Wow, I feel like I watched a different film than you guys. I did enjoyed some scenes (revolutionary info line), but for the most part I had no idea what I was supposed to be getting out of it. Things happening in rapid progression in the first hour without any time to breathe and/or get interesting, and then film turned into a action-family drama and dragged as fuck at times , and I have no idea why entire sequences were even in it. DiCaprio was overacting, I had no idea what Sean Pean is doing and del Toro was an out of place comedy relief character? I was thinking about a bizarre universe in which 'No Country For Old Men' was an utter failure. I concede.

Fair - it certainly has its flaws but it’s a movie made for this moment in America, right now, made by one of our working greats and based on a book that was written by a guy who saw the 20th century for what it was and the 21st century coming before anyone else. If anybody involved is discussed for centuries, it’s going to be Pynchon.

He is the opposite of the cowboy Cormac McCarthy prestige horseshit in a lot of ways, and I say that as a fan of both. If you want Pynchon doing No Country for Old Men you can find chapters here and there out of Against the Day, but Tom doesn’t have the delusion of isolation that motivates Cormac so much - he’s out there in the city, among everybody, hidden in plain sight and his books reflect that.

I keep thinking about The Asshole walking through an ICE facility to the sounds of children playing. That was a wonderful moment and it lasted seconds. I think about the bigs ass truck that Sean Penn drove, and the fact that he owned a jet ski.

Vineland is just as much of a mess, honestly. The movie fumbled some of the stuff (nun camp), leaning too hard into some things, and its treatment of the left was done differently than Pynchon ever did - I didn’t feel like PTA had a lot of love for the weather underground-esque group whereas fucked up underdogs are Pynchon’s bread and butter… PTA sees them through the guise of media spectacle.

I'm still baffled. The first part seemed to be setup for a messy Freudian-based study about sex, violence, revolution and society which could have been good or at least interesting but then all of it gets ditched and we get a more tv-drama-like remake of Commando with heavy political themes which also don't go anywhere as far as I could say?
The best performance in the film for me was DiCaprio's daughter character - everybody was painfully one dimensional but she the very basic conveyed the despair of not wanting to be killed while being a daughter of a revolutionist really well, fantastic physical acting too.
Some shots and scenes were A+ and screaming "THAT'S REAL CINEMA, MOTHERFUCKER' while others seemed to be made for tv/streaming series.
I didn't even know it was based on Pynchon's book so maybe reading it would help, but it did feel like a lot of what should have been in the story wasn't there or was skipped / cut out - like what happened to Sean Pean Army who I thought are going to chase DiCaprio? Crazy rush in the first part, the guy who is supposed to give the daughter to Bad Guys and does so but has a sudden change of heart? edit: and the long sequence showing that the yought is really good at jumping over things while DiCaprio is not. I was constantly wondering why something was or wasn't shown while trying to figure out what the tone of the film even is.
So yeah, if there was supposed to be a point to any of it, it was missed by miles, either by me or the film.

emmanuelle cunt wrote: Thu Nov 20, 2025 5:29 pm Wow, I feel like I watched a different film than you guys. I did enjoyed some scenes (revolutionary info line), but for the most part I had no idea what I was supposed to be getting out of it. Things happening in rapid progression in the first hour without any time to breathe and/or get interesting, and then film turned into a action-family drama and dragged as fuck at times , and I have no idea why entire sequences were even in it. DiCaprio was overacting, I had no idea what Sean Pean is doing and del Toro was an out of place comedy relief character? I was thinking about a bizarre universe in which 'No Country For Old Man' was an utter failure. I concede.

yeah, sounds like that one wasn't for you.

Just finished. I really enjoyed. I thought it was clearly in “black comedy” territory so didn’t really spend a lot of time considering the social themes, which were lifted from the Pynchon novel. It felt more like a mythical quest, so Coen Bros-esque is definitely something I’d paint it as…

Great performances, especially Chase Infiniti. DiCaprio Deserves a nod as well, he’s actually acting.

Not a masterpiece but the first 90 minutes were relentless. I felt the feel good ending was a bit off, considering who underlyingly grim the rest of the film was beyond the slapstick.

I enjoyed it but do agree that it was a bit ‘light’. Would have enjoyed learning more about some of the other revolutionary characters early on vs center so much on Leo’s The Dude character.

emmanuelle cunt wrote: Fri Nov 21, 2025 5:03 am remake of Commando with heavy political themes which also don't go anywhere

Yeah, pretty much, but then I like Commando. I don't know if you've been following the PTA throughline, but he's often tempting his lowbrow instincts, and he acknowledged as far back as Inherent Vice that he was influenced by Cheech and Chong's cinematic outings. I think this is absolutely meant as an emptyheaded popcorn flick as much as it is "cinema". If you accept it as such you might just have a good time. Full disclosure I disliked many of his films including the last two (Phantom Thread and Licorice Pizza), so this felt more like a return to form, and as many have already mentioned, works best as a Coen-esque romp. I also put it into the context of what else is playing in the theatres right now, and it stands out as having some kind of legitimate spark. I could not finish Eddington, which it has also been compared to.

Same re Eddington, but I’m surprised a longtime PTA fan would dislike Phantom Thread. Maybe worth a second shot.

I like Paul Thomas Anderson's movies pretty well, but I hadn't seen anything since The Master.

The instant this was over and the spell broke, I thought well that is his masterpiece.

I am forever grateful for films that don't spend an inordinate amount of time on backstory. If the actors do their jobs, you don't really need it, and they did their jobs here.

Leo is very good at playing lunkheads.

A+

I loved Benecio del Toro in this.

"I had a few small beers."