Critical Analysis: David Lynch • Page 2

Surprised there isn't more love for Wild At Heart, one of my all time favorites. I think for Lynch full films the only one I haven't seen is Elephant Man, but will fix that soon. Just saw Inland Empire for the first time earlier this summer and was mesmerized.

 

The Elephant Man is brilliant

 

High ii

 

Ive seen most of his stuff and will echo the sentiment that he is a genius. I think a strong argument could be made for best film maker of all time. Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire were probably my faves. Only seen each of them once but would love to see them again.

 

Have seen everything but Dune. I read it had homophobia and never felt compelled.

 

In finishing his filmography, I was surprised how few of his films actually adhere to the "Lynch stereotype" that many people have about his work. The Elephant Man is much more traditional than his other work, Dune is a too-sincere genre film, Wild at Heart plays with 50's imagery, and The Straight Story is completely lacking in the type of horror we associate with the man. Even within the typical "Lynch" film, the key change over time has to do more and more with dream logic, and the second you stop trying to understand the films, the more it becomes powerful and important. A Lynch film can be far more extreme and difficult to comprehend than a Malick film, but the Malick films are regarded as more arty and removed from narrative. However, this is an interesting flip on what the films actually are; Malick films are very easy to understand from a plot perspective if you pay basic attention, while Lynch's films completely undermine your understanding with the semblance of a typical plot spoken by famous movie stars and shot in a traditional style. In that way, Lynch's films become hard to love even when they are unquestionably brilliant, as Lynch's work is filled with unlikeable characters doing various degrees of evil things. You do not really identify with the protagonist of Eraserhead, or the college student in Blue Velvet, or Naomi Watts in Mulholland Dr., as they are just a vessel, and each one is proven to have their own shortcomings to be considered someone worth rooting for. That can make it hard for some people, but it ultimately makes it easier to follow Lynch on his bizarre story threads, so when Naomi Watts becomes a completely different person in Mulholland Dr. or Bill Pullman transforms into a teenager in Lost Highway you simply accept the internal logic of the film and see where it goes next.

There is really no one else like him in mainstream cinema. Some people might compare him to Kubrick, but the comparisons are only superficial, as Kubrick's most daring films never went into the psyche that Lynch does. With Twin Peaks coming back, hopefully more people become interested, especially since Twin Peaks is one of the easiest ways to get into his work.

 

So I havent seen everything by him.

Twin Peaks sold me on him though - loved the quirkiness of all the characters.

Eraserhead/Blue Velvet were odd as well - both good. solid.

DOnt know if I saw anything else by him - when was Twin Peaks 1986? I was in high school then :)

 

watched this earlier in the year when i was in hospital with pneumonia, very uncomfortably.

Eraserhead a man trapped in by his circumstances and own inaction, used by sex . lynch uses bizarre and frightening imagery based in real insecurity then combos it with the ery mechanical sound track filmed in black and white to create a very tense and unsettling film. We watch a man haunted by his life situation and tempted by the effectively irresistible but temporary release of sex which again chews him up and spits him out. Backed into a corner he violently unleashes on sex's creation - his deformed offspring ending what may be the only and by far the best pro male abortion film.

I think its a brilliant film but dont rank it as high as some of his other work, but its was one of his first and i think hes just honed his craft since then

i watched a David Foster Wallace interview where he talked in general about art and also about David Lynch and the concept of making art that where the audience has to work to enjoy/appreciate it which is interesting and i think people or more open to the idea of it in literature where they are already sitting down and investing large amount of time to it, where as I think it also applies to David Lynch films except because of our exceptions on film we are much more ready to immediately dismisses and disregard it if we arnt enjoying every second and frame we witness for the 90mins we are watching. David lynch films i think are most enjoyed with the more amount of time and effort you put into them, watching it once enjoying the ride and visuals and getting a vague idea then researching and watching again and coming back for sequential views only makes them better. May have taken it too far with Inland Empire but im happy to be wrong and change my mind later

 

Watching Eraserhead while hospitalised with pneumonia sounds like an... interesting experience.

 

yeah the hospital beeping and droning noises blended in pretty well, overall don't recommend

 

I can't remember if I've said this here before

but Mulholland Drives 'Diner Scene' and a certain death scene in Blue Velvet will forever be ingrained in my head. The former is maybe the most scared any piece of media has made me feel

 

The diner scene is fascinating in how scary it is. I'd like to see a David Lynch horror film. He's obviously put some unnerving, terrifying shit on screen, but I mean a movie that he promotes as, "This is a horror film," because I know if he were to say that about his movie, we'd be in for something completely different than what most people think of as "horror."

 

It's scary and more than scary