- Thread starter
- #1
Omar 382
Well-Known Member
- 16,827
- 1,166
- 173
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2013
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,000.00
- Fav. Team #1
- Fav. Team #2
- Fav. Team #3
What do you guys think of him? Thus far, I've seen Mulholland Drive (3/5 stars) and Blue Velvet (2.5/5 stars) from him. Neither were terrible movies, and both were engaging and provocative at various points in their respective running times. But, honestly, what does any of that matter if the end result just adds up to "it's a dream" (Mulholland Drive) or "the good guy wins, the bad guys lose" (Blue Velvet)?
And don't get me wrong, I like movies that incorporate elements of surrealism. For example, Terry Gilliam's Brazil (4/5 stars) contained various bizarre and off-the-wall elements that may make no sense to the viewer while watching- and that was cool, because the film as a whole added up to being about the constant surveillance state of governments and the awful effects it has on its citizens. Yes, it featured some cool shots (I'll put them in the spoiler to avoid taking up too much space)
but the shots and imagery enhanced both the thematic content and the plot of the film. In other words, they weren't just cool shots to be cool shots.
For example, the sex scene with Dennis Hopper and Isabella Rossellini in Blue Velvet. Yes, it was a cool scene in the sense that (in my opinion) it depicted what drugged-up, angry, violent, selfish sex looks like. The sped-up sequence of Hopper on top of Rossellini illustrates what someone who is doing that must look like to an alien- just entrenched in pure hedonism.
But what does any of this ultimately do for the plot or purpose of the film? Overall, I took the movie to be a story of good fighting against crazy, deranged, over-the-top evil; and good winning (the sex scene was meant to illustrate the over-the-top evil). But that's such a boring and generic theme. And the fact that I had to sit through 2 hours of Lynchian imagery and symbolism to arrive at this theme just pisses me off. If I wanted to see good beating out evil, I'd watch Lawrence of Arabia or something.
I know there are some people who say you either "get" Lynch, or you don't. Do you guys "get" him? To me, he's good with the camera and showing surreal scenes, but his movies (that I've seen) don't amount to much because the overall plot and ultimate thematic content both suck.
I'm going to watch (the original) Twin Peaks to see if I can figure him out.
And don't get me wrong, I like movies that incorporate elements of surrealism. For example, Terry Gilliam's Brazil (4/5 stars) contained various bizarre and off-the-wall elements that may make no sense to the viewer while watching- and that was cool, because the film as a whole added up to being about the constant surveillance state of governments and the awful effects it has on its citizens. Yes, it featured some cool shots (I'll put them in the spoiler to avoid taking up too much space)
but the shots and imagery enhanced both the thematic content and the plot of the film. In other words, they weren't just cool shots to be cool shots.
For example, the sex scene with Dennis Hopper and Isabella Rossellini in Blue Velvet. Yes, it was a cool scene in the sense that (in my opinion) it depicted what drugged-up, angry, violent, selfish sex looks like. The sped-up sequence of Hopper on top of Rossellini illustrates what someone who is doing that must look like to an alien- just entrenched in pure hedonism.
But what does any of this ultimately do for the plot or purpose of the film? Overall, I took the movie to be a story of good fighting against crazy, deranged, over-the-top evil; and good winning (the sex scene was meant to illustrate the over-the-top evil). But that's such a boring and generic theme. And the fact that I had to sit through 2 hours of Lynchian imagery and symbolism to arrive at this theme just pisses me off. If I wanted to see good beating out evil, I'd watch Lawrence of Arabia or something.
I know there are some people who say you either "get" Lynch, or you don't. Do you guys "get" him? To me, he's good with the camera and showing surreal scenes, but his movies (that I've seen) don't amount to much because the overall plot and ultimate thematic content both suck.
I'm going to watch (the original) Twin Peaks to see if I can figure him out.
I think that was one of Naomi Watt's first big films IIRC
