Discussion:
OT: David Lynch
(too old to reply)
j***@gmail.com
2006-11-10 18:27:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message


Also, I saw Inland Empire on Monday. One of the weirdest and most
interesting movies I've seen in a long time. Check it out when it opens
wide.
Yelps
2006-11-10 19:00:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://youtu.be/Ut6zdE8qWj0
Also, I saw Inland Empire on Monday. One of the weirdest and most
interesting movies I've seen in a long time. Check it out when it opens
wide.
That's pretty cool.

dc
Wordsmith
2006-11-11 00:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://youtu.be/Ut6zdE8qWj0
Also, I saw Inland Empire on Monday. One of the weirdest and most
interesting movies I've seen in a long time. Check it out when it opens
wide.
Where did you see it? You some kinda in(land)sider or somethin'?

Seriously, did it look good on the big screen in spite of having been
shot digitally?

W : )
j***@gmail.com
2006-11-11 01:10:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wordsmith
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://youtu.be/Ut6zdE8qWj0
Also, I saw Inland Empire on Monday. One of the weirdest and most
interesting movies I've seen in a long time. Check it out when it opens
wide.
Where did you see it? You some kinda in(land)sider or somethin'?
Seriously, did it look good on the big screen in spite of having been
shot digitally?
W : )
I saw it the the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood. It was at the annual AFI
Fest and I paid $25.

Some of it looks good, some of it looks like it was being shot by
someone who was using a DV camera for the first time (and he probably
was). I'm not a big fan of films shot in DV (I thought the Star Wars
films looked great, but it was helped by the fact that they were so
FX-driven). What I have yet to warm up to is that fuzzy picture you get
in those exterior shots, especially when the sunlight figures
prominently.

Fortunately, there's not a whole lot of that here, and for the most
part, Lynch's picture is wild and beautiful. Some have found it to be
muddy and ugly, but I did not.

Other than that, the first hour is somewhat linear, and then be
prepared for a two-hour dive into a Lynchian mindfuck from which there
is seemingly no escape. My brain felt like scrambled eggs after this,
and it made Mulholland Dr. look like nursery school. I do plan on
seeing it again. It's a baffling, fascinating puzzle.

Only serious Lynch fans should attend. Others should probably stay
away. Far away. I can't wait for the reviews.
Yelps
2006-11-11 01:30:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Other than that, the first hour is somewhat linear, and then be
prepared for a two-hour dive into a Lynchian mindfuck from which there
is seemingly no escape. My brain felt like scrambled eggs after this,
and it made Mulholland Dr. look like nursery school. I do plan on
seeing it again. It's a baffling, fascinating puzzle.
Only serious Lynch fans should attend. Others should probably stay
away. Far away. I can't wait for the reviews.
Guess I missed out. I wanna see Laura Dern get an academy award, she is
amazing. This movie sound like something else to look forward to.

Nothing better then a three hours mindfuck.

dc
Wordsmith
2006-11-11 08:14:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Wordsmith
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://youtu.be/Ut6zdE8qWj0
Also, I saw Inland Empire on Monday. One of the weirdest and most
interesting movies I've seen in a long time. Check it out when it opens
wide.
Where did you see it? You some kinda in(land)sider or somethin'?
Seriously, did it look good on the big screen in spite of having been
shot digitally?
W : )I saw it the the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood. It was at the annual AFI
Fest and I paid $25.
Some of it looks good, some of it looks like it was being shot by
someone who was using a DV camera for the first time (and he probably
was). I'm not a big fan of films shot in DV (I thought the Star Wars
films looked great, but it was helped by the fact that they were so
FX-driven). What I have yet to warm up to is that fuzzy picture you get
in those exterior shots, especially when the sunlight figures
prominently.
Fortunately, there's not a whole lot of that here, and for the most
part, Lynch's picture is wild and beautiful. Some have found it to be
muddy and ugly, but I did not.
Other than that, the first hour is somewhat linear, and then be
prepared for a two-hour dive into a Lynchian mindfuck from which there
is seemingly no escape. My brain felt like scrambled eggs after this,
and it made Mulholland Dr. look like nursery school. I do plan on
seeing it again. It's a baffling, fascinating puzzle.
Only serious Lynch fans should attend. Others should probably stay
away. Far away. I can't wait for the reviews.
You don't have to wait. As of now, there are nine up at Rotten
Tomatoes.

W : )
Harry Bailey
2006-11-12 01:56:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://youtu.be/Ut6zdE8qWj0
Also, I saw Inland Empire on Monday. One of the weirdest and most
interesting movies I've seen in a long time. Check it out when it opens
wide.
INLAND EMPIRE ... Can't wait.

[The two guys who made/accidentally-captured this 2-minute video - of
Lynch in a suitably bizarre "performance art" promotion of his latest
film on a Hollywood sidewalk - sound ominously like the two guys from
the Black-Book office scene/massacre in Lynch's Mulholland Dr ...].

Since its premiere at the Venice Film Festival last September, this
DV-shot, 3-hour oneiric epic has been rhizomatically percolating ever
so slowly but surely.

"EVEN by David Lynch's weird standards his latest thriller is an
exasperating stretch. For three chilly hours we shadow a small cast of
artists and prostitutes as their identities are deliberately blurred in
one of the most impenetrable films ever made ... The character played
by Jeremy Irons is trying to shoot a psychological drama about love and
terror in some sort of crazy labyrinth but there's something deeply
wrong with his script. "

"David Lynch's latest opus is a Russian doll of a film with stories
inside stories inside stories. But coming in at three hours long, made
in Poland and Hollywood, the digitally-shot film is inspired and
incomprehensible by turns ... Laura Dern (who also co-produced) stars
as an actress who has just landed a part in a new film. What the
producers have neglected to tell her is that the movie is a remake and
that the two original leads were murdered. Now, history looks set to
repeat itself. "

"There is a very clean divide in Mulholland Drive between a woman's
dreams and waking life, but the walls between the two are completely
dissolved in the more fragmentary Inland Empire, Lynch's most
self-reflexive creation to date. The director has vowed never to work
on film again, and for this, his first feature shot on digital video,
he lobs a cherry bomb at his entire canon, recording the jagged
remnants that resonate from the blast as they slide and dissipate into
the swirl of his projector beam. Some may call it a toilet, but I like
to think of it as a splendiferous whirlpool of wonders. "

"You may ask what the film's stream of non sequiturs, anecdotes, clues,
doublings, folktales, and psychotic episodes mean. We could say nothing
and declare that Inland Empire doesn't so much fall into the abyss as
it resides in it, telegraphing dizzying sounds and visions from its
drowned world toward the outside, which should suffice as an
explanation if you've learned to respect the fact that Lynch carves his
films much closer to where our id resides than anyone has ever dared.
Lynch, more honestly than Godard, embraces the dark and dingy contours
of the DV format ..."
kelpzoidzl
2017-05-22 07:52:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Twin Peaks The Return

Tonights premiere knocked it out of the park. Two more combined episodes next sunday. Total of 18 episodes at this stage. I hope they continue the 2 hours a week.

Tonights 2 hours was excellent. This may end up being Lynch's best work.
Don Stockbauer
2017-05-22 12:25:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I once saw an interview with lunch and I swear to God he came across like a giggly four-year-old.
kelpzoidzl
2017-05-22 18:56:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Yeah hes a funny guy, but I think he is always acting.
Don Stockbauer
2017-05-22 22:56:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
You must be right, he was very childlike and giggly. I was really surprised. That was the only interview of him I ever saw, don't remember when and where. I have a great typo up there, lunch instead of Lynch.
kelpzoidzl
2017-05-24 20:44:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
He has an "extra," video, I think it was on the Inland Empire dvd, (probably on youtube) where he talks about how to cook Quinoa, that is pretty funny. Its all surrealism. His character, the deaf FBI agent who shouts, the acting part he plays in the original Twin Peaks is pretty hilarious. He's actually a great comedic actor. I think his dream sequencs and weirdness are really advanced comedy.

Yes I had noticed your typo, it remnded me of Quinoa for lunch.
Don Stockbauer
2017-05-25 03:39:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
OK, then in the future I'll consider it acting rather than inate.
kelpzoidzl
2017-05-25 08:05:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
...he could also be insane...lol
Don Stockbauer
2017-05-25 10:10:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What if we all are?

Loading...