Licorice Pizza - Speculation & General Reactions

[Alethia]

Okay.

[Tdog]

Any writer can tell you that having a 400-page screenplay is not hyperbole. Typically you write and write and keep writing and then you have to cut it down to something that will fit on the screen. That has been his process for the longest time.

I was going by memory before, I looked it up and he said 600 pages.

[nomorecoffee]

Sounds like a good amount for his 10th feature film.......

[Drill]

I saw Paul Thomas Anderson's new film @licoricepizza last night at the magnificent Village Westwood Theater. It's masterful — a classic. I know that sounds like a premature assessment. It's not. All the performances are incredible, but watch for the lone scene with Harriet Sansom Harris (as the Talent Agency Owner). It's spectacular.

View this post on Instagram

[nomorecoffee]

Yes sir.

[wilberfan]

All the performances are incredible, but watch for the lone scene with Harriet Sansom Harris (as the Talent Agency Owner). It's spectacular.

Oh, my Gawd.  One of my two fav cameos in this thing.   I sat bolt upright in THREAD when she did her thing there, thinking, "Who IS this?!"  Last night it was, "You magnificent wench, you've done it again..."

[wrongright]

So I guess giving the movie a title was as messy as it seemed and LP has no real meaning or connection to anything in the film.

And it sounds like

Spoiler: ShowHide

"Sam Harpoon" is Ben Stiller in makeup? Wasn't this already done recently with "Lutz Ebersdorf"?

[PaulElroy35]

So I guess giving the movie a title was as messy as it seemed and LP has no real meaning or connection to anything in the film.

And it sounds like

Spoiler: ShowHide

"Sam Harpoon" is Ben Stiller in makeup? Wasn't this already done recently with "Lutz Ebersdorf"?

Spoiler: ShowHide

It has meaning to Paul apparently .

I think it's just Sam Harpoon.  Though if that was Tilda wouldnt that be something.

[wrongright]

I put that comment under "spoiler" for a reason.

[axxonn]

Very much wishful thinking on my part but could the "longer project" mentioned by PTA be Mason & Dixon?

No, because he wouldn't say that he's having difficulty "writing it" since it's just an adaptation.

That doesnt really rule Mason & Dixon out. If its a tough book to adapt then he could be having trouble "writing it".

Yes, it rules it out. Adapting a novel isn't difficult in comparison to writing an original story. He adapted Inherent Vice by copying it out into Microsoft Word and then cutting it down. Pretty simple.

You're experienced in both, are you? 

[Montclair]

Very much wishful thinking on my part but could the "longer project" mentioned by PTA be Mason & Dixon?

No, because he wouldn't say that he's having difficulty "writing it" since it's just an adaptation.

That doesnt really rule Mason & Dixon out. If its a tough book to adapt then he could be having trouble "writing it".

Yes, it rules it out. Adapting a novel isn't difficult in comparison to writing an original story. He adapted Inherent Vice by copying it out into Microsoft Word and then cutting it down. Pretty simple.

You're experienced in both, are you? 

What? Do I have to be experienced in both to know that creating an original great work of art is MUCH more difficult than transcribing/copying/tracing an original great work of art? This isn't up for debate.

[Shughes]

Very much wishful thinking on my part but could the "longer project" mentioned by PTA be Mason & Dixon?

No, because he wouldn't say that he's having difficulty "writing it" since it's just an adaptation.

That doesnt really rule Mason & Dixon out. If its a tough book to adapt then he could be having trouble "writing it".

Yes, it rules it out. Adapting a novel isn't difficult in comparison to writing an original story. He adapted Inherent Vice by copying it out into Microsoft Word and then cutting it down. Pretty simple.

You're experienced in both, are you? 

What? Do I have to be experienced in both to know that creating an original great work of art is MUCH more difficult than transcribing/copying/tracing an original great work of art? This isn't up for debate.

I would say that both adapting existing material and writing original material would be challenging in their own ways.

As we know, what works in a novel doesn't always work on screen. It isn't a case of just copying it over. In some ways original material can be more freeing because you're not tied to making something work from the novel. In any case, I wouldn't say either would be a simple process.

I would say this is very much up for debate.

As for Paul's own description of the process that you mentioned, I'm sure there's more to it than that. If he made it sound simple I'm almost sure he was being self-effacing and humble.

[PaulElroy35]

What are chances you reckon we will get a couple tv spots before the release on the 26th?

[Yes]

Just found Wrongright's review https://letterboxd.com/ay_la/film/licorice-pizza/

[Montclair]

Very much wishful thinking on my part but could the "longer project" mentioned by PTA be Mason & Dixon?

No, because he wouldn't say that he's having difficulty "writing it" since it's just an adaptation.

That doesnt really rule Mason & Dixon out. If its a tough book to adapt then he could be having trouble "writing it".

Yes, it rules it out. Adapting a novel isn't difficult in comparison to writing an original story. He adapted Inherent Vice by copying it out into Microsoft Word and then cutting it down. Pretty simple.

You're experienced in both, are you? 

What? Do I have to be experienced in both to know that creating an original great work of art is MUCH more difficult than transcribing/copying/tracing an original great work of art? This isn't up for debate.

I would say that both adapting existing material and writing original material would be challenging in their own ways.

As we know, what works in a novel doesn't always work on screen. It isn't a case of just copying it over. In some ways original material can be more freeing because you're not tied to making something work from the novel. In any case, I wouldn't say either would be a simple process.

I would say this is very much up for debate.

As for Paul's own description of the process that you mentioned, I'm sure there's more to it than that. If he made it sound simple I'm almost sure he was being self-effacing and humble.

Dude, I'd say what F. Scott Fitzgerald did when he wrote The Great Gatsby was much more difficult than what the many different screenwriters did when adapting it. That's not up for debate. Also, Paul isn't making "Mason & Dixon" as his next film, that would've been a huge announcement. I'm really not sure why we're even still talking about this?