HALFBORN: An Inland Empire Analysis

[Jeremy Blackman]

I got it. Can you post that here?

[DBeyond]

I got it. Can you post that here?

Sure I'll copy past it.

1- Sue sees herself in the otherside of the street. The doppelganger.

-> I liked the fact that you imply that the actors are fake and the characters are real. That's funny and has a ring of truth to it, but I think this thought has miss guided you in this part. Clearly Sue and Nikki are linked by the same body and Sue is aware of Nikki and vice-versa.

"At 1:13:50, Sue looks down and sees a more desperate version of herself sitting on the floor, looking up with terrified eyes. Is this the same doppelganger? Is this a representation of the prostitute state?"

This is Sue looking at Nikki, in fact there are 2 ways you can look at this:

1- Nikki got insane, that suffocating rubber clown suit.
2 - Or that's Sue, and she is dead inside, she is going to kill Smithy - whatever the reason is, murder is never a sane thing to do. It's not good for the soul.

In that scene they both see each other. In fact I think Sue's conscience grows after doing that silk thing, a very spiritual thing, and she is going to put a stop on that "spell" that forever-repeting-tape.

So in the walk of fame, I always saw it has a mirror of what could have been. Remember that Doris is going to kill, who ever is the one on the other side, Sue or Nikki. But she doesn't know that something has changed and she will die for it.

2 - Who is the blurry-faced man in the opening hotel room scene?

There is one thing you didn't mentioned on the explanation and to me it helped a lot figuring a lot of the things out.

I know they shot things on Poland and the movie (the original) was on Poland, but what you are seeing is the 47 the GERMAN film. That's what Kingsley says.

So what you call Old Poland is infact 47 the german movie. The blurry opening scene is a scene from that film. Lost-Girl was a character in that film and she became trapped in it, that's why Sue goes to that apartment.

In a way you can see that corridor has a big hotel (Lynch likes hotels for metaphors, like on Lost Highway) with lots of rooms and in those rooms there's always the same story, the lost of innocence or the never-ending-repeting-story of INLAND EMPIRE in all it's different versions.

That's also an explanation for the Rabbits. Kingsley says that the original GERMAN film was based on a POLISH FOLK Tale, so it's ok for it to be filmed in Poland and in Polish. But the rabbits are the FOLK TALE.  There's a tale in Poland about 3 rabbits being a representation of god, or whatever suits you better.

But your thoughts about them being in the PURGATORY are real and it fits all of this. In fact I already had notice on the "Rabbits" show that they all talked in the past, so I always assumed they were dead.

And if you pay attention the Rabbits have the EXACT same HOUSE has Sue's, only in Green. For David, green is the divine, hope, and all that comes it with. And they play the film again.

So if I explained myself just right. Polish Folk Tale (origin, Rabbits)->47(GERMAN FILM)->On High on Blue Tomorrows (REMAKE).

I think David's smallest mistake was having the Old Poland scenes in POLISH, it would ring in peoples mind if they were talking in GERMAN. Maybe he just found that out latter.

In fact you can see Jack The Rabbit on the same table has Nikki/Sue, that's the beginning of the story, like Visitor #1 just said, "a boy...and then the variation".

In fact in the beginning Jack The Rabbit gets out of the house and then it appears the PHANTOM, it's all ok: the reflection and EVIL followed the boy"

3 - We hear the line "it was the man in the green coat" several times in the film. Smithy and Janek both have green coats. What does this mean, if anything?

I think it can be two things:

1 - Janek is also reincarnated and was also a victim of the same story, so was Smithy's.
2 - The blame on the GERMAN version was on Smithy's, and for somewhat reason he finds Janek and they want their revenge, because they acted wrongfully ???

What do you think ? Let me know

[DBeyond]

Btw can anyone get me Lynch-2. I'm from Portugal and my DVD version doesn't have it. I would really like to see it. Thanks.

[Pubrick]

have you tried the internet?

[polkablues]

I think he just did...

[DBeyond]

have you tried the internet?

I know what you mean and the answer is: yes, I have. All the familiar places. Can anyone help on this? I'm just that curious. For example on the Lynch(one) he says what part of the bible inspired the 3rd act of the movie, INLAND EMPIRE.

Like on Lost Highway I think Lynch is a bit insecure about people getting INLAND EMPIRE, so he likes to help in a very discreet way.

Help a very, very curious man.

[hotpinktamale]

Just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed your analysis of IE. Really helped me understand the film & made the entire experience so much better. Great job, much appreciated

[Jeremy Blackman]

Thanks!

[Mulligan]

Hi people, have you read this new eBook up on Amazon?  "David Lynch's INLAND EMPIRE Explained" by Michael T. Lidstone?  I checked it out and it's great.  Specifically it explains things like AXXoNN (it comes from a 1920's Russian book on Slavic folklore) as well as pretty much everything else in the  movie.  It goes through a bunch of Polish-gypsy folktales as well and uncovers a lot of answers.  Here is the link:

http://www.amazon.com/Lynchs-INLAND-EMPIRE-Explained-ebook/dp/B004LGS7I6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1373866441&sr=8-1&keywords=lynch+inland+empire

[Jeremy Blackman]

Interesting. I might have to get that.

You could just be honest and say that you're the author, though. (Your email address gives it away.) The way you posted sounds oddly spammy, when there's nothing wrong with a shameless personal plug, especially when it's this relevant.

Anyway, without reading your book yet, I'm curious if you have any major disagreements with my interpretation...

[polkablues]

Yeah, it's cool just to say, "Hey guys, I wrote a book about this and here's the Amazon link if anyone's interested." We're largely reasonable people around these parts, and can handle complex truths.

[jenkins]

well that was the internet. and if you're wondering, most of us are just thinking "holy shit, the internet." that's the way the internet goes

amazon'd the situation and i think you're doing a great job at #6 there, in the Biographies & Memoirs of Movie Directors section. i know it's tricky to sell this, and you put it at a price that shows you're trying to sell it

lol. oh man. no one here is trying to fuck your shit up, not at all, promise, but this came out on january 28, according to amazon, and on march 10 there's an amazon review -- which i read because this is the internet -- that either stole from your amazon summary or you stole from it for your amazon summary. because of the date of the review and the reviewer's lack of any other review, that's you too! i bet. to be honest, my guess would be that Jeremy Blackman read the amazon reviews and wondered about what the fuck was going on

it's as easy as trying to talk with Jeremy Blackman about his own interpretation, which he offered, and we all go "this sounds interesting" if it does, because why wouldn't a person who wants to hear about the movie want to hear about the book about the movie? makes plain sense

[Pubrick]

makes plain sense

plain sense

sense

.
.
.

trashculturemutantjunkie, everybody.

[jenkins]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism

the internet, australia

[Mulligan]

Hey people yeah sorry I am the author!  I just wanted to inform you the book is out there and wasn't sure if you'd be angry because I'm also the author.  I did read some of Blackman's interpretation.  I think the difference is that my book isn't really interpretation, it's just an investigation into a number of things based on hard evidence and verifiable sources that I include at the end of my study.  Basic things like, what EXACTLY is AXXoNN and where does it come from EXACTLY, or where EXACTLY do the talking rabbits come from and what exact texts did Lynch derive them from etc.  I've read psychological interprations and philisophical ones before from a number of people and those are fine but they don't answer the hard questions in any real way and in order to understand what you are interpreting you need to know some basic things about the movie first, and as far as I can tell, and I've looked pretty high and low, my study so far is the only one that does that.