Page created 1 May 2002 by lukas , last modified 1 May 2002 by lukas
URL: http://www.davidlynch.com
David Lynch (imdb) has a long career as an arist and filmaker and I won't bore you with the details. Here's a brief list of his work (with randomly slected links):
I watched the movie 2 times when I rented it and I think it was more grounded in reality and a general concept of sanity than Lost Highway was, but it was still definitely out there. I will admit that the ending took me by surprise and it annoyed me at first, but it grew on me. Also, there were several little episodes throughout the film that I wish would have been developed. Nonetheless, I liked it muchly.
Plus, did I mention the Denny's of pure evil?
Of the aforementioned titles, I have only seen Dune. But, I am a big fan. I've read the book by F. Herbert and think the movie does a pretty good job bringing the world to life. I've seen the more recent movie Dune with William Hurt. It may have been a bit more loyal to the text of the book, but Lynch's version was much more artistic and alluring overall. But, I will say for the record the spice guild guy was pretty gross looking.
i just didn't like it at all. i like dune and thats about it. i think i've seen bits of lost highway and wasn't sure what the hell was going on but, i'm guessing even if i watched it strait threw i still would know. but, i love you lukas and your opions like your love for bruce willis.
RULES
i was bored. sorry. i mean, it was quite picturesque and absurd watching an old man drive his lawn mower. and im all about
picturesque-osity and absurd-iness. but i just couldn't dig this movie. maybe i just wasn't in the right mood. other than that, i can't say i've seen any of the movies on the list. i have always been curious to jump into the world of david lynch, but i think that the stories i've heard coupled with such a daunting list of titles is what has held me back. if i decide to check out a particular director, i want to be able to see at least 85% - 90% of his/her films. i just don't know if i'll be able to handle all of these. but someday i will commit to a month of rentals of solely david lynch films, and we'll see what all the fuss is about. i even skipped over david foster wallace's essay on david lynch in the book A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again just because i had never seen the films and figured i'd be better off seeing them first and then reading what DFW had to say about them. so, who's gonna commit to the month of lynch with me?
Call me a spineless worm, but I can't committ to watching James Bond two weekends in a row, it depresses me so much. There's no way I could handle watching David Lynch for a whole month.That said, try the straight story again some time, and ahead of time, just relax, and give yourself over to the fact that it's extremely slow paced. I think the beauty of that movie, that so few movies manage to do, is the honesty and realism of the characters -- it feels like a documentary of his journey -- because the actors are just living their parts, rather than ACTING. I mean, obviously there are some "movie moments" (shooting the lawn mower), but if you just watch the movie thinking that this is real life unfolding (in the slow way that it often does), I think this movie actually does a really good job of acting like real life, like a real journey, rather than a Hollywoodization of the story of this guy.
Also, I think that Richard Farnsworth is a great actor, and it's cool to see him in this, his last role (before he committed suicide on his ranch due to his bone cancer) -- to see him playing an old man putting his own life on the line to go visit his possibly dying brother is really poignant -- and the interaction between the brothers at the end I think is really priceless -- it's not glossed over with hollywood acrylic schlock -- it's really a lot like what two hard, old men would do -- but in the minimalism of their interaction is more forgiveness and reconciliation than any hollywood writer could have scripted for them.
dogmanphil, if you couldn't stand Mulholland Drive, I recommend you steer clear of Lost Highway. The two intersecting story lines take place outside of space and time. It's not unlike a psychotic moebius strip projected into a dream and onto film. To quote Lynch on the film:"The unit publicist was reading up on certain mental disorders during production, and she came upon this true condition called 'psychogenic fugue,' which is where a person gives up himself, his world, his family - everything about himself - and takes on another identity. That's Fred Madison completely. I love the term psychogenic fugue. In a way, the musical term fugue fits perfectly, because the film has one theme, and then another theme takes over. To me, jazz is the closest thing to insanity that there is in music."It would be interesting to watch Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive in sucession because the themes are quite similar. However, that would be a mind-numbing double feature.
"The film deals with time; it starts at one place and moves forward or backwards, or stands still, relatively speaking. But, time marches on and films compact time, or prolong time in different ways. There are sequences built with time in mind, as is the music."
I like it. An entertaining film made from a crappy book. I've also heard it described as Spartacus in space which is about right. I'm not sure if it should be in the Lynch category as he disowned it.Am I remembering things wrongly or was Werner Herzog originally supposed to direct the film? That would have been fascinating to see. Fitzcarraldo is one of my very favourite films.
The way I understand it is that Lynch took his name off the extended version, which is often played on the sci-fi channel, but left his name on the theatrical version, even though he was unhappy with the film in general. Apparently, Lynch wrote screenplays for the next two books in the series which were not optioned since the first movie didn't do so well. I don't know about Herzog being tapped for Dune, but I do know Lynch cites Herzog as an influence (even though they are roughly the same age).
On a related note, I rented the sci-fi channel production of Dune some time back. I enjoyed it but wasn't overly impressed. Maybe it was lacking the eerie kookiness Lynch has a way of imparting.
david lynch on lost highway:
"You can say that a lot of Lost Highway is internal. It's Fred's story. It's not a dream: It's realistic, though according to Fred's logic. But I don't want to say too much. The reason is: I love mysteries. To fall into a mystery and its danger ... everything becomes so intense in those moments. When most mysteries are solved, I feel tremendously let down. So I want things to feel solved up to a point, but there's got to be a certain percentage left over to keep the dream going. It's like at the end of Chinatown: The guy says, 'Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown.' You understand it, but you don't understand it, and it keeps that mystery alive. That's the most beautiful thing."
"Well, there's a scene in the film that has something to do with rules of the road. And it just strikes me that we could talk about what's happening in Los Angeles and maybe many places in the world: People are going through red lights. It's a big problem. And I understand the frustration of the light turning yellow and the cars in front are going ahead. But it's extremely important to stop at a red light."
lukas has read these already i'm sure, but i just did today myself as i tried to figure out what th' hell he was going for with mulholland drive, which i saw this last weekend. yikes. why didn't anybody tell me about all the hot girl-on-girl action? i would have seen it months ago.
talking to my dad (a headshrinker) about mulholland drive. i described the plot as best i could and asked him about "psychogenic fugue". the result: if one were looking to describe action of the film in terms of mental disorders you would need to include more than psychogenic fugue, like maybe for instance some serious paranoia and maybe some supernatural jazz like precience etc, which is to be expected with lynch. this doesn't really matter unless you are interested in trying to figure-out if the film could be explained as a depicion of a mental illness (which doesn't sound like it was what lynch was going for if his own comments can be believed, so i'm not sure why i though it might be true), or how closely it resembles a documented flavor of disturbed mental state, which i am, or was, until i started trying to wade through some goofy phsychobabble dissertations/case studies, and then i got lost real quick and gave up. the upshot: david lynch is kooky. i would love to get my dad to sit down and watch the whole thing and then give me a really considered opinion, but on the other hand, who wants to sit down with their dad and watch hot girl-on-girl action? so this might be all the psychiatric help i get on this one.
lynch's rough-and-ready given definition of "psychogenic fugue" (as related above by lukas) is at best semiconsistent with the definitions i have found so far. here's what i've come up with:
fugue n.
Music: An imitative polyphonic composition in which a theme or themes are stated successively in all of the voices of the contrapuntal structure.
Psychiatry: A pathological amnesiac condition during which one is apparently conscious of one's actions but has no recollection of them after returning to a normal state. This condition, usually resulting from severe mental stress, may persist for as long as several months.
[Italian fuga(influenced by French fugue, from Italian fuga), from Latin, flight.]
fugue n.
A condition in which an individual suddenly abandons a present activity or lifestyle and starts a new and different one for a period of time, often in a different city; afterward, the individual alleges amnesia for events occurring during the fugue period, although earlier events are remembered and habits and skills are usually unaffected.
and, from a faq on dissociation:
Psychogenic Fugue is the assumption of a new identity and the inability to recall one's previous identity; it involves a complete switch in lifestyle, including home and/or work recall. This is usually caused by severe psychosocial stress, such as severe marital problems, being a part of military conflict, or being in some type of natural disaster.
Psychogenic Amnesia is a sudden inability to recall important personal information, when not due to any organic cause. Like Psychogenic Fugue, this is usually caused by severe psychosocial stress
Both psychogenic fugue and psychogenic amnesia are sudden, and they both are usually fairly short-lived, with a complete recovery made. They are most common during wartime or just after a natural disaster.
Differential Diagnoses include epilepsy and other forms of amnesia; both are also sometimes feigned (malingering).
the entry for Multiple Personality Disorder is also instructive, as is the entry for Depersonalization Disorder - many of the characteristics mentioned seem to correspond to certain aspects of the story of mulholland drive, like issues of personal agency and cause - but to put them in here would be waaaay-way-overboard, instead of the simple way-overboard approach i've adopted here, so i'll restrain myself.
david has his own subscription-based website, with tons and tons of presumably fantastic and disturbing original movies and cartoons and photos and music and hand-scrawled e-mail greeting cards etcetera, fantastic stuff i will never see 'cause it's all streaming broadband-necessary stuff and it costs a tenner a month to join. i'm butt-puckeringly envious of anyone with the wherewithall to get in on this. lukas, if you want a guaranteed visit...
And self indulgent.I hate most of his catalogue, especially the newer stuff. The truth is that he is NOT really pushing any limits as to what is acceptable in a narrative frame work. He is ripping off ideas from younger film makers, most of which are either in school or too young and *unknown* to get their pictures made.
He is a sham. When he was in film school, that is when he should've expressing these ideas of what a narrative really is. But he wasn't because he probably never really had any ideas in the first place. The success of his films *in a purely functional sense* has been equal to the average amount of time the sun shines on the exposed hindquarters of a dog. He is like a professor who takes the work of the undergrad and passes it off as his own. I will give him points for being resourceful. I will give him points for The Straight Story...that story was begging to get made into a film. But he didn't create that story, just another thing to rip-off.
He is a phoney and the worst kind of poser. Give me Altman. Give me the Cohens. Dude, give me Brakhage. At least he outwardly expresses that 90% of his work is purposely unaccessible. Let the pseudo-goths keep Lynch. He is a Rammstein standing on the uncredited shoulders' of a sea of Laibachs. He is Mr. Burns at the end of the Pin Pals episode of The Simpsons. He is and always will be, in my honest opinion, one notch below Michael Bay.
but, if you were to really feel strongly about it, what would your opinion be?
Okay, I started this response as to why I think DL is an original filmaker and not a ripoff artist etc, but I killed my Mojira tab by accident (excuses, I know). Sufficed to say, I disagree and think he has done some quite original work. Plus, he makes furniture.
let me reiterate my gushing schoolgirl crush on david lynch, if for no other reason than that it has illicited the best crashin' smashin' flamin' blowout outburst i've read on this bbs so far - mr. zilla, that was great. now, i should really stop there because i always end up with even my friends hating me when i try to have some verbal fun with folks - somehow i can't exactly get the tone of my posts right so they come across as unoffensively as i mean them. what i'm really interested in is some director and movie recommendations from mr. zilla - your post strikes me as that of someone who has thought long and cares hard about film, so i'd like to hear some talk about what is lovely and praiseworthy in the medium.and (i can't help myself - i've just got to do some needling) i'd love to hear some clarification on the points you make.
first, who are these young film school folks who's films are to unknown (excepting to you) to get their bracing avant-sterpieces seen by us? sure, if someone cops something wholecloth without adding anything, that's pretty evil, but to charge him of the Despicable And Unforgiveable Crime Of Un-originality without any documentation at all just leaves us film novices panting at your door for fulfillment. enlighten please.
further following this initial flyer down the garden path: most of us have never been to film school or had the opportunity, wonderful that it would be, to view these wonders. can we then be blamed for liking an idea the first time we see it, never mind that someone else may have come up with it first? am i not allowed to like baz luhrmann's romeo and juliet because it's not the first film version of the play? am i not allowed to like moulin rouge because it's in the style of romeo and juliet? is no-one else besides pete townsend allowed ever again to feature feeback in their guitarplaying without being called a poser? or a bluesman employ a blues progression? or a video director a chorus of tight-black-dressed gel-haired hip-swingin' sirens holding guitars and pretending to be sexy zombies a-la "simply irresistible"? if you don't find lynch interesting that's one thing, and that's quite respectable of course.
also, i'm not sure i understand the accusation of "unaccessible"ness. some of lynch's stuff might be inexplicit, but most of it communicates. i figure you don't have to be explicit to communicate, especially not in film. sure, some times when you go to the movies with your folks to see a more-or-less predictably inert lump of admittedly star-studded and pleasent but not the least bit gripping nominal "murder-mystery", you want the Bad Guy with the help of the director to painstakingly walk you through every tired bob-and-weave of improbable yet unavoidable unravelling backstory - complete with lots of Horrified Heroine Reaction Shots - and tie up all the loose ends nice and tidy like (anyone else seen Gosford Park?), but sometimes one likes to pick up the rubber-covered spoon and messily shove one's own creamed carrots into one's own friggin' mouth, can i get an amen? plus i like the idea of open-ended interpretation that works emotionally but may be tough or impossible to write a clean and understandable dissertation on, and who th'hell cares in the end? everybody figures out pretty quick that explaining why a joke is funny is not real funny, right?
hmm. here i maybe find myself arguing against something that you didn't really want to say but i misinterpreted, yes? but it was fun to write. so, come back to ground, let me just say that even inarticulate things can communicate profoundly, like say a baby, a dog, a loon, a facial expression, and that i find this kind of communication present in lynch's stuff, which renders it at some level accessible to me. but hey, you can access whatever you want. and maybe that brakhage slam wasn't a slam, but i bet it was a slam.
or maybe you were responding to the lynch quotes lukas and i were swapping. surely he's not the first or the only artist to be a crappy spokesperson for himself. sure, a lot of his interviews read pretty silly - that's one reason i like them. there's nothing quite so absurd and funny as someone trying to explain what they think is profound to someone who doesn't think so, especially if the former is inarticulate. he comes off personally as so cute and dumb and harmless, and then comes out with such disturbed stuff - this is in fact my favorite dynamic in his movies also: the "goofy good vs. unrelentingly opressive (if sometimes also goofy) evil". maybe that's uninteresting to you, which is fine, but i don't think it counts as "unaccessible".
i really did like that rammstein cut. kinda hope you stay all exercised about this so we'll get another piece.
oh yeah, and i had quite the rep for pastels in junior high, and am notorious amongst my college buds for mismatched multiple plaids and patterns, so keep that pseudo-goth slurring to yourself. although i bet i would look pretty good in black lipstick...
moonboots only wishes he was a pseudogoth.
mein hut er hat drie eckeeee, drie eeeecke haaaat mein huuuut, dann hat mein hut kein eckeeee, er wird nicht bin mein huuuut...or etwas else auf deutsch...man that's embarassing - my german's almost as bad as my english.
I just had to make sure that the voice of the Lynch Haters was heard. Having spent a large chunk of these last six years studying film history, the filmmaking process, and the critical analysis of film, it has been my experience that Lynch is a tool often used by unintelligent people to make them appear intellectual, edgy, or deep, dark and brooding. I am not suggesting that this was the case in Lukas's post, but just shedding light on this fact. You would be suprised at the amount of people in the industry who share in this opinion.That being said, I like Dune. I think Eraserhead is interesting. I love Twin Peaks. The Straight Story is a movie that I can watch with my parents, and that is always a plus. But I like these films in spite of their director.
I like Lost Highway...but for weird reasons. Lynch is a great example of how meaning is negotiated...and that is quite a lofty concept. When Lost Highway came out, a small group of friends would endlessly debate what Lynch's message was, each arguing that their interpretation was more accurate than anyone elses. The idea that any one interpretation could ever be more accurate and/or legitimate counters the idea that meaning is negotiated.
Try this: Next time you are out and about in a restraunt or watching Red Vinegar play at one of them trendy micro-breweries ( Ha Ha Ha! ) and you see a group of people that is dumb-but-trying-to-be-smart, ask them what they think of David Lynch. They will most likely profess to love his work. Then ask them to name 4 David Lynch films. You can do this very slyly like asking them to rank their Top 5.
Pseudo gothic and brooding and dark Like a peppermint lifesaver when you see my spark
Dave
and i totally see what you're getting at. but if I did that, it wouldn't work. because i've only seen The Straight Story and part of Dune. but i'll bet this is the case with other directors/rockbands/actors/poets/authors/artists as well. because so many people find this ICON of whatever it is they want most to be, and then profess to be madly into/in love with/all about this artist. and a lot of these people are posers. why do you think NIN got big? because 'trent knows my problems man.' why do people wear mohawks and claim to be anarchists? because its all about looking cool. at least for a while, until you realize that it doesn't matter. and that "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with people when you're uncool." (i know i already posted this quote elsewhere, but i was appropriate) don't get me wrong Shredzilla, i don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to the topic of David Lynch, so i can't really say what i actually think about him and his work. but i do think the problem you cite with many of his 'fans' is a common occurrence in ALL forms of media.
I think movie critics love to gush about lynch for the reasons Dave talked about above. But then, I have this whole theory of the mob mentality of movie critics and who can gush the most about certain films. Anyway one of the Lynch sites out there has some old Ebert reviews archived of Wild at Heart, Blue Velvet, Lost Highway, etc. I'll find the link and post it.
shredzilla, i owe you an apology. i should have kept my mouth shut and listened. i do love to shoot my mouth off - for my own amusement mostly - but i should probobly save that sh*t for my journal. anyways, i'd love to hear more from you about film sometime. i like to watch them, as many as i can afford, but know nothing about them from the academic side. i'd at least love some recommendations, or opinions of other directors, if you ever feel so inclined. like for instance, what do you think of kurosawa? is he as big a deal as i keep hearing? i've been checking-out a bunch of his stuff lately (mainly 'cause my library has them and i'm too poor for blockbuster) and liking quite a few of them (maybe it's just the exoticness) - i know, he's another big buzzword guy, what with him being ripped-off by various american directors and spaghetti western directors, but still, throne of blood was lots of fun...man, now i'm all self-conscious and scared to come off like a film-school poser...i'd better shut up...
There are essentially two camps of modern film. The first one is narrative film. The second one is art film. Documentary film is the neutral ground between the two camps. Because narrative film, or entertainment film, has become such a huge all encompassing thing, the role of the film critic has become one who interprets how entertaining the film is. Because a majority of film critics no longer talk about the art and language of film and film making, an appreciation for these matters in not prevalent in the mind of the film goer.Every once in a while, a film critic will break out of his/her mold and endorse a film, saying it is not entertaining but important. Like American Psycho. Perfect example. The truth is there is nothing important about American Psycho. The reason it was endorsed by critics as "important" is that critics would feel morally compromised by acknowledging that American movie audiences love, crave, dig and lust for violence.
American film critics have lots of words/concepts that they replace important with. "Disturbing" is one of my favorites. "Dark" is another. There are plenty of disturbing films out there that aren't gross or gorey. But you have to really want to watch them to find them and vice versa. Todd Solondz really pushes what humanity is vs. how humanity interprets itself. "Happiness" is disturbing. "Hannibal" is just a bunch of fake blood and brain matter.
It is important to realize that just as film critics can be full of crap, the same thing is true for supporters of the art film community.
Stan Brakhage is an art film theorist who instructs ant NYU. I had to interpret a film of his where he took plant matter, taped it to raw film stock, and then exposed it to light. Now rerun at 24 frames per second a lot of information is lost and it is really hard to interpret any meaning from the flickering light. Lost of kids in the class read their papers, talking about how horrible it is that the rainforests are being burned down or the plight of the american farmer. One student in my class took two sheets of paper and threw markers at them until he was satisfied with the arrangements of color. He got full credit for the paper and quickly dropped out of the Film Program. That guy is my hero. If I ever see him again, I will buy him a drink.
man, film school sounds like a lot of fun. i remember what outraged and frusterated fun i had in my english senior seminar on literary criticism. reminds me of my favorite philosopher story, and i'm an ass that i can't remember who, i think maybe one of the cynics. somebody asked him (whoever it was) something about the possibility or practice or meaning of human communication, and all he did was hold up his hands and move his fingers all around in random patterns. that's killer. no doubt it would be a better story if i had any of the details.
I wasn't implying that film critics do critical analysis. The Ebert reviews I was referring to (1, 2 , 3) echo some of my own feelings of those movies.
My own fascination with Lynch started when a friend in high-school loaned me his copies of Twin Peaks as he taped it. I still think some of the early episodes are his finest work.
I had pretty much the same experience. Two of my very close friends still break out the Box Sets during creative dry spells.Please understnd Lukas that I did not post my brief take on film to illustrate any ineptness on your part. It was more of a post geared to let others see where I was coming from.
Now then, I think Twin Peaks was a great idea, but if you look at how it came to be and how it ended, you can catch of glimpse of the fact that Lynch is, for the most part, more interested in money than his art, which makes him, in my eyes, significantly less valid. Same thing goes for Chris Carter. Both Chris Carters. The one who made the X-Files and the Ex-Vikings Wide Reciever.
And of course this brings us to the Elitist/Populist argument of communication theory, but I am too tired now to get into it.
I remember one of the classes that was part of my ElectronicEng course in college was Communications. They spent a couple of weeks on information theory, Shannon & Reed, etc. Then they taught us how to write CVs, job application letters and how to give presentations. As part of the latter, everbody was to give a presentation on some subject to the class. I couldn't face that, so I stopped going.
Great Film. Of course, I just watched From Hell, and with John Merrik making a brief appearance. I found my memory jogged.In Elephant Man, we see Lynch as a storyteller, not posing out on his own self indulgent "art". I found particularily interesting the use of black and white film, combined with the nature of the story, presenting the subject in a sort of Frankenstein Context, for in Frankenstein we find that the monster was us...as is a larger underlying theme in Elephant Man.
For those of you looking for a solid Lynch introduction, I would suggest the film. In it, one can see Lynch *using* juxtaposition rather than *abusing* it. It has some slightly off-putting visuals, especially for its time. As his career progressed, the use of such visual material became an element that Lynch developed to the point of caricature. It would be interesting to view a bill of The Elephant Man, Lost Highway, and The Straight Story, afterwards contrasting and comparing the visual language.
I always wonder what Twin Peaks would have been like had it been given a bit more leeway on a network like HBO. Because there are times, especially in the second season when Lynch was off filming Wild at Heart, when the crass commercialism shines through. During the second season you get all sorts of 2-3 episode story arcs that weer obviously intended to try to grab new viewers and keep them around. Many of these little plot lines are intersting, but some of the just don't fly. And all the while Lynch was off working on Wild at Heart, which turned out to be a not-so-good film.
My train of thought has been interrupted (again) by my stupid phone with people calling to ask stupid questions.
public radio is kool. fresh air is toasting the dvd release of blue velvet with a david/dennis/isabella interview show. the hopper bit is too short, but still it's bitchin'.
We watched The Elephant Man the other night since Karna had never seen it. I had forgotten what a great movie this is. Whenever I watch it I get the feeling that it is much older than it really is. It also reminds me in some ways of Eraserhead but I really don't know why. There were just certain shots that triggered me to think, hey that looks like Eraserhead. Anyway, just spouting off on a slow tuesday afternoon. If you haven't seen The Elephant Man I recommned it as it's a good movie as well as a good intro to Lynch. Although I think a better intro to Lynch would be the original Twin Peaks pilot (not the crazy euro version with a closed ending) and parts of the first season of Twin Peaks. Of course, that's also what I would consider the best of his work so after that it's all downhill.
my favorite part is when bones says "dammit jim i'm a doctor..."just kidding guys, but to be completely honest, i never knew that Dune was a lynch film, i'll definitely have to take a couple more looks at it, in fact, just that fact that it is a lynch means that i might add it to my "collection", right after i get lost highway.
alright, proceed to make fun of me
tom,you're silly.
hahahahaha
I found this entree and wanted to throw in some points. While I will acknowledge that Lynch has certainly challenged some conventions, I also find him to be a bit pretentious for my taste. (By the way, I've thought the same thing of the few episodes of Six Feet Under that I've seen. So there, HBO)Having said that, I wanted to touch on some other points that were made in the discussion. Having just gone through film school of sorts (specifically looking at the intersections of art and science, content and commercialism) I can say that film school is fun, but not all it's cracked up to be.
Regarding filmas a concept, I think that a ll film should be considered art. Now, this doesn't mean that it's all good art. If I draw a stick figure, technically that's art. but I don't expect the art world to bang down my door. When I look at a film, I am certainly looking to be entertained. but I am also looking for any aesthetic qualities, such as lighting, shot selection, editing, acting, etc. that I can appreciate for their inherent beauty. Of course, this gets into a whole other philosophical discussion. The third thing I look for in a film is whether it leads to the exchange of ideas, usually in dicussion form. A great example of this is the film "Boondock Saints." I recently watched it again and enjoyed it very much. I also like much of the camera work and editng choices. But I especially liked that I could discuss my take on the ethical dilemma that it posed.
As it relates to Lynch, I agree with moonboots (15 May) that there is a certain level of emotional communication that is deliberately inexplicit. But for that, I prefer Kubrick or Altman.
Shredzilla, on a side note, someone once said, good writers borrow, great writers steal. I know, it's a cliche of beginning screenwriting classes, but I'm somewhat disenchanting with the myth of the brilliant film student, as I am with the whole auteur theory of film criticism. I think film students and critics in particular like to lump a director's work together and say that everything in a body of work is great, which isn't true.
But to end on a positive note, someone who's delivered great scripts so far is Charlie Kaufman. I liked Being John Malkovich and thought Adaptation was exceptionally brilliant. I'm looking forward to Confessions of a Dangerous Mind.
no longer wrapped in plastic, laura (sheryl lee) is on kingpin, the pathetically bad sopranos/godfather drug cartel mini-series.
baggins, if i lived in chicago, i'd definitely be down for the month of lynch.all the best, thesuckahassler
That was a weird one.