I like that. Intentional crap is still crap. Lynch doesn't have to worry about everything in the movie tying together. Most people will assume there is a tie somewhere & will piece it together with their own feeble imaginations. Even Lynch isn't sure, but he knows that his rabid fans will attempt to make some false sense out of it, and then start calling the movie "genius" by vitrue of it being surreal, disjointed and incoherent. No wonder Lynch refuses to explain many scenes, he doesn't have to
Nonsensical motivations? Do you mean like real life? A lot of films are unrealistic, most in fact, in the manner in which they convey motivations. Why should every character have a motivation? Many people have no clue on why they do certain things. Also, the acting is intentionally overdone to show that something is not quite right within the films realm. The diner scene also serves a purpose in showing that the whole first portion of the film is in fact a dream.
Brilliant movie! this with Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and Lost Highway are my faves! his only real clunker was Dune, OUCH. I mean hollywood blockbusters isn't his thing when his only good hollywood product was Elephant Man
lol At first I thought this review had to be a joke. Why else would he call office-buildings hotels and say that he didn't know what the fuck was going on unless this was a parody of a real review. And then I realized, Mulholland Drive is a litmus test to judge stupidity. Perhaps you should go watch some more Micheal Bay movies.
I laughed all the way through your review. Lynch is a genius, you just don't know it yet. He's today's Warhol. The film is about parallel universes, There are two stories, the story about what happened and the story about what didn't happen. It's too bad you feel the way you feel. You should start thinking out of the box and expect films to conform to your pov..
hing that happened. I think the point when they find the lady in the bed (if you know what I mean) is when I finally started getting into the film. Everything after that point are some of the most intense, beautiful, and nightmarish film-making I've ever experienced.
I was going to recommend you see Inland Empire (another David Lynch nightmare), but I almost guarantee you hating that three hour incoherent work of unthinkable beauty (which is infinitely more confusing than Mulholland Drive). I watched Mulholland Drive for the first time about four months ago, and I was honestly blown away with my jaw left lying on the floor after the credits starting rolling. I wasn't really sure what to think of the film during It's first hour or so, but then there was somet
The "I didn't know what the fuck was going on" line really sealed this as such an intelligent review in my mind, it was just the perfect scythe blade of appropriate cursing that cut through a lot of crap. Really I hate DAvid Lynch movies too, I have walked out a on a groupd of friends watching "CLue Velvet", and I muscled through "Dune" only because we were making fun of it "MST:3000" style.
3) To be fair I did offer a copy of Mullholland drive and I do have an entire video store at my disposal so if you need help finding a movie feel free to ask
Finally I just wanted to say that in terms of you scale of Lynch movies mine is the same as yours (except I havent seen Eraserhead so I wouldnt know) but I do think I'll give Inland Empire a miss, so its off to you QuantumJoker
there are thrre things I want to say about this review. 1) I completly agree with you on Mullholland Drive (and I'm not just saying that either) the story is incoherent the characters are never developed and the sotry doesnt reach a conclusion of any sort. 2) I really did like this review, beacuse your editing and interplay of pictures and scenes is far better than David Lynch's
Hey, if you don't like it, I'll recommend you two analysis of the film if they change your mind about anything. The first is by "John David Ebert":
It's on youtube, but youtube sucks with links, so add this to the normal youtube page:
watch?v=JpYcM8aVEjQ
The second analysis is on the website Collative Learning. It's under the "film analysis" section. So I suggest you read and watch those analysis and at least SEE if they convince you of anything.
And as a final note, it's just another aesthetic. This is a style of movie-making. Pretty much invented by Kubrick with his 2001 and later films, and put to the extreme test by Lynch's later films, this is a style of film-making that involves things surrounding the story being elevated in importance. Kubrick managed to perfectly balance the story with how he tells it. HAL9000 looking like the monolith is thematic, but doesn't change his character. Lynch pretty much made an entirely thematic film
But Lynch's mind is messed up. He likes IDEAS, not as a coherent story, but as a medley of tidbits. He takes his many odd ideas and forms a basis around that. Similar to how Eraserhead goes off on WEIRD tangents, his most recent films like to put you in Lynch's head putting what's in his head directly onto the film. P.S., did you know that your thoughts are very non-structured? Lynch's mind is at work on his films, and that's why it's so fragmented. The ideas are most important to him.
I can appreciate Lynch's motivations, and I do view ideas in movies as important (the ideas are a bigger strength than the story in 2001), but I simply don't like the way he broke conventions. He might have done it to provide a new perspective on storytelling, but I think he provided a BAD perspective on storytelling.
@QUANTUMJOKER your review of Mulholland Dr. is acually my exact spot - on opinion on Lynch's Lost Highway. I disagree though with Mulholland Dr. and Blue Velvet, especially in regards to the acting. bad acting exists without a doubt, but there are many different types of styles of good and/or great acting all depending on your own tastes. Both films especially blue velvet, have them.
I can appreciate Lynch's motivations, and I do view ideas in movies as important (the ideas are a bigger strength than the story in 2001), but I simply don't like the way he broke conventions. He might have done it to provide a new perspective on storytelling, but I think he provided a BAD perspective on storytelling.
That's cool. I don't really care if you like his films or not (but seriously, Kubrick... it's just WRONG to criticize him in my eyes. Besides his first two films, he has not made a single film that I haven't thought was a masterpiece). It's just that I can't say that he's BAD because he's so different. I'd rather him conform to his own rules, and have as much creative freedom as he does, then see this same film if it were made by Michael Bay. Lynch's ideas are great. The execution is debatable.
I hate Pulp Fiction for actually the same reason you hate this film - BAD ACTING, BAD STORYTELLING, but also, nothing makes sense, and it's entirely style over substance.
But Lynch's films don't function on that level. He exploits the ideas of breaking conventions to an extreme degree, but not just to break conventions. It's because he wants to provide a new perspective on storytelling. Similar to Kubrick's "put you in MY mood" aesthetic, Lynch makes you see through his eyes.
But I can defend both movies in a way that doesn't make it "crap". And I will. I haven't seen the films, so this is all hypothetical, but I have seen "Inland Empire" which is somewhat like Mulholland Drive.
Postmodernism is the reason it sucks to you. I'm not the biggest fan of Postmodernism, but I think Lynch does it right. Eraserhead is postmodern as well as this film, and Pulp Fiction. I'll elaborate in my next comment.
So, in conclusion. Mulholland Drive is a REALLY good movie. It had good story, and what I liked about the story, is that it's like a puzzle. I thought the acting was pretty good, and I like Naomi Watts as an actress.
While I was watching the movie. there were only a few scenes that gave me goosebumps, and also, it made me keep guessing until the end. So, I'll give Mulholland Drive an 8 out of 10.
Although I do respect your opinion, I really liked Mulholland Drive. The thing is, that, when people are watching this movie, they need to pay REALLY close attention on what's going on in the film. And this movie, it's like a puzzle.
I think the reason why you HATED the film is that you didn't watch it again in order to figure out what is going in the film. The movie keeps you guessing until the end.
I'm sorry I uploaded this review before we could debate it together, but after seeing Mulholland Drive, I felt compelled to present my thoughts as quickly as possible.
I love this movie, but I'm not going to try to convince you that it's good. If everyone liked the same movies, then the world would be boring. I think there are things in the film your are missing that would make its meaning more clear. But why should you have to work to appreciate a movie you clearly don't like? I didn't like "Raging Bull". Should I have to endure it over and over until I enjoy it like everyone else? Nope.
I'm not surprised :) But I guess you aren't surprised we're quite fond of that movie. But that's okay. One thing I'd like to add, though: Lynch's movies tend to grow on you, so you might like movies like Blue Velvet or Mulholland Dr. more if you rewatch it in a couple of years. You might start noticing that things are not as random as one is lead to believe during the (admittedly always confusing) first watching.
You could be right. I will rewatch Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive sometime in the future, as I don't like hating movies, especially from a director who has made some very good movies.
Shut the f**k up, it's an allegory.
alexmax2467 4 months ago
wow...' oh hai, I'm qualified to do reviews, hey, whaddaya know? each of David Lynch's movies have nonsensical narratives?! lololol'
do you realise just how big of a moron you are?
lebell79 4 months ago
You clearly don't understand this film. Thanks for the review though.
lazlo214 4 months ago
I like that. Intentional crap is still crap. Lynch doesn't have to worry about everything in the movie tying together. Most people will assume there is a tie somewhere & will piece it together with their own feeble imaginations. Even Lynch isn't sure, but he knows that his rabid fans will attempt to make some false sense out of it, and then start calling the movie "genius" by vitrue of it being surreal, disjointed and incoherent. No wonder Lynch refuses to explain many scenes, he doesn't have to
dustygrady 6 months ago
"... What the fuck is going on?"
Read Rob Agers film analysis.
It makes so much sense to me, on what the plot of this movie might be.
BearWindAppleyard 6 months ago
lol you should try to review Inland Empire. That movie is insane!
nunobelo 9 months ago
Nonsensical motivations? Do you mean like real life? A lot of films are unrealistic, most in fact, in the manner in which they convey motivations. Why should every character have a motivation? Many people have no clue on why they do certain things. Also, the acting is intentionally overdone to show that something is not quite right within the films realm. The diner scene also serves a purpose in showing that the whole first portion of the film is in fact a dream.
SanVanSkater 9 months ago
Brilliant movie! this with Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and Lost Highway are my faves! his only real clunker was Dune, OUCH. I mean hollywood blockbusters isn't his thing when his only good hollywood product was Elephant Man
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
What? They never tried to get him to hire Betty. Did you even watch the film?
dcj28 10 months ago
What a horrible review... pretentious reviewer.
gerrixx 10 months ago
lol At first I thought this review had to be a joke. Why else would he call office-buildings hotels and say that he didn't know what the fuck was going on unless this was a parody of a real review. And then I realized, Mulholland Drive is a litmus test to judge stupidity. Perhaps you should go watch some more Micheal Bay movies.
MrDementedbaboon 1 year ago
@MrDementedbaboon It's a litmus test for pretentiousness, and your PH is very much in the conceited end, given your above comment.
billymagfhloinn 11 months ago
I laughed all the way through your review. Lynch is a genius, you just don't know it yet. He's today's Warhol. The film is about parallel universes, There are two stories, the story about what happened and the story about what didn't happen. It's too bad you feel the way you feel. You should start thinking out of the box and expect films to conform to your pov..
Orishanla 1 year ago
Lynch is a genius, you just don't know it yet. He's today's Warhol.
Orishanla 1 year ago
hing that happened. I think the point when they find the lady in the bed (if you know what I mean) is when I finally started getting into the film. Everything after that point are some of the most intense, beautiful, and nightmarish film-making I've ever experienced.
MegaFilmFanatic 1 year ago
I was going to recommend you see Inland Empire (another David Lynch nightmare), but I almost guarantee you hating that three hour incoherent work of unthinkable beauty (which is infinitely more confusing than Mulholland Drive). I watched Mulholland Drive for the first time about four months ago, and I was honestly blown away with my jaw left lying on the floor after the credits starting rolling. I wasn't really sure what to think of the film during It's first hour or so, but then there was somet
MegaFilmFanatic 1 year ago
The "I didn't know what the fuck was going on" line really sealed this as such an intelligent review in my mind, it was just the perfect scythe blade of appropriate cursing that cut through a lot of crap. Really I hate DAvid Lynch movies too, I have walked out a on a groupd of friends watching "CLue Velvet", and I muscled through "Dune" only because we were making fun of it "MST:3000" style.
Rocketboy1313 1 year ago
3) To be fair I did offer a copy of Mullholland drive and I do have an entire video store at my disposal so if you need help finding a movie feel free to ask
Finally I just wanted to say that in terms of you scale of Lynch movies mine is the same as yours (except I havent seen Eraserhead so I wouldnt know) but I do think I'll give Inland Empire a miss, so its off to you QuantumJoker
frostclan19 1 year ago
there are thrre things I want to say about this review. 1) I completly agree with you on Mullholland Drive (and I'm not just saying that either) the story is incoherent the characters are never developed and the sotry doesnt reach a conclusion of any sort. 2) I really did like this review, beacuse your editing and interplay of pictures and scenes is far better than David Lynch's
frostclan19 1 year ago
NOT to be a jack ass but I wonder if you saw david lynch movies that you think are bad a second time and then you magiclly like them
Not to be hypocritical because I have only seen blue velvet once
themetalhead667 1 year ago
Hey, if you don't like it, I'll recommend you two analysis of the film if they change your mind about anything. The first is by "John David Ebert":
It's on youtube, but youtube sucks with links, so add this to the normal youtube page:
watch?v=JpYcM8aVEjQ
The second analysis is on the website Collative Learning. It's under the "film analysis" section. So I suggest you read and watch those analysis and at least SEE if they convince you of anything.
Bassbait 1 year ago
And as a final note, it's just another aesthetic. This is a style of movie-making. Pretty much invented by Kubrick with his 2001 and later films, and put to the extreme test by Lynch's later films, this is a style of film-making that involves things surrounding the story being elevated in importance. Kubrick managed to perfectly balance the story with how he tells it. HAL9000 looking like the monolith is thematic, but doesn't change his character. Lynch pretty much made an entirely thematic film
Bassbait 1 year ago
But Lynch's mind is messed up. He likes IDEAS, not as a coherent story, but as a medley of tidbits. He takes his many odd ideas and forms a basis around that. Similar to how Eraserhead goes off on WEIRD tangents, his most recent films like to put you in Lynch's head putting what's in his head directly onto the film. P.S., did you know that your thoughts are very non-structured? Lynch's mind is at work on his films, and that's why it's so fragmented. The ideas are most important to him.
Bassbait 1 year ago
@Bassbait
I can appreciate Lynch's motivations, and I do view ideas in movies as important (the ideas are a bigger strength than the story in 2001), but I simply don't like the way he broke conventions. He might have done it to provide a new perspective on storytelling, but I think he provided a BAD perspective on storytelling.
QUANTUMJOKER 1 year ago
@QUANTUMJOKER your review of Mulholland Dr. is acually my exact spot - on opinion on Lynch's Lost Highway. I disagree though with Mulholland Dr. and Blue Velvet, especially in regards to the acting. bad acting exists without a doubt, but there are many different types of styles of good and/or great acting all depending on your own tastes. Both films especially blue velvet, have them.
1HalfASSreViewer 8 months ago
@Bassbait
I can appreciate Lynch's motivations, and I do view ideas in movies as important (the ideas are a bigger strength than the story in 2001), but I simply don't like the way he broke conventions. He might have done it to provide a new perspective on storytelling, but I think he provided a BAD perspective on storytelling.
QUANTUMJOKER 1 year ago
That's cool. I don't really care if you like his films or not (but seriously, Kubrick... it's just WRONG to criticize him in my eyes. Besides his first two films, he has not made a single film that I haven't thought was a masterpiece). It's just that I can't say that he's BAD because he's so different. I'd rather him conform to his own rules, and have as much creative freedom as he does, then see this same film if it were made by Michael Bay. Lynch's ideas are great. The execution is debatable.
Bassbait 1 year ago
I hate Pulp Fiction for actually the same reason you hate this film - BAD ACTING, BAD STORYTELLING, but also, nothing makes sense, and it's entirely style over substance.
But Lynch's films don't function on that level. He exploits the ideas of breaking conventions to an extreme degree, but not just to break conventions. It's because he wants to provide a new perspective on storytelling. Similar to Kubrick's "put you in MY mood" aesthetic, Lynch makes you see through his eyes.
Bassbait 1 year ago
Can't kill you for putting Opeth at the end!
But I can defend both movies in a way that doesn't make it "crap". And I will. I haven't seen the films, so this is all hypothetical, but I have seen "Inland Empire" which is somewhat like Mulholland Drive.
Postmodernism is the reason it sucks to you. I'm not the biggest fan of Postmodernism, but I think Lynch does it right. Eraserhead is postmodern as well as this film, and Pulp Fiction. I'll elaborate in my next comment.
Bassbait 1 year ago
Is that your cat? So I guess you will not end up founding a David Lynch fanclub, huh? Haven't seen the movie, so I can't comment on it. :)
damanhl 1 year ago
So, in conclusion. Mulholland Drive is a REALLY good movie. It had good story, and what I liked about the story, is that it's like a puzzle. I thought the acting was pretty good, and I like Naomi Watts as an actress.
While I was watching the movie. there were only a few scenes that gave me goosebumps, and also, it made me keep guessing until the end. So, I'll give Mulholland Drive an 8 out of 10.
moviedude1500 1 year ago
Comment removed
moviedude1500 1 year ago
Although I do respect your opinion, I really liked Mulholland Drive. The thing is, that, when people are watching this movie, they need to pay REALLY close attention on what's going on in the film. And this movie, it's like a puzzle.
I think the reason why you HATED the film is that you didn't watch it again in order to figure out what is going in the film. The movie keeps you guessing until the end.
.......
moviedude1500 1 year ago
Did you intend to do this review on David Lynch's birthday?
mwhite148 1 year ago
@mwhite148
Actually, I watched the film on my birthday (January 19), then wrote and uploaded the review the next day.
I didn't realize that January 20 was Lynch's birthday. Thanks for pointing it out!
Though I realise that this would be a pretty spiteful birthday present.
QUANTUMJOKER 1 year ago
Hey, I thought we were going to do a roundtable discussion on this.
Screw that, we are still so going to do a roundtable discussion on this because you are WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! ;)
poparena 1 year ago
@poparena
I look forward to our discussion.
I'm sorry I uploaded this review before we could debate it together, but after seeing Mulholland Drive, I felt compelled to present my thoughts as quickly as possible.
QUANTUMJOKER 1 year ago
I love this movie, but I'm not going to try to convince you that it's good. If everyone liked the same movies, then the world would be boring. I think there are things in the film your are missing that would make its meaning more clear. But why should you have to work to appreciate a movie you clearly don't like? I didn't like "Raging Bull". Should I have to endure it over and over until I enjoy it like everyone else? Nope.
vinson1445 1 year ago
I'm not surprised :) But I guess you aren't surprised we're quite fond of that movie. But that's okay. One thing I'd like to add, though: Lynch's movies tend to grow on you, so you might like movies like Blue Velvet or Mulholland Dr. more if you rewatch it in a couple of years. You might start noticing that things are not as random as one is lead to believe during the (admittedly always confusing) first watching.
TheCriticalTwins 1 year ago
@TheCriticalTwins THAT IS TRUE!
moviedude1500 1 year ago
@TheCriticalTwins
You could be right. I will rewatch Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive sometime in the future, as I don't like hating movies, especially from a director who has made some very good movies.
QUANTUMJOKER 1 year ago