| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| duh |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 15:06:07
While at work last night, I put on my headphones and listened/watched this film online. I found it very intriguing UNTIL Lynch dropped the initial story line and started in with his trademark kooky vignettes. That was when I said to myself, 'this is bs,' and quit watching.
The first half of the film reminded me somewhat of Hitchcock's Vertigo. Why did Lynch have to screw it up by overdoing the artsy-craftsy crap? |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 11/28/2008 : 14:07:48
Great article Randall, thanks...here's the Lynch Link |
| randall |
Posted - 11/28/2008 : 05:23:08
I understand that die-hard Lynch-haters won't care, but just for the record, David Foster Wallace's piece on Lynch from the LOST HIGHWAY set [it was originally commissioned by PREMIERE and is now found in his essay collection A SUPPOSEDLY FUN THING I'LL NEVER DO AGAIN] comes closer than anyone else I've ever read to describing just why those of us who dig Lynch dig Lynch. There are warts, to be sure, but there are also serious undercurrents that don't show up in anyone else's movies. As if Lynch cared what you think. But then, that's part of the point. |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 11/19/2008 : 15:14:33
But it's not the same movie...
How very Lynchian of us discussing one of his movies under the Thread heading of an other....he'd be proud. |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 19:16:03
Just remember - they're the same girl!
|
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 18:59:08
I watched it two nights running (with no stimulants!!) and the dreams I had on that second night were a series of terrifying vignettes.
Still haven't properly worked it out.
I mean the plot is quite simple but trying to work out the rest of it is proving quite difficult. |
| randall |
Posted - 11/16/2008 : 19:46:43
quote:
Originally posted by 9eanmimo
I couldn't find (or didn't try hard enough) the Inland Empire thread, from what i remember i enjoyed Mulholland Drive but lynch has gone a step further, i'll need to watch IE again but this time with squared paper and a ruler, or just a joint to really wreck my head!!
Love those Bunnies.
My three viewings were all weed-free, but the home-video screenings [#2 and #3] both happened late at night, when I'm able to turn off my mind, relax and float downstream. Same thing, I guess. In a year or so, I'll watch it again. |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 11/10/2008 : 11:04:09
I couldn't find (or didn't try hard enough) the Inland Empire thread, from what i remember i enjoyed Mulholland Drive but lynch has gone a step further, i'll need to watch IE again but this time with squared paper and a ruler, or just a joint to really wreck my head!!
Love those Bunnies. |
| randall |
Posted - 04/20/2008 : 11:31:28
I've seen INLAND EMPIRE three times now. As with SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, I can't quit watching once I dip in. Nope, I can't explain some of it -- hell, most of it -- but it's hypnotically powerful to me. I guess that's what makes horse races; enough people were unimpressed that Lynch had trouble finding U.S. distribution, but then he shot on digital for a fraction of what it might have cost otherwise, so he's been lent a certain aesthetic freedom from popularity polls. Thank god for DVDs, and for the New York Film Festival, which gave me the chance to see it on a real movie screen. |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 04/20/2008 : 03:09:56
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
And I don't mind surrealism or indeed pretension: this just has no elan - at all.
Whaaaaaa?
I swear to God, I practically expect you to tell me that Singin' in the Rain was filmed in black-and-white next.
At least we agree on Inland Empire. Boy, do we ever agree on that. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 19:47:43
The only thing going for this for me is that it is more watchable than Inland Empire. And I don't mind surrealism or indeed pretension: this just has no elan - at all. |
| duh |
Posted - 03/28/2008 : 14:56:11
quote:
Originally posted by dem08nic
What MBI said - how can you know if you gave up half way through? I don't follow that logic. The end is totally brilliant and pretty much explains what's been going on.
Perhaps I ought to fast-forward and watch the end. 
(Surrealist films: I enjoyed 'Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me.')
Would someone be kind enough to message me privately to explain Mulholland Drive to me, so I can understand what brilliance I missed? |
| MM0rkeleb |
Posted - 03/28/2008 : 14:53:29
quote:
Originally posted by dem08nic
What MBI said - how can you know if you gave up half way through? I don't follow that logic. The end is totally brilliant and pretty much explains what's been going on.
I'm in the definite minority in that this is exactly why I didn't like this movie!
I liked it a lot better when it was truly weird and dreamlike and didn't make any sense. The last half just damn literalized everything. |
| demonic |
Posted - 03/28/2008 : 14:28:25
What MBI said - how can you know if you gave up half way through? I don't follow that logic. The end is totally brilliant and pretty much explains what's been going on. |
| Sean |
Posted - 03/28/2008 : 07:31:58
quote:
Originally posted by duh
I maintain it was BS.  
Do you like any surrealist movies? |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 03/28/2008 : 03:38:56
quote:
Originally posted by duh
I maintain it was BS.
You wouldn't know, as you didn't finish. |
