Is the Paul Anderson Pynchon's Inherent Vice the Next Big Lebowski

[Albert Rolls]

You want the trailer to open the movie and P to narrate the switches from the present to the flashback. That would be worth the price of admission.


-----Original Message-----
>From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
>Sent: Mar 9, 2011 2:46 PM
>To: “pynchon-l at waste.org“ <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>Subject: Re: Is the Paul Anderson Pynchon's Inherent Vice the Next Big Lebowski
>
>My problem with a movie version of IV and something the director will
>have to figure out is how do you balance the humor/goofiness with the
>later violence. Mr Anderson didnt really solve that problem in Boogie
>Nights--there was such an abrupt shift in tone in that movie like you
>felt you walked (or what you were watching was spliced) into a totally
>different movie (unless you're Bunuel you pbly wont be able to pull it
>off)
>So, will IV be the big lebowski followed by the long goodbye--the
>trick is to make that switcheroo seamless. not an easy thing to do.
>
>I think a more effective conceit would be to have doc 40 yrs in future
>reminiscing about the old days and flashback to 1970. that way you can
>bridge the sweet and the sour and considering where we are now in the
>good old USA the really fucking sour.
>
>rich
>
>On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I wonder if the first anything can be the next something.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> I was one of them...maybe in the same theater as Thomas:
>>>
>>> I di'nt get it.
>>>
>>> Just confessin'..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: Thomas Beshear <tbeshear at insightbb.com>
>>> To: Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>; Michael Bailey
>>> <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>> Sent: Wed, March 9, 2011 8:38:16 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Is the Paul Anderson Pynchon's Inherent Vice the Next Big Lebowski
>>>
>>> Yeah, The Big Lebowski was NOT popular at the time, was seen by many as a big
>>> letdown from Fargo. (Not by me -- I laughed myself silly in the theater. But I
>>> was also aware that most of the audience that day just DIDN'T GET IT. Most sat
>>> in silence.)
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Kohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>>> To: "Michael Bailey" <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: "pynchon -l" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 7:28 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Is the Paul Anderson Pynchon's Inherent Vice the Next Big Lebowski
>>>
>>>
>>> Nice excuse for some PR...but
>>>
>>> The Big Lebowski wasn't The Big Lebowski when released. It was NOT Fargo, many,
>>> many said.
>>>
>>> And, trying to label a movie the next cult classic is like a company sending out
>>> its YouTube promo to thousands and
>>> claiming it is viral. Already.
>>>
>>> And, The Big Lebowski had no original book to be found different/lacking from.
>>> Just sayin'.
>>>
>>> Yet, I am eager to see this myself just because...
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: Michael Bailey <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>
>>> To: P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>> Sent: Tue, March 8, 2011 3:11:50 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Is the Paul Anderson Pynchon's Inherent Vice the Next Big Lebowski
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Henry M <scuffling at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2011/03/is-inherent-vice-pt-anderons-big-lebowski.html
>>>>l
>>>> l
>>>>
>>>> AsB4,
>>>> ٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶
>>>> Henry Mu
>>>> http://astore.amazon.com/tdcoccamsaxe-20
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- "The general agreement is that language should be a kind of honey.  I
>>> like it to be a kind of speed." - Michael Moorcock
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Psyche pasa athantos." --Plato
>>