Inherent Vice (2014) Review

Lucas Versantvoort / February 20, 2015

Oh, Inherent Vice, I really wanted to like you. I’ll preface this review by saying I haven’t read the Pynchon novel, so don’t go expecting any kind of comparisons. But yeah, when I saw the trailers and posters, my expectations soared. Finally, after the ambiguous The Master, PTA would surprise everyone with a trippy, Big Lebowski-esque parody of the detective genre. (You may recall that Iñárritu did something similar. After the crushingly serious Biutiful, he ensured Birdman didn’t suffer from the same soul-crushing melodrama.) Anyway, although Inherent Vice is an occasionally fun film, I can’t help but feel something’s missing.

            The central narrative is all about a mystery, or so it might seem. Armed with a limitless supply of weed, Doc Sportello is told by his ex to look into something. She fears her current lover, real estate magnate Mickey Wolfmann, might be kidnapped soon by his wife and her lover and put in the looney bin. Doc agrees and starts looking into it and that’s all I can say, not because I would be treading into spoilerish territory, but because that’s all I can remember in terms of plot! Doc jumps from one conspiracy into the next, stumbling upon endless strange characters and before you know it, you don’t what the fuck is going on anymore…and that’s of course precisely the point. In this sense, the film very much reminds me of The Big Lebowski. What do you remember most? The mystery or all the weird shit along the way? Nobody’s still talking about the kidnapped millionaire’s wife, but the Dude’s language, John Goodman’s fanatical behavior, the Dude writing a check for a milk carton, the way seemingly unimportant characters and events suddenly become crucial, etc. Inherent Vice is the same. You learn to leave the plot alone and enjoy the hippy humor and oddball characters, like agent Bigfoot telling the owner of a Japanese restaurant that he wants ‘motto panakeku.’ The scene itself features Doc and Bigfoot discussing the central mystery, but do you remember any of that? No, we all just quote motto panakeku.

This is the film’s central strength: the Lebowski-esque, acid-trip humor à la the seventies. The film looks and feels authentic in this regard too: from the language, clothes to the cinematography, everything fits. But I think I wanted more humor, frankly speaking. I appreciate the subtle humor and I laughed here and there, but in what definitely feels like one long-ass film purposefully designed to mind-fuck you, I’d have appreciated more ‘out there’ humor. It also doesn’t help that you never come close to giving even a remote shit about any of these characters. As a film buff, I definitely like the idea of screwing with those viewers who’re obsessed with completely figuring out plots, etc. but for me, I simply needed more comedy. It’s too subtle for its own good. It’s obvious Inherent Vice was made by a very talented director: see for instance the multiple visual references to the concept of Inherent Vice. Maybe my immediate suspicion that I would be seeing Big Lebowski 2.0 was wrong and maybe it’s all a hidden message about the cultural downfall of America or something. PTA is one of those directors who has such a firm grasp of cinema that it’s doubtful he could ever make a truly bad film, though it could also mean you’re too devoted a fan… Either way, I haven’t unlocked Inherent Vice’s secrets and though I want to, I’m not too inclined to go through the ordeal of watching it again which is something reserved for only the most devoted of PTA’s fans. The rest of us would consider Inherent Vice to be a bad trip.

Dutch version

Oh, Inherent Vice, je filmposters en je trailer zorgden voor zulke hoge verwachtingen…. Eindelijk, na zijn vorige film, het ambigue The Master, zou regisseur P.T. Anderson iedereen weer verrassen met een LSD-trip, een Big Lebowski-achtige parodie op het detective genre. (Iñárritu deed iets soortgelijks, na het über-serieuze Biutiful kwam hij tot het wijze besluit om Birdman te voorzien van veel humor.) Hoewel Inherent Vice uiteindelijk aan deze verwachtingen voldoet, ontbreekt er toch iets.

            Het centrale verhaal draait om een mysterie. Gewapend met een oneindige voorraad wiet, krijgt detective Doc Sportello de opdracht van z’n ex om een mysterie op te lossen. Haar huidige minnaar is een vastgoedontwikkelaar genaamd Mickey Wolfmann en ze vermoedt dat zijn vrouw en haar ‘vriendje’ samenzweren om hem in het gekkenhuis te stoppen. Doc gaat akkoord en gaat op onderzoek uit en meer dan dat valt er eigenlijk niet te zeggen over het verhaal. Niet omdat er anders teveel zou worden verklapt.....

Juist het tegenovergestelde: meer is er niet echt te vertellen. Detective Doc vliegt van complot naar complot, van willekeurig personage nummer 1 naar willekeurig personage nummer 2 en je raakt snel in de war…en dat is ook de bedoeling. In dit opzicht doet de film erg aan The Big Lebowski denken. Wat herinner je je van die film? De ontvoering of alle bizarre personages en gebeurtenissen die je onderweg meemaakt? Niemand praat anno nu nog over de ontvoerde vriendin van de miljonair, maar wel over het taalgebruik van The Dude, John Goodman’s fanatieke gedrag, hoe The Dude een cheque uitschrijft voor een pak melk, hoe kleine personages of opmerkingen ineens belangrijker blijken dan je dacht. Voor Inherent Vice geldt hetzelfde: je leert het mysterie los te laten en gewoon te genieten van alle subtiele hippie-humor en vreemde personages. Neem de scène waarin Doc en agent Bigfoot praten in wat eruit ziet als een Japans restaurant. Wat herinner je je van die scène? Hun discussies over de zaak? Nee, natuurlijk niet. Je herinnert je Bigfoot die in belabberd Japans de kok vraagt om meer pannenkoeken: “Motto Panakeku”.

Dit is de kracht van de film: de Lebowski-achtige LSD-humor in de context van de jaren zeventig. De film klinkt en ziet er ook behoorlijk authentiek uit in dit opzicht: taalgebruik, kleding, cinematografie, alles klopt. Maar eerlijk gezegd had er meer humor in moeten zitten. Oké, de film bevat subtiele humor en bizarre situaties, maar wanneer een film zo’n tweeënhalf uur bezig is met een mysterie wiens enige functie is om je te verwarren, dan had er extra humor in gemogen ter compensatie. Het helpt ook niet dat je nooit echt in de hoofden van de personages kruipt, je blijft qua emotie altijd op afstand. Grappig om de kijkers in de maling te nemen die geobsedeerd zijn met het raden van de dader, maar er had gewoonweg meer bizarre humor in gemoeten. Dat de film gemaakt is door een zeer begaafd regisseur is duidelijk, vooral door zijn visuele verwijzingen naar het concept ‘inherent vice’. Misschien is het verlangen naar meer humor en een variant op The Big Lebowski onterecht. Wie weet gaat de film over iets heel anders, over bepaalde facetten van de culturele ondergang van Amerika bijvoorbeeld. Anderson is een regisseur die zulke indrukwekkende films heeft gemaakt en zo’n grip heeft op de filmgeschiedenis, dat het maar de vraag is of hij eigenlijk wel een ‘slechte’ film kan maken. Zo’n aura heeft hij. Dit voedt het idee dat al zijn films geweldig zijn als je maar goed genoeg oplet. Maar dat kan ook een teken zijn dat je met een iets te toegewijde fan te maken hebt. Hoe dan ook, om het geheim van Inherent Vice te ontdekken, dat zal ongetwijfeld meerdere kijkpogingen vereisen. Maar misschien zijn alleen de meest toegewijde Anderson fans daartoe bereid, opnieuw tweeënhalf uur verveling. Inherent Vice valt tegen, ondanks de reputatie van Anderson. Zeker geen slechte film, maar je kan moeilijk het gevoel loslaten dat er meer in zat.

The Master (2012) Review

Lucas Versantvoort / March 10, 2013

There is a certain difficulty in reviewing a film like The Master. It’s hard to figure out if it’s a good film or not, because in doing so you’re required to thoroughly analyze it, which isn’t the purpose of a review. In a review I can only give an overview of the plot, share some of my observations and my opinion of the film. So…

            …What is The Master about? It’s about many things or rather: it can be about many things depending on how you read it. Among other things, it’s about a cult/movement; it’s about psychology; about the effect of war on the individual (PTSD among other things); it’s about the complex relationship between two men; it’s about the cult versus the world; about manipulation; it’s about the master-follower relationship, etc. The main character in all this is Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), a Naval veteran returning from WWII. After he stumbles through daily life, he accidentally comes across Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman), the leader of a cult (or ‘movement’) known as The Cause. He becomes intrigued by Dodd and decides to follow him. Thus begins a long and complex relationship between the two.

The poster as seen in France

            Leaving the plot out, the things I can more easily qualify as good or bad (good in this case) are the performances by the leading trio (Phoenix, Hoffman and Adams), the cinematography and Jonny Greenwood’s score. These are things I can use to judge this film a good one. Phoenix (after a four years without a film credit to his name) returns to the field of acting with a fantastic performance. Although his performance could be judged to be of the ‘I am acting!’ variety, I’d say it’s of the tour de force variety and he always stays in character. Just like in Doubt, Hoffman gives another impressive and multifaceted performance. Where in Doubt he had to constantly keep the audience guessing (is he guilty or innocent of child molestation?), here he has to make the characters (and the audience) believe he truly understands what he’s saying, while simultaneously hinting he’s ‘making it up as he goes along’. Amy Adams is also one of the most interesting and varied actresses today. Even though her role in The Master is limited, it’s unlike anything she’s done and there’s an interesting twist regarding her husband-wife relationship with Hoffman. Jonny Greenwood’s score is just as intriguing as his score for Anderson’s There Will Be Blood, utilizing percussion and strings to create interesting soundscapes. It’s one of those scores that just fits the film.

            But only discussing these aspects of The Master is like discussing Last Year at Marienbad without mentioning its plot and the difficulty in interpreting it. As mentioned, I’ll share my observations about The Master. I won’t devolve into analysis, however – you can read articles like this and this for that, if you’re interested.

            It’s a film whose screenplay was the subject of much critique and even though I can see why (Anderson was inspired by so many diverse things that the finished film seems like a series of random events), but the script also has many things going for it. For instance, many events in the film tie in with later events. Consider the many times Lancaster Dodd asks Quell where they’ve met before; Quell’s sand sculpture with which the film also ends; how Quell emulates Dodd by ‘processing’ a woman he’s sleeping with, etc.

            Ultimately, the chances you’ll enjoy The Master are rather high, simply because of the fantastic acting, music and cinematography. Whether you’ll think of The Master as something more will depend on how much time and effort you’re willing to spend on analyzing and dissecting it. Did I like The Master? Yes, I did. I liked it for many reasons, one of them being that I didn’t completely understand it after it was over. I didn’t understand it, but I didn’t feel like I had watched something meaningless. This may be an inherently wrong reason to like a film, but 2001: A Space Oddysey wouldn’t be so interesting if it had divulged its secrets during the first viewing. It’s the film that reportedly made Rock Hudson shout out in the theater: “Will someone please tell me what the hell this is about” and now 2001 is one of the world’s most famous films. Or consider Last Year at Marienbad again. Its director, Alain Resnais, once said his film has no meaning…but people are still talking about it even now. Whether The Master will have a similar fate is something only time will tell…