I can’t believe it’s been two years since a Paul Thomas Anderson movie has been released. The American auteur has diligently been working hard on his new film Inherent Vice, an adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s highly regarded 70’s stoner detective novel. Yesterday, the film had its world premiere at the NYFF festival and, based on the audience reaction, it’s a faithful adaptation and another solid cinematic contribution from Mr. Anderson.
Set in LA in 1970, Inherent Vice opens with a drug-loving private eye named Doc Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) receiving an unexpected visit from an old flame of his, Shasta Fay Hepworth (Katherine Waterston). She begins to tell him an emotional story involving a scheme involving her current billionaire lover’s wife and her boyfriend. The plot involved kidnapping among other things and Doc decides to take the case, but the road he follows is anything but straight forward. With a cast of characters spanning the gamut and continually weaving in and out of the story, Inherent Vice takes us on a psychedelic journey that seemingly leads us nowhere and everywhere at the same time.
Firstly, I haven’t seen all of P.T. Anderson’s films but from what I have seen and can remember, Inherent Vice seems like one his most accessible and mainstream friendly titles despite the fact that it will leave people confused. When you watch Inherent Vice you think you understand the story, then people talk and talk until you start zoning out and appreciating the terrific imagery that P.T.A. and his cinematographer have painted, then you snap back to reality and continue on. A lot of the dialogue is fantastic exposition that relates and helps propel the story forward, but because there are scenes with so much of it you start forgetting what the conversation was originally about. Thankfully, if you miss something you won’t be mad because you can fall back on the visuals. There’s one scene in particular involving Doc and a naked Shasta that I found incredibly intense, but it’s a scene that’s reflective of the zoning out situation and even with that it became one of my favorite scenes in the film.
I’ve never read the novel, but what I loved about the film (and everyone says the novel is just like it) is that it is weird, very funny and quirky, yet it can drastically change its tone to one of somberness in the blink of an eye and works every time it does so. Since the tone is constantly shifting back and forth it keeps you on your toes, never providing an honest hint of what’s to come or what characters you’ll meet. One minute Josh Brolin’s character Lt. Detective Christian F. ‘Bigfoot’ Bjornsen is having a heated discussion about a case with Doc and then the next minute he’s yelling in Japanese for more pancakes at the diner they’re at. The last thing I expect from a white, hard-ass LA cop in the 70s that doesn’t like Doc is for him to speak in Japanese. There are a ton of scenes like this as well as a few like the one I mentioned earlier with Doc and Shasta that work in unison to create a movie that delivers smart joy to an audience that craves some form of “substance” in their films.
Inherent Vice is very much an ensemble film and features a powerhouse cast comprised of the few actors I mentioned above along with Owen Wilson, Jena Malone, Reese Witherspoon, Benicio Del Toro, Maya Rudolph, Hong Chau, Martin Short, Eric Roberts, and Michael Kenneth Williams. This movie is no joke when it comes to the cast and everyone delivers top notch performances, it’s hard not to shine when your director is P.T.A. The absolute shiners were Phoenix, Brolin, surprisingly Jenna Malone, Hong Chau and Katherine Waterston. I also want to give credit to Joanna Newsom who played Sortilège, Doc’s best gal pal, most of her role was voiceover oriented but it’s the kind of voiceover that worked well within the context of this film.
Overall, I don’t think there will be one clear consensus on Inherent Vice. The narrative is hard to comprehend (it’s done on purpose) and the ending doesn’t necessarily leave you with a sense of closure. In fact, as mentioned earlier, the end will likely leave you confused. As a result, some will feel unsatisfied with the way the film turned out, maybe it’s too trippy for them, others, including myself, will find that this was a highly enjoyable and funny piece of cinema that embraces the chaos of the psychedelic time period, doesn’t follow your traditional narrative structure and refuses to give the audience a traditional film, instead opting for a bizarre and beautiful film that feels pretty damn refreshing.
Rating: While not a masterpiece, Paul Thomas Anderson’s trippy new film is a solid piece of cinema and a much welcomed return to comedy after a 12 year hiatus from the genre (7.9/10)
Recent Comments