I'm a fan of PT Anderson, but this movie was half-baked and lackluster. It was like Inherent Vice without Thomas Pynchon's script, or Phantom Thread minus Daniel Day Lewis's performance. It has been likened to "Once Upon A Time ... in Hollywood" but lacked Tarantino's attention to time period aesthetics (this movie has no establishing shots to let viewers enjoy the design of the time, backgrounds are often out of focus). I'm fine with a movie being style over substance, but if you're going to do that, the movie needs to show off that style, and this movie is muted in that category. The costume design and art direction isn't good enough to make up for the fact there's close to no plot.
All it had to say was that men were misogynist in the 1970s. All the men treat Alana as a pawn. This is positioned as opposite to her relationship with Gary, a 15 year old, who is too young to have a physical relationship with Alana. I got the message that this relationship was more "pure" than Alana's superficial relations with older men, because it contained Gary's youthful optimism and genuine interest (infatuation) for her. He basically falls in love with her at first sight and there are so many scenes of them running into each other's arms. Give me a break.
This emphasis on the purity of youth is "feel good", but honestly Gary's infatuation with Alana is an immature take on love, and not something to be put on a pedestal. While I liked Gary's eternal optimism in the face of the dark, cynical side of Hollywood, that optimism was only there because of Gary's inexperience. Is this inexperience and naivety something to envy? Not for me.
Maybe I'd feel differently if I grew up in the 70s. But honestly, this movie is a cynical attempt to cash in on nostalgia. They get you with the David Bowie trailer of people running around in polyester. If that does it for you, by all means, watch this movie. But for me, I need a little more.