Film-Strut: Mulholland Drive

13»

  Comments


  • SPlDEYSPlDEY Vegas 3,135 Posts
    Skip Inland Empire. Watch Millenium Actress. 



    - spidey

  • ketanketan Warmly booming riffs 2,141 Posts
    SPlDEY said:
    ketan said:
    SPlDEY said:
    That's the beauty of this Mulholland Drive, and all of his films. It's intentionally grotesque, disjointed and some parts just feel wrong, but there are some deeply memorable moments that somehow resonate with you on some level and somehow wind up deep into this mental visual library of every film you've ever watched. Like the strange guy behind the trash can, baby wants Blue Velvet, the unexplained blue cube in the handbag, Bill Pullman going nuts on the sax, Strange baby with the measles dying. David Lynch works in this magic realm of unsettling minutiae hidden deep within your mind that you didn't even know existed. 

    - spidey

    Inland Empire was torture, though, right?  (Did you ever see it, Spidey?)  Did anyone here enjoy watching it?  Redeeming qualities?
    It wasn't torture, but imo it wasn't his best film. I think the story line was actually one of his most coherent stories ever. It even had a happy ending with a Nina Simone dance number. I guess the problems that I had with it boil down to: the digital cameras intentionally made every scene feel dated and campy, the lost girls plot line was uninteresting, and I don't think it was worth being 3 hours long. 

    - spidey
    I forgot that it was 3 hours long!!  Aaaahhhh....

  • foefoe Marina 148 Posts
    I can't get with Mulholland Drive. Watched it in film school with a bunch of smart, like-minded people a few years after it came out, and everybody seemed blown away but me. This was part of a set of classes where we also watched the hardest-of-the-hard avant-garde stuff. I watched a whole >1hour screening of blinking solid colors onscreen with no soundtrack that were created by exposing film cans to daylight with no camera and then putting them through a broken digital-transfer machine, and took notes at the Q&A like "she says 'the space between you and the person behind you in the ATM line is a non-space space' (what)" so it's not like I'm some rube who can't cope with a bit of surreality/disjointed plot and images. I don't think I misunderstand the kind of effect Lynch's thing is supposed to have on me but in that film especially it just did nothing for me. So it's just weird to me that this is everybody's favorite highbrow art film given the occasionally seriously mindblowing stuff that I saw around that time. The very idea of people spending loads of time trying to string together the plot into a cohesive whole bruns my ass. Even most fans of the movie must agree that's missing the point. Plus the dude was paid to come to universities and film schools and refused to talk about filmmaking and instead promoted his transcendental meditation shit. Transcend my fist in your teeth. 
    everybodys favorite highbrow art film is by nature not that highbrow. they like it because it looks good and because they feel they can almost understand it. personally i prefer elephant man because i connected emotionally to it, but mulholland drive is a nice looking puzzle feature.

  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    Yeah I don't really consider it a highbrow film or even a particularly interesting puzzle. For me, as mentioned numerous times above, it's all about the feel of a Lynch film - that dreamlike state that is like a slightly altered reality. I always think of the beginning of Blue Velvet with the slow mo sequence as a true representation of the Lynchian state, That was probably the main reason Inland Empire left me cold - as spidey mentions, the digital stock just lacked the lushness .

    I also went into it pretty much cold with very little background information which is always the best way to enjoy his films, IMHO.

    I thought everyone was into that piece of dogshit Inception now as their favourite quasi complex movie?

  • Yeah I don't mean to place Lynch's stuff alongside actual "highbrow" stuff as he's far too popular to call that really, but to a mainstream viewing audience, like the type of viewer for whom, like, Donnie Darko was a mindblowing departure from what they thought movies could do, he's the highbrow avant-garde in that set.

    I also heartily agree that shitty video looks like shitty video and nobody likes it as an aesthetic to lose yourself in. It can be effective for other purposes but not the atmospherics people look for in a David Lynch film.

    And Inception was a blockbuster! Are people calling that a thinking man's film??

  • foefoe Marina 148 Posts
    yeah, you must remember, for most people, the matrix is the most mind blowing and original movie they have ever seen. 

  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    I seem to recall conversations with people where they looked to break down the complex genius of Inception for me.

    On the other hand, when I went and watched The Matrix at the cinema on its release, it was pretty visually mindblowing and a lot of fun. Not sure why I refused to engage with Inception in the same way. Perhaps because it is so depressingly po faced.

    Speaking of overrated directors. That Christopher Nolan. My god.

  • ppadilhappadilha 1,808 Posts
    Junior said:
    I seem to recall conversations with people where they looked to break down the complex genius of Inception for me.

    On the other hand, when I went and watched The Matrix at the cinema on its release, it was pretty visually mindblowing and a lot of fun. Not sure why I refused to engage with Inception in the same way. Perhaps because it is so depressingly po faced.

    Speaking of overrated directors. That Christopher Nolan. My god.

    people said the same thing about Insterstellar, as if it was some sort of deep existential experience. There was a decent sci-fi film somewhere in there, crammed between two action movies.

  • foefoe Marina 148 Posts
    Junior said:
    I seem to recall conversations with people where they looked to break down the complex genius of Inception for me.

    On the other hand, when I went and watched The Matrix at the cinema on its release, it was pretty visually mindblowing and a lot of fun. Not sure why I refused to engage with Inception in the same way. Perhaps because it is so depressingly po faced.

    Speaking of overrated directors. That Christopher Nolan. My god.
    i watched the matrix a few days after the premiere and everybody told me it was mindblowing and nothing like anything i'd ever seen. imagine my surprise when i found out it was a mix of kung fu movies, manga and sofies world.

    i never watched inception. i liked black knight, but so many people are acting like it was the second coming just because it was the best super hero movie at that point. i like Christopher Nolan tho, but i can't argue about him not being over rated. 

  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    Yeah there were no new ideas in The Matrix but I maintain that at the time nothing else had actually visualised it all successfully in a Hollywood "live action" movie. Sometimes just doing something well is enough in itself. I doubt its aged well and the less said about the sequels the better.

    The Dark Knight is great even if it peaks way before the end. Pretty much everything else he's made confuses a lack of humour with depth. Just people being miserable in films where the plots don't actually add up. They generally look very nice though. 

    And yeah ppadilha, Inception is dull but Intersteller is mind numbingly yawn inducing from the mid point onwards. I'm pretty immune to Mcconaughey's charms though so that probably didn't help.

  • SPlDEYSPlDEY Vegas 3,135 Posts
    ppadilha said:
    Junior said:
    I seem to recall conversations with people where they looked to break down the complex genius of Inception for me.

    On the other hand, when I went and watched The Matrix at the cinema on its release, it was pretty visually mindblowing and a lot of fun. Not sure why I refused to engage with Inception in the same way. Perhaps because it is so depressingly po faced.

    Speaking of overrated directors. That Christopher Nolan. My god.

    people said the same thing about Insterstellar, as if it was some sort of deep existential experience. There was a decent sci-fi film somewhere in there, crammed between two action movies.
    Interstellar was definitely Christopher Nolan's clear homage to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Which in my opinion Kubrick's film is one of the most complex highbrow art films of all time. It's pretty obvious that Christopher Nolan loves puzzles. Which works in a way that is actually quite similar to how David Lynch approaches film making. Both directors require a deep attention span, multiple viewings, interpretations and discussion to reveal the deeper meanings of their films. The big difference being that David Lynch makes odd decisions influenced by dreams or ideas that come to him subconsciously to create his films. Where Stanley Kubrick made very clear calculated decisions, and forced the audience to come up with their interpretations of what he was trying to say similar to a puzzle. I think that David Lynch sometimes make decisions that he's not even sure what their true meanings are himself. 

    - spidey
    Junior

  • foefoe Marina 148 Posts
    Junior said:
    Yeah there were no new ideas in The Matrix but I maintain that at the time nothing else had actually visualised it all successfully in a Hollywood "live action" movie. Sometimes just doing something well is enough in itself. I doubt its aged well and the less said about the sequels the better.

    The Dark Knight is great even if it peaks way before the end. Pretty much everything else he's made confuses a lack of humour with depth. Just people being miserable in films where the plots don't actually add up. They generally look very nice though. 

    i don't disagree with you about the matrix. I felt the joker carried the black knight. he made it good.
    Junior

  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    I watched the pilot/first episode of Twin Peaks again the other day in anticipation of the new series.

    I approached it with some trepidation, not really sure how it would hold up after all these years. After the initial shock of how 80s/90s the production was  I was fully sucked in again after around fifteen minutes of action. I remembered all the melodrama but had totally blanked on how heavy the first episode is - it's like a constant wave of crying and Badalamenti tones. It's also pretty straight compared to the weirdness that followed. I seem to recall that it's around episode three that the dream sequences et all kick in.

    Still fantastic television.

  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    Also



  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    So, did anyone else watch Twin Peaks: The Return? Judging from viewing figures, I guess not.

    I binge rewatched the first two seasons again to bring my frau up to speed though foolishly skipped Fire Walk With Me which would have been a better primer.

    Anyway, the new series was probably one of the greatest things I've ever seen. I'm still mulling over scenes, images and sounds from it two weeks after it finished and I expect I will for some time to come. Truly extraordinary. The first two hours are a bit of a grind if you come straight from seasons 1&2 and are eager for Cooper action but the more you watch, the more rewards that come.

    At times it felt like all the different aspects of Lynch rolled into one - there was Eraserhead style surreal horror, Lost Highway identity nightmares, Mulholland Drive fractured realities and surreal humour, the undercurrent of nastiness in suburban life from Blue Velvet and so on and so on.

    I genuinely don't know if I want another series or not.  Truly a unique piece of film making. 

    The number of associated actors who died during the making and screening massively depressed me though. So many.

  • ppadilhappadilha 1,808 Posts
    Fire Walk With Me is essential viewing before starting on the new series - that's pretty much where they pick up, isn't it?

    I'm still in the middle of it (ep 11 or something), but I like it a lot, you just have to accept that you're not getting a regular series full of cliffhangers and set pieces first. And it does feel like a Lynch omnibus kind of work, it seems to reference just about everything else he's done so far. Crazy mix of amazing moments and some truly baffling shit.
    Junior

  • JuniorJunior 4,801 Posts
    Yeah I really hadn't clicked about FWWM, having avoided as much of the pre-season interviews and think pieces as possible.

    Luckily a lot of it was seared on my brain but did involve some speedy recaps along the way.

    Without dropping any spoilers at all I will say that the season gets better and better as it goes on. You're in for so many more treats.
Sign In or Register to comment.