That was an excellent one.

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Better Late Then Never

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

I am not a huge fan of Pynchon's work, but I found the books of his which I have read (five in all) difficult but worth the effort. Of course, I know about the author's mysterious, reclusive lifestyle and was curious to see a documentary on the author. However, this film is less about the author than those who try and stalk him.The filmmakers interview exactly two people who ever met Pynchon (both in the 1960's). There is an interview with a literary critic who reviewed the novel V. when it was first published. Finally, there is an interview with a guy who runs a Pynchon index on the web. These were the only worthwhile interviews in the film. All of the other people interviewed come across like nuts. One interviewee tries to make the case that Pynchon and Lee Harvey Oswald might have known each other because. . . both were living in Mexico City at the same time (and how populated is Mexico City?). Someone else stakes out an address where Pynchon might be living and becomes convinced he found the man because. . . the guy got upset when the stalker snapped a picture of him without asking. Someone else claims that he might have seen Pynchon at a Thomas Pynchon lookalike contest because. . ."he was shifty and talking in a French accent that was obviously fake." Towards the end of the film, another interviewee was obsessed with footage of a man who might be Pynchon and was analyzing it like it was the Zapruder film. "He is wearing a red cap; what is he trying to say by that?" By the time the film ended, I perfectly understood why Pynchon was in hiding. Salman Rushdie only had religious extremists to worry about. The fans in this documentary are truly scary.As a film, the directors do not have enough interesting material to justify feature length. They use a lot of stock footage to eat up time. There is annoying score by the band the Residents, which is not pleasing to listen to. Finally, viewers unfamiliar with Pynchon's work may wonder what all the fuss is about. The filmmakers quote the opening of Gravity's Rainbow twice, but that is the only quotation used from any of his books. There is almost no mention of what his books are about. This documentary will probably not make anyone new to the writer curious enough to give one of Pynchon's novels a try, which is a shame.

This isn't a journey into Pynchon's mind, it's a journey into his fan base's collective mind. I understand the compulsion to read into Pynchon's mysterious reclusiveness as I too went through that period of time where it really seemed like, OH God Man, This Pynchon Cat KNOWS Something! This obsession that is built out of his mind-boggling and madcap works is something that you get over once you've read enough of his works to get a clear sense of his humor, a bit of his passion, and the joyful way he mixes his world with alternative worldviews. This documentary ultimately suffers from the same tendency in people of various foci to see correlation as causation. Yes, OBVIOUSLY Thomas Pynchon was aware of the crap raining down around him during the 60s and 70s, the strange counter-cultures popping up amongst paranoia and new chemical drugs developed by the CIA. Who wasn't? It doesn't mean he personally met Lee Harvey Oswald--as the gentleman in the interview sez, "It's fun to think about." And ultimately that's all the documentary offers, as much information (actually less) than you can find on Pynchon's Wikipedia page and a few too many "webmasters" compiling documents and texts and looking into the man's private letters while chasing down every phantom lead to find his image. Certainly there is something about seclusion that leads to mystery but a lot of these guys just gotta leave the man alone, know what I mean?Honestly, if it's scary conspiracy theory meets famous shady person you're looking for, look into Dammbeck's "Das Netz." If you're looking into more information about Thomas Pynchon, reread his novels and enjoy the unmatched depth of detail. But it's a little disturbing having a man point at a television screen with two seconds of another man walking by just out of frame and reading every fold of that man's jacket as indication into the personality and mindset of Thomas Pynchon, provided that the videotaped man is actually he. Certainly Pynchon must have this extreme aching Thanatos desire to lead people to the mystery of himself and the truth behind the enigma of his writing--that's why he spends time on The Simpsons and writing letters of defense for Ian McEwan as regards taking from primary sources for historical fiction! Ultimately the best parts of this movie are when the interviewees talk about the significance of his work to themselves and the way they view the world, and when Irwin Corey plays the recording of himself accepting Pynchon's national novelist award. There is a culture that extends beyond the man himself that is of predominantly more significance, and this movie sort of misses the real core of what it has in that fact. Instead of regarding Pynchonmania with an air of curiosity and friendliness, they juxtapose interviews with found footage of scientific experiments, propaganda animations, and really bad music.I agree with some of the commentators in this movie: everyone should at least attempt to read a Pynchon novel and the problem is not that we are lacking information about Pynchon, it is that there is too much information in his novels to ever really settle. However, like with most artists, the person doesn't matter--it's what he creates that is truly significant. Leave the rascally old git alone so that he can get back to writing another novel.--PolarisDiB

Thomas Pynchon is a best - selling American author, who, very much unlike the vast majority his peers, has eschewed the lime light with almost fanatical determination for the past four decades. This very well made movie pieces together testimonies and evidence and investigates Pynchon's background and (speculative) motivations, not just for his persistent hiding, but especially for his writing. It left me with a lot of admiration for the person Thomas Pynchon, who is happy to have his books read and get on with his life, rather than cheapen himself on the media circuit. The sound track is aptly provided by "The Residents", an American underground band who for the past 30 years have only appeared masked on stage and whose members are unknown. Seems that Pynchon is in good company.

Stunning experience to find, how little can be revealed in such a length of time - the oh so clever and appropriate-like point intended (to s h o w that nothing can be shown, yep) could as well have been made in half an hour - IF the choice of experts asked about Pynchon had been revealing at all: it must be an art in itself to find people belonging that much to the outskirts of the literary scene. Don't let yourselves be tricked by the topic - one does not have to admire this arty-farty-stuff, because little is less than an art-movie that has not enough to it.