Licorice Pizza - Speculation & General Reactions

[wilberfan]

I hate Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, so the idea that this is going to be compared with that or that this is some sort of "response" to that film is not very appealing.

(You had me at "I hate [OUATIH]").     

I agree completely that a comparison between the two films would be...problematic for me. Especially if, as you say, it was considered some kind of response.   Ugh.

[Yes]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too. 

[Heisenberg]

I'm still convinced that we're only aware of half the cast.

[Yes]

With Inherent Vice, we had a general sense of what to expect since it was a book adaptation

Phantom Thread had many more details available. I swear it was here where the basic premise was revealed or "leaked" very early in production. Of course it was the vaguest idea but that still eased our appetite.

You'd think privacy would enhance a film's anticipation but everything surrounding this has just gotten obnoxious (personally). Compare it to The Master's legendary history and trajectory. We don't know the full cast, any plot plots, if Greenwood is scoring. It caused so much unnecessary speculation and anxiety. The only reason to be excited is because it's PTA. The man we've devoted our lives to for many decades

[PaulElroy35]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too.

Just because hes done 2 films set some what in  the 70s before doesnt really make it redundent.

If he was making contemporary  films nonone would say that would be redundent.  As long as the story is different to what hes done before which no doubt it will be the decade its set in doesnt really matter.

I'm suprised how lukewarm it seems people  are on the idea of this film.

[Rooty Poots]

I'm probably more excited for this one than I've been for the last few. And I'm digging the secrecy. And the excitement of seeing like ten new unread posts in this thread and wondering each time if something's been found out, haha

[itwasgood]

I think the most hyped one is definitely The Master. The mystery of the film itself before the teasers revealing and all the good things said about it from Venice excited the crowd very much. People were expecting another TWBB. The hype for Inherent Vice mostly came from the speculation of Pynchon's involvement. Phantom Thread's hype, like Soggy Bottom, is the result of its secretive production.
I'm excited for Soggy Bottom. It seems smaller and more personal, from the rumored story to the known casting choice. I like it when filmmakers get there.

[Yes]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too.

Just because hes done 2 films set some what in  the 70s before doesnt really make it redundent.

If he was making contemporary  films nonone would say that would be redundent.  As long as the story is different to what hes done before which no doubt it will be the decade its set in doesnt really matter.

I'm suprised how lukewarm it seems people  are on the idea of this film.

He hasn't made a contemporary film since 2002. Society has completely shifted these decades apart? That's why nobody would say it's redundant.

His last 4 films have been period pieces. One of those films takes place exact same era and near location as this film. Boogie Nights also involves 70s. Not sure what else he can get from this time frame? What else is there to explore? Vice was about the melancholy, Boogie about the exuberant pop culture. And considering this involves actors, it's not that much a different story than what he's created before

The decade it set in does matter lol. That's literally context and location.

[RudyBlatnoyd]

I'm sure it's possible for a director to make more than two films set in the 70s and for them all to have different tones, subject matter and emphases.

After all, there were many filmmakers working in the actual 70s who managed to make lots of different kinds of contemporary movies set in the period...

[RudyBlatnoyd]

Also, Balzac wrote, like, 70 novels and short stories set around the same period and milieu of nineteenth-century France. There's a lot you can do by mining down into a time and place.

I think the 70s, even if one remains in California, is a rich enough period to sustain a lot of work. Not saying a modern-day drama wouldn't be interesting, mind!

[PaulElroy35]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too.

Just because hes done 2 films set some what in  the 70s before doesnt really make it redundent.

If he was making contemporary  films nonone would say that would be redundent.  As long as the story is different to what hes done before which no doubt it will be the decade its set in doesnt really matter.

I'm suprised how lukewarm it seems people  are on the idea of this film.

He hasn't made a contemporary film since 2002. Society has completely shifted these decades apart? That's why nobody would say it's redundant.

His last 4 films have been period pieces. One of those films takes place exact same era and near location as this film. Boogie Nights also involves 70s. Not sure what else he can get from this time frame? What else is there to explore? Vice was about the melancholy, Boogie about the exuberant pop culture. And considering this involves actors, it's not that much a different story than what he's created before

The decade it set in does matter lol. That's literally context and location.

Or maybe the 70s is  just backdrop.

Plus there is loads more that could be said if he wants to.

[pynchonikon]

I wouldn't have the slightest problem if he decided to make California-set pieces for the rest of his life, but I also like the idea of exploring different time frames and of course I would be fascinated to look his view on modern society.

Yet somehow I think of Soggy Bottom (from the little we've known so far) as a potential attempt to reconcile himself with the earlier period of his work - basically BN/Magnolia, like a try to return, as the experienced and mature artist that he is now, to this comfort zone and give a fresh point of view. So I kinda understand why this particular film might be truly special and personal for him.

[Yes]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too.

Just because hes done 2 films set some what in  the 70s before doesnt really make it redundent.

If he was making contemporary  films nonone would say that would be redundent.  As long as the story is different to what hes done before which no doubt it will be the decade its set in doesnt really matter.

I'm suprised how lukewarm it seems people  are on the idea of this film.

He hasn't made a contemporary film since 2002. Society has completely shifted these decades apart? That's why nobody would say it's redundant.

His last 4 films have been period pieces. One of those films takes place exact same era and near location as this film. Boogie Nights also involves 70s. Not sure what else he can get from this time frame? What else is there to explore? Vice was about the melancholy, Boogie about the exuberant pop culture. And considering this involves actors, it's not that much a different story than what he's created before

The decade it set in does matter lol. That's literally context and location.

Or maybe the 70s is  just backdrop.

Plus there is loads more that could be said if he wants to.

Lmao nobody sets a film in 70s for just a backdrop. Come on. That's terrible filmmaking. And not to mention, financially impossible. It makes no sense. Everything has a reason. Every location, setting, etc is the cornerstone of a film. All PTA's period films needed to be so. You can't make Phantom Thread in 2017, Master needed to occur after post-war, There Will Be Blood was during oil boom. I can't believe I need to explain something so obvious. That's just like duh. Basic movies 101. I'm sure PTA has a specific reason since, you know, Jon Peters-esque character is involved, seems to include the gas crisis, cruising culture... all of which were specific to early 70s. I just dont find any of that personally exciting. Definitely not compared to the hype and anticipation of The Master

[PaulElroy35]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too.

Just because hes done 2 films set some what in  the 70s before doesnt really make it redundent.

If he was making contemporary  films nonone would say that would be redundent.  As long as the story is different to what hes done before which no doubt it will be the decade its set in doesnt really matter.

I'm suprised how lukewarm it seems people  are on the idea of this film.

He hasn't made a contemporary film since 2002. Society has completely shifted these decades apart? That's why nobody would say it's redundant.

His last 4 films have been period pieces. One of those films takes place exact same era and near location as this film. Boogie Nights also involves 70s. Not sure what else he can get from this time frame? What else is there to explore? Vice was about the melancholy, Boogie about the exuberant pop culture. And considering this involves actors, it's not that much a different story than what he's created before

The decade it set in does matter lol. That's literally context and location.

Or maybe the 70s is  just backdrop.

Plus there is loads more that could be said if he wants to.

Lmao nobody sets a film in 70s for just a backdrop. Come on. That's terrible filmmaking. And not to mention, financially impossible. It makes no sense. Everything has a reason. Every location, setting, etc is the cornerstone of a film. All PTA's period films needed to be so. You can't make Phantom Thread in 2017, Master needed to occur after post-war, There Will Be Blood was during oil boom. I can't believe I need to explain something so obvious. That's just like duh. Basic movies 101. I'm sure PTA has a specific reason since, you know, Jon Peters-esque character is involved, seems to include the gas crisis, cruising culture... all of which were specific to early 70s. I just dont find any of that personally exciting. Definitely not compared to the hype and anticipation of The Master

Ok so the there Is a reason. Why are YOU so naive to think  Paul could only tell 2 stories in the 70s.

I'm not trying to argue and clearly YOU apparently no more than me about filmaking which is cool.  I just think you're dismissing this project and going in negatively  just because of the time frame.

Hard eight
Magnolia
Punch drunk love

All contemporary of their time yet you're not complaining  about him doing 3 films in a similar time as they were.

[Yes]

PTA loved Hollywood and is still friendly with QT but I don't think he's ever made a film in response to another director. Maybe that pushed/inspired him but this film was first announced Nov 2019, so he was clearly working on it long before he saw Hollywood.

(I loved Hollywood but I completely understand the divisiveness. And PTA returning to 70s LA is somewhat redundant)

I just wish he made something contemporary (which was rumored here). And like I said, not crazy about the cast.  I avoid all social media discourse but I do dread the inevitable "another white cast" cloud that'll follow this, too.

Just because hes done 2 films set some what in  the 70s before doesnt really make it redundent.

If he was making contemporary  films nonone would say that would be redundent.  As long as the story is different to what hes done before which no doubt it will be the decade its set in doesnt really matter.

I'm suprised how lukewarm it seems people  are on the idea of this film.

He hasn't made a contemporary film since 2002. Society has completely shifted these decades apart? That's why nobody would say it's redundant.

His last 4 films have been period pieces. One of those films takes place exact same era and near location as this film. Boogie Nights also involves 70s. Not sure what else he can get from this time frame? What else is there to explore? Vice was about the melancholy, Boogie about the exuberant pop culture. And considering this involves actors, it's not that much a different story than what he's created before

The decade it set in does matter lol. That's literally context and location.

Or maybe the 70s is  just backdrop.

Plus there is loads more that could be said if he wants to.

Lmao nobody sets a film in 70s for just a backdrop. Come on. That's terrible filmmaking. And not to mention, financially impossible. It makes no sense. Everything has a reason. Every location, setting, etc is the cornerstone of a film. All PTA's period films needed to be so. You can't make Phantom Thread in 2017, Master needed to occur after post-war, There Will Be Blood was during oil boom. I can't believe I need to explain something so obvious. That's just like duh. Basic movies 101. I'm sure PTA has a specific reason since, you know, Jon Peters-esque character is involved, seems to include the gas crisis, cruising culture... all of which were specific to early 70s. I just dont find any of that personally exciting. Definitely not compared to the hype and anticipation of The Master

Ok so the there Is a reason. Why are YOU so naive to think  Paul could only tell 2 stories in the 70s.

I'm not trying to argue and clearly YOU apparently no more than me about filmaking which is cool.  I just think you're dismissing this project and going in negatively  just because of the time frame.

Hard eight
Magnolia
Punch drunk love

All contemporary of their time yet you're not complaining  about him doing 3 films in a similar time as they were.

Why do you keep bringing up these contemporary films to invalidate my opinion lmaoo. There's nothing similar at all about those 3 films. Why would I complain? PDL is a early 2000s film that's shot like a musical with one true main character, Magnolia is a late 90s ensemble and Hard Eight is mid90s film set in a casino. Seeing PTA in 2020s would be interesting since he's never done anything involving current culture, social media, etc. This just makes no sense lol. There's a complete difference between making a film that doesn't need a period setting... you genuinely don't understand that?

Also, dude, I never said Paul could only tell 2 stories in 70s. When you glibly mentioned 70s we're only a backdrop, I rightfully corrected you and said the setting has a meaning. There's a reason this is 70s like I said, but so far many of those reasons don't excite me the way his last films did. I just don't know what more there's to say about Jon Peters, I don't care about 70s car culture. I only hope it's not derivative

Why do you care so much about another man's opinion about a filmmaker you worship? You say you don't want to argue so you shouldn't have posted. I am not dismissing, I wouldn't be here otherwise. I've been a fan longer than you have. The topic was anticipation and I said I'm not anticipating it as much as his other recent films. And timeframe isn't the only reason I gave—the cast is another reason.