A psychologically troubled novelty supplier is nudged towards a romance with an English woman, all the while being extorted by a phone-sex line run by a crooked mattress salesman, and purchasing stunning amounts of pudding.
Director:
Paul Thomas Anderson
Stars:
Adam Sandler,
Emily Watson,
Philip Seymour Hoffman
Set in 1950s London, Reynolds Woodcock is a renowned dressmaker whose fastidious life is disrupted by a young, strong-willed woman, Alma, who becomes his muse and lover.
Director:
Paul Thomas Anderson
Stars:
Vicky Krieps,
Daniel Day-Lewis,
Lesley Manville
During the psychedelic 60s and 70s Larry "Doc" Sportello is surprised by his former girlfriend and her plot for her billionaire boyfriend, his wife, and her boyfriend. A plan for kidnapping gets shaken up by the oddball characters entangled in this groovy kidnapping romp based upon the novel by Thomas Pynchon.Written by
bignicknasty97
According to Josh Brolin, he and Joaquin Phoenix shot several versions of the progressively weird moments between their characters, which were crazier and crazier, so Paul Thomas Anderson had options when editing the movie. See more »
Goofs
In the same café scene with Doc and Bigfoot, Doc takes a drag off of a cigarette and clearly stubs it out in the ashtray with his right hand. Bigfoot then tells him to pick a card, which he does. Doc looks at the "card", taking a deep drag off another cigarette with his left hand. There was no time in between cuts for Doc to have lit another cigarette. See more »
After the credits roll, the end caption is the opening inscription from Pynchon's novel, Inherent Vice: "Under the Paving-Stones, the Beach!" - Graffito, Paris, May 1968 See more »
Break out a pen and paper cause so much is going on it's hard to follow watching this for the first time. So many characters, so many plots surrounding sub-plots surrounding plots, you could easily lose your place if your attention wavers in the slightest. I felt like I needed to make an outline to make sense of it all. The movie is very hard to follow and needs a second viewing to fully grasp the whole thing.
My first impression is much like Joaquin Phoenix's character, a hazy pot soaked mind looking for a murderer with Bigfoot's help. No, no, he's looking for someone who was kidnapped by the Golden Fang Consortium of Nazi Heroin Smugglers led by dentist cokehead Martin Short. Or was he looking for Bigfoot's partner Littlefoot? I don't know nor do I care. One scene seemingly does not follow from the next and the whole movie became a big jumble I had no interest in solving.
All I have left in my brain are foggy recollections of details to what felt like an infinity of plots and characters. While some scenes have 'A Big Lebowski' vibe to them and were entertaining, they're sadly not enough to make me sit through this a second time. And I'm afraid without that second viewing, I'll have to live with just a brief glimpse of what might or might not be a good film. But if you have the 2h:22m to do it all again, muster up some patience, make a pot of coffee, and take good notes (some help at 1h25m). And for you truly bold viewers out there, reading the book might help.
122 of 182 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
Break out a pen and paper cause so much is going on it's hard to follow watching this for the first time. So many characters, so many plots surrounding sub-plots surrounding plots, you could easily lose your place if your attention wavers in the slightest. I felt like I needed to make an outline to make sense of it all. The movie is very hard to follow and needs a second viewing to fully grasp the whole thing.
My first impression is much like Joaquin Phoenix's character, a hazy pot soaked mind looking for a murderer with Bigfoot's help. No, no, he's looking for someone who was kidnapped by the Golden Fang Consortium of Nazi Heroin Smugglers led by dentist cokehead Martin Short. Or was he looking for Bigfoot's partner Littlefoot? I don't know nor do I care. One scene seemingly does not follow from the next and the whole movie became a big jumble I had no interest in solving.
All I have left in my brain are foggy recollections of details to what felt like an infinity of plots and characters. While some scenes have 'A Big Lebowski' vibe to them and were entertaining, they're sadly not enough to make me sit through this a second time. And I'm afraid without that second viewing, I'll have to live with just a brief glimpse of what might or might not be a good film. But if you have the 2h:22m to do it all again, muster up some patience, make a pot of coffee, and take good notes (some help at 1h25m). And for you truly bold viewers out there, reading the book might help.