Inherent Vice - SPOILERS!

[HACKANUT]

found this... purdy gud.

[WorldForgot]

First Pick as Lil Lebowski filmz

[Lewton]

I watched this again recently via the Blu-ray and it's really a completely different experience in the summer (well, nearly summer). I remember seeing this in theatres in the dead of winter and something about the seasonal mismatch nagged at me...which is probably a weird observation, lol, but oh well. But this is a movie meant for summer afternoons and nights...heck, summer mornings, too. Phantom Thread, on the other hand, really feels like a winter movie.

Also, IV is the kind of movie where you reach the end and "Any Day Now" flares up and you're like, "wait, is this the best movie he's ever made?" And in that moment you're almost ready to toss aside The Master and PDL to bow down to this one as the true magnum opus!

[eward]

   Yeah, every time I rewatch Inherent Vice it creeps further and further up my list of favorites. I would encourage all those who have more lukewarm feelings about it to give it a second, third, fourth, fifth (ad infinitum) spin. 

[modage]

Probably not intentional/conscious but came across this scene in Sugarland Express and reminded me a bit of Shasta's entrance in IV. Particularly the orange/blue.

[eward]

This is cool fucking awesome

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JRHFIkxGpsWHOndIwuPU7dZdiEepbi9P/view

[jenkins]

it's a link to The Inherent Vice Companion, described like this:

When asked what the film Inherent Vice was about, film- maker Paul Thomas Anderson (PTA henceforth) was quick to respond, “it’s about Pynchon.” The author’s byzantine plots, poetic prose, and fantastical worlds have inspired countless forms of adoration as critique or homage, and in the case of PTA: adaptation. The same can be said of this companion, which serves as a love letter to both the author and the director.

While the book had been derided by some as “Pychon- Lite,” the film is one of PTA’s most confounding. Critics were often at a loss to make sense of the plot and audiences dubbed it “incoherent vice.” Misunderstood by many, the film resists first impressions and rewards those who spend time with it. As such, this companion is styled in the fashion of Steven Weisenburger’s A Gravity’s Rainbow Companion (essential to Pynchon’s magnum opus), but with timecode replacing page numbers and scenes replacing chapters.

I would not presume that my interpretation of the film’s deeper meanings are definitive or even relative. The compan- ion catalogs — by timecode — the film’s motifs, themes, and references; allowing you the opportunity to draw your own con- clusions. In addition, each scene is accompanied by trivia as to any cars, sampled music or location featured within it. Scenes are numbered and titled in correspondence to the final shooting script. To the observant reader, it will become apparent that some of the scenes from the script are missing. A full list of all the cut scenes is provided in Appendix B. Appendix A lists the film’s sprawling cast of characters along with notes on each. Round- ing out the companion are references and an index. The index exclusively uses timecode and is a helpful tool in identifying the film’s many motifs. All references are further categorized as such:

PROPS/SCENERY: All physical items in the film are in caps.
“Dialogue”: Spoken dialogue is in quotations.
Written words: Any text shown in the film is written in italics.
: Filming location : Music
: Automobile

There is no correct way to use this companion, but might I make some suggestions? It can be read after having watched the film or consulted while viewing it. My preferred method is to view the film scene by scene, pausing after each to read the corresponding notes and analyze what was just watched. The choice is yours; some methods reward repeat viewings while others are more appropriate for first time viewers.

Ultimately the companion’s goal is to foster a deeper enjoyment of Inherent Vice. The film is so dense with allusion and plot that viewers can feel lost, but as Doc sez, “thinking comes later.” So my hope is that the companion can shoulder the burden of making sense of it all and allow you the opportunity to just enjoy a truly magnificent film.

Happy viewing, dopers.

[WorldForgot]

Bless you, eward 

[wilberfan]

Awesome, indeed.  No way to know if this will soften my dislike of the film, but it will certainly increase some level of understanding of the individual pieces.

[eward]

I love Inherent Vice and have seen it many times, I've read the book twice as well (though that was some years ago), and this still managed to help me clarify certain little things, with fun nuggets of trivia interspersed throughout.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Totally, this was great. I guess I never fully tracked that the paramilitary group following Doc was real. I also didn't get that Doc plotting out the conspiracy map happened the next night, he's so worked up in it I figured he was coming down off of Batnoyd's coke later that same night.

I still don't quite get Bigfoot's revenge plan for dealing with Prussia and why he ripped off the Golden Fang's dope just to plant it on Doc, it doesn't really hold together for me. Also, why did Puck kill Glen?

I would love if there were more details about the deleted scenes, especially the Thomas Jefferson scene and the Hallucinating in the mirror scene. I wonder if PTA ever considered shooting the Vegas sequence from the book...I'm assuming he at least wrote it out at some point.

[eward]

I believe the Thomas Jefferson scene is in the leaked script, no?

[modage]

Believe PTA said he cut the Vegas stuff pretty early just to keep the sprawling narrative (slightly more) contained.

The Thomas Jefferson stuff was filmed, remember?

[eward]

"Do you detect a common thread here, Lawrence?"

[Tdog]

So, seeing as a recent picture of Thomas Pynchon was snapped by a paparazzo in January, has anybody gone through the movie again to search for a potential cameo?