Xixax Film Forum

....out of all of the directors that have thier own forum

ONLY DAVID LYNCH'S FILMS ARE THE LEAST CRITICIZED BY FANS, CRITICS, MEDIA, OR WHATEVER.   EVERY FILM THAT HE DIRECTED IS  GREAT TOO NEAR FLAWLESS.   HE IS THE BEST DIRECTOR POSSIBLY OUT THERE. HE IS WAY UNDER-RATED  AND NO ONE CAN SERIOUSLY  TALK SMACK ABOUT HIM.


.....................................................

I really don't like Lynch.  His best effort behind Mulholland Dr was Straight Story, in my mind.

Blue Velvet is over-rated and Wild at Heart blew.

And to prove he's the least criticized of them, you had to post it in the Director's Forum for people to read it! :wink:

And for the record, I don't fancy him much either. I like some of his films but he is by far NOT the best of the bunch.

i think he is really good but he gets over praised by some for intentionally going over the audiences head

I have only seen the straight story, blue velvet, and lost highway....

I am not a huge fan...in fact...2 forums I may have never posted in...his and the Coen Brothers....Big Lebo is good...but not a huge fan.

The Straight Story is a sweet film. Dare I say, a near-perfect little film.

You can have the rest of the Lynch filmography. I'm not a fan.

But, then again, I love "Lucas" and "Con-Air," so who the hell am I?

The Elephant Man is awesome.

Lynch is hands down my favorite director.  I love everything he's done (and yes, Dune, but in a Showgirls-bad kinda way... "The worms ARE the spice!"  :lol: ).  I started seeing his shit around the age of 11 and it seriously tripped me out.  

I don't really give a shit if people talk smack about him-- I'll be the first one to admit that at times his films aren't entirely *accessible*-- because the feelings I get watching his work is something so wonderful and amazing that well... it's just really inspiring.  I could gush all day.

I just wish he'd stop worrying about meditation and world peace and just make another damn movie!

Quote from: Find Your MagaliThe Straight Story is a sweet film. Dare I say, a near-perfect little film.

You can have the rest of the Lynch filmography. I'm not a fan.

But, then again, I love "Lucas" and "Con-Air," so who the hell am I?

I met the screenwriter/editor/producer of that movie.  Well, I asked her questions in a Q&A.

Quote from: ShanghaiOrangeThe Elephant Man is awesome.

OK, I have to be honest and give props to that one, too.

That's two films. Dear heavens, am I a David Lynch fan?  :?

Funny Lynch-related story: so I went to film school in NC.  Back in the day, Dino DeLaurentiis had a film studio down there and that's where they did Blue Velvet.  The movie got made basically b/c Dino 'owed' Lynch one after Dune-- see 'Lynch on Lynch' for the details.  

Anyhoo: after graduation, we had a class trip to LA and for one of our event-things, our graduating class went to Dino's house up in the hills for dinner/meet-and-greet since he's friendly to the NC film community.  The place is spectacular and has a massive patio that looks down into a canyon-- just awesome.  Dino spends the whole time sitting in a huge chair in front of a huge TV so he can watch the Lakers game.  Next to him is a phone with what looks like 100 different lines on it.

My classmates and I walk around the house and property drinking booze and eating tasty snacks.  Before dinner, Martha, Dino's producing partner and wife (who is A FOX), leads us to Dino and make us crowd around him.  She says we can 'ask the master anything.'  My comrades, being the boobs they are, can't think of anything to say.  I can't believe it, this guy produced Fellini movies!  So, I step forward and clear my throat...

I blurt out how Blue Velvet is my favorite movie and that it was so wonderful and daring that it inspired me to be a filmmaker (all true).  I go on and thank Dino for taking a chance on the film and how I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for him blah blah blah... and then I started to cry.  Not bad.  But it was obvious.  I immediately backed away and got more booze.

So after that, we had dinner and a good night.  After it was over, I headed for the door, and before I could leave, Martha grabbed me by the arm and stopped me.  She said "What you said was really touching.  Thank you, it meant a lot to Dino and I.  Next time I see David, I'll tell him what you said."  She gave me a hug, wished me the best in my career, and that's that.

cool

i love lynch. he is simply the best. better than all the rest. Better than anyone, anyone I've ever met. I'm stuck on his heart, and hang on every word he says. Tear us apart, baby I would rather be dead. i cannot believe that anybody can hate Wild at Heart. what a beautifully over the top movie.

Quote from: bonanzatazi cannot believe that anybody can hate Wild at Heart. what a beautifully over the top movie.

You get it! YOU GET IT! The rest of these Lynch-ambivalent know-nothings can eat your dust. Seriously, I'm not even close to being sarcastic.

And I would add: If you're going to criticize David Lynch, or have mixed feelings about his work, because you feel it's "intentionally over the head" of the audience (I'd say they go straight into the human head, which is a murky, dreamy, semiotically warped thing that thrives on displacement of content, just like a Lynch movie), you'd better be ready to criticize Steven fucking Spielberg and his ilk for always "intentionally" presenting us a dull little plate with the meat already cut up for us.

david lynch rules.

My criticism for most of Lynch's work is that it has no soul, no feeling.  I think Mulholland Dr & Straight Story are the exceptions.

Although, I guess I have only seen Blue Velvet & Wild at Heart (and the above).  So he is 2/4 in my book.

see elephant man and you'll be 3/5

Quote from: Find Your MagaliThe Straight Story is a sweet film. Dare I say, a near-perfect little film.

not to say I didn't enjoy the few films I have seen of his...but I just don't get giddy.  Maybe I need to see Mull Drive though.

ok probably nobody here will like what i have to say and think i have no idea about movies... but frankly... muholland drive SUCKS!

i didnt like the movie... yes i do think the directing was great... and i admire lynch... but i was hoping to see the movie and be very impressed.. like when i saw magnolia or punch drunk love, or the matrix, or many others...

i hated it!

Did you understand the story and what was going on?

i did understand it... i did watch it again just in case... i though it was ok, but i dont know, maybe i was expecting more after so much buzz about it...

one good thing i can say about the movie is: naomi watts, great performance by her...

Anyhow, my question was bogus; the film was purely surreal so there wasn't much of a story to understand.
That's my take on the whole "Boo Mulholland Dr." stuff.. you either hate surrealist works or you cream your pants over it. I'm a big Bunuel buff so I loved Mulholland Dr... the majority of his work, however, I can do without.

dunno... it just wasnt one of those movies that i think about for weeks... or months... and wait anxious for the dvd to come out... yada yada yada...

I criticize both David Lynch and Steven Spielberg equally.  Er, Spielberg a little more than Lynch, because I actually respect what Lynch tries to do with film.  I love Bunuel, but Mulholland Drive, while somewhat beautiful, was a mess.  And Blue Velvet was only a mess.  Dune was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.  Still, I can't wait to get a chance to see Wild at Heart, or Eraserhead, or any of the other stuff of Lynch's I haven't seen.  And to Lynch's credit, I'll never have that sort of anticipation for anything Spielberg makes.

Ebert said that there wasnt a plot and you werent suppose to understand it

The inside of the DVD has clues to understanding the movies.  Is that just bullshit or is there really a coherent plot?  Every time i have watched it i just think most of the movie is a fucked up masturbating fantasy.  Is there more to it?

The truth is...... that David Lynch is not that great.

David Lynch sucks.

Incorrect

Mulholland Dr is not life-affirming to me, but rather career-afirming... seeing that movie makes me want to make movies.

i agree with nick. mullholland drive is the one that sucked me in, but after watching his other movies, i realize it isn't his strongest. i wish that the show had been picked up, because as it stands, when i watch mul dr i want more. my favorite has (obviously) become wild at heart. it's one of those movies that after only 3 or 4 viewings i can already quote the whole movie. it's really a precursor to quentin's early movies about fucked up couples - natural born killers and true romance. blue velvet is also awesome. and i know i'm not a "true" lynch fan because i haven't seen eraserhead, but i own it and plan to watch it soon.


EDIT: this is the fiftieth time i've done this. i've seen eraserhead a million times, it's elephant man that i've never gotten around to watching. jeeeezass.

Quote from: BankyEbert said that there wasnt a plot and you werent suppose to understand it

The inside of the DVD has clues to understanding the movies.  Is that just bullshit or is there really a coherent plot?  Every time i have watched it i just think most of the movie is a fucked up masturbating fantasy.  Is there more to it?

The clues are likely to inspire you to try to 'figure it out' as best as you can. But the reality is that this is clearly a surrealist picture. I remember Ebert saying this was an American surrealist film, but I sort of thought that was a given, since NOBODY could have actually 'solved' the film's puzzles without influencing some a debate with somebody about their beliefs on MD. Therefore, I feel its a purely surreal film. And for the record.. I don't feel Lynch is that great.. but the man sure doesn't suck. His brain is very active with creative concepts and his best films like MD, Elephant Man, and Straight Story prove that...

Quote from: Cinephile

Quote from: BankyEbert said that there wasnt a plot and you werent suppose to understand it

The inside of the DVD has clues to understanding the movies.  Is that just bullshit or is there really a coherent plot?  Every time i have watched it i just think most of the movie is a fucked up masturbating fantasy.  Is there more to it?

The clues are likely to inspire you to try to 'figure it out' as best as you can. But the reality is that this is clearly a surrealist picture. I remember Ebert saying this was an American surrealist film, but I sort of thought that was a given, since NOBODY could have actually 'solved' the film's puzzles without influencing some a debate with somebody about their beliefs on MD. Therefore, I feel its a purely surreal film. And for the record.. I don't feel Lynch is that great.. but the man sure doesn't suck. His brain is very active with creative concepts and his best films like MD, Elephant Man, and Straight Story prove that...

With Mulholland Drive, you really need to let go of the literal-minded notion of plot and think about what emotional sense it makes. I think it's probably Lynch's most emotional film, and it imparts some powerful things about human beings... and the movies.

Quote from: Find Your MagaliBut, then again, I love "Lucas"

Alright, Lucas! Don't be ashamed at all, that's a really great great great movie. I love your taste by the way, with My Boyfriend's Back (and didn't you say Can't Buy Me Love too?), that's great. It makes me feel less alone. Not that I like Con Air but I like movies that are thought to be as bad as Con Air is thought to be. I do love Lucas. Winona Ryder is a goddess.

Lynch is a really really really good filmmaker, no doubt in my mind. Just recently became a fan of Mulholland Drive, Wild At Heart makes me feel cool and hip...love it lots, The Elephant Man affected me in a way that few other films have, and Blue Velvet...it wasn't as good as I wanted it to be but it was good. I still really want to see Twin Peaks and The Straight Story...maybe Lost Highway too. He's still a great filmmaker even if I end up hating all three of those. Weird guy, great filmmaker.

Quote from: godardianI think it's probably Lynch's most emotional film, and it imparts some powerful things about human beings... and the movies.

Yes... human beings love masturbation...

Quote from: TheVoiceOfNick

Quote from: godardianI think it's probably Lynch's most emotional film, and it imparts some powerful things about human beings... and the movies.

Yes... human beings love masturbation...

Yeah... so? Are you saying that's what you think the movie was about???

Quote from: ebeaman

Quote from: Find Your MagaliBut, then again, I love "Lucas"

Alright, Lucas! Don't be ashamed at all, that's a really great great great movie. I love your taste by the way, with My Boyfriend's Back (and didn't you say Can't Buy Me Love too?), that's great. It makes me feel less alone. Not that I like Con Air but I like movies that are thought to be as bad as Con Air is thought to be. I do love Lucas. Winona Ryder is a goddess.

1. I'm not ashamed of Lucas, not at all. It's a wonderful little film; a film full of perfect moments that rings more true about life and love in high school in the 80s than almost any other (Hughes included). ... Kerri Green was my goddess from that movie, by the way. (Does that make me Corey Haim? Hmmmm.)

2. Con-Air is just a fun popcorn flick, and I guess that makes it a guilty pleasure. I don't think any action film has ever been more self-aware of how ludicrous it is, while at the same time delivering all the action, excitement, one-liners and sappy moments that we crave.

3. Actually, I don't list "Can't Buy Me Love" among my favorites. I'm allergic to Patrick Dempsey and have to carry benadryl with me at all times.

4. As far as My Boyfriend's Back, it's the ultimate deadpan zombie comedy. And Philip Seymour Hoffman gets eaten. How could you not love it? It was just robbed at the Oscars.

Now back to this regularly scheduled David Lynch thread....

Lynch is the best director alive. Final. Zero of his movie are unperfect (even Dune). His paintings are wonderful. His philosphy is incredible. His wit is unchallengable. I've never been in disagreement with whatever he said, and you can point exemples of supposedly stupid things he said. I have a tendancy to automaticly love people who love him. I think when he'll die people will start regretting him.

Stanley Kurbick said if he could have made only one movie he didn't it would be Eraserhead.

And why the fuck should I need to defend DAVID LYNCH ?!?!

Screw everyone who thinks he's manipulative or that he tries not to make sense. That's just being ignorant.

Oh and Godardian, I missed you while you were away !  :kiss:

Quote from: Find Your Magali

Quote from: ebeaman

Quote from: Find Your MagaliBut, then again, I love "Lucas"

Alright, Lucas! Don't be ashamed at all, that's a really great great great movie. I love your taste by the way, with My Boyfriend's Back (and didn't you say Can't Buy Me Love too?), that's great. It makes me feel less alone. Not that I like Con Air but I like movies that are thought to be as bad as Con Air is thought to be. I do love Lucas. Winona Ryder is a goddess.

1. I'm not ashamed of Lucas, not at all. It's a wonderful little film; a film full of perfect moments that rings more true about life and love in high school in the 80s than almost any other (Hughes included)

Yea, but Hughes rules too, I love Hughes.

...Kerri Green was my goddess from that movie, by the way.

She was my goddess from Goonies moreso than Lucas. And Winona was more from Edward Scissorhands. Than there was Elisabeth Shue from Adventures in Babysitting. I could go on more too. The 80's was a beautiful movement in movies akin to the french new wave.

Getting back to Lynch, I'll say one thing I forgot to before: Hopkin's preformance in Elephant Man=better than preformance in Silence Of The Lambs. And I love Silence! It's one of the best thrillers ever made and definitely one of the best potrayals of a serial killer by Sir Anthony. But what he did in Elephant Man - that was something really important I think, that was something special. Maybe one of the 5 best preformances of all time imo.

Quote from: TheVoiceOfNickYes... human beings love masturbation...

whew....I am somewhat normal.... :wink:

Quote from: ebeaman(Kerri Green) was my goddess from Goonies moreso than Lucas. And Winona was more from Edward Scissorhands. Than there was Elisabeth Shue from Adventures in Babysitting. I could go on more too. The 80's was a beautiful movement in movies akin to the french new wave.

Nah, I'll take the Kerri Green in "Lucas" over the one in "The Goonies." ... Her "Lucas" character was smart and had depth. Her character in "The Goonies" was a ditzy, underwritten cliche.

And as for Elisabeth Shue ... sigh ... all I ever wanted to do was meet a cool, sassy, smart, soccer-loving girl like Ali in "The Karate Kid."

Sorry for getting away from Lynch AGAIN. Maybe we should kick off a "80s Movie Characters You Were Smitten With" thread...

Quote from: Find Your MagaliSorry for getting away from Lynch AGAIN. Maybe we should kick off a "80s Movie Characters You Were Smitten With" thread...

We should really start an 80's movies board, seriously, just for an experiment. I could probably take any existing thread here and still be distracted by 80's nostalgia, whatever the topic is.

Think I might watch Mulholland Drive today. This thread has made me want to.

Quote from: ebeaman
Think I might watch Mulholland Drive today. This thread has made me want to.

If you can go through the movie, your next step will be ... IRREVERSIBLE and the rape scene ! Mooouhhahahaha !

Sorry.

Quote from: Pas Rapport

Quote from: ebeaman
Think I might watch Mulholland Drive today. This thread has made me want to.

If you can go through the movie, your next step will be ... IRREVERSIBLE and the rape scene ! Mooouhhahahaha !

Oh, I've seen it once already. I was thinking about rewatching it. Mulholland Drive that is. I still do want to see Irreversible. I can't believe Blockbuster didn't have a rated version, I guess they didn't release one.

I think David Lynch is extremely talented. But I don't necessarily like all of his movies. I think at times he uses cliches or thin plotting to move along his strange visuals or themes. And I'm never sure whether he's using them BECAUSE they're cliches or because he thinks its good plotting.

But with Mulholland, it doesn't fit together into a neat narrative. That was the point -- even though the process from TV pilot to feature film is evident. He wanted to use images and sequences to create an experience for the viewer that didn't need to rely on plot. He was basically trying to obliterate the need for narrative.

Mulholland Drive is a status symbol. If you live on Mulholland you're probably part of the elite. It looks down on the inferno of LA from above. It's the difference between success and failure. It's also, like the movie, a twisted dangerous road that if you travel too quickly and carelessly you'll fall off of.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY....out of all of the directors that have thier own forum

ONLY DAVID LYNCH'S FILMS ARE THE LEAST CRITICIZED BY FANS, CRITICS, MEDIA, OR WHATEVER.   EVERY FILM THAT HE DIRECTED IS  GREAT TOO NEAR FLAWLESS.   HE IS THE BEST DIRECTOR POSSIBLY OUT THERE. HE IS WAY UNDER-RATED  AND NO ONE CAN SERIOUSLY  TALK SMACK ABOUT HIM.


.....................................................

I'm affraid the critics just don't want to look stupid, so what they do is pass a hot potato(I belive that's the way to say it).

Quote from: molly
I'm affraid the critics just don't want to look stupid, so what they do is pass a hot potato(I belive that's the way to say it).

molly,

i don't know anything about you, seeing as you are a relatively new member on the board, but to actually believe what you have just written is pure idiocy. the critics saying they like something so as not to be lambasted by the public? kind of defeats the whole purpose of criticism, don't you think? the reason lynch gets so much praise is because he is one of the ONLY people in the industry today whose movies push the art of film while still generating box office and a huge fanbase. i don't think anybody's been able to make an artistic and original movie that still appeals to the public since kubrick. lynch is the beacon of light in a sea made up mostly of what can only be described as boring, unoriginal cinema.

taz.

Quote from: bonanzatazthe reason lynch gets so much praise is because he is one of the ONLY people in the industry today whose movies push the art of film while still generating box office and a huge fanbase.

Well, that depends on how you define "generating box office." ... The last Lynch film that had a U.S. gross that was higher than the film's budget was "Wild at Heart," which grossed $14.5 million and had a $9.5 million budget.

Since then, his films have had relatively meager U.S. box offices:

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me ... $4.2 million ($10 million budget)

Lost Highway .... $3.8 million ($15 million budget)

The Straight Story ... $6.2 million ($10 million budget)

Mulholland Dr. .... $7.2 million ($15 million budget)

----

Of course, early in his career he had one big hit (The Elephant Man grossed $26 million on a $5 million budget) and one big bomb (Dune grossed $27 million on a $45 million budget).

forget box office, what about video sales/rentals? lynch has to make money SOMEHOW!

but that's besides the point. he's still able to get money to finance his films, so obviously people believe in him and he has a big following.

Yes, but most of his financing comes from France, and he usually breaks even/makes a profit overseas.

guess i should do my research next time, eh?

heh heh... heh...


*crawls into a dark corner and cries for days on end*

your point still stands, taz

Quote from: bonanzatazguess i should do my research next time, eh?

heh heh... heh...

*crawls into a dark corner and cries for days on end*

Replied to the above, not yours (we posted at the same time).  You can get out of the corner.

Your point definitely still stands, Taz. ... I just had a hunch that Lynch is no more of a commercially successful director than PTA or anyone else that we admire as "cutting edge" directors.

And while I'm sure there is, at the end of the day, a profit after all the foreign box office and video sales are tallied, the numbers show that the name "David Lynch" doesn't put people in the theatres in the U.S. Never has.

Quote from: bonanzataz

Quote from: molly
I'm affraid the critics just don't want to look stupid, so what they do is pass a hot potato(I belive that's the way to say it).

molly,

i don't know anything about you, seeing as you are a relatively new member on the board, but to actually believe what you have just written is pure idiocy. the critics saying they like something so as not to be lambasted by the public? kind of defeats the whole purpose of criticism, don't you think? the reason lynch gets so much praise is because he is one of the ONLY people in the industry today whose movies push the art of film while still generating box office and a huge fanbase. i don't think anybody's been able to make an artistic and original movie that still appeals to the public since kubrick. lynch is the beacon of light in a sea made up mostly of what can only be described as boring, unoriginal cinema.

taz.

I wasn't saying that I think Lynch is bad in any way, I just wanted to say that I haven't read a good critic ( I meant a good written text) that says about Lynch anything new and original. I think that critics just repeat general things that go around about Lynch, that he's a genious, but not saying anything inspirable. Or I haven't read the right stuff.

Quote from: molly

Quote from: bonanzataz

Quote from: molly
I'm affraid the critics just don't want to look stupid, so what they do is pass a hot potato(I belive that's the way to say it).

molly,

i don't know anything about you, seeing as you are a relatively new member on the board, but to actually believe what you have just written is pure idiocy. the critics saying they like something so as not to be lambasted by the public? kind of defeats the whole purpose of criticism, don't you think? the reason lynch gets so much praise is because he is one of the ONLY people in the industry today whose movies push the art of film while still generating box office and a huge fanbase. i don't think anybody's been able to make an artistic and original movie that still appeals to the public since kubrick. lynch is the beacon of light in a sea made up mostly of what can only be described as boring, unoriginal cinema.

taz.

I wasn't saying that I think Lynch is bad in any way, I just wanted to say that I haven't read a good critic ( I meant a good written text) that says about Lynch anything new and original. I think that critics just repeat general things that go around about Lynch, that he's a genious, but not saying anything inspirable. Or I haven't read the right stuff.

Read Ebert's review of Blue Velvet.

Quote from: SHAFTRRead Ebert's review of Blue Velvet.

That review just plain blows my mind.  I disagree w/ it on every level.  I don't even bother w/ Ebert's reviews in regards to Lynch's work anymore.  He slams the guy for years, now he's the biggest supporter: **** for SS and MD (and even screened MD for his frame-by-frame analysis-seminar-thing).  How he could rave about his last 2 films (which I find to be the *safest*, if there is such a thing regarding Lynch) and dimiss the others doesn't quite wash w/ me.

Oh yeah, and by Ebert's math, Radio is a much better movie than BV :wink:

And, BTW, two TV products marked my childhood: Dynasty(some might remember that) and Twin Peaks - the first one as especially and unforgettably bad, and the other one as especially and unforgettably good.

Quote from: Weak2ndAct

Quote from: SHAFTRRead Ebert's review of Blue Velvet.

That review just plain blows my mind.  I disagree w/ it on every level.  I don't even bother w/ Ebert's reviews in regards to Lynch's work anymore.  He slams the guy for years, now he's the biggest supporter: **** for SS and MD (and even screened MD for his frame-by-frame analysis-seminar-thing).  How he could rave about his last 2 films (which I find to be the *safest*, if there is such a thing regarding Lynch) and dimiss the others doesn't quite wash w/ me.

Oh yeah, and by Ebert's math, Radio is a much better movie than BV :wink:

I actually agreed with Ebert's review on Blue Velvet.  It described in words how I felt after the 3 times I saw the movie.

Quote from: mollyAnd, BTW, two TV products marked my childhood: Dynasty(some might remember that) and Twin Peaks - the first one as especially and unforgettably bad, and the other one as especially and unforgettably good.

you don't have to watch dynasty to have an attitude.


i wasn't trying to "diss" you molly. it came out as harsh because i get defensive over lynch. i can see you are a fan and i'm completely insane. i wasn't calling you an idiot, but saying that the only reason critics like lynch is because they don't want people to think they're stupid couldn't possibly be true. if a work went over a critic's head, i'm sure most would admit it. maybe they're not as enthusiastic about lynch as die hard fans, but if they hate a movie, they'll say it. that's their job.

Quote from: bonanzatazif they hate a movie, they'll say it. that's their job.

no, acting like their opinion is more important and "accurate" then everyone else is their job. where would we be without these brave souls, telling filmmakers exactly whats wrong with their films?

Quote from: bonanzatazthe reason lynch gets so much praise is because he is one of the ONLY people in the industry today whose movies push the art of film while still generating box office and a huge fanbase. i don't think anybody's been able to make an artistic and original movie that still appeals to the public since kubrick. lynch is the beacon of light in a sea made up mostly of what can only be described as boring, unoriginal cinema.

..damn now that is what I am talking about.  ... :yabbse-thumbup:

one of the key word  is that lynch makes ORIGINAL..films.  unlike any one else..
him loosing that acad. award to howard  for a beautiful  mind :roll: ..

look at his films and compare/comtrast them w/ all the other directors that have thier "respective" forums..

eraserhead
elephant man
dune
wild ar heart
lost highway
fire walk w/me
blue velvet
mulholland drive
the straight story
...not to mention his side projects..

FACE IT like tina said  he's "simply the best".......
thats it lock this thread and end this.
:wink:

Well, I'd argue that the beauty of Xixax is that we all have 2 or 3 directors who we think make "original" films that are "unlike anyone else." ... and we bring that combined love of cinema into mostly civil debates about those directors and films.

So Lynch is definitely some people's cup of tea. ... Not so much for others.

I'm the furthest guy from saying David Lynch is the best going now. I've only seen a few films compared to others, but to make it quick, Blue Velvet wasn't effective because it tried to put a controversial subject into a very tired structure, one similiar to an old Hitchcock film. Instead of finding a structure to allow the material to be explored, it finds one to allow the material to be reduced to easy identifications. And it all feels so general now in intensity of the effect. With Dennis Hopper's character, the idea of who he represents is chilling. The performance is not. His character is hardly explored and too frequent in pulling out the gas mask - his signature calling card of when he is going to attack, so to say. The film was screaming for an exploration as intense as the one of Hannibal Lector in Silence of the Lambs.

With Lost Highway, the film is wonderfully more effective and memorable on all the outer layers lacking in Blue Velvet. Its structure isn't tired, but intriguing and most importantly, mysterious. And Lynch doesn't film as casual, he is operating more of making it as effective as a horror film would. The visuals and technique, again, not as traditional and much more effective. The ultimate problem though is that the film is pure style. Nothing more. It is shades of Bunuel's That Obscure Object of Desire and making the same mistake as the film: it shows ambiguilties, but little to think about later. IMO, Bunuel is dealing with superficial beauty in what is exotic with the spanish girl and what is mundane with the french one. They both play the same character, but the french girl gets all the sexual scenes. The spanish girl none. In the male character's search for control of this woman, we feel his pain because we too cannot totally grab the girl we want. We desire to see the spanish woman in the revealing scenes because she is more mysterious and exotic. We just don't get it. Lost Highway actually has nothing between the man and teenager in how they could be the same. No strip of thread intertwining them. It is just a clear break to see how the audience reacts when it is so clearly done with no purpose. We are too feel the discomfort of the plot and of the switch. It succeeds in that, but this success isn't the most satisfactory.

Muholland Drive, though, is a masterpiece. On general thought, its outer form of a puzzle is disheartening and intriguing all at once. What is intriguing about it is that does catch your attention, as puzzles do, to delve deeper into the story. What is disheartening is that usually with puzzle movies, complexity of emotions are reduced because all puzzles lead to answers. Ambiguilty none. Whats so great about this movie is that the puzzle does, in ways, seem neverending even if a good basis and many thorough ideas are generally accepted. Whats frustating, (meaning good) is that the film never seems right in what everything is about. The reason to call it a masterpiece is that the film is so continually inventive and so daring and made with such confidence in talent all around. Nothing like this has been achieved before.

I do really want to see The Straight Story. Everything I've read about the film suggests I'd love it. I started Wild At Heart but turned it off only 10 minutes into it. Maybe I'll give it another try.

As for best filmmaker? Not sure. I'm not sure if anyone is generally consistent in making great films all the time. As high as I marked all the PTA films, I never put them that high. For most, something was missing for me to keep from putting them over the top. Only with PDL was I thoroughly pleased. With others, Fernando Meirelles had a debut like no other with City of God, but its just one movie. David Gordon Green did great with George Washington, but dropped off a lot with All the Real Girls. I guessed if I had to dismiss competition and pick someone, I'd say Hayao Miyazaki. His last two movies were amazing works of mastery and dominated the years they came out for me.

~rougerum

I agree that Mulholland Drive is a masterpiece, if not for all the same reasons as GT.

With Blue Velvet, though... I really love that film. It's not as good as Mulholland Drive (Lynch's best film), but I think it is really beautiful, a real movie-lover's movie, and very Bunuelian in its own way... I'm not quite sure I understood GT's criticism of it, but it does seem to me that if you didn't like Far from Heaven, it would follow that you wouldn't like Blue Velvet. I think the very direct and very purposeful- pointed- artifice of these films seem pointless to their detractors, but me- I love artifice, and I love the way these films play with it, bring out the tension of blunt artificiality in a supposedly plot-driven drama. To me, the bottom-line "point" of such a thing is a certain tender sadness over the absolute and inexorable divorce between the compelling, inspired fantasities and distillations of "real" life we see on the screen, and the much heavier, much less exciting or "pure" experience of actual reality (a theme explored more obviously in Mulholland Dr.).

To me, Blue Velvet has all the child-like love of film and nostalgic innocence that everyone's always claiming Spielberg has, but I have yet to find in his work...

i like david lynch alright, but i think he really has movies that he'd like to make but he isn't allowed to make his way.  if i'm wrong, then i don't really like him.  
seriously, he has a resemblance to bunuel.  but bunuel is way better, because he seemed to have been able to film whatever the hell he wanted to and it's so great.  
i'm a little off topic.  
lynch...okay, in my opinion

Quote from: godardianI'm not quite sure I understood GT's criticism of it

With my problems on Blue Velvet, first I say it has a very tired structure, one similiar to an old Hitchcock film. Specifically, it uses that dark and light comparison a lot, where something really bad happens in a really good place and the difference between the two is observed and our own personal security is threatened. Sado Maschism (sp?), by definition alone does that and feels like a topic so new in movies for the time that to introduce it on these terms of is saddening. This structure of putting it into a Hitchcock mold only reduces it. It allows little exploration.

And to continue the Hitchcock comparison, everything feels generalized. Most importantly, Dennis Hopper's performance feels generalized. The movie, with tired structure, lacks the intensity of showing this gruesome character. Everytime I saw him pull out the gas mask before attack, I felt ten feet further away from him than in almost every shot of Silence of the Lambs in which Lector is observed. For me, personally, his role is not really memorable and only screaming of better attention.

The film was trying to be memorable, as with a horror film, in effect of what it showed. Its just dated. As with many Hitchock films, the intention is understood but the lack of ferocity is felt in exploring the subject because everything is so traditional in the filmmaking. Time destroys all effectiveness because other films explore the subject better. And an example of this? The Piano Teacher.

I'm not sure though if these reasons are similiar ones to why I disliked Far From Heaven. Given the Sirk recreation in that and recreation of Hitchcock here, prolly so.

~rougerum

Holy shit GT when did you get an avatar? You have an avatar! Holy shit.

Quote from: SHAFTR

Quote from: Weak2ndAct

Quote from: SHAFTRRead Ebert's review of Blue Velvet.

That review just plain blows my mind.  I disagree w/ it on every level.  I don't even bother w/ Ebert's reviews in regards to Lynch's work anymore.  He slams the guy for years, now he's the biggest supporter: **** for SS and MD (and even screened MD for his frame-by-frame analysis-seminar-thing).  How he could rave about his last 2 films (which I find to be the *safest*, if there is such a thing regarding Lynch) and dimiss the others doesn't quite wash w/ me.

Oh yeah, and by Ebert's math, Radio is a much better movie than BV :wink:

I actually agreed with Ebert's review on Blue Velvet.  It described in words how I felt after the 3 times I saw the movie.

That movie put the disease in me!  Ebert is a sick fat fuck... screw him... i've never liked his reviews... I try not to listen to any reviews before I go see a movie... I have an overall unique view of film... no one has ever accurately sync'ed up with my film sensibilities.... and Ebert is the worst.

Quote from: TheVoiceOfNick

Quote from: SHAFTR

Quote from: Weak2ndAct

Quote from: SHAFTRRead Ebert's review of Blue Velvet.

That review just plain blows my mind.  I disagree w/ it on every level.  I don't even bother w/ Ebert's reviews in regards to Lynch's work anymore.  He slams the guy for years, now he's the biggest supporter: **** for SS and MD (and even screened MD for his frame-by-frame analysis-seminar-thing).  How he could rave about his last 2 films (which I find to be the *safest*, if there is such a thing regarding Lynch) and dimiss the others doesn't quite wash w/ me.

Oh yeah, and by Ebert's math, Radio is a much better movie than BV :wink:

I actually agreed with Ebert's review on Blue Velvet.  It described in words how I felt after the 3 times I saw the movie.

That movie put the disease in me!  Ebert is a sick fat fuck... screw him... i've never liked his reviews... I try not to listen to any reviews before I go see a movie... I have an overall unique view of film... no one has ever accurately sync'ed up with my film sensibilities.... and Ebert is the worst.

I've gone from hating Ebert to really enjoying his reviews, even if I don't agree with them.

ebert's praise for dark city ..is as ridiculous as  his hatred for blue velvet

..honestly....he lost alot of my respect when found out that he didn't like BV.

but then he goes bananass over mulholland.... :roll: , :? , :x .....

Quote from: godardianit does seem to me that if you didn't like Far from Heaven, it would follow that you wouldn't like Blue Velvet.

i thought far from heaven was alright. nothing special. blue velvet is awesome though. one of the few movies i felt compelled to watch thrice in two days. sorry to say, i'm not much of a todd haines fan.

anyway, there goes that theory.

Quote from: classical gasi like david lynch alright, but i think he really has movies that he'd like to make but he isn't allowed to make his way.  if i'm wrong, then i don't really like him.  

Ever since Dune, he's had final cut. He only makes movies that he really wants to make (which is why he hasn't made more). So unfortunately, I guess you really don't like him.

well, final cut or not, he needs to quit the bullshittin' and get on his next movie, STRAIGHT UP.  8)

Quote from: bonanzataz

Quote from: godardianit does seem to me that if you didn't like Far from Heaven, it would follow that you wouldn't like Blue Velvet.

i thought far from heaven was alright. nothing special. blue velvet is awesome though. one of the few movies i felt compelled to watch thrice in two days. sorry to say, i'm not much of a todd haines fan.

anyway, there goes that theory.

I really meant that GT had similar reasons for disliking both... I mean, I love them both, but for different reasons. It just seemed as though GT, not liking what he saw as a too-overt Hitchcock robbery in one and a too-overt Sirk robbery in the other, had similar reasons.

Okay, clarification over.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

Quote from: godardianI'm not quite sure I understood GT's criticism of it

With my problems on Blue Velvet, first I say it has a very tired structure, one similiar to an old Hitchcock film. Specifically, it uses that dark and light comparison a lot, where something really bad happens in a really good place and the difference between the two is observed and our own personal security is threatened. Sado Maschism (sp?), by definition alone does that and feels like a topic so new in movies for the time that to introduce it on these terms of is saddening. This structure of putting it into a Hitchcock mold only reduces it. It allows little exploration.

And to continue the Hitchcock comparison, everything feels generalized. Most importantly, Dennis Hopper's performance feels generalized. The movie, with tired structure, lacks the intensity of showing this gruesome character. Everytime I saw him pull out the gas mask before attack, I felt ten feet further away from him than in almost every shot of Silence of the Lambs in which Lector is observed. For me, personally, his role is not really memorable and only screaming of better attention.

The film was trying to be memorable, as with a horror film, in effect of what it showed. Its just dated. As with many Hitchock films, the intention is understood but the lack of ferocity is felt in exploring the subject because everything is so traditional in the filmmaking. Time destroys all effectiveness because other films explore the subject better. And an example of this? The Piano Teacher.

I'm not sure though if these reasons are similiar ones to why I disliked Far From Heaven. Given the Sirk recreation in that and recreation of Hitchcock here, prolly so.

~rougerum

I think The Piano Teacher and Blue Velvet are good films apart from those parts of their content that have ceased to be shocking, though. I think there are more memorable things about it than Dennis Hopper brutalizing Isabella Rossellini, just as I think there are more memorable things in The Piano Teacher than just the rape scene... I like Blue Velvet's strangely nuanced appreciation of Americana (the surface of it and what's underneath), and I liked The Piano Teacher for the way the form (the direction, the lighting, length of takes, framing, etc) matched the content (Isabelle Huppert's performance) so well, both conjoining to build up that repressed, hermetic, rigorously controlled exterior within which sheer, violent emotion is waiting to force its way out... in any way it can.

I can't say I was shocked, though... and I think a rape or violent sexuality on film is something that remains disturbing long after the taboo against those depictions has been broken. You don't have be shocked and surprised to have seen something to be disturbed by it... there are certain elementals in us human beings that don't come and go with the current mores.

Quote from: godardianI liked The Piano Teacher for the way the form (the direction, the lighting, length of takes, framing, etc) matched the content (Isabelle Huppert's performance) so well, both conjoining to build up that repressed, hermetic, rigorously controlled exterior within which sheer, violent emotion is waiting to force its way out... in any way it can.

Great wording to why I did like The Piano Teacher so much. It had the grounds for exploration on the subject. Blue Velvet, to repeat my main point, was operating a very fine subject under a very dated structure that did little to explore the content at all. It wasn't exploration of a material, but an experiment on an old structure with a very new subject, film-wise. Its fascination lies not in its success as a film, but in the the development of film history and its handling (or as critics of Hitchcock may say: abuse) of subjects. For exploration of material, I definitely side with critics of Hitchcock. He didn't operate for that purpose at all. This movie is just re-visiting some old cliches.

To make a few more final notes, I wasn't out to be just shocked by the material and see if it holds up well in horror film context, its just with exploration and delving into the subject is that I do believe The Piano Teacher was more effective in conveying the feeling of sado maschism in desire and threat to us. This being one of the principle purposes of Blue Velvet.

~rougerum

Festival honour for David Lynch

Director David Lynch has been given a Lifetime Achievement Award at a European film festival.

A retrospective of his works was shown after he received the award at the Stockholm International Film Festival.

He said the inspiration for his offbeat and often surreal films, such as Blue Velvet and Eraserhead, often came from a single "seed" of an idea.

Fans then met the director before a sell-out screening of eight episodes of cult TV series Twin Peaks on Friday.

"When you fall in love with an idea... it tells you exactly what to do. And all you do is translate it into a different medium," the director said about his film-making.

Internet story

"I like it when people analyse my films. It's a subjective thing, so all interpretations are fine," he said.

The director, whose last film was the dark thriller Mulholland Drive, said he wanted to work on an a serial on the internet, but was still looking for finance.

Lynch also criticised US president George W Bush, saying he was concentrating too much on terrorism when there were other world problems such as poverty. The director is well-known as an advocate for world peace.

Quote from: taz.i love lynch. he is simply the best. better than all the rest. Better than anyone, anyone I've ever met. I'm stuck on his heart, and hang on every word he says. Tear us apart, baby I would rather be dead. i cannot believe that anybody can hate Wild at Heart. what a beautifully over the top movie.

I feel exactly the same way. Lynch is my favorite and I am addicted to BV, WAH, & MD. Fire WWM and Twin Peaks were freaking great. But I am a weird fucker anyway, which is why I am a freakerdude.

To borrow GDIDM's words........Lynch makes me cream my mental pants.

Quote from: SHAFTRMy criticism for most of Lynch's work is that it has no soul, no feeling.  I think Mulholland Dr & Straight Story are the exceptions.

Although, I guess I have only seen Blue Velvet & Wild at Heart (and the above).  So he is 2/4 in my book.

....i ll try to explain this and give my honest opinion about this w/o the typical fan boy biases...i have never admitied that i am a lynch know-it-all nor can i express myself as eleoquently as Pubrick, JB, godardian, ghostboy, macG, Gold T,  or others....exscpecially P's post in that thread about the classifications of kubrick.....but i can speak it on 'from the gut terms'.....bu tto say that some of lynchs work has no fereling or soul and applying that notion or rationality to Blue Velvet is wrong......and this is why i believe it to be so....

spoilersssssssssss for blue velvet and other sh*t....


>on the surface of the film[blue velvet] it seems like simply this: jefferey[the kyle mac character] goes home to visit his father who had a stroke and is in the hospital, he then discovers an ear and brings it to a law enforment official that he knows, this leads him to the relationship w/ both    dorothy valens[issabella] and sandy[laura dern]....and to frank[hopper], sh*t happens and at the end bad guy dies and good previals........underneath that surface the film is read as 'what goes on underneath the surface of anytown, USA"......thats a simple idea that lynch is putting onscreen......no 'trick' narrative like mulholland , eraserhead, lost highway......the film follows a concrete narative.....another thing that you need to know about lych is that he is a painter before a filmaker and what i have learned is that he 'paint's the mis-e-scene[or whatever that typical film school word is]...and that IS WHERE HIS SOUL, FEELING, LOVE [insert other synonomous adjectives here _________ ], that is what makes lynch LYNCH or lynchian......he uses the same themes or characteristics in his film like mistaken identity, women in crisis, beneath the surfaces[LOOK CLOSER..should be blue velvet s tagline] and also he uses a character behind the 'scenes' pf sh*t..[like the cowboy in mulholland, the robert blake character in LH, the lil midget in FWWM, the bum behind winkies, the guy controlling the levers in eraserhead and frank in blue velvet, so, he recycles same themes or characters,,and there are others that either i am not smart enough to figure out or i am just forgetting.....but the way he creates mood, senese, feeling in his films is astonishing.......you leave his films feeling like someone phucked your brain and thats something......to  give you an example of this we will use a film that is 'souless' or devoid of feeling..like blue velvet......the fisrt ten or so minutes are incredible where the blue curtian and titles then the shot of the guy on the fire truck [notice the lenses are fuzzy and reflect a 'warmth'] and then the closeup of the ground then the zooming in underneth the 'surface' to reveal the uglyness represented by  [in the curreent scene those ants and beetles and sh*t and not in the scene the ugliness is frank].....but the way these beginning scenes develope along with lynch s masterstroke of spound usage is incredible.....[eraserhead established his talent w/ noise and sound]....he is a badass at this stuff.....another scene that   proves my point is thje scne with ben[ stockwell] who could be another one of lynchs trademark characters....but anyway to not watch that scene from beggining until the end [when frank screams lets fuck i ll fuck anything that movesd]....besides being flat out hilarous is also a brilliant piece of filmaking.... you got ben complete with make up and singing into a light bulb and his crazy friends [one of them plays with a snake ] and the two fat girls next to a puppewt in the background, ..there is a whole lot of sh*t goingn on in that scene that amazing and unique.....but i  believe that its filled with feeling its all from lynch s imagination and to say that blue velvet is w/o feeling or souls i just don t get it....he obviously cares about his  films  and is finding new and inovating ways to advance cinema....[there is a reason why kubrick gives lynch and eraserhead props....B/C LYNCH IS A PHUCKING AMAZING FILMAKER AND IT DOESN T TAKE MUCH TO REALIZE THIS]....basically w/o trying to repeat myself which i know i already have i msaying that lynch s soul of feeling comes through his use of sounds, the bizarre, and his 'painting' of the mis-en-scene....it takes made talent to do what he does......i should nt have to defend this film....it speaks for itself ...fill buffs knwo  the importance of this film....

>some visual evidence:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv001.jpg&hash=5d5441a25119818af322b55802952b97844f2aaa)
-above the surface[notice the typical white picket fence and the roses]

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv006.jpg&hash=a903f9dbfbc57393c77185de3e42ccd3a05034bd)
-beneath the surface
..this is the films poitn [what lurks beneath a beautiful surface]..and there are other ways to read into it ..that sanother cool thing about lynch-muli meanings

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv048.jpg&hash=040833742f092beb0f9bdacedc999b2b063cf972)
-leading up to this scene and during this part is another point i want to make about lycnh..this is arousing but yet disturbing ..the way the dual sexual feelings that lynch creates is brillaint.......

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv054.jpg&hash=1aadf8782a36e6eb460c4c322a50f9486dc78c96)
-this whole rape scne had me just about covering my eyes..its very disturbing but yet the scene is tastefully done..and creates absurd but yet harrrowing moods......[the blue velvet stuffed into her mouth is a nice touch]

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv060.jpg&hash=f15bb86a3e1ec8f00654bd0fd36ecea0aa997c6e)
-this speaks for itself.............gorgeous.........

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv087.jpg&hash=6e8d87fdfb08a0ec5fd47b148193d98d233af7c5)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv088.jpg&hash=18f8313a5dece5d589977745a9664609f07e395e)
-the ben scene as i described earlier..[that look on nances face ..hahahaha]

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv090.jpg&hash=a201a931cae27ec3591f8e2ec2065e3e1cc82fe0)
-this character is one of the best film villians of al time..when you think of bad guy this will rank hiogh up on any list....just like a certain guy from the film in your avatar......what makes is so awesome is that frank is both scary as hell and funny as sh*t......hes got lines like 'henikne fuck that sh*t ..pabst blue ribbon'....if you can t laugh at that then you goit problems......and then the fact that lych has him inhaling gases and spouting 'daddy wants to fuck!'..his whole character is just brillaint..oh, and rossellini looks hot from that side view.......

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv092.jpg&hash=850f03b5ee5fba50cf4a9713f373f3a737391b88)
-:kiss: ...nice touch

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv104.jpg&hash=9c26be876c82d6f25949947f779281eb90e261b9)
-here is a good example of what i m saying..when this scene starts it pans all around these characters and to reveal this setup.that you see now..then man in yellow then twitches and knock of over a light [another lych motif-'flickering lights']...........but  i cannot do justice in wordfs to to describe this that well but it takes souls and feeling to create something like this..........maybe you might just not 'get it'.....i love the added touch w/ the blue velvet stuck in dorothy valens husbands mouth.......and who the dead guy is standing straight up.........odd and  disturbing yet extreamly artistic..which sums up the soul and feeling of lynch s films.....
lycnh does stylized violence and grotesque very well...........like the [haed meets corner of glass table in lost highway].........

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynchnet.com%2Fbv%2Fpics%2Fbv113.jpg&hash=0fb30fe4da77f128b3e6054ac15a85f28ff1e37c)
............the end..........

I'll never doubt Lynch's filmmaking ability.  He's incredible with visuals and even with his use of sound.  I doubt his ability to tell a story, consistently.  My fav Lynch film is Straight Story, and he didn't write that.  Next comes Mulholland Dr which I like but not that much for the story.  I think the story is pretty flat but Watts puts so much life in her character that I can forgive it.  Wild at Heart didn't do it for me.  It was too campy, and I think it's an embarassment.  Sure it's fun but Lynch could do better.  Blue Velvet, visuals are great but the story is just so whacked out that I didn't care about anyone in the film; I just wanted it to end.  Nor did I feel emotionally moved or intellectually moved in anyway.  Now, I do need to see his other films...as you can see he's 2/4 for me.  I don't hate Lynch or his films, I'm just not a fan.  Neon, thanks for the attempt to sell me on Blue Velvet...but I just don't like it.  I'm more than willing to see his other films, so give me your suggestion on the next film to watch (on DVD).

Quote from: SHAFTRdon't hate Lynch or his films, I'm just not a fan.  Neon, thanks for the attempt to sell me on Blue Velvet...but I just don't like it.  I'm more than willing to see his other films, so give me your suggestion on the next film to watch (on DVD).

this was my exact situation.  i thought blue velvet was okay/weird, wild at heart was terrible, mullholland was good but overrated, but i was WRONG!  please, seek out Twin Peaks and make it easy one yourself.  after devouring that you will look at his movies totally differently, even the ones you'd already seen.

Quote from: SHAFTRI'm more than willing to see his other films, so give me your suggestion on the next film to watch (on DVD).

Based on how you like his visuals, but not his own stories/scripts, watch Elephant Man next.

I've come to the conclution that you either feel his films or you don't . As simple and undebatable as that.

Quote from: SHAFTRI'll never doubt Lynch's filmmaking ability. He's incredible with visuals and even with his use of sound.

>cool...thanks for reading my post...and your praise of lynch s visual and sound is basically what i was trying to say is his passion, soul, and feeling for his filmmaking..

Quote from: SHAFTRI doubt his ability to tell a story, consistently.  My fav Lynch film is Straight Story, and he didn't write that.  Next comes Mulholland Dr which I like but not that much for the story.  I think the story is pretty flat but Watts puts so much life in her character that I can forgive it.

> i see your point on this trust me..it hurts me to say this but your right in a way...in blue velevet, mulholland dr, and ill even toss in wild at heart..the main story is not all that unque ..but what sets him aprt is how he may take a story [however conventional it may be] and put the lynch stamp on it it..........through his brilliant use of sound and visuals he creates works of art......but as for story i believe lost highway is a great story also..its rivaling mulholland for my fav lynch.......[i just want the dvd..i though the region one was suppose to come oput first quarter 2004??]....

Quote from: SHAFTRWild at Heart didn't do it for me.  It was too campy, and I think it's an embarassment.

>this is a tricky film for people......some lynch fans like cowboykurtis hate it..but love lynch......its different  from the rest of his catalogue.......i just watch it as a fun 'road film'....but it doesn have its moments of genius..[car crash scene w/ fenn]...i can see why  people don t get into it..but it enjoyed it..

Quote from: SHAFTRI don't hate Lynch or his films, I'm just not a fan.  Neon, thanks for the attempt to sell me on Blue Velvet...but I just don't like it.  I'm more than willing to see his other films, so give me your suggestion on the next film to watch (on DVD).

>here is a list his feature films and my suggestions
1. eraserhead- you could get this on his website for $50 for me, im in Heaven..bu tfor you i would try to borrow someones copy of at least find someway to watch it..........but his dvd is a flawless transfer......gorgeous sh*t....

2. dune-uh, you might want to avoid this one...........but there is a regoin one dvd out there for you..

3. the elephant man....nice dvd .......this is as great film..lynch w/o the twisted narative.....

4. lost highway- no regoin one dvd, bu tthere might be dvds from overseas available but be careful of what you get.......for me i have this on a widescreen vhs.......strill in good conidtion............[you must see this film any way you can]..

5. twin peaks :FWWM......this is a gresat alternate way to  getting into lynch...you might want to net flix or whatever season one tv series which artisan has a beautiful region one season set...[i think mod-age could vouch for that].........but you could get into the tv series..then watch FWWM(fire walk with me)........which is on dvd......that a different way.......

i think that sit as for lynch films you havent seen and my opinions........hope this helps..........

** i will say  this though i might be fighting a loss cause..b/c  sometimes w/ people you either get his films or you think thery are trash.....its always one extreme to another........

Quote from: NEON MERCURY
** i will say  this though i might be fighting a loss cause..b/c  sometimes w/ people you either get his films or you think thery are trash.....its always one extreme to another........

hey, try defending Kevin Smith.  You are lucky, Lynch is much easier to defend.