Nel 1970 a Los Angeles l'investigatore privato Larry "Doc" Sportello, con il vizio della droga, indaga sulla scomparsa di una sua ex fidanzata.Nel 1970 a Los Angeles l'investigatore privato Larry "Doc" Sportello, con il vizio della droga, indaga sulla scomparsa di una sua ex fidanzata.Nel 1970 a Los Angeles l'investigatore privato Larry "Doc" Sportello, con il vizio della droga, indaga sulla scomparsa di una sua ex fidanzata.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Candidato a 2 Oscar
- 15 vittorie e 99 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
We can't criticize the incomprehensible nature of the movie because it was intentionally written that way to capture the tone of the novel. Eventhough I personally couldn't enjoy this movie, I completely understand why other people like it. I understand what they were going for but I couldn't connect with it personally. All the performances, especially by Phoenix and Brolin were top notch. Both those characters were written extremely well. There were some genuinely funny sequences too. However there are several instances where Doc relies on coincidences and conveniences to uncover the cases. This aspect felt like lazy writing.
I don't dislike this movie but I can't like it either. I have such a complicated opinion on this movie. PTA is one of the best directors working today. But I couldn't appreciate this movie like I did with his other movies like The Master, There will be blood etc.
I don't dislike this movie but I can't like it either. I have such a complicated opinion on this movie. PTA is one of the best directors working today. But I couldn't appreciate this movie like I did with his other movies like The Master, There will be blood etc.
I am writing this review after my second try: this time I went a little more far in but, once again, I had to give up.
What a wasted potential, in my opinion!
A superb cast and a great director trying to serve a never-ending elements additions to a random story, which already has nothing really original.
As many other people wrote here, the plot is too intricate, as well as the amount of character who pop up every scene after the other.
Imagine yourself tryng to write The Big Lebowski in a Tarantinian style, with a thousand characters in a hundred sub-plots connected to some other (but not to each other) and doing your best to not lose your mind over it.
Someone said this was meant to be, they wanted to recreate the structure and the mood of its source material: I get it but, still, was it the best choice? In my opinion, it wasn't.
When a story is that complicated, it kicks me off the movie; and when that happens, you have a half of a movie.
I like and respect PTA but I think this film is the Moby Dick of filmmaking: you know it's something valuable but you just can't keep up with it!
What a wasted potential, in my opinion!
A superb cast and a great director trying to serve a never-ending elements additions to a random story, which already has nothing really original.
As many other people wrote here, the plot is too intricate, as well as the amount of character who pop up every scene after the other.
Imagine yourself tryng to write The Big Lebowski in a Tarantinian style, with a thousand characters in a hundred sub-plots connected to some other (but not to each other) and doing your best to not lose your mind over it.
Someone said this was meant to be, they wanted to recreate the structure and the mood of its source material: I get it but, still, was it the best choice? In my opinion, it wasn't.
When a story is that complicated, it kicks me off the movie; and when that happens, you have a half of a movie.
I like and respect PTA but I think this film is the Moby Dick of filmmaking: you know it's something valuable but you just can't keep up with it!
This film tells the story of a private detective in Los Angeles who investigates the disappearance of his former girlfriend and a rich real estate tycoon.
"Inherent Vice" has a super incoherent plot. Not only do I not understanding a thing while watching it, I still don't understand it even when I paused the film and read the plot synopsis regularly. So the detective investigates the case, then somehow the case is completely forgotten because a prostitute tells him about a shipment of heroin. There are just far too many characters in the film, each one of them doing their little bit in the story that does not glue together as a whole. Every subplot gets mentioned them dropped, without any satisfactory resolution. This film is a tremendous waste of time!
"Inherent Vice" has a super incoherent plot. Not only do I not understanding a thing while watching it, I still don't understand it even when I paused the film and read the plot synopsis regularly. So the detective investigates the case, then somehow the case is completely forgotten because a prostitute tells him about a shipment of heroin. There are just far too many characters in the film, each one of them doing their little bit in the story that does not glue together as a whole. Every subplot gets mentioned them dropped, without any satisfactory resolution. This film is a tremendous waste of time!
In 1970, drug-fueled Los Angeles detective Larry "Doc" Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) investigates the disappearance of a former girlfriend.
Whether or not Los Angeles was like this in 1970 does not matter. For the sake of the story, this is the world Doc Sportello lives in, and it is one crazy place: drug cartels, ouija boards, crooked cops and hippie cults.
The problem with this film, and what seems to turn most people off, is the very complex plot. Following in the same vein as "The Long Goodbye" or "The Big Lebowski", this is a world where many seemingly unrelated worlds intersect. And it is brilliant. Unfortunately, it is very hard to follow and that will ruin it for many people. Or, at best, it will make them want to watch it two or three times until it all starts to click.
Whether or not Los Angeles was like this in 1970 does not matter. For the sake of the story, this is the world Doc Sportello lives in, and it is one crazy place: drug cartels, ouija boards, crooked cops and hippie cults.
The problem with this film, and what seems to turn most people off, is the very complex plot. Following in the same vein as "The Long Goodbye" or "The Big Lebowski", this is a world where many seemingly unrelated worlds intersect. And it is brilliant. Unfortunately, it is very hard to follow and that will ruin it for many people. Or, at best, it will make them want to watch it two or three times until it all starts to click.
Glad not to be a professional film critic - I would not know what to say. Great casting. Fun costumes. Some scenes give you the feeling of other scenes you might have seen somewhere else. Kind of like an instant classic rehash. Do not make the mistake to follow the plot. There is a higher chaos beneath us all. Probably good material to test the effects of various psychoactive substances on people who make an effort of connecting dots when watching movies. You do not need substances though. There are dots all right but there is no coherent picture that is good for everybody. Any connection you draw is fine. Maybe that is the message.
I usually follow the guidance of amazon (I believe it to be the owner of this site) and try to give points between one and ten. Impossible here. I consider that the film's quality.
I usually follow the guidance of amazon (I believe it to be the owner of this site) and try to give points between one and ten. Impossible here. I consider that the film's quality.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizAccording to writer and director Paul Thomas Anderson, Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon "have their own language and short hand" with each other. While their natural rapport helped to show the chemistry between their characters, this led to Anderson having to constantly remind them to stop chatting so that they could film.
- BlooperWhen Doc goes to see Penny at her office she asks if he will let her depone him. While the use of the word "depone" might seem unusual compared to the more common "depose", this should not be regarded as a mistake. Penny's actual line from the source novel is this: "Would you be willing to depone for me?"
- Curiosità sui creditiAfter the credits roll, the end caption is the opening inscription from Pynchon's novel, Inherent Vice: "Under the Paving-Stones, the Beach!" - Graffito, Paris, May 1968
- Colonne sonoreDreamin' On a Cloud
Written by Heinz Burt (as Burt Heinz)
Performed by The Tornadoes (as The Tornados)
Courtesy of Sanctuary Records Group, Ltd.
By arrangement with BMG Rights Management (US), LLC
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Inherent Vice?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Vicio propio
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 20.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 8.110.975 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 328.184 USD
- 14 dic 2014
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 14.810.975 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 2h 28min(148 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti