Movie: Inherent Vice

[David Morris]

Yes. The "makes sense" aspect does make it *less* Pynchonian. But that's OK.

On Monday, May 25, 2015, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:

> The movie is a neater, more streamlined version of the book. Made
> total sense to me, ie there were no loose ends or cryptic signifiers
> that left me scratching my head. Seriously don't get the reviewers who
> said 'not getting it is the point!'
>
> Then again, all of this kind of makes it *less* Pynchonian, but still
> kinda more enjoyable than the book itself imho.
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/inherent-vice-from-page-to-screen-the-6-biggest-changes-from-the-book-20141215
> >
> >
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/12/19/inherent_vice_book_vs_movie_how_pynchon_s_novel_paul_thomas_anderson_s_movie.html
> >
> > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:49 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> I just now saw IV movie on DVD.  I liked it a lot. Might the movie be
> better
> >> than the book?  Is there a source that judges how close the movie and
> book
> >> compare? Still, it felt a lot like Pynchon to me.
> >>
> >> David Morris
> >>
> > -
> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150525/35f0dc0f/attachment.html>