Paul Thomas Anderson is arguably the greatest living director today. He is quite frankly the Stanley Kubrick of this generation in how he is constantly redefining his cinema with each passing film and thus exploring the possibilities of the medium. He is a true pioneer, and any film he makes is sure to be a major event for any lover of cinema.

His latest film, "Inherent Vice," has created a tremendous amount of hype for numerous reasons. It represents the first time any filmmaker has managed to climb the Mount Everest of screenplay adaptations and commit a work by the complex author Thomas Pynchon to the medium. It is also Anderson's first foray into the film noir genre. It features an all-star cast of top-grade actors. And, of course, it is an Anderson film.

The film starts off with Shasta Fay (Katherine Waterston) telling her ex-boyfriend and private investigator Doc Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) that her rich lover Mickey Wolfmann (Eric Roberts) has gone missing and that she suspects his wife and her lover might be behind the plot. Shasta asks Doc to look for him, leading the investigator down a turbulent and unpredictable path. Along the way, he has to deal with the FBI, LAPD and a drug cartel.

Anderson paces the film at a steady click and it rarely ever wavers. However, the plot is constantly introducing new characters and interweaving seemingly unrelated plots that can and will get confusing after a while.

During the press conference for the film's premiere at the New York Film Festival, the auteur noted that Howard Hawkes' "The Big Sleep" was among the inspirations for this film. Like that classic noir, this one's plot meanders constantly without any sense of growing clarity. And this seems to be Anderson's modus operandi here. It doesn't always work (and it certainly starts to lag in its final third when the conceit loses its luster), but there is enough here to make fans of the filmmaker happy.

One of these factors is the visuals of the film. Anderson and cinematographer Robert Elswitt capture the 1970s brilliantly in the feel and texture of the movie. Shot on 35 mm film (though the press screening did not view the film print), the colors tend to oscillate between muted and intense. For example, Phoenix's face is bathed in a tremendous blue during a few shots early on.

The shooting style is rather reserved with few grandiose gestures one might be accustomed to in the filmmaker's other work. That doesn't make it less visually appealing or effective. A lot of conversation scenes start off in medium two shots and slowly track in onto one of the characters (usually the person Doc is talking to). It allows the viewer to take in the scene and especially the sumptuous performances on display (more on that later). At other points, they pick up on some noir tropes. At one point, Doc drops off a character at home in a wide shot. In the background, the audience sees the character's reconciliation with his family while Doc looks on from the foreground. These characters are in silhouette, indicating how far their reality is from Doc's own loneliness. In another instance, Doc finds himself in a sea of fog. Other stunning visuals include a rather comic recreation of Da Vinci's Last Supper (with pizza!) and a leaning tower that resembles male genatalia.

The performances of this film are what really makes it all worthwhile, however. Phoenix was absolutely phenomenal in Anderson's previous film "The Master" and he simply continues to prove himself one of the best actors out there in this film. He is a bit more subdued in "Inherent Vice" than his bestial Freddie Quell in "The Master," but his character is as shifty as the plot and numerous disguises he undertakes. He often looks like he is high on something and thus docile. But there are other moments where he looks like a fierce predator on the hunt. Nowhere is this more apparent than during a climactic sex scene. He has a way with the snappy repartee and his interactions with Josh Brolin's "Big Foot" are among the most humorous in the film.

Speaking of which, Brolin plays yet another tough guy, but Anderson gives him quite a subtle twist by the end. It makes for one of the few cathartic moments in this otherwise anti-climactic narrative.

The other big standout in the picture is Katherine Waterston. The actress, who is on the rise, delivers a haunting turn as the "femme fatale." During one scene she strips bare and unearths not only her body, but her story for the audience. The camera frames her almost from Doc's perspective, almost placing the viewer in his position. As she sits down beside Doc, she rests her foot on his leg and ever so slowly creeps up in the most seductive of manners. What happens is a struggle for the viewer to concentrate on her dialogue (which is spoken so softly that it forces the viewer to listen even more intently) or the increasingly sexual impact of her creeping foot. When the scene does reach its expected climax it is a tremendous release for both the viewer and clearly the character. Anderson's decision to maintain this scene in a single shot makes it all the more visceral and compelling and Waterson's performance clinches the deal.

The remaining cast members, which include Owen Wilson, Jenna Malone, Reese Witherspoon, Benicio del Toro, Martin Donovan and Maya Rudolph, all bring different flavors to this chaotic recipe. Most viewers of course will be enticed by the brief but hilarious turn by Martin Short.

Johnny Greenwood, who is now on his third score with Anderson, diverges greatly from his two previous efforts. Where those had similar bizarre sound worlds that were still similar in color, this score has a far vaster palette that includes more classical sounds and even rock music. It is a cacaphonic cornucopia in the vein of Anderson's "Magnolia." In some ways, this mirrors the frenzied narrative of the film, but it's lack of identity makes it less effective than his work on "The Master" and "There Will Be Blood."

So what is the verdict of "Inherent Vice?" It is very difficult for this writer to really claim this to be a review. Instead it should be considered more like the first impressions from the first screening. Anderson's film is enjoyable in its constant fluctuation between the comic and the dramatic, but it all seems to add up to nothing. And this is where the dilemma lies. Anderson's cinema is rich in its human interactions, philosophy and perspective. And yet this film seems lacking in all of them to some degree. A filmmaker of that stature deserves more analysis and that is why this movie deserves a second viewing by all. It will entertain fans of the book and the director, but others may feel like they missed out on the fun. They may simply have to try again to find it. Or the sad truth might be that it really is as empty as meets the eye. Maybe that is the film's "Inherent Vice."