dissapointing

[gary webb]

I think one of the reasons PTA's rendition of IV is a little hard to wrap
one's head around is the simple fact that it is a major motion picture, the
film must necessarily constrain Pynchon's riffing, the film, though in many
senses is an homage to Pynchon, it isn't necessarily made for Pynchonfiles.
I have read many bloated and obviated reviews of both IV, the novel and the
film, as well as Bleeding Edge... I don't think Pynchon is writing for the
V., TCoL49, and Gravity's Rainbow obsessives anymore... IV and Bleeding
Edge, his more contemporary work, feels exactly just that, young and
fresh... Pynchon is young at heart... I think he has left the New York
Times Book Review crowd and moved onto a new more fresh generation, his
son's generation... his message isn't as enigmatic because it doesn't have
to be... I thought IV a much more bleak and harsher rendition of the
novel... it doesn't have to compare with the Long Goodbye or Lebowski, it
flows a lot like the more cynical noirs of the 70s, like Altman's take on
the Long Goodbye...

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Toby Levy <tobyglevy at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes it was great to see the novel in graphic display on a big screen, but
> as a discreet work of art, the film fails on all levels that I measure
> movies.  If any objective viewer was to view The Big Lebowski, The Long
> Goodbye and Inherent Vice in short order would know exactly what I am
> talking about.
>
> Toby
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150111/f5b5165a/attachment.html>