers of privilege aren't all necessarily there, with the exception of Moore and her relationship, so in that sense the scope of the film seemed broader than, say, The Darjeeling Limited, where it felt like a specifically very privileged group just made it feel a little bit more cartoony, a little hard to swallow, and offbase.  I mean that juxtaposition is part of that movie but I dont think it exactly hits home hard enough for me.


Quote
of course all of this is part of a much larger problem in the film world, which is not pta's fault. perhaps these issues would not stand out as much if we had more diversity in filmmakers - more women, gays, racial minorities telling stories. it's not a shame when a straight white male filmmaker tells a story from their point of view, it's a shame when we get that so often and not much else. it places too much emphasis on one point of view at the expense of everyone else. if our patriarchal system evolved into something more inclusive, more welcoming of people from different economic backgrounds/genders/races/sexual persuasions, we would all be better off - both the filmmakers and the audience.

Agreed. :bravo:

EDIT: and just to be clear I'm not exactly faulting PTA for the content of the movie.  and I'm not suggesting that the political context of the portrayals or anything diminish what is a great movie from an amazing director.  but it's definitely not the most inclusive PTA film. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: ono on October 08, 2014, 07:33:26 PM
Punch is not right.  Neither is chere mill.  cbrad said it best, really.  Art is a mirror, and it tends to reflect that which is most prevalent in the viewer's mind.  You are projecting all of your hangups on to PTA.  It is not his responsibility to change the world.  He only takes his snapshot of the world out there to interpret it how you will.  That is the inherent joy of making a film for others' consumption.

As for the issue of why there aren't more women filmmakers, it's not a field that necessarily attracts women.  It's not a problem that needs active fixing.  Women don't necessarily gravitate towards coal mining, or garbage collecting, or -- heh -- oil drilling, just as men don't gravitate towards fields that are traditionally populated by women such as nurses, secretaries, and marine biologists (I shit you not -- every third girl in my high school wanted to be one, and they all rode horses, too).  Stop trying to press too hard on the proverbial seesaw and just treat people as equals.  We need more good filmmakers, period.  And me, I'd love to watch a good film, regardless of your plumbing or your socioeconomic background.  But I am grateful PTA never falls into the trap of making boring social justice tripe and pandering to those who would cry out to have him do so.

Thread rebalanced.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on October 08, 2014, 07:47:01 PM
This threads need Pubrick.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Punch on October 08, 2014, 07:56:36 PM
"Art is a mirror, and it tends to reflect that which is most prevalent in the viewer's mind." exactly i completely agree with this. did you read what i said? what is there to disagree with i was merely talking about whats brought up during film criticism, that it should be more then aesthetics. that the critique should be complex.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 08, 2014, 09:06:39 PM
These are the questions that are important to me:

- Are PTA's films racially problematic or sexist to any significant degree? No.
- Is it still fair to bring those things up? Sure. He's not perfect.
- Does PTA have a responsibility to advance social issues? Nah, I don't think he does.

Anyway, in this conversation I don't think people disagree with each other as much as they think they do.

yes, pta has some problems in his representation of women. i don't consider him sexist, but he is fairly phallocentric. he tends to relate more to his male characters (emotionally and psychologically) than the female ones - the male's desires, ideas, problems, etc. while there are some exceptions,  many of the female characters have been the nurturing, motherly type for the leading man...

I think on the whole, PTA's female characters are closer to archetypes than stereotypes. But otherwise I thought you brought up some interesting points. It's absolutely true that PTA is imperfect on race and gender, and yet it doesn't bother me at all. PTA makes phallocentric films, and so what? Almodovar makes films about women. Lynch makes films about dreams and darkness. Every filmmaker is allowed to have their strength. We don't need to have one mega-filmmaker who contains and expresses the entirely of human experience.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Alexandro on October 08, 2014, 09:34:57 PM
this is the guy who made a film about a substitute father son relationship, followed that one up adding a lead with the biggest cock in the world, continued with tom cruise's mantra "respect the cock", turned adam sandler man child into an emasculated shell, made a film about an OIL MAN who DRILLS holes in the ground and several shots of oil spilling up from below like fucking sperm and his latest is about a pretty much homoerotic relationship between two men and a disruptive woman, one minute into the film the lead is fucking a sand sculpture at the beach. Being phallocentric is basically his fucking point, that notion is at the heart of all his movies, wether he knows it, likes it or not.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on October 08, 2014, 09:59:37 PM
this is the guy who made a film about a substitute father son relationship, followed that one up adding a lead with the biggest cock in the world, continued with tom cruise's mantra "respect the cock", turned adam sandler man child into an emasculated shell, made a film about an OIL MAN who DRILLS holes in the ground and several shots of oil spilling up from below like fucking sperm and his latest is about a pretty much homoerotic relationship between two men and a disruptive woman, one minute into the film the lead is fucking a sand sculpture at the beach. Being phallocentric is basically his fucking point, that notion is at the heart of all his movies, wether he knows it, likes it or not.


Ive been saying this since fucking forever, Twbb is full of phallic shit, thank you Alex.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on October 08, 2014, 10:17:15 PM
And that TWBB draft where Daniel's dick didn't work.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: matt35mm on October 08, 2014, 10:38:55 PM
Yeah, I see his movies as engaging seriously with notions of masculinity, which is really interesting when he does it. I actually have tended to be more drawn to movies that engage with femininity in a serious way. I am generally uninterested in movies about dudes by dudes. PTA is the major exception. He makes movies about very peculiar but very specifically masculine relationships. He has a lot he wants to explore about men, and he's doing it so well, and I want to see him dig deeper in that direction because it's meaningful and illuminating when he does it. Masculinity is a major theme in his movies, and to have the focus on the men makes very good sense.

In my own films, I know that I'm always going to be more interested in engaging with femininity. I have nothing I want to explore about masculinity, but I have endless fascination with femininity. If you just look at the movies I've made so far, they could be called sexist in that they never feature major male roles. Several of my movies only feature women. The more movies I make, the more it's going to be this way.

The problem with almost every other movie is that it is not seriously engaged with any of these ideas, and the male dominance is done simply as the default. But for a filmmaker's movies to be heavily masculine or feminine is not a problem to me, if that is that filmmaker's interest. To me, the real enemy is the tendency to fall back on the default, and that default is sexist and racist and ageist and all of that. But if a filmmaker moves away from the default and into serious engagement, or at least personal obsession, then I don't see much to get pissed off about. It's the default, thoughtless stuff that's the problem.

To address something else, the idea that directing is not something that attracts women is just not correct. It's something that men assume they can do (even though most of the men I know who say they want to direct are idiots and should not direct), and the whole system assumes that men can do, and that many women who have legitimately great ideas are unsure if they really should direct because the system assumes that they can't. The general mentality and assumptions about how a director is supposed to behave is something that blocks the very many women who want to direct but aren't taken seriously by others or themselves, even though they should be. Men are just very good at being oblivious to their own idiocy/ineptitude, which is fine because they can let "being a man" do all the heavy lifting as far as getting people to take them seriously. How men have ever gotten so far is a mystery. Have you ever noticed how many men are just bad at their jobs, and not very smart or interesting or thoughtful? Yes, the same is true of women, but men don't get penalized for it in the same way, or quite as pigeonholed into ideas of what they can and can't do, even when they've never demonstrated any special ability. They can skate by, and this perfumes them with an ill-gotten confidence that allows them to skate even more by. Meanwhile, we all have to suffer the general lowering of standards that happens when the actual best person for the job isn't the one getting to do the job, and when an untold number of women who could do really brilliant work if they were encouraged to fully bloom their abilities are instead (understandably) cowering in self-doubt from having to suffer 20x the amount of social pressure that men do.

Anyway... yeah PTA's great.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Alexandro on October 09, 2014, 12:10:00 PM
there is a difference between an ARTIST like  PTA and every other industry hack who will be phallocentric because that's the way commercial films pander to audiences. when PTA (or any other serious artist) does it, the less he plays around with PC correctness the better, because he's not following non written rules about gender or race in cinema, he's just submitting to his impulses and finding himself through his films.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: ono on October 09, 2014, 07:39:50 PM
Encore!

https://twitter.com/TheNYFF/status/520247910253223937
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: mogwai on October 10, 2014, 12:23:28 PM
This threads need Pubrick.

Where did he go?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on October 10, 2014, 04:46:14 PM
the reason why I see it as wrong is becuase its a constant stereotype the obese angry black mammy but its a toss up if this is how you see negros then fine & i never said pta couldnt write woman characters i think he has.

Again, I that's where I wish there was more in the film that was in the shooting script...
it seems like this movie is full of stereotypes, as a jumping off point, that then gets deeper into their layers of being. Like the Cop is more than just a "Cop", the Junkie is more than just a "Junkie", the Trophy Wife, etc.
So did Marcie have a deeper story wherein she was a protector to her son and grandson by eliminating an abusive force in their lives. So I totally agree with you, and am cursed with knowing there was SO much more that could be made of that role in just a scene or two.

Aight, I'm done talking Magnolia! onto the IV!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 10, 2014, 04:49:07 PM

Again, I that's where I wish there was more in the film that was in the shooting script...
it seems like this movie is full of stereotypes, as a jumping off point, that then gets deeper into their layers of being. Like the Cop is more than just a "Cop", the Junkie is more than just a "Junkie", the Trophy Wife, etc.


so true. this becomes clear after reading the magnolia screenplay
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 10, 2014, 09:32:01 PM
Just occurred to me... Do people remember the scene in Hard Eight where Sydney is talking to Clementine... she's sitting on the bed and he's standing right in front of her? That was an especially memorable bit from the commentary track. PTA talked about how intimidating/threatening/phallic that position felt to him and described how intentional that was. Maybe worth revisiting for this conversation.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on October 11, 2014, 04:08:42 PM
I've got a question for the majorspoiler squad. Is there a scene in this akin to the frogs in Maggie, the ending to twbb, the processing scene in The Master? I don't mean in terms of content but similar in a "holy fuck" woah nowthatssomething" kinda way. ik that almost every moment in his films r like that but i mean these especially, in a way that the critics and casual viewers see them as the most memorable/especially abstract and big, and they often hold a large space in the films space in ur mind and seem to be the crescendo.

The way IV's been described so far and from reviews there doesn't seem to be somethin like this, but whas ur guys perspective?Please dont give away what scene in actually is or any majorspoils though haha, i jus wanna know some vague y/n type answer
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 11, 2014, 08:23:41 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10698645_633415963444521_6814295398570328891_n.jpg?oh=a616c9b7db499bc8d7018682cfcac48f&oe=54B5DED9&__gda__=1420605025_6c34023d5554cbe8a3fa85e494f68bef)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on October 12, 2014, 11:44:01 AM
Evidently, I need to do a better job of committing to my "no spoilers" approach, but since I'm here, I must ask: Larry, where is that image from? It's great. It looks like a scan. If so, do you know which magazine it was taken from?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 12, 2014, 12:38:40 PM
I found it here: https://www.facebook.com/PTAndersonPeru (https://www.facebook.com/PTAndersonPeru)

it definitely looks scanned, a little too grainy. Wish I knew where these guys found it. It must have been a magazine
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on October 12, 2014, 12:44:21 PM
Critics got it at the press screening. Booklet. I don't know the exact word. It was the picture for Doc's bio.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 14, 2014, 08:10:36 PM
Indiewire's NYFF 2014 Critics Poll Results: 'Inherent Vice' Leads the Pack

http://www.indiewire.com/article/indiewires-nyff-2014-critics-poll-results-inherent-vice-leads-the-pack-20141014
 (http://www.indiewire.com/article/indiewires-nyff-2014-critics-poll-results-inherent-vice-leads-the-pack-20141014)

“Inherent Vice,” the tale of private investigator Doc Sportello adapted from Thomas Pynchon's 2009 novel, led the way in four different areas of our New York Film Festival critics poll, including Best Narrative Feature, Best Director and two different acting categories. As we often do at the end of major film festivals, we asked critics to single out their favorites, this time including films, performances, directors and screenplays.


full results:
http://www.indiewire.com/survey/best-films-and-performances-from-nyff-2014/ (http://www.indiewire.com/survey/best-films-and-performances-from-nyff-2014/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 15, 2014, 01:19:38 PM
‘Inherent Vice’ Set For Gala Screening At AFI Fest


After a vibrant world premiere at the New York Film Festival, Deadline reports that Inherent Vice is heading west; the film is set for a gala screening at the AFI Fest in Hollywood on November 8th in The Egyptian Theatre.



http://deadline.com/2014/10/inherent-vice-afi-fest-joaquin-phoenix-paul-thomas-anderson-851641/
 (http://deadline.com/2014/10/inherent-vice-afi-fest-joaquin-phoenix-paul-thomas-anderson-851641/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 15, 2014, 01:23:14 PM
‘Inherent Vice’ Set For Gala Screening At AFI Fest


aka the festival pubrick shittalked last year for one of his personal satisfactions

that's my festival return zinger and if anything i'm another person who's said the p name as part of his incantation

i have to text people brb
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on October 15, 2014, 02:13:59 PM

that's my festival return zinger and if anything i'm another person who's said the p name as part of his incantation


Pubes didnt come for IV trailer = It's safe to say he's deceased ("He's dead, Jim")....... or went to another forum (110% unlikely).

I miss Pubrick's 10/10 shitting on people posts. If someone communicates with him, tell him his hostility is dearly missed.

Now back to IV....
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 21, 2014, 01:14:00 PM
I think these are screenings for academy members/

http://www.warnerbros2014.com/screenings/film.php?film=inherentvice#
 (http://www.warnerbros2014.com/screenings/film.php?film=inherentvice#)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 21, 2014, 01:36:48 PM
certainly things like that, and it's cool to see the scroll bar of nominations they want to grab, but these are five various theaters. it's general marketing to movie people. i figured that out from the director's guild being mentioned. the aero is part of the american cinematheque. two other theaters i haven't been to, and i think the warner bros one is on some lot or something

none of those theaters are academy theaters. the academy doesn't work itself as marketing so much, and iv will play there on the saturday or sunday after its limited release, and there'll be a q&a and i'll be there
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Tictacbk on October 25, 2014, 10:41:52 PM
http://www.warnerbros2014.com/screenings/film.php?film=inherentvice#
 (http://www.warnerbros2014.com/screenings/film.php?film=inherentvice#)

Woo!  Going to at least one of these screenings.  Pumped!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Pozer on October 26, 2014, 09:44:21 PM
FILLER. nothin but filler here....

This is probably nonsense. or has been discussed. or dismissed. But I stumbled upon this old taint it cool article from the Fincher/testicular period that includes a letter from spazzy PTA. I found his comments on Scott Rudin interesting considering their relationship in film nowadays. more interesting is this foreshadowing moment from PT when he talks about meeting Rudin who held the rights to Underworld at the time, which he considered adapting. From all that's been said/read of how faithful he's been to IV, it seems pretty spot on that this is the one. more or less....?

Quote
Whatever...all the things met in the middle, I went to meet him, honestly not knowing how the fuck I would ever do it as a movie.....I didn't love it sooooo much that I would just say, "fuck it, I'm gonna shoot every word and see what happens..." Which is what I want to do one day when a book really catches my fancy......and I just talked with him a bit....Scott Rudin is very interesting.

interesting, kinda? no? old news? too much sunday scotch..??

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/5949
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on October 26, 2014, 10:08:17 PM
Keep drinking that scotch if it produces gems like this
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on October 29, 2014, 10:07:43 AM
New still from the movie.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1HUzLRCIAAbrhy.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Reelist on October 29, 2014, 10:28:30 AM
Best one yet!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 29, 2014, 12:02:49 PM
WHAAATTTTT!! THIS IS EPIC

hopefully a new trailer soon?!

-its been exactly 1 month since the first trailer
-recall, The Master.... released teasers every month leading up to the theatrical release
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 29, 2014, 04:48:11 PM
But this is WB's show so we haven't gotten the stealth PTA-cut teasers or anything along the way.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 30, 2014, 01:50:46 PM
I need this hanging on my wall.

(http://31.media.tumblr.com/e903aec73f87f56714e3e9a533b2a4ee/tumblr_ne9tc7Azds1qzp428o1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 02:04:42 PM
this is a terrible part of literary adaptations, it is. i wish i hadn't seen this because, you may not believe it, but pynchon hadn't seen the movie when he wrote the book

i'd throw down a fiver that pta had nothing to do with its creation and i hope he doesn't support it. it's prettier but it's like
(http://i.imgur.com/oetQx6d.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 30, 2014, 02:32:58 PM
Are you kidding me?

It is fucking beautiful and he 100% had everything to do with its creation/approval. It could not be further away from the hideous cash-in that you posted.

I'd be surprised if it isn't the final movie poster.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 02:42:02 PM
not kidding. you saved the book for after the movie, didn't you. the book has always been far from your mind. the art is pretty, you got it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on October 30, 2014, 02:44:12 PM
Jenkins posted an extreme example but it's a valid point when a movie starts encroaching on the source material for marketing purposes. Modage, it may not matter to you because your appreciation/respect for the book and the author is secondary to the film, and yeah as a poster this is 100x better than the one they went with so they should've released it as that and left the book alone but that's asking too much of publishers these days and it's not really that bad compared to-

(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--c1f_pX5L--/18j434kxha0aijpg.jpg)

(http://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/528431_506569139385506_1114455028_n.jpg)

(http://www.insideadog.com.au/sites/default/files/imagecache/book_cover_full/bookcovers/Jordi/i-robot-book.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: polkablues on October 30, 2014, 02:55:23 PM
Book covers are just a form of marketing anyway, and movie tie-in covers are a marketing gimmick that has proven to sell more copies of the book. They don't do any harm to the book itself, and if they offend you, you can always buy an older edition. But as long as the publishing industry is still an industry, they're going to do it, because IT SELLS MORE BOOKS. Nobody suffers from more books being sold. So if they're going to do it, they might as well make gorgeous covers like the Inherent Vice one.

That Dante's Inferno cover is one of the funniest things I've ever seen, though.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 03:05:51 PM
what i'm saying is they harm the book because they burn into the reader's brain an image already created which wasn't the author's intention

it's normal, agreed. just thought we had some classy people working on this. but polka is right, they're going for what sells, and modage is right, it's so pretty
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: polkablues on October 30, 2014, 03:44:25 PM
what i'm saying is they harm the book because they burn into the reader's brain an image already created which wasn't the author's intention

My point is that book covers do this by their inherent nature. I'm sure there are that rare handful of covers that are personally overseen by the author, but in most cases it's the publisher making a marketing decision: what image can we present that will sell the most copies of this book. The only difference with this one is that it has faces of people you recognize.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on October 30, 2014, 03:44:53 PM
I agree with Jenkins in principle, and respect his consistency on the issue. I do think, however, that this is a pretty particular circumstance where the author and filmmaker were in intense collaboration and both sides are probably in approval of this. The people involved in this jacket clearly agree with your sentiment here, and went as far away from the tacky commercialization as they could. I think they did really well!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 03:55:26 PM
but in most cases it's the publisher making a marketing decision: what image can we present that will sell the most copies of this book. The only difference with this one is that it has faces of people you recognize.

like a romance novel, which chooses models who appeal to the base fantasies of the reader. pta fans can gobble this up because they're reminded of their crushes

but yeah, it's the principle of the situation i'm weighing. and i think it weighs rotten. conversely, i do think they did their best and, fact is, we know for sure, for absolute sure, that some pta fans would've never read pynchon if not for this movie. which matter is at the end of the day far more important than what i think about the new book cover
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 30, 2014, 04:17:08 PM
But this is an illustrated collage, not a tacky photograph and has no more bearing on burning itself into the reader's brain than the image of a Ghostbusters car with surfboards does now. If someone sees the movie, or the trailer, those also infringe on a pure reading of the book. The same way that, even if you haven't seen The Shining, even if the book cover has nothing to do with the film, if you were to pick up the book, the pop-culture stained imagery from that movie are already burned into your brain.

As far as infractions of artistic purity go, it's relatively minor in the scheme of things. The original cover is just some artists interpretation of the book to begin with that the author signs off on and they probably sign off on the movie version as well. If they don't, they at the very least signed off on the principle of their work being adapted for film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 04:29:30 PM
don't you realize you right now fabricated the idea of that as a ghostbusters car? that was your imagination man. a little neural link you made. those are fun. why didn't you do the same with surfboards? don't be timid

you're simply able to invent less for yourself when the book cover creates a direct path to so many links the filmmaker himself invented. and that's a bummer. however you say it, i think that's a bummer. but it's what's happening and i gotta take my breathing exercises
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 30, 2014, 04:33:07 PM
Right and other than the image of Joaquin as Doc, the psychedelic book cover allows you to draw plenty of your own connections. I think we can deem it SPOILER-FREE.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 30, 2014, 04:39:29 PM
i think the cover is really cool. I think its nice that Penguin is using this as a marketing strategy to push the number of copies sold. At the same time, it does evoke images that may direct your perception of the characters in a certain way.

 as someone who had read the book in 2012, I remember, for the longest time, being curious about what this film/poster/anything related will look like. So its a bummer that people who are unfamiliar with the gravity of this film/author will have an image stamped on their covers that they didn't really need. At the same time, it's a really nice cover. so I can't really hate on that. Its beautiful, magenta and neon.
With that being said, just because its a nice book cover, does not mean that the poster should look like this. In fact, I would be extremely surprised and slightly disappointed if pta allowed Penguin Publishing to dictate the advertising material for his newest baby. In fact, I do not think it will look like the second, official poster, because paul is always so in control of the marketing of his films.

This is has stirred a number of responses. All I know is that it has enhanced my anticipation for this film, yet again.

6 MORE WEEKS
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 04:43:30 PM
i do think i'd have a tricky time saying the book cover elicits more from the reader than the movie itself, which draws us into a debate over the existence of literary adaptations in their entirety, and i got no beef with adaptations. because i think literature and cinema are two separate art forms that should exist on their own terms. and i think this is muddled marketing, so maybe i'm in my "sensitive" region
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on October 30, 2014, 04:45:45 PM
The original cover is just some artists interpretation of the book to begin with that the author signs off on and they probably sign off on the movie version as well. If they don't, they at the very least signed off on the principle of their work being adapted for film.
When you reach a certain level of influence as an author and you can affect how your book is marketed, the book cover is definitely used make a deliberate artistic point, for Pynchon that would be Vineland onwards, whose cover is a 1930s photo of a seattle logging camp and is significant thematically to book, as are all his other later covers including Inherent Vice whose cover predates the book and was something Pynchon stumbled on to. The name (http://imdb.com/title/tt0060371/) of the surf shop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endless_Summer_(The_Beach_Boys_album)) as well as the scratching out and replacement of "endless" with "eternal" become significant when associated with the book.

Of course I acknowledge the cynical/realistic arguments about commercial viability, but that doesn't mean I can't complain about it or believe that either Pynchon or PTA had a say in the matter.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on October 30, 2014, 04:56:00 PM
Honestly, if neither of them had a say in it and Penguin came up with this on their own, then kudos to them! I think this is better than any of the posters for The Master (which had multiple great posters, just to clarify).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 30, 2014, 05:03:57 PM
In fact, I would be extremely surprised and slightly disappointed if pta allowed Penguin Publishing to dictate the advertising material for his newest baby. In fact, I do not think it will look like the second, official poster, because paul is always so in control of the marketing of his films.
There is probably close to 0% chance that Penguin commissioned this artwork without any oversight from PTA. From the looks of it, he was probably completely in control like the inkblotty Master Blu art.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on October 30, 2014, 05:15:23 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/oetQx6d.jpg)
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--c1f_pX5L--/18j434kxha0aijpg.jpg)
(http://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/528431_506569139385506_1114455028_n.jpg)
(http://www.insideadog.com.au/sites/default/files/imagecache/book_cover_full/bookcovers/Jordi/i-robot-book.jpg)

Jesus Christ, what fucking abominations.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 30, 2014, 05:37:21 PM
There is probably close to 0% chance that Penguin commissioned this artwork without any oversight from PTA. From the looks of it, he was probably completely in control like the inkblotty Master Blu art.

Not saying they didnt consult him. Just that the posters for the film are his own. Its most likely that this book cover is a collaborative effort.

with that being said, i find it hard to believe that this will be the final poster. Its just an unconventional way to unveil it to the public
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Dr_Chile on October 30, 2014, 07:36:45 PM
I personally think the cover art looks great and, fundamentally, if this gets more people to read Thomas Pynchon this is not a bad thing.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on October 30, 2014, 07:49:59 PM
books assholes dig: Inherent Vice by Thomas Pynchon, As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on October 30, 2014, 07:58:00 PM
dirty
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 30, 2014, 11:30:44 PM
Pynchon is also commonly agreed upon as the #1 name dropped by assholes attempting to look brainy. Born in 1937, he served his country during World War II by firing v-2 rockets out of his infant penis.


http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Thomas_Pynchon (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Thomas_Pynchon)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on October 31, 2014, 08:58:06 AM
when do u all think we'll get a sound of JG's score?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on October 31, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Not saying they didnt consult him. Just that the posters for the film are his own. Its most likely that this book cover is a collaborative effort.
This cover has PTA's fingerprints all over it. It's as "his own" as a poster would be. It was almost certainly commissioned and overseen by him. No offense to Penguin but it's doubtful they would've initiated something like this on their own without his direction (otherwise it'd just be the legs poster on the cover).

If it's not the final poster, maybe it's because WB veto'd it but PTA still got to use it for a book cover instead. Just speculating on that though, so we'll see.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on October 31, 2014, 01:37:01 PM
Not saying they didnt consult him. Just that the posters for the film are his own. Its most likely that this book cover is a collaborative effort.
This cover has PTA's fingerprints all over it. It's as "his own" as a poster would be. It was almost certainly commissioned and overseen by him. No offense to Penguin but it's doubtful they would've initiated something like this on their own without his direction (otherwise it'd just be the legs poster on the cover).

If it's not the final poster, maybe it's because WB veto'd it but PTA still got to use it for a book cover instead. Just speculating on that though, so we'll see.


your right.....it might be the final poster
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on November 01, 2014, 11:23:06 AM
This is the second interview with PTA for Inherent Vice, via the LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-ca-sneaks-paul-thomas-anderson-20141102-story.html#page=1 (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-ca-sneaks-paul-thomas-anderson-20141102-story.html#page=1)

Paul Thomas Anderson takes on 'Inherent Vice'


(http://www.trbimg.com/img-5452b484/turbine/2029190-ca-1021-anderson8-wjs-jpg-20141029/750/750x422)

takeaways:

-"Trying to make the movie feel how the book made me feel, or how Pynchon in general made me feel, there are many times where I feel lost, but never in a bad way," Anderson said. "If I'm participating with the book on its terms and it's not giving me what I want it to give me, then maybe that's on me. Maybe I just need to giggle and give in a little bit.
"It's like getting high and being nervous about it," he instructed. "Just enjoy the high. Just sit back and relax. Don't freak out."
-budget: "around 20 million"
-Anderson first considered adapting Pynchon's "Vineland" or "Mason & Dixon" before the book "Inherent Vice" was released in 2009 (has anyone read these?)
-"Doc was a great character, and I have to believe that's probably the main thrust of it, parallel with just wanting to collaborate with a Pynchon book.
"Whatever book it was actually didn't so much matter. It was using his take on the world and working with that as a collaborator that was the most valuable."


https://twitter.com/cindyhively/status/527998510415618048/photo/1 (https://twitter.com/cindyhively/status/527998510415618048/photo/1)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1PT2NfCcAIZPop.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on November 01, 2014, 06:02:29 PM
PESUDO-MASTER SPOILERS?

From the interviewer's twitter, Jenkins lead me to this about a week (?) ago.

Quote
Ask PTA if Freddie Quell from THE MASTER becomes Doc in INHERENT VICE. He imagines Freddie starting something like The Source Family. #yes

(http://maximumfun.org/images/source_family.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on November 05, 2014, 12:56:36 PM
now THAT is how you internet.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: tpfkabi on November 06, 2014, 07:57:10 PM
Are you kidding me?

It is fucking beautiful and he 100% had everything to do with its creation/approval. It could not be further away from the hideous cash-in that you posted.

I'd be surprised if it isn't the final movie poster.

If you like this type of artwork, you should check out the last Roman Coppola movie.
It had a lot of cool graphic design stuff in it.
The lead character was a graphic designer, I think? Been a while.

*tangent*
I tried tracking down one of the Charles Swann posters - the one with Charlie Sheen laying horizontal with an arrow sticking out of his chest - but wasn't able to. The movie wasn't popular so I was thinking someone involved would send me or sell me one. I'm not sure they exist since it didn't get a cinema release. If anyone could knows a channel to go through, let me know, please.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 07, 2014, 11:24:39 AM
making sure pta fans are aware of this fun thing he's doing:

PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON PRESENTS MONDO HOLLYWOOD
Quote
This underground cult classic documentary captures Hollywood at its most psychedelic, from 1965 to 1967. But this isn't a la-la-land we're used to seeing. Instead, it goes beneath the usual glitz and glamor and heads for the fringe, following everyone from would-be actors and models to politicians and even skydivers. The film's opening scene, which documents the original hippie-vegan Gypsy Boots exercising "Watusi-style" with stripper Jennie Lee under the HOLLYWOOD sign, perfectly nails the film's focus of, as Variety wrote in its 1967 review, "the Hollywood the public doesn't know." But plenty of Hollywood we do know also get their closeups: Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, Sean Connery, Alfred Hitchcock, Sonny and Cher, Brigitte Bardot and even Bobby Beausoleil of the Manson Family make appearances. Paul Thomas Anderson has listed this film as a chief inspiration and influence on his latest film, INHERENT VICE, an AFI FEST Gala presentation. After the screening, Anderson will be in conversation with MONDO HOLLYWOOD director Robert Carl Cohen.

i'm not going to it because i'm going to the tribe instead, but i just can't help myself from appreciating pta's interests

http://afifest2.afi.com/sections/T3400
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 09, 2014, 05:19:36 AM
i accepted the inherent vice press pack because i thought my internet friends would want to hear about it. the other day while walking home from seeing little annie rooney i read on my phone little annie rooney's imdb trivia page (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0016028/trivia?ref_=tt_trv_trv) and, isn't that something, the trivia page listed the screening i was walking home from. and someone had already liked the trivia. these are fast times

the pack has other pages. unfortunately this enterprise "took me long time" and i deleted six baddest photos, including a page with owen wilson playing a saxophone. if people want more of the book i can arrange more of the book

imgur thingy of pages from the iv press packet (http://imgur.com/9mkDAQN,37u0ZoE,v6KDYld,XbZdqOu,AImysgv,2O9wgZc,ruErFka,GUPX4dV,9Ly9Af6,WCs2VM0,TSQw4ws,yxFbg5l,l84qZ3m). just checked the imgur thingy and only the beginning pages are in proper order. what a disaster. everyone act natural for a second, then get excited for a moment. plan
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on November 10, 2014, 06:13:17 PM
I really hope we get a full, proper Charlie Rose interview this time.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on November 12, 2014, 12:02:18 PM
https://imgur.com/a/X3U3x (https://imgur.com/a/X3U3x)


high quality! more pages!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: noyes on November 13, 2014, 11:53:15 AM
INHERENT VICE "sneak preview" screening on December 8th at BAM in NYC, a part of the BAMcinématek series 'Sunshine Noir'. Tickets on sale now.

http://www.bam.org/film/2014/inherent-vice
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on November 13, 2014, 02:27:09 PM
Been waiting for this. Thanks for the heads up.  :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on November 16, 2014, 09:58:36 AM
By the way, the soundtrack will be released on december 15th.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/official-soundtrack-details-for-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-revealed-20141115?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on November 16, 2014, 01:57:53 PM
wanted to see the trailer on the bigscreen so i saw st. vincent. does anyone have a list of movies that it plays before?
also, st vincent sucked.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on November 17, 2014, 09:31:26 AM
Well, I have a hardon now. Not really. It's just a reference. I could have one, though.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2p0XNuCAAEnri4.jpg:large)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on November 17, 2014, 12:14:14 PM
And fuck this shit and why is not in fucking Paris?

Anyway, those who're in London you can watch Inherent Vice...wednesday...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItztN-egY8A
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on November 17, 2014, 12:30:28 PM
AL ROSE IS BACK!!! This is an amazing trailer.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on November 17, 2014, 01:08:02 PM
Thanks Drenk for the headups just got some tickets!!! So fucking excited!!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: KJ on November 17, 2014, 01:21:48 PM
fuck! I just realized that I won't see this until march.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on November 17, 2014, 02:06:21 PM
Yes, I thought about you Max, I'm glad you've got tickets!


And the OST cover (if I remember correctly, Greenwood's wife does the cover of the soundtracks):

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2qxDEsCMAA_DZ6.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on November 17, 2014, 02:31:32 PM
HAHAHAHAHAH Josh brolin eating that frozen banana and the way joaquin looks at him... had to replay it like 50 times  :yabbse-grin: :bravo:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 17, 2014, 03:34:47 PM
i don't see the benefit of knowing the movie's jokes before you see it
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on November 17, 2014, 03:39:48 PM
Well, it is a teaser for a comedy, no? Sort of a requirement to put a joke or two in there.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 17, 2014, 03:42:48 PM
i mean from the viewer's perspective. i mean i don't watch trailers and this seems scary to me

but that's me, you know
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fitzroy on November 17, 2014, 04:10:20 PM
Wednesday? London? I'm there!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on November 18, 2014, 12:45:41 PM
i mean from the viewer's perspective. i mean i don't watch trailers and this seems scary to me

but that's me, you know
Gotcha, and I know what you're saying.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on November 18, 2014, 12:56:11 PM
if all the jokes are included in the trailer, in context, then it must be a horrible and incomprehensible movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on November 18, 2014, 02:13:41 PM
I wonder if the music from the 30 second teaser is JG. Does anyone know?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on November 18, 2014, 02:31:56 PM
if all the jokes are included in the trailer
Who said they were?

I wonder if the music from the 30 second teaser is JG. Does anyone know?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZF98gNGvtA
 
It's from the book.
Also, there are only two google results (http://goo.gl/ORFbZt) for the song before 2009 when the book came out.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on November 18, 2014, 03:07:49 PM
jenkins on last page.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on November 18, 2014, 03:12:36 PM
Not really. But ok.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 18, 2014, 03:22:13 PM
he's proudly noticing a movie's trailer isn't the full movie, to defend the rights and privileges of trailers and their viewers i guess
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on November 18, 2014, 03:30:21 PM
not really. you said that the trailer was showing the movies jokes and that it wasn't beneficial. and i said that the trailer didn't seem to do that at all. you've seen the movie, so if you're saying that the jokes in the film are given away by the trailer, i was joking by saying that must be pretty weird as the trailer doesn't give away that much. yall can try and twist what i said into something negative as usual but what i said makes perfect logical sense and was completely harmless.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 18, 2014, 03:33:13 PM
so you're saying that you don't get the jokes in the trailer to their full effect and you're feeling excited about discovering the big pic. right on. i don't like knowing the jokes beforehand, is what i was saying

settled
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Pozer on November 18, 2014, 05:25:44 PM
if you guys are specifically talking about that teaser, it plays more like non-sequitur "next week on Mad Men" snippets. the trailer too, really. snippets of incomplete jokes maybe. i mean, but that's me, you know, idk. or however the fuck you kids are talking these days.   
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on November 19, 2014, 03:07:57 PM
If you're in LA: a screening the first of december.

It seems to be free.

https://inherentvice.wbmoviescreenings.com

Bonus: PTA is Plainview's brother.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B21kQxuIAAE9jYH.jpg)

Totally Plainview.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B213D6jIIAArJDn.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Pozer on November 21, 2014, 04:49:31 PM
Google Hangout interview on IV with Josh B

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV5i4VMCGWw
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on November 24, 2014, 02:38:28 PM
"There were things that Joaquin and I did that were insane."

(No major spoilers, as the thread says, but they mention some stuff from the movie.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhEkQkrnZa8


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rHOpj7FNKo
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on November 25, 2014, 05:08:34 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3Kn7_RCYAA6wH3.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3Kn8L7CEAAKzDy.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3Kn7w_CEAArbZK.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3Kn7f2CcAA6rrl.jpg)


Annnnnnd...
(http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/images/column/nova14/xvicescreener.jpg.pagespeed.ic.wJJto2vghO.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on November 25, 2014, 08:23:11 AM
Can someone who's watched the film go into detail about what JG's soundtack is like? Ive been listening to the twbb and master ost all fucking day for about week and am tired of hearing critics kinda reference it but not going into any depth. need sum xixaxian detaiiill and insighttt
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: greenberryhill on November 26, 2014, 12:22:57 PM
have you seen this? the web site has an animated banner now  :yabbse-grin:

http://inherentvicemovie.com/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on November 26, 2014, 12:35:38 PM
i just watched the interview with brolin and i think its amazing that he disses oldboy.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Tictacbk on November 28, 2014, 01:56:27 PM
http://www.acehotel.com/calendar/losangeles/inherent-vice-screening (http://www.acehotel.com/calendar/losangeles/inherent-vice-screening)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on November 29, 2014, 01:46:28 PM
new bev:
(http://i.imgur.com/M2Z9TrC.png)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on November 30, 2014, 02:26:50 AM
has anyone heard of any showings coming up for the Dec 12 release outside of NY and LA? I live in a small-ish city near a bigger city and the two 'arty' theaters here have yet to put it on their schedule and I couldn't find any info about it being shown in the bigger city nearby.  Usually some of the limited release things make it here.  it seems like it's close enough that it shouldn't be hard to find showings going on...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on November 30, 2014, 08:32:24 AM
Nope, Dec 12 will be NY/LA. Wide release isn't until January unfort.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: idk on November 30, 2014, 01:42:29 PM
Yea, the independent-y theatre near me that gets tons of limited releases and got The Master a couple weeks earlier than the cineplexes, has IV on their schedule for January 9th. :(
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 01, 2014, 02:00:31 PM
inherent vice's new book cover is pretty chill and really i was being a baby. it's out btw
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 02, 2014, 09:54:19 AM
Short clip between Phoenix and Short. (Short sentence with two shorts.)

http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/segments/77851
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 02, 2014, 02:03:34 PM
I responded better to this, than to any of the posters so far for this movie, which I think by PTA standards, haven't really been all that...(remember that last poster for The Master, that they used for the newspaper? and the first teaser poster for the Master?) but this is just a cool image and the fonts (colour, size, placement) are lush.

Simple as fuck, but I dig it....

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on December 04, 2014, 01:47:18 AM
Nope, Dec 12 will be NY/LA. Wide released isn't until January unfort.

If I'm not mistaken, the December 12th limited release also includes Toronto.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Pozer on December 04, 2014, 12:22:48 PM
40+ new images plus behind the scenes shots  :o

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/over-40-new-images-from-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-20141204 (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/over-40-new-images-from-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice-20141204)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Korova on December 04, 2014, 01:29:26 PM
So, apparently this is from the soundtrack of the movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjCN9K8Cq_A
The beginning is Sukiyaki and then there is Adrian Prussia (at 3:17) by Johnny Greenwood. Is that really from the movie?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: putneyswipe on December 04, 2014, 06:05:27 PM
I like this, sounds a little like On the Corner-era Miles Davis
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on December 05, 2014, 06:41:20 AM
I get Bob James vibes (with a twisty JG edge now that I've convinced myself that it's JG).
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on December 05, 2014, 07:22:29 PM
http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2014/12/vice-makes-national-board-of-reviews.html (http://cigsandredvines.blogspot.com/2014/12/vice-makes-national-board-of-reviews.html)

Woo-hoo! National Board of Review names Inherent Vice one of the top 10 films of the year and awards PTA Best Adapted Screenplay!

Shit is ON.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 05, 2014, 07:45:28 PM
^plus you're probs late on a chill vid with iv
http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=13003.msg337423#msg337423
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 07, 2014, 08:10:33 AM
Hey! Joaquin is talking.
EDIT: It spoils two shots from the movie, one is in the trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtE_VwNCcNQ
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 07, 2014, 03:50:40 PM
Three clips of Inherent Vice appeared.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIft-KxLKn8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCzoAA0gA0g

THIS ONE CONTAINS SPOILERS!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIUG1BjmnYE

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on December 07, 2014, 07:05:28 PM
Nope, Dec 12 will be NY/LA. Wide released isn't until January unfort.

If I'm not mistaken, the December 12th limited release also includes Toronto.

I was mistaken: December 25th for Toronto, if there are any Canadians that visit these forums.

I really want to watch that Phoenix interview but I'm still trying to limit my exposure to the film. Is anything particularly interesting said (that does not qualify as a spoiler)?

Also, thanks for being conscientious with the spoiler warnings.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on December 07, 2014, 07:27:30 PM
Nice! It's great to get a feel of things. :yabbse-thumbup:

If you don't want to read discussion of the FIRST TWO clips, probably stop reading this thread for a week or something.

I didn't know there would be humor at Doc's expense. That look Benicio gives him is priceless.

"What's up, Doc?" (LOL) I didn't know that was a thing in the book/movie. Now the Bugs Bunny pics make more sense... didn't expect that to be actual dialogue.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Larry on December 07, 2014, 07:31:09 PM
christmas came early with these clips

umm im not exactly sure about the toronto release dates have been reading 12th here and 25th there...saw a massive poster of iv on this theatre off the expressway....really hoping its this week though!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on December 08, 2014, 01:31:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdK61JEOk3Y
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 08, 2014, 02:40:13 AM
Interview with IV art director; Ruth De Jong and production designer David Crank.

https://stories.californiasunday.com/2014-12-07/pynchon-inherent-vice-los-angeles/ (https://stories.californiasunday.com/2014-12-07/pynchon-inherent-vice-los-angeles/)

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 08, 2014, 03:01:56 AM
christmas came early with these clips

umm im not exactly sure about the toronto release dates have been reading 12th here and 25th there...saw a massive poster of iv on this theatre off the expressway....really hoping its this week though!!

It's 25. I've seen a poster for Canada and it was written.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on December 08, 2014, 09:38:46 AM
6 IV clips!!

http://collider.com/inherent-vice-clips-josh-brolin/ Clips in order:
1. Doc and Shasta at the beginning
2. Sauncho, Doc and Bigfoot at police station
3. Sloane Wolfmann
4. Doc and Sauncho
5. Police investigate car
6. Doc and Penny
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 08, 2014, 04:05:06 PM
A TV Spot. I haven't watched it. The first seconds seem real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53EigFLkjtE
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on December 08, 2014, 06:46:51 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53EigFLkjtE
These are doing a pretty good job of selling it. People are going to hate this film.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 08, 2014, 06:48:12 PM
IT'S PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON WEEK AT GRANTLAND!

http://grantland.com/tags/paul-thomas-anderson-week/ (http://grantland.com/tags/paul-thomas-anderson-week/)

The first piece is on Paul Thomas Anderson’s Los Angeles.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 08, 2014, 06:54:44 PM
I like the those trailers but that's not the movie I saw by a country mile. I know they wanna get bums on seats but word of mouth once people see the thing will be: it's nothing like the way the trailer sells it. I would love to see a trailer a bit more in line with the movie's tone/pace, but I get why they're doing it! And I don't blame them. And it's Warner Bros godammit. So kudos to them for taking a chance with this movie, that's fuckin' great!

But I'm also worried that this could maybe be the worst reviewed PTA movie so far, judging from the quotes used on the trailer and stuff like this:

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2014/12/fair-warning-fan/ (http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2014/12/fair-warning-fan/)

I hope it doesn't hurt his next move, but I doubt it. Dude doesn't give a fuck and that's the way to be. Keep changing, moving, venturing out. I cannot wait to see it again. You lucky bastards in NY/LA.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: ©brad on December 08, 2014, 07:41:47 PM
The guy's a moron (the reviewer, not PTA).

I hate it when critics claim to dislike movies that don't take risks until they finally see one that does. Then they hate it for doing so.




Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on December 08, 2014, 09:41:10 PM
The guy's a moron (the reviewer, not PTA).

I hate it when critics claim to dislike movies that don't take risks until they finally see one that does. Then they hate it for doing so.

I think IV is  good movie, I'm more excited to see it again.  but so far the marketing has been way off.  IV could have been that movie, but it isn't, whether it's better or worse off for it is for brighter minds to consider.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: P Heat on December 08, 2014, 10:53:34 PM
These new teasers and previous videos/interviews of actors and P.T talking about mystery noir style of the film makes me just keep thinking about Chinatown.  So like Chinatown the comedy version.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on December 09, 2014, 12:14:51 AM
I am not a big fan of Jeffrey Wells' writing. I only skimmed the linked article, as I haven't seen IV yet and Wells loves spoiling stuff in the context of a "review" (or via an obnoxious, thoughtless informal riff and/or an inconsiderate headline and photo combination, etc.).

For starters, the tone of that post is silly. Wells positions himself like PTA's well-meaning but condescending friend; it's like he's imparting some advice to a buddy.

I also see he draws a parallel between Joyce and Anderson and argues that this is "not cool," which is a really bizarre statement. So, Anderson's work is evoking the legacy of one of the most revered and sui generis writers in history and this is a bad thing? Yes, Joyce is often labelled as "difficult," but that word shouldn't always be used pejoratively.

Moreover, given the specifities of each artist and his respective medium, I'm assuming Wells is making a very basic, off-the-cuff comparison between Joyce's reputation and Anderson's films. A more substantial comparison between the two is best left to someone with ample knowledge of Joyce, Anderson and Pynchon's respective work... I'm not certain that Joyce is really the best literary analogue, but it would make for an interesting discussion.

So, following Wells' argument, we ought to tell Anderson to reign it in and offer us something more vanilla and readily comprehensible or something? Something more palatable or within a more digestible, super coherent framework? No. He's on a roll; let him be. The results have been magnificent.

Also, Wells admires There Will Be Blood but argues that The Master's "studied opaqueness was a bit of a problem." I wouldn't use those same words but what he's referring to is a VIRTUE, not a "problem." If, as Wells suggests, IV is an amplification of The Master's aesthetic and narrative characteristics, then that sounds great. That's hardly a red flag.

The Master is really just an astounding accomplishment, by the way. I hope its reputation will only improve as time goes on. A recent revisit had me in awe once again, and I was totally struck by the enormity of sadness and beauty contained in that film. I continue to find its distinct rhythms and idiosyncrasies absolutely exhilarating. It's bracing in the best way possible. The fascination of the film, its mixture of sublime craftsmanship and intriguing aesthetic/narrative maneuvers, recalls Eyes Wide Shut (this is meant as high praise).

My only concern with regards to the critical reception is how it might affect Anderson's financing for future films (as mentioned by max) but I don't think that's going to be a problem.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 09, 2014, 11:41:48 AM
Joaquin Phoenix is being ultra-friendly on talk shows for Inherent Vice.

And you have a narrative between the two shows, by the way. And the clip from IV in Letterman is the one with a spoiler.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1d0QpmE5QA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFxL0HyRAq0
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Korova on December 09, 2014, 12:42:51 PM
This clip is perfect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BKneeaxI_A
It actually captures the feeling of reading a Pynchon book. This constant paranoia, but also the hilariousness of it all. I'm already in love with this movie. Shame I will apparently only be able to see it in March...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 09, 2014, 01:21:35 PM
New trailer. I watched ten seconds of it. The movie seems rich and everytime I spoil myself some new footage I hate myself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTRMkQzFYHI
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 09, 2014, 01:30:08 PM
http://inherentvice.wbmoviescreenings.com/ (http://inherentvice.wbmoviescreenings.com/)

MORE FREE SCREENINGS!!!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: polkablues on December 09, 2014, 02:04:48 PM
Joaquin Phoenix is being ultra-friendly on talk shows for Inherent Vice.

With the expectations he's built up over the years, the idea of Joaquin Phoenix going on Live with Kelly and Michael and giving a perfectly normal, pleasant interview is probably the most surprising thing he could have possibly done.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 09, 2014, 02:21:57 PM
Ok, so that trailer has so much madcap stuff that's not in the movie, alternate takes and extra-pussy eating...how can you not like it?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 09, 2014, 02:24:59 PM
it also sells the theme hard and has some nice cuts between the police, the cult (looking very Ku Klux) the black power character which definitely struck a 'relevant' chord with me, what with Ferguson, Eric Gardner and a whole bunch of dudes in the Ferguson police force being KKK family. Anyways, that's my ramble....
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on December 09, 2014, 02:39:06 PM
Oh, man. I'd really like to watch that Letterman interview. Are there any spoilers before they cut to the clip?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 09, 2014, 02:51:34 PM
Oh, man. I'd really like to watch that Letterman interview. Are there any spoilers before they cut to the clip?

At some point they talk about one shot from the first trailer, but that's all.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on December 09, 2014, 03:57:13 PM
Thanks. I checked out the first bit. Awesome. I'm going to devour all of these interviews after the movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Cloudy on December 09, 2014, 04:22:59 PM
I contacted American Cinematographer to see if they'll be covering bc it doesn't say so on their website, response:
Quote
We were planning to cover "Inherent Vice" but the project's cinematographer, Robert Elswit, politely declined to be interviewed. Make of that what you will...

Best,

Stephen Pizzello
Editor-in-Chief and Publisher
American Cinematographer
Huge, massive bummer.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 09, 2014, 04:32:18 PM
what's he alluding to?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on December 09, 2014, 04:39:13 PM
Quote
what's he alluding to?

I'm not sure that there's much to speculate about. Elswit might be busy with another project or something personal. It would have been nice, though. Hopefully he'll eventually comment on his contributions.

Is there any chance that C&RV will do another "The Making Of" interview series?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Cloudy on December 09, 2014, 05:10:15 PM
It's really the only coverage I've been looking forward to, along with some of the production design stuff (but they never get as in-depth). When PT speaks in interviews these days he's always just dancing around it, and it's fucking energizing and inspiring to listen to the song and dance, and thankfully he never says it directly (maybe not a choice), but when it comes down to things technical....fuck, AC gives a depth that no other coverage has the ability to do with his movies...the craft is as important as the substance, the way things technical curl into the ineffable stuff in his work is absurd. Just a stupid example: the PDL AC article, Elswit talks about how he was going to use ND filters or some other kinds of filters because of the high contrast in the locations, but PT caught him doing this, and adamantly refused to let Elswit use any filters in the movie. the way Elswit described his reaction to the filters was as if it was a spastic Barry-esque gut-reaction, tied to a reason entirely beyond aesthetics.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on December 09, 2014, 05:33:44 PM
More Grantland goodness:

http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/paul-thomas-anderson-inherant-vice-magnolia-boogie-nights-california-history/ (http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/paul-thomas-anderson-inherant-vice-magnolia-boogie-nights-california-history/)

I love PTA Season.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 09, 2014, 05:44:02 PM
Cloudy - have you got a link/scan of the PDL AC article? And is it the interview where they talk about Godard's influence on PDL?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 09, 2014, 05:47:36 PM
Max, could you say what shots of the new trailer are not in the movie?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 09, 2014, 06:32:17 PM
drenk > I'll put it in the spoilers thread...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: P Heat on December 09, 2014, 11:22:15 PM
Max, could you say what shots of the new trailer are not in the movie?

LIGHT SPOILERS

Asian girl in the back seat of a car getting cunnilingus. Also, he said anything with the cult in the trailer. Being a CAN fan, I like the trailer but Damo better be getting royalties from that man. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 10, 2014, 02:43:55 AM
pta appreciating qt and 35mm nerds, an instagram video i found when i searched tonight's new bev screening:
http://instagram.com/p/waUqPUswSS/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on December 10, 2014, 10:32:19 AM
This is really good
 
http://www.stereogum.com/1721447/jonny-greenwood-gaz-coombes-dany-goffey-spooks-feat-joanna-newsom-stereogum-premiere/mp3s/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 10, 2014, 05:30:54 PM
Good news!!!

The 10 best films of 2014: No 3 – Inherent Vice (via The Guardian)

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/dec/10/the-10-best-films-of-2014-no-3-inherent-vice (http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/dec/10/the-10-best-films-of-2014-no-3-inherent-vice)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on December 10, 2014, 05:37:48 PM
This is really good
 
http://www.stereogum.com/1721447/jonny-greenwood-gaz-coombes-dany-goffey-spooks-feat-joanna-newsom-stereogum-premiere/mp3s/

Aren't there two versions in the movie?  I thought I remembered the surf-y one that hd been previously played by Radiohead being in the movie..
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 10, 2014, 06:01:05 PM
Where PTA draws a picture of Pynchon.

http://touch.metro.us/entertainment/paul-thomas-anderson-draws-us-a-picture-of-thomas-pynchon/zsJnli---kEU4uWMiMYUjU/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 11, 2014, 10:52:18 AM
This is why I'll fuck with PTA till the very end. He's an excellent filmmaker, sure, he's friggin' incredible. But all in all, he gets down and looks out for those who feel that life is a struggle, occasionally peppered with a small victory or two, but ultimately a rough as fuck struggle, with ourselves, with our environments, with the powers that be, with our pasts and our dreams, real and actualized, with our urges and desires....It reminds me of something that Claire Denis said about fighting for her characters and giving them justice. She didn't mean justice in the traditional sense though, something more like fighting for those people, most people wouldn't fight for. Her, Cassavetes and PTA, and good ol' Marty when he loved messylostpeople back in the day, FUCK!!!!!!! I'm so fuckin' down for these guys....

Do you ever think of your films in that way, as a whole body of work with overarching themes?
Only in interviews, I do. Like now. But it's funny, things come out in the wash. Like on "The Master," the preoccupation was, "You make films about fathers and sons," and I was like, "I do? F---, I guess I do. OK, sure." I'm just so happy that I'm not hearing, "You make movies about fathers and sons" anymore. (laughs) But that's a moveable thing, you know? I never thought I'd be making a detective movie, ever. This was a way to make a Thomas Pynchon movie, and his concerns are my concerns, whether I got them from him because of his writing or whether I had them to begin with and that's why his voice speaks to me so much, but I'd like to steal from his kind of preoccupation with this country, this world, where it's at, where it's going. Republicans in power, land grabs, abuses of power. You know, all this kind of stuff that I love. That stuff gets me going. It brings out a fight in me that makes me feel good, that makes me feel righteous, I think, in a good way. And I get it from his work, from his writing. He sees the absurdity in it all, but it's not just absurd. He's pretty pissed off about it, too.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on December 11, 2014, 11:28:02 AM
2 minute director's commentary. (http://nytimes.com/2014/12/12/movies/inherent-vice-directed-by-paul-thomas-anderson.html)

Above the review.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on December 11, 2014, 11:48:02 AM
Damn, thanks for that. It's only 2 minutes but man is it great to hear him doing commentary again. 15 years without is a long time.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on December 11, 2014, 12:08:24 PM
Thanks for that. Great review. Loved it. Especially this bit:

"Like Wolfmann and Fenway, the L.A.P.D. belong to another story about Los Angeles, one that didn’t need Charles Manson for a villain. It’s a story that’s been told in narratives about Chavez Ravine, a largely Mexican-American neighborhood demolished by the city that became the home of Dodger Stadium, and in films like Charles Burnett’s “Killer of Sheep,” a masterpiece about a black family in 1970s South-Central. At one point, Doc drives down to South-Central (now called South Los Angeles) and, with the camera riding alongside him, looks out at some black children racing alongside his car, an image that echoes one in Mr. Burnett’s film. Soon after, Doc seems to be hallucinating a line of men — like Indians in a western — running through the flatlands like ghosts."

At odds with her problems with Shasta and Doc's big scene. Thought that was one of the best scenes in the movie. I can't wait to see this again....and boy was that good to hear him do commentary again. Jesus, has it been that long?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Pozer on December 11, 2014, 12:43:58 PM
that commentary bit is pretty fantastic! IF only we get the full shebang on the blu. i dont live too far away from that old hotel at the base of Lake Arrowhead, didn't clue in that that's the location they used for the looney bin till now...

cant wait for friday at the Hollywood Dome in 70mmmmmmmm
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 11, 2014, 01:25:25 PM
cinerama dome but i know what you mean, since it's in hollywood. this is the future btw:

(http://i.imgur.com/QLP4YHm.png)

iv will be playing in 70mm on two screens, since pta is respected and taken seriously, and some people don't like the dome. and on 1 screen in 35mm because some people don't like 70mm? people like their options

it'll also be playing at the landmark and century city

and since it's 2014 and everything, iv opens today at 7pm in the dome and century city. then it plays at 7:10 at the landmark, then it plays at 8pm on the other 70mm screen, then i guess it keeps playing until, what, april. let's say iv will be in theaters until april, sounds good
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: MacGuffin on December 11, 2014, 03:42:20 PM
Current Entertainment Weekly issue:


(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o15/Mac_Guffin/114AF73B-CEE5-4C16-94DA-B055C6117EBF_zpseytsxxew.jpg)

(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o15/Mac_Guffin/78D71B9C-FB6D-423F-BA62-026032277CE2_zps6nb6akpx.jpg)

(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o15/Mac_Guffin/54779321-2082-4829-BE10-203201E8D395_zps5xnht5ie.jpg)

(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o15/Mac_Guffin/E20D545A-42E6-4738-A919-CC4770A8C244_zpsabd1wnyr.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 11, 2014, 03:54:51 PM
Lovely, lovely interview.

http://m.hitfix.com/motion-captured/paul-thomas-anderon-on-finding-the-music-in-thomas-pynchon-for-inherent-vice?hf_exp=social_title_off&title=Paul%20Thomas%20Anderon%20on%20finding%20the%20music%20in%20Thomas%20Pynchon%20for%20'Inherent%20Vice'
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: ©brad on December 11, 2014, 06:24:03 PM
I feel like the press for this is much more PTA centric than his previous movies. Certainly more than The Master. Anyone agree?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 12, 2014, 09:42:59 AM
My favorite review of the movie with the one Wilder wrote.

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/inherent-vice-2014

Quote
"Inherent Vice" is a film about a stoner which itself seems stoned. This is just one small part of what makes it distinctive.
Adapted from Thomas Pynchon's 2009 novel, the movie has been compared by many to the Coen brothers' "The Big Lebowski," a drug-fueled LA comedy with a similarly labyrinthian mystery (or "mystery") and some shared themes. But "Vice" is a richer, deeper, sweeter, but equally funny movie. It owes a great deal to laid-back, character-and-atmosphere driven 1970s L.A. films such as "The Long Goodbye" and "Cisco Pike," but it never makes too big a deal of that lineage. As adapted and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, it's a historical and political picture about The American Soul, though not too strenuously that. Mostly it's a long, shaggy, knockabout comedy about eccentric people who pursue their own appetites and manias and indulge their private demons while remaining oblivious to their effect on others. As such, it's a great people-watching film, showcasing a large, diverse cast giving performances that are the acting equivalent of self-caricatures rendered under the influence. The line goes where it goes.
The phrase "Inherent Vice" refers to "the tendency in physical objects to deteriorate because of the fundamental instability of the components of which they are made, as opposed to deterioration caused by external forces"—a mouthful that refers simultaneously to the characters, their city, their nation, and the particular historical period that has defined all of it, and that is already passing into memory when "Inherent Vice" begins. (Exhales smoke rings.) It's set in Los Angeles circa 1970, after Tet and Altamont and Manson so many other time-and-place names that viewers of a certain age will recognize as markers of the point where '60s Utopianism morphed into '70s numbness. In his gonzo epic "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," Hunter S. Thompson referred to the Summer of Love in 1967 as, in retrospect, the point where the great wave of the counterculture "broke and finally rolled back."
The film's hero, the pothead private investigator Larry "Doc" Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix), is standing on the beach waiting for the tide to return. He's a shaggy-haired, mutton-chopped man-child, a little bit piggish in the way that a lot of hippie guys were then, but basically decent; he wouldn't hurt a fly unless he thought the fly was bogarting his joint, maybe not even then. He blurts out sentences that are non-sequiturs to everyone but him, and makes high-pitched strangled sounds, a la Ben Braddock in "The Graduate," when he's frustrated. He's the kind of guy who might preface an important fact with "dig this," and who can say "right on" in response to any statement, varying the inflection so it always seems an acceptable answer. He solves cases intuitively, reading life as others might read tea leaves. (The closeups of his detective's notepad reveal phrases like, "Paranoia alert" and "Something Spanish.") It's a method, a process; it's his way, man. Yeah, fine, it doesn't often seem to yield visible results. But that's all part of it, you know? Because we're all too obsessed with results, with solving for "X," with explaining things and answering things. Right?
Oh—you want to know what the movie is about? Dig this: "Vice" is not the kind of movie whose plot you can flow-chart, or that will benefit terribly much from the inevitable click-baiting "explainer" pieces that are sure to be written about it in the coming months. The movie starts with Doc being visited by his ex-girlfriend Shasta Fay Hepworth (Katherine Waterston), now the girlfriend of local real estate bigwig Mickey Wolfmann (Eric Roberts). She wants Doc to thwart plans by Mickey's wife and her lover to have Mickey committed to a mental institution. Around the same time, coincidentally and strangely, a brother named Tariq Khalil (Michael Kenneth Williams, right on) visits Doc at his medical office (he's some kind of physician, seemingly?) and asking if Doc can help one of Mickey's bodyguards, Glen Charlock, a white supremacist who did time with Tariq. Because, for whatever reason, Doc can't seem to walk down the street without being handed a case or a mission or asked for a favor, he also tries to locate the disappeared jazz saxophonist Coy Harlingen (Owen Wilson, who seems born to hold a sax, if not necessarily to play it) on behalf of Coy's girlfriend Hope (Jena Malone).
Everything ties together, and yet it doesn't all tie together, or maybe it's one of those films where it kind of doesn't matter whether it ties together, and if so, to what degree, and it's fine, it's intentional, it's part of it, maybe. As I said up top, the film itself seems to be stoned, and to have trouble keeping track of itself. Images repeat, situations repeat. Sometimes the movie tells you things you already know, or refers to things it never mentioned before as if you're intimately familiar with them. It's all over the place, and there are long sections—notably Doc's encounter with coke-addled dentist Dr. Rudy Blatnoyd, played by Martin Short, who deserves a special Oscar for his slinky crab-walk—where the plot, such as it is, gets put on hold so that the movie can luxuriate in people and places and vibes. Reese Witherspoon plays an assistant D.A. named Penny Kimball who disapproves of Doc on at least five different levels but adores him and sometimes sleeps with him; with maybe thirty minutes to go, "Vice" takes time out to observe the two in a post-coital moment, Witherspoon lying on a bed smoking a joint and laughing joyously.
Anderson—who's become even more of an actors' director in his last few films than he was already—is at the peak of his powers here, ironically but appropriately directing "Vice" in such a way that phrases like "peak of his powers" (and other language connoting masculine swagger or preening mastery) seem contrary to the spirit of the thing. More so than any film Anderson's made, "Vice" impresses by seeming uninterested in impressing us.  He treats the 16x9 movie screen as a sheet of blank paper, shooting moments as plainly as possible, staging whole scenes in unobtrusive long takes or tight closeups, letting faces, voices and subtle lighting touches do work that fifteen years ago he might've tried to accomplish with a virtuoso tracking shot that ended with the camera tilting or whirling or diving into a swimming pool. There's a long, teasing, frankly sexual scene that plays out for five or six minutes without a cut. There are entire scenes where one character walks into a room and starts talking to another character and the rest of the scene plays out alternating shots of the actors' faces, but there's so much going on in those faces (which seem to eschew makeup and draw attention to actors' freckles and moles and other "blemishes") and in cinematographer Robert Elswit's creamy '70s-style lighting that you might not mind spending another ten minutes with those people, or an hour, or going for another drive with that dentist I mentioned earlier, whatever his name is. Blatanowsky? Anyway.
Anderson's second and third features, "Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia," got compared to Robert Altman, but this one is way more Altman-y, if that's a word. Its seems to be unfolding, as per a line in the novel and the screenplay, on "Uranus, the planet of rude surprises." At times Anderson's script seems to have taken its cue from that film buff-beloved anecdote about the time Howard Hawks called Raymond Chandler while adapting Chandler's novel "The Big Sleep" to say that neither he nor any of the assigned screenwriters could figure out who killed the Sternwoods' chauffeur, only to have Chandler admit that he didn't know, either. The Coen brothers obliquely allude to this anecdote near the end of their Chandler-influenced gangster thriller "Miller's Crossing," when the hero asks the scheming accountant Bernie Birnbaum (John Turturro) who killed a third character, and Bernie replies "That was a mistake" but does not elaborate. (The film's signature moment might be the one where Short's dentist asks Doc to repeat where he told the secretary he was from, and Doc just stares and stares and stares.)
I digress. Um.
And, and, and: the whole time, Doc is followed and vexed by a right-wing, hippie-hating cop named Christian "Bigfoot" Bjornsen (Josh Brolin, whose beef-slab physique and woodblock head suggest that Nick Nolte and Kurt Russell somehow managed to have a son together). Like some other characters in "Vice," Bigfoot is an emblem of received Establishment values and handed-down "wisdom" about the proper way for 'Murricans behave. ("Any gathering of three or more people constitutes a possible cult," he informs us.) But like Oliver Stone adapting the life of Richard Nixon and somehow ending up feeling for the guy, Anderson, who's never given any public indication of sharing Bigfoot's values, seems to value him as a human being, a lost soul. Dig: there are moments wherein Bigfoot—who at every turn trashes Doc's body, property, feeling and values—seems to be in the grip of forces beyond his or anyone else's understanding (maybe like Jonathan Winters destroying that gas station in "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World"); something in the way Phoenix regards Brolin during these scenes suggest an addled yet fathomless empathy. They get each other. In its strange way, the relationship between the stoner "detective" who pretends to be a master crime fighter and the meathead cop who sometimes moonlights as an extra on "Dragnet" is the real great love story of the movie, an accidental metaphor for the liberal/conservative, dungarees/suits, blue state/red state divide that's defined U.S. politics since the Civil War. If you don't believe me, keep an eye out for the wordless scene where Doc watches Bigfoot absentmindedly fellate a popsicle.
Beyond the goofy humor and loopy digressions is a tremendous feeling of yearning, of sadness over undefinable loss. The foggy sunlight that illuminates so many "Vice" scenes matches the fogginess of the hero's perceptions, which are rooted as much in nostalgia as in drugs (nostalgia is itself a kind of drug). Nearly every major character is haunted by roads not taken or less traveled, or by loves not pursued, days not seized. They wonder where the time went. They wonder what they're doing here. They just walk and talk, eat and screw and smoke, and the sun goes down and the tide goes out. And what is there to life?
Beauty. So much beauty. You can see it even in silliest images, such as the tableau of Wilson's Coy Harlingen taking part in a Last Supper-styled pizza dinner/photo shoot. You can see it in the momentous images, like the dusky opening shot of the sea as viewed from between two rickety houses. You can see it in a flashback of Doc and Shasta, done in a single long take: just a shot of them walking up and down a street past a chain link fence and huddling in a doorway while storm clouds gather and Neil Young plays on the soundtrack. The wave rolls out, the wave rolls in.
What were we talking about?

And here, where Anderson talks about the music in his movies, he said this:

Quote
I’d trade all my screenplays for a writing credit on ["Slow Boat to China"]. My ex-old lady Fiona [Apple] sings this song better than anyone.

My ex-old lady. He talks like his movie. And Phoenix described PTA as a "Method Director".

http://www.wonderingsound.com/feature/paul-thomas-anderson-inherent-vice-music-films-interview/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on December 12, 2014, 11:23:31 AM
I feel like the press for this is much more PTA centric than his previous movies. Certainly more than The Master. Anyone agree?

I was noticing this too! For the first time it feels like he's really getting his due not as an up-and-comer but as a director who actually has a substantial body of work. Lots of retrospective pieces this week covering everything in his career. It's like Christmas.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 12, 2014, 12:58:08 PM
Someone posted the Greenwood tracks from the soundtrack in YouTube. Is this real?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCzH4iC0-lg
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on December 12, 2014, 01:19:21 PM
Yes. That's real.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 12, 2014, 06:45:28 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXkCQuhfuJg
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on December 12, 2014, 10:00:54 PM
I'd be surprised if it isn't the final movie poster.

Yep.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t31.0-8/q87/s960x960/10835486_753748838041683_8649669564525786268_o.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: mogwai on December 13, 2014, 05:41:39 AM
Why isn't this in wide release already?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 13, 2014, 07:21:26 PM
PTA on NPR. You care? Click.

http://www.npr.org/2014/12/13/369599571/adapting-inherent-vice-made-director-felt-like-a-student-again?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=movies&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

And an hour long interview here:

http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201412121000
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on December 14, 2014, 03:46:27 AM
I'd love it if everytime he's asked that stupid Pynchon question, PTA sidetracked into a B Traven anecdote like in the NPR interview.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: picolas on December 14, 2014, 08:50:07 AM
saw an advance screening last night. i've had zero time to write a proper review (flying in an hour) but i will say i was surprised by how accessible/awesome it was on first view, despite all the critical stuff i'd been hearing about how incoherent and frustrating it was supposed to be. i stopped following the plot about 30 minutes in, but that didn't matter. every performance in this is a gem. i had no idea martin short could do this. katherine waterston is an incredible discovery. she conveys a world of history in her eyes. i was often so caught up in the look and feel and randomness of this that i couldn't hear what people were saying. in the best way. all the experimental direction brolin spoke about is wildly evident.

this movie is dedicated to 'ida' and i'd like to know who that is.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 14, 2014, 10:03:07 AM
Ida is the middle name of his fourth child.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: putneyswipe on December 14, 2014, 01:22:56 PM
So no PSH in the credits, right?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Pozer on December 14, 2014, 02:12:09 PM
I think the film's content had to do with him missing from the dedication. maybe. hell, Ida know.   
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: picolas on December 14, 2014, 06:03:26 PM
So no PSH in the credits, right?
yeah i didn't see him. interesting theory pozer.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on December 15, 2014, 03:13:19 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0l2syrZpfTo all JG songs apart from Under the Paving Stones and Amethyst! for ur considerashun
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 15, 2014, 05:12:30 AM
Under the Paving-Stones and Amethyst are not in the FYC CD, this is surprising; Amethyst, especially, is fantastic. But once again, Greenwood won't be nominated for the Oscars. So...

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Ghostboy on December 15, 2014, 08:06:58 PM
I'm sure this has been mentioned, but I love the irony that Brett Ratner's company helped finance this.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: polkablues on December 16, 2014, 12:02:45 AM
He probably just did it as a favor to me.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: DocSportello on December 17, 2014, 12:57:56 PM
http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2014/12/17/katherine-waterston-on-her-breakout-role-in-inherent-vice (http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2014/12/17/katherine-waterston-on-her-breakout-role-in-inherent-vice)

This morning's interview with Katherine Waterston on the Canadian CBC Radio show "Q". I only just started it and it's sort of a slow interview so far, nothing really new. But just putting it out there since I don't know how many non-Canadian xixaxers would see it.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 18, 2014, 02:20:52 AM
this is the backstory section: not seeing iv at the new bev with pta there and everything is like my hugest movie blunder of the year. like i straight bombed that right there, because i switched work shifts and the long story short is now i have to cry all the time. tonight was my first time back at the new bev since the date when i missed iv. former-owner michael was at the ticket window! i couldn't believe it. that's some side gossip, because maybe you remember earlier this year there was a social scandal at the new bev. ok so under the new order of things, which basically has fun as a mayor, there's a cartoon before every movie. tonight i saw a fantastic looney tunes episode before a double-feature celebration of spaghetti western's 50th anniversary, here's a clip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSPaLiTBL3E) from the tunes, and anyway it was during this night when i heard what short was played before inherent vice

and oh, i'm so jealous -- here's the main story -- the cartoon that played before inherent vice at the new bev:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QIaqcnsuog

it may not be a googleable detail from that evening but i heard a firsthand account, and what you can google is why exactly it's interesting that short was chosen. for example (http://inherent-vice.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chapter_7)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 18, 2014, 10:23:03 AM
Some cartoons on the digital booklet of the soundtrack. One has spot


(http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/11/65/95/74/captur12.jpg)

(http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/11/65/95/74/captur13.jpg)

(http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/11/65/95/74/captur14.jpg)

(http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/11/65/95/74/captur15.jpg)

THIS ONE CONTAINS SPOILERS.

(http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/11/65/95/74/captur16.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on December 18, 2014, 11:24:23 AM
and oh, i'm so jealous -- here's the main story -- the cartoon that played before inherent vice at the new bev:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QIaqcnsuog
That's fantastic and there could be 10 different reasons for picking that cartoon from Pynchon to Altman to Ashby.

But here's a nifty connection: Klaus Voormann plays bass on Basketball Jones and besides being kind of a fucking legend in his own right he was a session bassist for people like Lou Reed and Harry Nilsson. Harry Nilsson is of course stamped over Magnolia (One is the Loneliest Number) and Punch-Drunk Love (He Needs Me from Popeye for which Nilsson did the music and in which Klaus Voormann appears in a cameo).

Without having seen it the biggest imprint Voormann has had on Inherent Vice is designing this cover:

(http://marcusgraphics.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/revolver.jpg)

Which seems to be the starting point for all of IV's marketing art:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t31.0-8/q87/s960x960/10835486_753748838041683_8649669564525786268_o.jpg)

(http://www.filmoria.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/InherentVice-Shasta-Horizonta-s.jpg)

Also, basketball jones is about a guy called "Tyrone Shoelaces" which makes him the second most famous protagonist who's named Tyrone for wordplay purposes. The other one's in this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity's_Rainbow) which came out earlier in the same year and which also contains a cameo by a clueless Nixon.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 18, 2014, 12:38:53 PM
A-and! New poster. Character poster. But with a lot of characters in it.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5KFjLuCIAA8ocL.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 18, 2014, 01:03:05 PM
tickles me how time period appropriate that is

(http://i.imgur.com/Quxbd7S.png)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on December 19, 2014, 07:50:56 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/kgIg4bP.jpg)


They need one of Josh Brolin in profile gorging on the banana.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on December 20, 2014, 01:55:30 PM
new 40 min Paul interview up on The Film Stage:

http://thefilmstage.com/news/listen-paul-thomas-anderson-talks-adapting-inherent-vice-and-there-will-be-blood-for-an-hour/

seems  lil exasperated in this one. that bit about Mad Men made me chortle.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Garam on December 21, 2014, 01:12:49 AM
Jonny Greenwood and London Contemporary Orchestra live at Manchester show all on Boiler Room

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG8GR1msPpo

Opens with stuff from There Will Be Blood, haven't got far in yet, but assuming it continues with Master and Inherent Vice cuts.

edit: just TWBB and Master stuff so not really relevant but still damn worth your time, wow.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Korova on December 21, 2014, 02:30:59 PM
The latest Josh Brolin interviews have also new clips from the movie.
This one has Bigfoot's first appearance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rriUFSYXO4o

On Letterman there is the pancake scene with Joaquin. Couldn't find a decent video to post here,
but it's on YouTube anyway.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 21, 2014, 03:43:48 PM
Too much IV clips and teasers. WB should send me the whole movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on December 21, 2014, 04:23:00 PM
Haha that head turn he does between 3 and 6 seconds "oh man where the fuck am I..."

Wish it would cut out to Jim Kurring laughing while eating cereal
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on December 21, 2014, 07:46:27 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvOi4928nZU

Legs. They move.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on December 21, 2014, 10:32:34 PM

On Letterman there is the pancake scene with Joaquin. Couldn't find a decent video to post here,
but it's on YouTube anyway.

I looked that up. The acting in that little clip... HOLY SHIT. holy shit. I am done watching any more footage.

EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1i8WzYU6jo


Clip is at 34:34.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Korova on December 21, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
So, what does the cook actually say? In the german version of the trailer he says something in Japanese, but in the english version he says something like "Got it.. You, forget it", is that right? Or am I completely wrong?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: samsong on December 22, 2014, 05:05:50 AM
FUCKING BRILLIANT.  saw it twice this weekend (the second viewing was to indulge in the 70 mm print).  i'm in love.

there's always the compulsion to reference anything and everything in relation to a new pta movie, so: this movie felt very much in the rivette wheelhouse -- endlessly whimsical and labyrinthine narrative teeming with ideas, a marked lack of formal exuberance as a means of achieving cinema magic (it's all actors and mise-en-scene and and rhythm that's indicative of a sensibility that just understands how to cast a spell over the audience without any discernible technique), CONSPIRACIES!!!!!!, languid use of formidable running time to slowly draw the viewer further and further down the rabbit hole, and a kind of free-wheeling whimsy that, at the very least, makes the film compulsively watchable in the midst of all its denseness and elusiveness.  also thought about the big sleep by way of bunuel.  also also, really fucking funny!  i laughed more the second time than i did the first, which was a lot to begin with.

j hoberman referred to inland empire's lack of logic outside of its "movie-ness", a term i've always enjoyed, and i feel like it applies to this... and i suppose to pta's work as a whole, as his films are so informed and charged by his cinephilia.  among many things this is made by someone who just really loves and gets movies, in a way that i think is the most poignant of all his films.  more than any other film of his so far i feel that here, he's really come into his own. the master remains a muddled curiosity to me but inherent vice sees him perfect this new mode of expression. 

performances, STELLAR all around (brolin is phoenix's equal here, katherine waterston is a vision, MARTIN FUCKING SHORT, joanna newsom an inspired bit of casting), and i think this is greenwood and pta's best collaboration yet.  someone referred to this movie as a hang-out movie per tarantino's ramblings about rio bravo and dazed and confused, and while i know he uses it as a term of endearment and high praise for two of his favorite movies, it makes it seem like it has nothing else to offer, and there's just so so so much here. 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on December 22, 2014, 12:57:17 PM
of course i'm a guy who likes how you put it in here because you wanted to be emotional and say how much you liked it

this strikes me as oddly appropriate:

Quote
this movie felt very much in the rivette wheelhouse

both in the tonal similarities you're noting, and the fact that sitting in a theater of people watching celine and julie go boating revealed that the movie isn't crowd fun. it's not everyone's favorite thing, it's dangerous to ask the audience to do some work, and i like such kinds of danger


[edit]
referring to:
FUCKING BRILLIANT.  saw it twice this weekend (the second viewing was to indulge in the 70 mm print).  i'm in love.

there's always the compulsion to reference anything and everything in relation to a new pta movie, so: this movie felt very much in the rivette wheelhouse -- endlessly whimsical and labyrinthine narrative teeming with ideas, a marked lack of formal exuberance as a means of achieving cinema magic (it's all actors and mise-en-scene and and rhythm that's indicative of a sensibility that just understands how to cast a spell over the audience without any discernible technique), CONSPIRACIES!!!!!!, languid use of formidable running time to slowly draw the viewer further and further down the rabbit hole, and a kind of free-wheeling whimsy that, at the very least, makes the film compulsively watchable in the midst of all its denseness and elusiveness.  also thought about the big sleep by way of bunuel.  also also, really fucking funny!  i laughed more the second time than i did the first, which was a lot to begin with.

j hoberman referred to inland empire's lack of logic outside of its "movie-ness", a term i've always enjoyed, and i feel like it applies to this... and i suppose to pta's work as a whole, as his films are so informed and charged by his cinephilia.  among many things this is made by someone who just really loves and gets movies, in a way that i think is the most poignant of all his films.  more than any other film of his so far i feel that here, he's really come into his own. the master remains a muddled curiosity to me but inherent vice sees him perfect this new mode of expression. 

performances, STELLAR all around (brolin is phoenix's equal here, katherine waterston is a vision, MARTIN FUCKING SHORT, joanna newsom an inspired bit of casting), and i think this is greenwood and pta's best collaboration yet.  someone referred to this movie as a hang-out movie per tarantino's ramblings about rio bravo and dazed and confused, and while i know he uses it as a term of endearment and high praise for two of his favorite movies, it makes it seem like it has nothing else to offer, and there's just so so so much here.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on December 23, 2014, 02:30:23 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/gz1bZIy.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on December 23, 2014, 09:45:15 PM
Online version of that Entertainment Weekly article

Paul Thomas Anderson's Tour of LA (http://www.ew.com/ew/static/longform/pta/desktop/?hootPostID=5c5e1b2b52808cf29a66c030aaa77379)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on December 26, 2014, 10:55:22 PM
Some revealing nuggets in that EW article.

"Robards' trophy wife, played by Julianne Moore, overdoses on prescription drugs and is found unconscious in her car by a little boy - an incident taken from Anderson's life. 'It was the tragic story of a wife my father had late in his life,' he says."

Was this known? An unknown known? I knew he was pulling a lot from his life but didn't know about that.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: convalescent_k on December 27, 2014, 05:34:44 AM
I cannot stop listening to Amethyst.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Garam on December 30, 2014, 10:43:49 AM
(http://41.media.tumblr.com/9cab38c4e9256e39e8a0f65353e9c7bd/tumblr_nhcw3uzUDh1tmhoieo1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on December 31, 2014, 11:48:06 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOBNYHDCJCI 


It just looks so fucking good. Best tv spot so far.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: convalescent_k on December 31, 2014, 02:58:15 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rZy_1OSY6Uk/VKREgjcQL_I/AAAAAAAAA6Y/wePYkf78u9E/s1600/jade%2Bposter.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Reelist on December 31, 2014, 03:39:47 PM
Of course you'd post that one
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on December 31, 2014, 04:17:19 PM
is that the least peoplest one?

edit: my bad, its benedict of the bull. which has 4.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on December 31, 2014, 05:58:07 PM
Man, those posters are the greatest. The colours are incredible. The last one looks like a scopitone.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 01, 2015, 08:14:52 AM
red lights
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: P Heat on January 03, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
So glad I get to see a screening for this on Monday and I can't wait. I'm contemplating if I should watch it high and enjoy the ride, considering it's been said it's already hard to follow as it is.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on January 04, 2015, 09:28:48 AM
Q. Film and film references figure so much throughout his novels. Yet they seem unfilmable.

A. Well, I started out on [Pynchon’s novel] “Vineland,” thinking maybe I can do this, though I never really tried too hard. But having gone through [“Inherent Vice”], I looked at “Vineland” again and now I know how to do it. The point is, after wrestling with what he writes, and just being in a position where you’ve got to get this 400-page novel down to a 2½-hour movie, the answers just presented themselves. Good writing is good writing. It’s a pleasure to work with that stuff — and it’s just painful cutting stuff out. What’s problematic is having stuff where the material is thin and you have to pad, not the other way around. If I had a couple more lifetimes, I’d try to do [Pynchon’s novels] “Mason & Dixon” — and “Against the Day,” what a movie that would make, if you could get the scale for it.

Q. The ultimate HBO miniseries.

A. Right, exactly.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/movies/2015/01/03/paul-thomas-anderson-tackles-inherent-vice/O2JKZbDzBTd81nr78uyAEI/story.html?event=event25
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on January 04, 2015, 10:55:52 AM
If I had a couple more lifetimes, I’d try to do [Pynchon’s novels] “Mason & Dixon” — and “Against the Day,” what a movie that would make, if you could get the scale for it.

Q. The ultimate HBO miniseries.

A. Right, exactly.
He'll write and direct an HBO miniseries.

It will be an adaptation of Against the Day.
He's been dropping references to the book both in The Master and in the press shit he did for it. It'll be the best thing ever
.
.
.

And it will never happen.

Nor should it. It's nice to fantasize about though. Touching any of his other books for adaptation is a bad idea, except maybe Lot 49 if someone good wants to take a shot at it.

Edit:individual sections are a goldmine though. I'd throw all my money at Don Hertzfeldt's Byron the Bulb
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 04, 2015, 11:03:13 AM
maybe he'll direct an episode of dancing with the stars next year, you know, how can i know? i just want to point out that pta said movie and it was the interviewer who had the same fountain of excitement about tv that so many do, and pta wasn't gonna wrestle him. pta said movie
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on January 04, 2015, 11:07:09 AM
I edited something. Also it's a word. People count Berlin Alexanderplatz and Scenes from a Marriage as tv shows and it doesn't degrade them.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 04, 2015, 11:10:59 AM
pta appreciating qt and 35mm nerds, an instagram video i found when i searched tonight's new bev screening:
http://instagram.com/p/waUqPUswSS/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on January 04, 2015, 11:17:59 AM
And I recall you recently saying how backwards this 35mm fixation is and how filmmakers will be buried with their reels and the funeral will be seen on TV. If someone wants to make an 8 hour movie and have people actually watch, i don't see how it violates cinema's supposed sanctity.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 04, 2015, 11:27:17 AM
yeah. he could direct hbo tomorrow. showtime. fx. aren't there like eight tv channels now, in the future? my point is pta's mind was on movies, and the interviewer's mind was on tv. we simply don't live in an age where the guy became enthusiastic about imagining a trilogy of movies around mason & dixon, what about five movies around against the day? wouldn't that be something? that's an exciting idea. i've heard of people going on to make tv shows because that's what people expect these days and alright, but i hope that pta is in this to find a fight of his own for a thing that some of us do care about. the theater is my sweet cosmic longtime partner, that's where i want to be, and living rooms scare me. that's what i'm saying
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on January 04, 2015, 11:29:50 AM
Agreed.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Tictacbk on January 04, 2015, 12:39:08 PM
Disagree.  If PTA is given the chance to do whatever he wants for 8 hours on HBO he'd be crazy not to take it.  Get with the times, man!  I'm not saying that's going to happen, but every thing he makes is a gift, and I don't want him fighting any fights that result in less opportunity for him to put out content.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 04, 2015, 12:49:31 PM
look,

i've heard of people going on to make tv shows because that's what people expect these days and alright

that was established as a possibility, so you're saying it's beyond even your imagination to picture anything outside of tv. that scares me
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Tictacbk on January 04, 2015, 01:12:22 PM
I'm not saying it's beyond my imagination at all.  I suspect PT will continue only making films.  What I'm saying is, if he's given the opportunity to do something like write/direct an HBO Limited Series, he shouldn't fight it just because it will be consumed on a television.  No matter what he creates in the future, it's probably mostly going to be consumed on a TV anyways.  And you probably don't have to worry either, someone like Cinefamily will probably find a way to screen everything he makes for the rest of his life in a theater at some point too.  And it will be awesome.  Because as long as he's making stuff it will be awesome.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 04, 2015, 01:20:14 PM
i definitely think a person or two here will agree with you about pta being awesome and i'm not sure what the topic is anymore. i know you like tv. i know you like pta. and that's a wrap
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on January 05, 2015, 12:30:41 PM
Colorado! You can get high with PTA on a damn bus!

http://badassdigest.com/2015/01/05/denver-badasses-explore-your-vices-riding-a-party-bus-with-paul-thomas-ande/ (http://badassdigest.com/2015/01/05/denver-badasses-explore-your-vices-riding-a-party-bus-with-paul-thomas-ande/)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: putneyswipe on January 05, 2015, 03:05:07 PM
He's really going all out for this one
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on January 06, 2015, 05:01:10 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/ygJmbKg.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on January 06, 2015, 05:27:06 PM
I wonder how easy it will be to order these posters via a reputable online vendor. They're all so great.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on January 06, 2015, 09:44:58 PM
Anyone else here from Rochester NY, checking this out at The Little on friday nite?
coulda sworn there was at least one other ROC resident on this board at some point in history...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Ravi on January 08, 2015, 02:51:36 PM
Is this screening on 35mm anywhere?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on January 08, 2015, 03:40:38 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fURVDOgwL60


(http://i.imgur.com/V1TyRvl.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: convalescent_k on January 08, 2015, 11:50:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrK7Im5UqP4

this is kind of cool
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on January 09, 2015, 11:17:10 AM
Gosh... I LOVE PTA SEASON!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on January 09, 2015, 06:02:54 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/H2Li7Ky.png)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on January 09, 2015, 06:31:46 PM
other than bottom right corner, that shit is WACK.
looks like a political poster.
sportello for president.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: putneyswipe on January 09, 2015, 08:07:04 PM
bit too much of a 19th century vibe
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 09, 2015, 08:32:14 PM
https://soundcloud.com/interview-magazine/paul-thomas-anderson (https://soundcloud.com/interview-magazine/paul-thomas-anderson)

Don't think this one was posted here before, pretty good 20-minute phone interview.

Also, you guys might dig this documentary on Dennis Hopper, The American Dreamer, shot in 1970 as Hopper was editing The Last Movie (1971). Plenty of groovy vibes within, along with perpetually lit joints, hippies galore and even some paranoia for good measure. Thanks to Hopper's incessant stoner ramblings, there is much hippie ideology to ingest. There's also a pretty strong melancholic vibe as the death knell of the "Peace, man" movement was imminent. I think. Anyway, dig: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9csAmyYF9ek (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9csAmyYF9ek)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 10, 2015, 03:45:12 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/fQkns2z.png)
from new bev
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Reelist on January 10, 2015, 02:24:00 PM
Funny how it's held up with a domino's magnet

"If you're craving a different kind of triangle"
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 14, 2015, 06:42:50 AM
The Daily Beast gets high with Paul Thomas Anderson

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/11/i-passed-a-joint-to-paul-thomas-anderson-on-the-inherent-vice-stoner-bus.html
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Axolotl on January 14, 2015, 07:42:21 AM
Quote from: Headline
WE GOT STONED WITH PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON

Quote from: First line
When I passed the doobie to Paul Thomas Anderson, he did not abide.

Gotta get them clicks.

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: greenberryhill on January 14, 2015, 08:52:38 AM
I found this groovy still of the set in the gallery by Wilson Webb:

http://www.wilsonwebb.com/new-gallery-1/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on January 14, 2015, 01:51:34 PM
Cool limited-edition print from PTA's poster artist Dustin Stanton is available on his site. (He asked me to pass this along so I figured I'd post it here.)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7VcnDWCMAAXSo7.png)

http://www.dustinstantoncreative.com/#!vstc1=merchandise
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Lottery on January 15, 2015, 07:43:34 AM
PTA, best adapted screenplay Oscar nomination.
Mark Bridges, best costume design Oscar nomination.

But PTA ain't gonna win. Always a bridesmaid, never a Coen.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on January 15, 2015, 09:16:03 AM
eh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF9Yn5mgrjY
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Sleepless on January 20, 2015, 09:51:09 AM
Would anyone happen to have a copy of the screenplay they could send me? Much appreciated :)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on January 20, 2015, 05:41:44 PM
Vulture has a think-piece on audiences' response to Inherent Vice's ambiguities. Stick around for their comments section to check out how divisive the film is among Vulturers.
http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/inherent-vice-and-audiences-ambiguity-problem.html?mid=twitter_vulture (http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/inherent-vice-and-audiences-ambiguity-problem.html?mid=twitter_vulture)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 20, 2015, 07:59:56 PM
and feel free to share the good parts because i'm not curious about that but it sounds funny
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 21, 2015, 05:49:04 AM
Last 2 days to catch IV on 35MM!!! (if you live in NY, that is) Angelika is the only theatre here to screen Vice on 35mm and digital simultaneously since its release, BAM had it on 35mm for about a week then switched to DCP, but starting Friday Angelika is going all digital. So get your celluloid kicks while you still can these next 2 days. I lost count of how many times I've seen this flick already (pretty sure it ranges 6-7), but yet to watch a digital print in its entirety. Now there will be no choice.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 22, 2015, 07:30:39 AM
Vulture has a think-piece on audiences' response to Inherent Vice's ambiguities. Stick around for their comments section to check out how divisive the film is among Vulturers.
http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/inherent-vice-and-audiences-ambiguity-problem.html?mid=twitter_vulture (http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/inherent-vice-and-audiences-ambiguity-problem.html?mid=twitter_vulture)

from the article: "In fact, Inherent Vice makes perfect sense, is organized like the walk-in closet of an obsessive...",

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on January 22, 2015, 09:36:13 AM
Vulture has a think-piece on audiences' response to Inherent Vice's ambiguities. Stick around for their comments section to check out how divisive the film is among Vulturers.
http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/inherent-vice-and-audiences-ambiguity-problem.html?mid=twitter_vulture (http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/inherent-vice-and-audiences-ambiguity-problem.html?mid=twitter_vulture)
Loved this article, thanks for the tip on reading the comments, though! These are pretty great! It's interesting to see how ANGRY people are getting with this movie.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: BB on January 22, 2015, 11:14:16 AM
"It's like PTA didn't learn a lesson from the critical reception to The Master."

"I go to the movies to watch movies, not live life.  I live life for that."

"Basically I feel like Anderson took that famous story about Chandler admitting that even he didn't know who killed the chauffeur in The Big Sleep and decided to build an entire film around that kind of failure."



Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on January 23, 2015, 01:11:05 PM
Pretty great article on Joaquin: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jan/22/joaquin-phoenix-real-life-evil-seduces-inherent-vice?CMP=fb_gu
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 24, 2015, 05:36:44 PM
i'm skipping the story about how i found this andbut anyway

(http://i.imgur.com/H1g7HIo.jpg)

http://www.davessigns.com/neon-signs-gallery-ventura-santa-barbara-los-angeles-county.html

i called to get helpful pricing info but they're closed. i think this is a bit tacky and slightly flawed, so i think it's the best iv poster option, it's what i'd want hanging in my private area. i like how the blinking "c" is a required component from the original billboard
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on January 24, 2015, 05:45:01 PM
^related, i'm creating a post with all the character posters together, so i can look at that when i want to, and to encourage people to say their favorite

(http://i.imgur.com/H1aZjZ7.jpg)(http://i.imgur.com/vzfigIw.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/UQ3GWDA.jpg)(http://i.imgur.com/s5QX5w2.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/giG4GjE.jpg)(http://i.imgur.com/SOImunv.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/fkmVztd.jpg)(http://i.imgur.com/plHMpiX.jpg)

the josh brolin design is my favorite and the hong chau one has my favorite color scheme
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: modage on January 25, 2015, 02:17:10 PM
The illustrations for all these are so good but the compositions on some of them seem so slapped together. Still nice to see them all like this but yeah, wish they didn't have a sticker-pasted quality to the placement of the characters.

Brolin's is best.
Waterston's worst.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: P Heat on January 26, 2015, 03:12:27 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjMlhJ0gjxI

This is a good laugh. Joaquin messin around
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 26, 2015, 08:13:49 AM
Can't believe this won't even recoup half its budget, wonder how this will affect financing his next one...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Frederico Fellini on January 26, 2015, 09:45:34 AM
For a second there I thought PTA was wearing DR. Blatnoyd's suit.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on January 31, 2015, 08:47:40 AM
Just started reading the book, but have seen the film so many times that every word of narration is in the voice of Sortilege. Fun times.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Jim Steele on January 31, 2015, 01:13:57 PM
Just started reading the book, but have seen the film so many times that every word of narration is in the voice of Sortilege. Fun times.

Same this happened to me after watching the movie, I was finishing up reading gravitys rainbow and every now and then I'd hear Newsom voice narrate it. I usually hear it in Pynchon's voice from the video of him narrating the IV book trailer. But there's something about her voice and his prose that just go together so well.   
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on February 07, 2015, 05:47:38 PM
Both the US (http://www.amazon.com/Inherent-Blu-ray-Digital-UltraViolet-Combo/dp/B00QXIIZ3W/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1423352591&sr=8-2&keywords=inherent+vice) and German (http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00SYL9H42/dvdbeaver0c-21/ref=nosim) blu-rays are up for pre-order, with the German blu-ray release date listed as June 25, 2015

(http://i.imgur.com/LtXMVGb.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on February 07, 2015, 07:21:39 PM
JUNE 25TH??? doesn't that strike anyone as fucked up? this isn't even playing in my city anymore. it was out for hardly a month.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Fuzzy Dunlop on February 08, 2015, 04:38:10 PM
This article hits pretty close to how I felt watching the film on first and second viewing. You really do need to see it more than once.

http://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/887-when-once-isnt-enough/ (http://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/887-when-once-isnt-enough/)

When Once isn't Enough
by Scott Tobias
via The Dissolve

Let’s begin by stating the obvious: We’re human beings, and it’s only natural that our relationship with works of art will change over time. Sometimes those changes are marginal, sometimes dramatic, as we gain life experience and our taste grows more refined, or baser. Or as the culture shifts, and as the art itself beckons a fresh understanding. If all opinions were static, I’d still hold the view, adopted by my 13-year-old self, that The Ice Pirates, featuring Robert Urich and a robot pimp, was the greatest space adventure of all time. In fact, I can remember where I was when I saw The Ice Pirates—in my cousins’ basement, laughing my head off—as clearly as such where-were-you cultural moments as Kurt Cobain’s death and 9/11. But even through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia, I can admit the film has dropped in my estimation.

Critics are the slowest to admit that items may have shifted during flight. And there’s a simple enough reason for that: Our opinions are a matter of public record. We’ve made the argument one way or the other in print, and that argument often gets calcified over time, as directors make more movies, and the narrative we’ve constructed about their careers adds new chapters. For better or worse—mostly for better—the current auteurist argument in favor of Clint Eastwood’s American Sniper is informed by his long, complex relationship to violence, which finds an ambiguity that the film’s harshest critics insist is not present. There’s wisdom in that, in understanding one film as part of a continuum, but also a dogmatic commitment to a reading of a filmmaker that may no longer apply. The Clint Eastwood who made American Sniper may not be the Eastwood who made Letters From Iwo Jima, and that Eastwood may not be the same one who made Unforgiven, much less Dirty Harry. Artists change, too.

For me, every review has a hidden disclaimer: “The following words reflect how I feel about a movie today.” But the dirty little truth of this profession is that I may not feel the same way tomorrow. Though there’s a high likelihood that my opinion won’t change that much if I see something again, I may have much greater or lesser appreciation of it than I had the first time. Ask me today what I think about American Beauty, after many years and a couple of repeat viewings. It definitely isn’t what this guy thought.

A couple of weeks ago, fellow critic and not-frequent-enough Dissolve contributor Jordan Hoffman contacted me for a piece he was writing for Vanity Fair about Paul Thomas Anderson’s Inherent Vice. Hoffman admits to being thrown by the movie during the first scene, when Shasta Fay Hepworth (Katherine Waterston) dumps a lot of information on our hero (and her ex-boyfriend) Doc Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix), who himself is swimming in a haze of pot smoke and unresolved emotions. “I confess that I, a guy who basically watches movies professionally, was pretty much lost,” Jordan admits. And it’s not as if Anderson, working from Thomas Pynchon’s novel, was going to spend the remaining 135 minutes holding viewers’ hands until they caught up. The plotting gets denser, not clearer.

Jordan quotes director Edgar Wright, who tweeted, “I call it Inherent Twice, since I am looking forward to seeing it again.” Jordan put the question to me, too, about my plans to see Inherent Vice a second time. My response:

On first viewing, I felt I was watching about four Chinatowns layered on top of each other. What I failed to fully appreciate was the melancholic soul of the film, which mourns the passing of a specific time and place—and which also mourns a certain era in filmmaking and perhaps the death of celluloid itself. These resonances flickered for me on first viewing more than shined, and I expect that once I can hack my way out of the storytelling thicket, I’ll like the film quite a bit more.

There’s a school of thought that second viewings are not necessary—that a film should work the first time around, and if it doesn’t, it’s a failure. Pauline Kael famously never saw a film twice: “It’s funny, I just feel I got it the first time. With music, it’s different. People respond so differently to the whole issue of seeing a movie many times. I’m astonished when I talk to really good critics, who know their stuff and will see a film eight or ten or twelve times. I don’t see how they can do it without hating the movie. I would.” And with regard to Anderson, in particular, Stephanie Zacharek rejected calls from other critics on Twitter that The Master should be seen more than once: “In their eyes, the picture is that rich, that artistically challenging, that impossible to immediately ‘get.’ But the subtext of those tweets—unintentional, I’m certain—was passive-aggressively dictatorial. The unspoken suggestion was, ‘If you didn’t get it the first time, keep going back until you do.’”

With respect to Zacharek—whose writing is humbling proof that she gets more out of a first viewing than I do—some great movies are too densely constructed to comprehend the first time around. Perhaps it’s Anderson’s fault for failing to make himself clear; if he’s losing people who should be attuned to a film like Inherent Vice—particularly fans of his work, who are inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt—then maybe he should be blamed for not streamlining it more. There are certainly examples of ambitious films that are badly overstuffed: For example, I’d make that argument against Peter Greenaway’s Prospero’s Books, which is so absurdly crowded with visual information and literary allusion that ushers handed out guides to audiences during its theatrical run.

To me, the threshold for repeat viewings is this: The first viewing must beckon you back for a second. It’s not enough to feel like you’d missed something the first time—as with Prospero’s Books, in which I felt I’d missed almost everything—but you have to like the film and feel compelled to return, like an itch that needs scratching. In many cases, the stickiness is in the plotting, which really has no bearing on the value of a film like Inherent Vice—like many byzantine procedurals, the story is merely an access point into a changing, now-forgotten slice of Southern California in the early 1970s. And when that access point becomes a barrier—as it did to Jordan, and me, and presumably other “Inherent Twice” people—then we lose a lot of information. Watching the film a second time can not only have a clarifying effect, but can allow us to experience it as really is, and have a fuller emotional experience.

Many of the best and most beguiling films of the past few decades follow the same model. The scrambled chronologies of Christopher Nolan’s Memento and Atom Egoyan’s Exotica are a demanding game of catch-up on first viewing, but emotionally devastating on the second, as the themes start to surface and there’s a clearer rationale for the structure. Buried in both films are keen insights into how we create fictions and false memories as a way to process grief. Ditto the Shane Carruth duos of Primer and Upstream Color—the former lost in the endless curlicues of time-travel paradoxes, the latter so stubbornly abstract that the best possible approach is to intuit your way through it. Perhaps some critics (and viewers) have a greater capacity for understanding a film the first time around, but there’s an arrogance in believing that a second look is never desirable or necessary, because we all have blind spots or other limits to our perception. Filmmakers fuss for years over every last detail in a movie; what makes us think we can take them all in at a rate of 24 frames per second? (Or however that metaphor might apply to the alien technology of digital projection.)

So what was Inherent Vice like for me on a second viewing? It was, as I suspected, a revelation. Having already hacked through the thicket of overlapping cases and sinister conspiracies the first time around, I could immerse myself more in the film’s enveloping vibe, with its uniquely compatible mix of shaggy-dog wackiness and tugging melancholy. Though Anderson’s connection to the New Hollywood filmmakers of the era has been clear since Boogie Nights—and his affinity for Robert Altman’s The Long Goodbye even more so here—Inherent Vice doesn’t feel like a nostalgia piece, but a genuine, imaginative attempt to plug into a certain era in the culture, and in filmmaking itself. All those things were there on first viewing, but hovering in the background, slightly out of focus, as I struggled with the ins and outs of the foreground. I can see it much clearer now. Items shifted during flight.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: BigSock on February 11, 2015, 09:43:26 AM
Where can I find a copy of the script to read?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: RegularKarate on February 13, 2015, 04:20:26 PM
I liked Inherent Vice
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: cinemanarchist on February 17, 2015, 01:37:44 PM
...and it's for sale on iTunes. Holy shit, that was fast.

Edit: At least in the United States. I know release dates vary from country to country.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on February 17, 2015, 01:47:17 PM
...and it's for sale on iTunes. Holy shit, that was fast.
Oh. Well there ya go..

What the fuck?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on February 17, 2015, 02:07:29 PM
do what now?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on February 17, 2015, 02:10:23 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/U11CVbQ.png)

[edit]now i see: Expected Release: Mar 17, 2015
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on February 17, 2015, 02:18:26 PM
it's legit, watching now. a lot earlier than expected...
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on February 17, 2015, 02:19:12 PM
this isnt normal right
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: cinemanarchist on February 17, 2015, 02:19:53 PM
That screenshot is of the WEBSITE for IV on iTunes, but if you actually go into the iTunes store you can purchase the HD version right now. For some reason it does still say the SD version isn't available until March. It is currently listed in the New & Noteworthy section, and they don't list pre-orders there.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: jenkins on February 17, 2015, 02:27:19 PM
if you actually go into the iTunes store

well said
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on February 17, 2015, 02:29:29 PM
it's like Barry stumbling upon the loophole in the pudding promotion, only with no monetary value.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on February 17, 2015, 03:32:03 PM
Is this a glitch a la last week's House of Cards leak by Netflix, or is WB saying 'fuck it, let's see if we can squeeze some money out of it here."
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gold Trumpet on February 17, 2015, 10:40:23 PM
A lot of movies get early digital releases now.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Gittes on February 18, 2015, 10:47:32 AM
I would still like to fit in another theatrical viewing and then I'm going to wait for the Bluray release, which is likely the better value. I would be interested in seeing some screen caps of the HD transfer that's up on iTunes, though.

On a related note, I recently had an entire season of Mad Men vanish from my iTunes library; Apple doesn't own the license to most content, so it's liable to be pulled by the provider at any given moment. I didn't have the episodes stored on my computer, but you can always re-download purchased items from the cloud -- unless you can't! I somehow doubt it would happen with IV, but it's made me think twice before buying content via iTunes. I used to be a big fan of that method and have several TV shows attached to my account, but this recent mixup is a reminder of the virtues of physical media. In Apple's defence, I contacted their support team and they did supply me with some credits to re-download the episodes. Also, renting and streaming via Apple TV is still super convenient.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: velociraptor on February 26, 2015, 01:28:42 PM
This is funny. http://www.thewrap.com/paul-thomas-anderson-slams-american-airlines-in-indie-spirit-acceptance-speech/
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: P Heat on February 26, 2015, 09:20:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj7FUukxEOA

Also a funny story.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: porgy on March 01, 2015, 10:16:54 PM
Extras? I didnt get any of those when I downloaded it.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Drenk on March 02, 2015, 02:21:09 AM
It's directly on iTunes, you scroll down on the IV page and, if you've bought the movie, you can click on iTunes extras. And watch them.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Something Spanish on March 02, 2015, 01:07:46 PM
weird, can't figure it out but the extras won't play for me. purchased IV the day it came out digitally and didn't see these extras as an option, did itunes just recently tack them on? guess i'll have to wait until the blu-ray or someone uploads these to youtube
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: greenberryhill on March 03, 2015, 05:54:03 PM
I was watching the Limp music video and found this very interesting shot! They are identical!

Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: KJ on March 03, 2015, 06:29:13 PM
I was watching the Limp music video

what, why?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: polkablues on March 03, 2015, 06:47:19 PM
Why wouldn't he?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: wilder on March 05, 2015, 08:23:15 AM
Blu-ray (http://www.amazon.com/Inherent-Blu-ray-Digital-UltraViolet-Combo/dp/B00QXIIZ3W/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1425565320&sr=8-3&keywords=inherent+vice) on April 28, 2015

(http://i.imgur.com/BIVBkNg.jpg)
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: N on March 05, 2015, 08:58:50 AM
My favourite out of all the IV-associated posters/cover art. Gonna pre-order this on bluray next month.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: N on March 13, 2015, 03:38:48 PM
(http://static.stereogum.com/uploads/2011/11/radiohead-young.jpg)
Jonny Greenwood released the instrumental for spooks on BBC 1 radio during a FlyLo session.

You can listen to the full thing here, JG doesnt kick in till the last third: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b054pdx2

Also uploaded the mp3 over here: Link died, it's on youtube now anyway.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: tpfkabi on March 22, 2015, 10:45:36 PM
Question about officially printed posters of the film:
Did the Joaquin rainbow color head on black background design get officially printed and sent to movie theaters or just the "pink legs" poster?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: max from fearless on May 28, 2015, 08:10:20 AM
I like this more than any of the paintings/individual character posters that were released.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Trystero on June 08, 2015, 08:59:29 PM
Question about officially printed posters of the film:
Did the Joaquin rainbow color head on black background design get officially printed and sent to movie theaters or just the "pink legs" poster?

Sure did, at least in Aus. Got mine as a gift from a friend who works at a local cinema. Very groovy
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on June 09, 2015, 07:50:30 AM
any know if the JG song that plays as Doc finds the Shasta's postcard is anywhere on the internet? I can't find it anywhere, a link would be beautiful
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: SailorOfTheSeas on June 09, 2015, 09:19:44 AM
Also, last night i watched the bluray, and fuuck, the film works so beautiful when you look at Doc as a paranoid schizophrenic. And if u watch Everything in this Dream straight after the film finishes.   
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: greenberryhill on June 18, 2015, 01:04:00 PM
This is amazing!!!!

https://vimeo.com/130899960
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on June 18, 2015, 10:02:28 PM
that is a very cool supplement

I just kinda get sad when there was stuff that was filmed that didn't end up in the film  :yabbse-undecided:
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: OpO1832 on June 27, 2015, 11:17:27 AM
Thats actually a pretty poor scan for super 8mm, especially considering this is for a P.T Anderson movie. I wonder who did the transfer. Tisk Tisk, Ocho Y Pico does the best super 8 scans...they are located in Spain. I am sure in California Fotokem would of done a dope ass job, or Cinelicious or however you spell that...
The D.P should of used 50D instead of 500T and 200T if she wanted more latitude she could of went with 250D. 250D and 50D would of yielded better results considering the nature of the shoot( the shots are EXT. in California sun, using a Tungsten balanced film was a poor choice but the footage should be re scanned.

Really what she also should of done was to try and find large stock piles of 100D Color reversal film, THAT would of given THE LOOK.

but nonetheless its still the BEST thing I have seen regarding behind the scenes shooting  espcially when it comes to just being a fan of P.T Anderson, this trumps the Magnolia That Moment thing, cause you really get a look at the cameras, lights, the dollys, everything you reallllly want to see. It was cool to watch that footage that was leaked online b4 the movie came out some guy shot with his phone the scene were J.P escorts K.W to her car and then you see J.P walk off set and signal to somebody for a stoogie, what was interesting about that from a film nerd perspective was the productions use of ultra strong lights probably a 12k HMI being bounced off a giant white board or w.e, from the roof across the street, it was probably something like (2) 12k (FAKE SUN) lights being bounced off two giant white cards,anyway shit like that fascinates me.

Inherent Vice is an interesting film, its the first film P.T Anderson shot in 1:85 ( although the Master was the first departure from the Anamorphic lenses but he choose to shoot in 65mm and 35mm so its  hybrid movie, props to him for blowing the 35 to 65mm and vice versa for the 70mm projection.

I hope P.T Anderson shoots his next movie in ULTRA PANAVISION like Hateful 8. Isn't it so cool to see two American Filmmakers working within the studio system, making REAL MOVIES, being inspired by one another. In these lame times when the studios crank out ADVERTISEMENTS masquerading as movies, its refreshing! Paul brought back the 70mm thing now Q.T is doing it up in slightly wider aspect ratio, it really is just great to see this kinship amongst directors!
 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: OpO1832 on June 27, 2015, 12:27:22 PM
did anyone notice that the girl from the master who freddie feels up in his darkroom is the same girl who is seen in the  1 second scene in inherent vice, passing by the camera during the visit to "interview" the boards, and in the behind the scenes she throws the peace sign to the camera, its the same actress!  She's interesting.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: DocSportello on June 27, 2015, 08:54:01 PM
She was also in the last stretch of Mad Men episodes for a few brief scenes. She was the girl babysitting for Joan and what not.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: OpO1832 on July 01, 2015, 08:28:34 PM
I don't watch Mad Men but good eye!
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: 03 on July 07, 2015, 06:52:18 PM
Has anyone come àcross any way to purchase one of the ties or found anyone  that is making fan versions or imitations?
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Reelist on December 28, 2015, 03:25:36 PM
It's funny to think that this is the only PTA film I didn't make a fuss over buying right when it came out. I still don't own the blu ray simply because I didn't see the point in revisiting it after my two theater viewings, I didn't feel the need to dig any deeper into it. Then, it just kind of came to me a second ago that maybe PTA was attempting to make the most dense stoner film of all time? Like, the go to quality those movies seem to shoot for is their rewatchability, that you can just throw it on at anytime, any scene, and have a laugh with your bros. It's probably the most universally reviled films by all his fans, though. I think what that speaks to is how adamantly he intended to make a Thomas Pynchon film over his own. That novel spoke to him so deeply, that he needed to propel it out there for us. I find that compelling. This movie is a beast to deal with, but I look forward to the day when I can sit on my couch, barefoot in the living room smoking a joint as fat as one doc would roll and really trying to get to the bottom of what this thing is about.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: martinthewarrior on December 29, 2015, 12:34:29 PM
Said it before, and don't have much of substance to add while waiting for a delayed flight, but the tone of IV is better than the whole of most movies. I love IV, and it's climbed to maybe second place for me when it comes to PTA. I will never tire of crawling inside it for a viewing. I sincerely hope the cool reception doesn't doom the chance of more in this vein. Works for me completely.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: Dobbs on May 02, 2017, 08:36:51 AM
What's the name of that film where 2 men fight on a boat and they do it like for real? If I am not mistaken it was a movie mentioned in here (or in some other thread) when IV was still in production... All I remember is that one man is supposed to be a detective? And he was wearing a grey/light blue suit or something. It was probably set in California too. Oh and a woman was involved, I don't remember if she were the reason for the fist fight though.
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: KJ on August 02, 2017, 10:50:10 PM
haven't seen it yet :(
 
Title: Re: INHERENT VICE (No Major Spoilers)
Post by: WorldForgot on August 05, 2017, 10:36:08 AM
haven't seen it yet :(

If you mean Inherent Vice,
round up your favorite substances,
make a lil tea,
take a trip