/lit/ - Literature

No one else is pumped for this?

It's my most anticipated film of the year by a long shot. I haven't read any Pynchon yet. Tried out GR for a bit when I was maybe 19 but I wasn't ready for it. PTA is probably my favorite living director, and Joaquin Phoenix is a great actor. It's a shame about Hoffman, I'll bet they weren't done collaborating yet.

so did any of those people read the book

>>5195609
Give Inherent Vice a try. It's short and restrained, at least as far as Pynchon comes. Gravity's Rainbow is a bit like jumping off the high dive before you've learned to swim.

>>5195615

I have. It's a good book. Most authors would step over their mother to write something so good, but because it's Pynchon people look at it more critically than it might deserve to be.

>>5195615
Paul Thomas Anderson is a master and a total perfectionist, it's in good hands.

You neglected to mention that Joanna friggin Newsom has a cameo role, by default making this one of the most notable films ever made

>>5195724
haha, what?

Who is she playing?

I'm still too frustrated that the Blood Meridian flim got killed.

All because of some kike pedophile's inflated ego.

>>5195745
No word on that unfortunately but here she is in costume on set

>>5195724
Joanna Newsom is shit. If she didn't have such a retarded voice and play the harp, nobody would give a fuck about that bitch.

>>5195762
I have the biggest crush on her.

I love folk singers with weird voices, like her and Jordaan Mason.

Hopefully she can act.

>>5195529
Ridiculously excited, I've been following it for a while now.

Will probably reread vice before the movie comes out, it's been about a year

>>5195768
She came off pretty natural on her Portlandia sketch, I don't recommend looking it up though as the actual sketch itself was shockingly bad
>>5195766
Have you heard her most recent album Have One On Me? Her voice is a fair bit more accessible on that one, maybe you'd find it easier to appreciate

>>5195780
Not that anon, but I never heard her of her before seeing this thread. She's good.

>>5195766
no u

>>5195754
No film could do Blood Meridian justice. Not the landscapes.

>>5195943
There's also the whole lack of an easily identifiable visual language to link a film like that to past films the way the book links various books from the past into itself.

>>5195943
Give it to Gaspar Noe

Just because, why not?

>>5195529
I can't remember when I have looked forward to a film more than this.

I'll enjoy it even if it's shit.

My bet is it's gonna be too strange or "wacky" for general audiences and it will end with a rotten tomatoes scores of 78%.

>>5195529
Just ordered the book a couple of hours ago. It'll be the first Pynchon book I ever read.
The reviews always call it 'Pynchon for the masses' so I guess it's appropriate for a pleb like me because Crying Lot went right over my head. Not that I'm surprised. Am definitely going to watch the movie.
I like black comedies, anyway.

>>5196844
I don't think general audiences will even see it, really.

Art house people will love it because
>PTA and Pynchon

In any case, I hope it's good and is forgotten for a while so that Pynchon people can have their cult movie that affirms forever and ever how great an adaptation of his work can be if given over to the right pair of hands.

>>5196867
>It'll be the first Pynchon book I ever read.
>Crying Lot went right over my head
because you didn't read it?

i'm just glad PTA's picked up the pace after the ridiculous amount of time it took him to make The Master

>>5196871
>tfw plebs didn't understand The Master and it is now considered one of his worst films

>Films stars Joquain Phoenix, Owen Wilson
>Owen Wilson
into the trash

>>5196882
Dude, it also took him 5 years between Punch-Drunk love and There Will Be Blood.

He was incredibly slow in the 00's.

>>5196871
PTA's hardly arthouse.

>>5196891
He can be alright if he is cast correctly.

See:
>The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou
>Midnight in Paris

>>5196883
I went and saw the Master at the local megaplex back when I was in grad school. It was only playing on one screen. I went to the opening weekend matinee.

It was just me and an old couple who sat up front.

Which, actually, was fine by me because I was able to enjoy the atmosphere and get into the movie without any distractions whatsoever.

That was a good fucking movie.

>>5196893
Neither is Pynchon, but we can agree that they are hardly mainstream.

Reminder that PTA will never top Magnolia and that TWBB is vastly overrated.

The Master was excellent though.

>>5196895
i hate his voice and his nose

If anybody is interested in seeing another Pynchon-esque film then Paris Belongs to Us (Dir. Jacques Rivette) is unerringly similar in theme to The Crying of Lot 49.

>>5196893
Well, whether he falls under that umbrella according to scholars and those who are anal about classifying a director in one place or another, he's considered arthouse by most popular critics.

I'm not saying it's fair, but he is probably considered the most successful American arthouse director today. Behind maybe Wes Anderson. And yes I'm aware they both work with studio money. They're also given a lot of independence to make movies with that money.

>>5196903
Magnolia is the only PTA I haven't yet seen. I've been saving it for a rainy day.

But my favorite of his is There Will Be Blood. Then The Master, followed by Boogie Nights.

>>5196909
Magnolia is okay. I actually think that movie is overrated. It's too disjointed and doesn't have a good flow.

Though, the last 45 minutes are a fucking master blueprint in how to raise the tension in 4 or 5 stories as they're being crosscut.

I personally think Punch Drunk Love is the film that should be talked about in the same sentence as TWBB. Boogie Nights is a bit episodic. The Master meanders a lot, though I think that's kind of the point. Punch Drunk Love is an extremely complicated movie about a simple premise.

I love all of PTA's movies though. He's one of my favorite living filmmakers and I could fawn over his movies all day.

>>5196871
>implying art house people know how to read a book

>>5196909

never saw the master

i prefer boogie nights and there will be blood to magnolia

>>5196902
But arthouse and mainstream are polar opposites. There's a lot in between, that's where PTA lies.

>>5196965
Avant-garde and mainstream are opposites. Arthouse is more a term that was co-opted for stuff that wasn't quite experimental enough for museums, but also not worthy for the nickelodeons.

>>5196972
Either way, PTA is closer to mainstream.

>>5196995
If the argument was about Nolan or Scorsese, then I would agree with you.

But PTA is closer to the likes of Malick or Kubrick. And no, Kubrick can't be considered mainstream.

>>5197008
>Kubrick can't be considered mainstream
I think we're done here

>>5197008
Uh, I'm this guy

>>5196972

Not this guy

>>5196995

But, yeah, Kubrick is definitely mainstream. And PTA is indeed closer to mainstream than to the avant-garde.

You don't get to make movies for the studios if you don't at least play by the rules of narrative convention. Kubrick and PTA bend them, but they're not really doing anything too experimental.

>>5197008
I'm sorry, but PTA is nowhere near Malick in quality or in accessibility.

Just look at /tv/, for example. Every pleb's favorite film is TWBB, yet when they watch The Tree of Life they don't know what to do with themselves, so they resort to calling it pretentious.

>>5197040
The Tree of Life is pretty terrible.

>>5197040
lmao

>>5197040
/tv/ hates TWBB.

>>5197040
>look at /tv/
I wouldn't wish that on anyone

>>5197040
You could take that exact same argument but switch it around and exchange the movies with The Master and Thin Red Line.

>>5197063
I know at least 2 people irl that love The Tree of Life but couldn't get into There Will Be Blood at all

>>5197063
The Master is pretty well liked on /tv/ whilst The Thin Red Line is dismissed as a National Geographic documentary with pretentious voice overs.

>>5197045
What's that suppose to mean?

>>5197047
No they don't, it's in most /tv/ user's top 10 movies, I bet. The ones that are honest anyways.

>>5197044
TToL is amazing.

>>5197018
indeed, 2001 and the shining are like the mainstream plebs' usual favourite

>>5197100
Where does Barry Lyndon fall?

>>5197104
That's obviously less accessibly but only mostly because of its length and pace. Most people never really get around to watching it unless they're "big stanley kubrick fans" so it's hard to really know what a general population's unbiased response would be

Solid film though I recommend it

>>5197104
>Barry Lyndon
dunno haven't watched it

>>5197111
*accessible
>>5197104
By the way the only Stanley Kubrick film I'd

>all this talk about PTA and Kubrick being mainstream

>having no fucking idea how shit mainstream really is

>Nolan is considered by the mainstream to be god

>http://www.nolanfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=12435&view=unread#unread

>>5197104
It's just as intellectually accessible as a lot of Kubrick's other works. Probably even more so than something like 2001.

But it's nowhere near the abstract tone and quality of a lot of avant-garde.

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbjSSyAo9WA

And tell me Kubrick isn't more accessible to a mainstream audience.

>>5197117
I don't have any big thing against christopher nolan, he's doing what he loves and has made at least one entertaining film, but god the dark knight rises was such a shitty movie

also
>That fucking ending, holy titttts. My favorite ending from Nolan, followed by 'Nception
why do they write like that. please dont do that

>>5195529
Serious question OP, is bugs bunny gonna be in this film? Is it going to be some hijinx, mushroom visions movie?

>>5197125
>Heaven and Earth Magic

Fucking pleb thinking that's arthouse. Watch some real art, why don't you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOzOVLxbCE

>>5197125
You don't even have to look to the avant-garde, even within "arthouse" there's stuff far more hard to approach than Kubrick, Belá Tarr being a more obvious example

>>5197134
Fite me IRL, nigga, and we'll see who is better at watching art

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSHEFI9dZ3g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMbKU9aU9vA

>>5197152
>music
>art

>>5197159
nigga you really want to play this

>>5197169
If you can see or listen to it without wincing, then it is not art.

>>5197181
that don't make no fucking sense

certified film patrician reporting in, PTA is pleb-tier trite

>>5197192
pleb

>>5197198
I'll bite: what's patrician film, then? Bergman?

>>5197218
Tarr, Tarkovsky, Parajanov, Dreyer, Lopushansky, German etc

>>5197222
kek

>>5197218
>Implying he isn't

Threadly reminder that Thomas Pynchon will make a small cameo appearance in this film and possibly give a shout out to /lit/.

>>5197235
He will be holding a tentacle and winking at the camera.

>>5197222
>he thinks he's a patrician because he watches Dreyer

Oh boy, I remember my first undergrad film course too.

>>5197235
Friendly reminder that if Pynchon does make a cameo, there will be no indication that it is him and he'll go unnoticed just to mess with his audience

>>5197218
Not him but Altman is far better than PTA

PTA's like Kubrick without the formal complexity, lofty ideas, big attention grabbing shots, but totally clumsy when it comes to dealing with human emotion.

>>5197237
>>5197237
No, blueberries.

How does Von Trier rank in the scheme of things?

>>5197239
Sure, sure.

>>5197244
He's a troll who knows how to get the critics talking.

Funny guy but his films aren't for me. He knows how to direct women though and I think he understands them well.

>>5197238
dreyer does rule though

ordet especially

>>5197239
It will be incredible if he does.

My guess is he'll be an extra in the background, staring directly at the camera with a big bucktoothed smile, but he'll be so out of focus that fans will pore over the film like they pore over his books to try and prove that it's him.

>it will be the only official image of Pynchon released for 50 years.

>>5197248
I know what you mean. It seems like some of his films are made ironically just because he knows how to press critic's buttons.

>>5197246
>recent photo
when was that taken, the 90s?

>>5197244
he's remarkably accessible but breaking the waves, europa, and to a lesser extent dancer in the dark are all extremely well done films and I think he has every right to be as respected as he is for those alone, in spite of his other failings

>>5197250
I've never seen a Dreyer film and even I know he's pleb tier criterioncore shit

>>5197256
Yeah. His son is in his 20's now.

>>5197258
If you've never seen a dreyer film why do you consider yourself any authority on film in the slightest? You've made it quite clear you haven't got any real criticisms, only memes

>>5197265
>only memes now

>>5197246
I don't think that's him.

>>5197269
haha, right, neither do I!

definitely not him, you guys!

look away! look away!

>>5197238
Have you actually done a film degree or is this just a joke? If so was it at all worth it?

>>5197230
Not implying that at all, just taking a guess as to what he considered patrician. I can appreciate Bergman.

>>5197281
Yes, I actually have. I'm in the midst of my dissertation for a PhD in Cinema Studies.

It's kind of a joke. My job prospects are pretty much: Professor of Cinema Studies, Professor of New Media Studies, Unemployed.

But I enjoy it. I'm exposed to a lot of world cinema and the kinds of films I never would've encountered otherwise. My mentor is at the head of his field, Silent Cinema and Modernism, and even though we work on different sides of a Century, we find common ground in being basically the only two dedicated Cinema Studies people.

It's a blast to pursue my degree. I have no illusions about its usefulness, however. Luckily there have tended to be more openings for Cinema Studies than more traditional positions in lit departments.

>>5197292
He's not patrician. He's filmed theatre. It's overwrought garbage.

>>5197292
Oh alright. wots ur fav bergman

>>5197300
Hm. I'm starting a film studies degree in london in 2 weeks and you've pretty much hit all my excitements and reservations on the head. I would quite happily be a teacher though, and I've never really felt like I've wanted a hugely high-paying job as long as I have the opportunity to utilize my knowledge on a subject I'm passionate about and I'm relatively at ease
>>5197301
Maybe his chamber films and scenes from a marriage are filmed theatre but to say they aren't artistically done is just arrogant. Besides, he's an incredible playwright regardless

>>5197301
Alright.

>>5197302
Winter Light.

>>5197313
*2 months
>>5197315
Same! Shouts out to scenes from a marriage though if for liv ullmann's performance alone

>>5197318
> Same! Shouts out to scenes from a marriage though if for liv ullmann's performance alone

Look! I'm a pretty woman yelling! Now I'm crying!

CLOSE-UPS ON MY FACE

> wow
> such cinematic
> wow

>>5197136
I find Bela Tarr easy to approach due to his films playing on the emotions rather than the mind. Werkneister Harmonies and Damnation are simple stories if you ask me. The only stepping stone is being content enough to watch the long shots

>>5197334

>>5197341
> Bela Tarr
> easy to approach

Yeah, Satantango, very easy to approach. It's how I got my mom into art films!

>>5197350
"I find"

>>5197347
Bergman = pure theatre
Antonioennui = pure photography
Bresson, Ozu, Chaplin = pure cinema

>>5197334
Wow look it's just a guy crying and giving his daddy a hug

wow dimly lit lighting

> so deep
> such composition
> bravo rembrandt

>>5197355
Tell me how you find 7 hour film with under 40 edits is approachable.

>>5197358
Stuff like persona and cries and whispers clearly goes beyond pure theatre, come on

And you could definitely translate some ozu into a theatre setting

>>5197358
Luc Bresson is garbage

>muh Leon

>>5197358
>Bergman's films aren't cinematic
>Antonio's films aren't humanist

>>5197360
But Rembrandt is a painter.

Bergman is a playwright who just happened to put a camera in front of his actors.

He doesn't in any way make use of cinematic techniques.

But it's easy for film critics to write about because he likes to scream this themes instead of doing something subtle.

>>5197367
kek
>>5197371
How much Bergman have you actually seen? Because you are seriously exaggerating right now

>>5197367
>Luc Bresson
top kek

>>5197365
> Stuff like persona and cries and whispers clearly goes beyond pure theatre, come on

How? Because weird montage Lacanian psychoanalysis ooga booga?

>>5197367
Try again.

>>5197377
>implying montage isn't pure cinema

>>5197375
I'm not exaggerating, and the proof is that Bergman always considered his work in the theatre to be superior to his "cinematic" oeuvre.

>>5197362
Did I mention Satantango on my original post? Personally I haven't seen it, all im saying is that the Tarr films I have seen are easier to get in to than I expected.

Stop trying to pick silly fights on message boards and go outside

>>5197386
Don't talk about Tarr if you haven't seen Satantango.

>>5197367
Kek

>>5197371
Get Rosenbaum's cock out of your ear, Bergman's films wouldn't be as respected as they are without his deeply affecting compositions

>>5197400
I agree with you, but Autumn Sonata isn't really the best thing you could be referencing to support your point here

>>5197395
So you can't mention an artist if you haven't consumed their entire body of work? What an empty place /lit/ would be then

>>5197410
> I've only read Tolstoy's short stories, he's a great novelist!

That's you.

>>5197412
I think it's fair to say Werckmeister Harmoniak is a major defining part of his output

>>5196880
I-I fucked up. I meant I expect myself to really read and enjoy Inherent Vice since I was too stupid to understands Crying Of Lot 49, which I did complete.

>>5196907
PTA is fedoracore

he's barely above Fincher-tier

>>5197425
no hes not hes cool :-(

>>5197422
No one "gets" CoL49 on their first read. Not even Harold Bloom.

Read it again.

Inherent Vice is a really fun summer read though. It's good stuff I should read it again.

>>5197412
You've been rekt mate. Time to pick up the pieces and move on.

>>5197440
This. And I'm willing to bet that you're way smarter than Harold Bloom.

Give Inherent Vice a try. If you don't like it, Pynchon might not be for you. He's not everybody's cup of tea.

>>5195766
confirmed for never having listened to joanna newsom

>>5197425
Nice critique

>>5197400
Excellent post, I thought it kind of sounded like he was parroting that Rosenbaum NYTimes article also

Bergman has some fantastic compositions and when he's working with Nykvist they create some beautiful art together; he's definitely one of my favorite filmmakers

>>5198834
>File: window_iconic[1].jpg
kek

true though

>>5195966
I hear Noe thrown around a lot for film adaptations of literature. Is there any evidence that he would actually do it justice? He's only directed three films. Irreversible was great, but ETV was just him showing off camera work with a weak premise.

>>5199076
well blood meridian has a great premise, so that'd hardly be a problem

personally my pick for a blood meridian adaptation would be herzog

>>5196883
I dunno, I find that whenever it's brought up people concede that it's pretty slow, but very interesting to discuss. I've never heard anybody say the acting or cinematography was bad either. Great movie. I like it more every time I see it.

>>5195568
No.
I don't care about literature or cinema. They are irrelevant.

>>5199102
70s Herzog would be incredible, I don't think he would have any interest in doing it now to be honest.

>>5199118
I'm surprised anyone thought it was slow (though I usually am with anything), if anything I thought the film just had rhythmic issues with the pacing. Regardless I think it was a brave move on pta's part in most aspects and it's great to see him challenging himself and trying to push forward considering how succesful he could be commercially were he just to rely on a style he'd explored in the previous films. I'd be interested to see how much he manipulates/plays around with convention in this one, you don't usually see that sort of thing in comedy movies

>>5195762

looks like Japonica to me

>>5195762
I love her so much

ITT: plebs+babbies

>>5199076
Enter the Void is incredible. Better than Irreversible, which itself is great. Looking for plot in something like EtV is the wrong approach.

>>5199435

>>5197131
Answer the fucking question.
You fags always post the pic with bugs bunny on it, if he isn't in the movie use a fucking different photo, or explain it to me.

>>5199652
He's not in the book, so I doubt it.

This isn't even an official poster. It's just some mockup that a random dude posted to his instagram, or something like that. It's fan-art

>>5199676
great poster imo

>>5197222
>Tarkovsky
>patrician

>>5200079
tarkovsky rules

>>5200081
Tarkovsky is my homeboy but I wouldn't call him "patrician".

>>5197222
>tarr

haha no

>>5200079
>>5200096
lol what are you on about

>>5196883
saw the master once; did not grab me

>>5196883
>I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist, a theoretical philosopher, but above all I am a man. Hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you.

I can't watch it after having heard that in the trailer.

>>5200096
one word
>solaris

>>5200183
His most accessible film probably

>>5200158
Why? It's just the words of a character, and not a particularly likeable one at that

People should watch Journey Into the Mind of P. Interesting documentary around Pynchon; it's in full on YouTube.

>>5200228
Rating: 2 - Review by Peter Bradshaw
1 May 2003 - Peter Bradshaw: This obtuse film semi-deliberately fails to engage Pynchon as a writer or as a person.

>>5200234
It's not really about Pynchon's personal life as much as the cult surrounding him.

>>5200243
mm might check it out. I've never read a book of his though

>>5200158
But that perfectly sums up the ego and self-constructed image that L. Ron Hubbard, whom the character of Lacaster Dawd is loosely based on, perpetuated about himself.

It was exceptional writing and showed right off the bat the kind of man he fancied himself, even though as the movie goes along the facade starts to crack and at different points he is exposed to his followers as a fraud.

>>5200192
Ivan's Childhood is definitely more accessiable

>>5196883
There's stuff to admire about the film but it's paper thin, and deff PTA's weakest. Acting and cinematography are god tier but it's screenplay is pretty fucking pretentious, it plays out like Paul took a summer class on Freud and basically amalgamated his notes into the film's characters.

I personally think it isn't very good but it's very much worth watching, even if it's just to see Joaquin and Phill Hoffman.

>>5196922
You're completely drunk if you don't think Magnolia doesn't have incredible pacing. The fact that the final hour of the film had all those subplots coagulating in wait for it is proof.

>>5197117
>>5197008


2001 grossed over 200 million, you'd have to be a retard to think he's not mainstream (the fact that he's so great just makes him an anomaly)

>>5196883
>Plebs don't realize the parallels between The Master and Gravity's Rainbow

>>5203398
Go on

>>5203403
Think about the parallels between Joaquin Phoenix's character and Tyrone Slothrop.

Think about the banana scene on the boat.

Where Gravity's Rainbow shows us Europe at the end of the war, The Master begins on the other side of the conflict, and shows the strange rise of Scientology in the US.

They work together, almost.

>>5203437
Are there any parallels with V.? I haven't read either by him, but always suspected they could've influenced PTA in making The Master since I heard he was making this new one.

Excited as fuck for Inherent Vice.

>>5204549
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5552250/
Not to mention this

>>5204871
⇒and bring in category theory which has nothing to do with philosophy, existence, being or cognition
Your ignorance of category theory is amazing. Kripke would laugh in your face.

⇒and should be treated as a bitch.
You're not my boyfriend.

>>5200228
>>5200234
>>5200243
The documentary has interesting parts.

They interview his ex-gf and she shows the house they lived in California...It's basically the setting for Inherent Vice.

Also, she was underage when he started fucking her.

based ruggles

>>5205155
Underage by american standards ?