Author Topic: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!  (Read 36720 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MacGuffin

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 22985
  • Respect: +638
Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« on: October 01, 2014, 02:10:50 PM »
+6
This is a thread in which people who have seen Inherent Vice in its entirety are free to talk about it with impunity.  Where spoilers can run rampant and anyone who ventures in prematurely only has himself to blame. 

So discuss, lucky ones, and know that until the rest of us huddled masses have the opportunity to watch the film, we'll be just outside, cursing your names under our collective breath.


THERE BE SPOILERS AHEAD.

----polkablues


I wanted to edit this post too
- JB


this edit marks my return. and now to stay the hell away from this thread for the next few months.
- p


Edit party!
- polkablues
« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 02:37:00 PM by polkablues »
“Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art.” - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
  • Respect: +1588
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2014, 01:07:03 AM »
+26
First thing I want to say is that I think this movie is virtually un-spoilerable.

If someone put a gun to my head and asked me to give a play-by-play of IV’s plot I’d be a dead man. I’ll need to watch it at least seven more times with subtitles before I’ll have the vaguest idea what was going on (mod was right to see this 3 times in one day). Even beyond the plot the movie is difficult to describe. The word “beguiling” has been used and is actually pretty apt. It’s hard to put your finger on, but that’s maybe the point, because Doc has a hard time putting his finger on anything beyond his lost love for the duration of Inherent Vice’s running time. The beauty is that it doesn’t even matter if you’re able to follow the story — what was most compelling to me was the always unexpected, dissonant ways the characters Doc comes across behaved within their vignettes. A scene is moving “this way” and a character is moving “that way” instead. Their life, their full, fleshed out life, memory, experience, all that, is what you’re watching, a specific slice of it shown just because it happens to coincide with the plot’s need to show a character at that moment, but their helping to unravel the mystery doesn’t really seem to matter. We get to see them, instead. This has to have the best acting in any PT movie, often Cassavetes level, an unprecedented immediacy in comparison to his previous films, and the detective story seems more an excuse for observation, a way to get Doc mobile running around Los Angeles and into the presence of all these insane characters to fix his eyes on what’s-going-on-with-them as humans regardless of their part within the crime thread.

The Master was beautiful but visually this is another horse entirely, a step beyond. It LOOKS like a movie straight up made in the 70s even moreso than Boogie Nights, and if I was unfamiliar with all names involved and happened to see it I’d probably think it actually was. The lighting, the textures, the furniture…how did he do that? It boggles my mind. I wasn’t alive 40 years ago, but even if it isn’t period accurate it definitely doesn’t look “like now”, and it doesn’t look like a pastiche. I need to rewatch the trailer but I feel like it was color timed to appear more like a normal movie, the picture I saw up on that screen felt such a departure from it. Maybe the trailer difference was my imagination. Whatever.

Inherent Vice starts off like something in the tonal vein of Love Streams and morphs, with the momentum of a hawaiian slide guitar, into a mad, mindblowing labyrinth of cryptic doublespeak and double entendres. It’s perverted as hell, thank god (Thank GOD), and DENSE, so many things going on and to pick up on repeat viewings. It’s a slipstream of madcap antics and unbeatable melancholy. Who is who and why is why and how is what I couldn’t tell you. I don’t think I care that I couldn’t tell you. The acting is SO GOOD though, that even when you’re bewildered, when characters like Martin Short’s Doctor Blatnoyd are speaking almost incoherently but Doc seems right there with them and to have some clue what’s going on, you believe them so fully as people, their renderings feel so real, that it doesn’t feel like the scene doesn’t make sense, but that you’re privy to an actual event that took place and just haven’t cracked the code. I loved that. Even if I never make sense of it I could watch it again and again — an endless supply of deranged company to hang out with.

In some ways Inherent Vice feels like a fraternal twin of The Master, conveying similar skepticism about America’s ideals, about its skeptics alternatives, and of any answers in general, and like The Master, at its core the movie is about a love that got away - love the only thing that will save you, and love as a drug that’s worth taking because sobriety in this life without a point doesn’t seem to be worth it. Love as a drug…a loved life worth living…sobriety as a life without love…drugs as a substitute for that lacking love…something or other…

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.

I bet Pubrick is going to write a book about it.

Going to have to edit this a bunch of times because my mind is still swirling and I have no idea how long it’s going to take me to wrap my head around something concrete. I know my comments are vague but atm I don’t know how to describe my feelings or really what I saw. The movie is so so original, and will rekindle your love of film and belief in its future possibilities even more than The Master, I think. IV goes into fever dream territory and never comes out.



modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Respect: +698
    • Floating Heads
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2014, 02:14:43 AM »
0
This review is basically perfect.

I'll add that I understand it slightly more on repeated viewings and enjoyed it tons more.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Something Spanish

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +42
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2014, 06:20:43 AM »
+2

velociraptor

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Respect: +56
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2014, 09:14:30 AM »
0
Let me ask the question we're all dying to know: what font does he use for the opening title? Does the movie open with the title like TWBB and The Master? Or does it have a title sequence?

Also, Wilder's review is better than any major journalistic publication's review thus far.

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Respect: +698
    • Floating Heads
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2014, 09:28:38 AM »
+1
Title is green neon lights over Joaquin like in the trailer.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Punch

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 99
  • Respect: +90
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2014, 09:35:53 AM »
+1
how was michael k williams & Hong Chau in the film? also are the las vegas scenes & acid trips in the movie?
"oh you haven’t truly watched a film if you didn’t watch it on the big screen" mumbles the bourgeois dipshit

martinthewarrior

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Respect: +19
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2014, 09:36:13 AM »
+1
First thing I want to say is that I think this movie is virtually un-spoilerable.

If someone put a gun to my head and asked me to give a play-by-play of IV’s plot I’d be a dead man. I’ll need to watch it at least seven more times with subtitles before I’ll have the vaguest idea what was going on (mod was right to see this 3 times in one day). Even beyond the plot the movie is difficult to describe. The word “beguiling” has been used and is actually pretty apt. It’s hard to put your finger on, but that’s maybe the point, because Doc has a hard time putting his finger on anything beyond his lost love for the duration of Inherent Vice’s running time. The beauty is that it doesn’t even matter if you’re able to follow the story — what was most compelling to me was the always unexpected, dissonant ways the characters Doc comes across behaved within their vignettes. A scene is moving “this way” and a character is moving “that way” instead. Their life, their full, fleshed out life, memory, experience, all that, is what you’re watching, a specific slice of it shown just because it happens to coincide with the plot’s need to show a character at that moment, but their helping to unravel the mystery doesn’t really seem to matter. We get to see them, instead. This has to have the best acting in any PT movie, often Cassavetes level, an unprecedented immediacy in comparison to his previous films, and the detective story seems more an excuse for observation, a way to get Doc mobile running around Los Angeles and into the presence of all these insane characters to fix his eyes on what’s-going-on-with-them as humans regardless of their part within the crime thread.

The Master was beautiful but visually this is another horse entirely, a step beyond. It LOOKS like a movie straight up made in the 70s even moreso than Boogie Nights, and if I was unfamiliar with all names involved and happened to see it I’d probably think it actually was. The lighting, the textures, the furniture…how did he do that? It boggles my mind. I wasn’t alive 40 years ago, but even if it isn’t period accurate it definitely doesn’t look “like now”, and it doesn’t look like a pastiche. I need to rewatch the trailer but I feel like it was color timed to appear more like a normal movie, the picture I saw up on that screen felt such a departure from it. Maybe the trailer difference was my imagination. Whatever.

Inherent Vice starts off like something in the tonal vein of Love Streams and morphs, with the momentum of a hawaiian slide guitar, into a mad, mindblowing labyrinth of cryptic doublespeak and double entendres. It’s perverted as hell, thank god (Thank GOD), and DENSE, so many things going on and to pick up on repeat viewings. It’s a slipstream of madcap antics and unbeatable melancholy. Who is who and why is why and how is what I couldn’t tell you. I don’t think I care that I couldn’t tell you. The acting is SO GOOD though, that even when you’re bewildered, when characters like Martin Short’s Doctor Blatnoyd are speaking almost incoherently but Doc seems right there with them and to have some clue what’s going on, you believe them so fully as people, their renderings feel so real, that it doesn’t feel like the scene doesn’t make sense, but that you’re privy to an actual event that took place and just haven’t cracked the code. I loved that. Even if I never make sense of it I could watch it again and again — an endless supply of deranged company to hang out with.

In some ways Inherent Vice feels like a fraternal twin of The Master, conveying similar skepticism about America’s ideals, about its skeptics alternatives, and of any answers in general, and like The Master, at its core the movie is about a love that got away - love the only thing that will save you, and love as a drug that’s worth taking because sobriety in this life without a point doesn’t seem to be worth it. Love as a drug…a loved life worth living…sobriety as a life without love…drugs as a substitute for that lacking love…something or other…

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.

I bet Pubrick is going to write a book about it.

Going to have to edit this a bunch of times because my mind is still swirling and I have no idea how long it’s going to take me to wrap my head around something concrete. I know my comments are vague but atm I don’t know how to describe my feelings or really what I saw. The movie is so so original, and will rekindle your love of film and belief in its future possibilities even more than The Master, I think. IV goes into fever dream territory and never comes out.




What a wonderful write up. Thanks for this.

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Respect: +698
    • Floating Heads
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2014, 10:08:23 AM »
+2
how was michael k williams & Hong Chau in the film? also are the las vegas scenes & acid trips in the movie?
There is no weak link in the cast. Everyone is great. Brolin may be a standout. Williams is only in one scene. No acid flashbacks or Vegas trip.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Drenk

  • The Magic Flight
  • ****
  • Posts: 770
  • Respect: +446
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2014, 02:00:31 PM »
0
SPOILERS

I don't want to know the ending, but I read it was "outrageously different" from the book. Outrageously seems quite...radical...

Here is the book ending:

« Doc figured if he missed the Gordita Beach exit he’d take the first one whose sign he could read and work his way back on surface streets. He knew that at Rosecrans the freeway began to dogleg east, and at some point, Hawthorne Boulevard or Artesia, he’d lose the fog, unless it was spreading tonight, and settled in regionwide. Maybe then it would stay this way for days, maybe he’d have to just keep driving, down past Long Beach, down through Orange County, and San Diego, and across a border where nobody could tell anymore in the fog who was Mexican, who was Anglo, who was anybody. Then again, he might run out of gas before that happened, and have to leave the caravan, and pull over on the shoulder, and wait. For whatever would happen. For a forgotten joint to materialize in his pocket. For the CHP to come by and choose not to hassle him. For a restless blonde in a Stingray to stop and offer him a ride. For the fog to burn away, and for something else this time, somehow, to be there instead. »

Do you confirm the "outrageous"?

I'm so many people.

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Respect: +698
    • Floating Heads
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #10 on: October 05, 2014, 04:47:50 PM »
+2
The major difference from what I've been told is that in the book Doc ends up alone. And in the film, he's with Shasta. Naturally, since PTA is a romantic.

Full songlisting from the movie.

http://thefilmstage.com/news/listen-to-the-soundtrack-for-paul-thomas-andersons-inherent-vice/
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Larry

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Respect: +86
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2014, 08:48:40 PM »
0
does sean penn make an appearance? or was that just rumoured

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
  • Respect: +1588
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2014, 09:30:02 PM »
0
Rumors I never heard. Penn isn't in there.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2264
  • Respect: +1364
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #13 on: October 06, 2014, 11:55:06 PM »
+2
i really hope this film is everything in my Wilder dreams

adorable

the dreamy review that was needed for all pta fans, from right here at xixax. just to let myself be like the fifth person to thank wilder for that
Every perspective is an act of creation.

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Respect: +698
    • Floating Heads
Re: Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!
« Reply #14 on: October 07, 2014, 07:27:49 AM »
0
Yeah no Penn and no Kevin J. O'Connor!

Also no Anders Holm or the actor they cast as Glenn Charlock.

There's a couple shots in the trailer not in the film too.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy