I fucking hate David Lynch

[Urinal Cake]

I just do. I know it's not fair, and it's not right (possibly) but there's something about him that really rubs me up the wrong way. It's plausibly not his fault and partially down to the fact that the movie magazines treat him like the world's greatest human being, but I think two films of his are shit. To be fair I do think he was (and occasionally still manages to be) a pretty decent  film director, and that's not to be mocked, but his attempts at serious movies are all too often painfully earnest, sometimes patronising, and at times even offensive. I mean the use of the bugs in Blue Velvet, christ, why not have a man scream in the camera "Look, at the bugs, fucking bugs, now do you see that the bugs were nasty?"

But I know I'm probably being a bit unfair, so is there anyone out there who can sell Lynch to me?

You know what would've been a great ending to 'Blue Velvet'? If there was a dead robin eaten by bugs. Now that would've been interesting.

I've seen in part why 'Blue Velvet' was important because it was seen as the first effective attack against the cultural malaise of 'Reagan'. But it hasn't aged well. It seems quite blatant.   

[El Unicornio, mang]

You've at least got to love him for this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0

(the top comment made me lol too)

[Pube]

Hmm. I'm not sure that works as a copypasta, but whatever.

I think one salient thing about David Lynch's films is that they all seem say "Analyse me." Because they're a bit mystifying, a lot of people try to deconstruct them as they watch. I don't think that's really the best way to watch Lynch's films. I just try to let them wash over me. Not mindlessly, not without some thought, but I don't constantly question what I'm watching, looking for meaning. Because some of the stuff in his films means fuck all, and I think you miss out on a lot of the simple surreal fun if you're constantly shouting BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN? David Lynch is not a completely serious man, I think, and some stuff is there because it's just funny.

I'd also recommend letting his films sink in without running to the internet for an explanation. To be honest, I figured out only one of his films on my own, which was Mulholland Drive. But being confused by some stuff in his other films was a good thing, it made them worth thinking about and watching again.

[Urinal Cake]

Eraserhead I could forgive because it was his 'student film' but I thought it was pretentious and forgot about him.

Blue Velvet I went in cold off the recommendation off a foaf.  All I knew was that some guy finds an ear in a field. At the end of the film it was- this film was so obvious.

He makes it quite clear Rossellini is the mother figure to the hero and the villain even though ultimately the only 'man' she really cares for is her son, he makes it quite clear the hero and the villain are similar even with a vaudeville villain scene in the car, 'You're the same as me'. The acting was uniformly woeful but the cinematography was great. And then in the end it all reverts back to normal with love saving the day with no hint of irony.

I only checked out the Internet to see why it's so lauded.

[Pube]

Did you not find any of it funny?

[Urinal Cake]

It was funny in bits though more silly rather than dark as I was expecting. However I found the acting the most hilarious.

[McFlymo]

I love this scene.

http://youtu.be/CMg47ABzINw

Mullholland Drive was pretty aces too.

Still haven't got round to watching Twin Peaks.

[Pube]

more silly rather than dark as I was expecting.

But what kind of dark were you expecting? Dark like a Nine Inch Nails music video? Lost Highway was the closest he came to that, and while it's a good film, it would be pretty boring if he did that all the time.

I can't "sell" Lynch to you but I do reckon that the silliness you're talking about is more intentional than you think.

[Funcrusher]

The coining of the phrase 'Jimmy Stewart From Mars' was the beginning of the end. I think he had a few interesting ideas in him, then just became Hollywood's pet eccentric.

[Noodle Lizard]

Already gone into it on t'other thread.  I do like more of his work than not, and love love love 'Mulholland Dr.', 'Lost Highway' and 'Twin Peaks'.  I think my issues with him lie more in the "legend" than the man himself.  A bit like Bill Hicks.

[BlodwynPig]

The coining of the phrase 'Jimmy Stewart From Mars' was the beginning of the end. I think he had a few interesting ideas in him, then just became Hollywood's pet eccentric.

Jesus christ.

Pet eccentric? It's people who watch his films just to seem "out there" that probably have given critics that particular stick to beat him with.

Taken in isolation - i.e. watching the film as a film and immersing yourself in it, is one of the most pleasurable things in life. The lazy observation that his films are just weird and incomprehensible or as one friend said of INLAND EMPIRE - "boring", reeks of a mind brought up on Batman movies and hot dogs.

Through his films I have been exposed to the wonders of cinema - true cinema - films like Celine and Julie Go Boating and Sunset Boulevard, El Topo and Aguirre. I do feel elevated above the bottom feeders who will watch Olympus Has Fallen and declare it the greatest movie of all time, but most probably we enjoy our films in equal measure and with the same verve, and hence my "superiority complex" is moot.

Anyway, thank you David Lynch, for making me very very happy.

[Petey Pate]

The coining of the phrase 'Jimmy Stewart From Mars' was the beginning of the end.

This was apparently Mel Brooks description of Lynch back in the late 70s, when he met him to discuss directing The Elephant Man. Do you think he hasn't done anything good since Eraserhead?

Incidentally Lynch is "thinking about" making a new TV series.  Would make a change from preaching transcendental meditation bollocks.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/david-lynch-thinking-about-returning-to-tv-20130411

[Pube]

I'm now going to respond to the Lynch backlash by being a patronising twat.

This is happening because he's a bit alternative, but not alternative enough. When you're deliberately seeking out obscure things in your youth, you want to be that one step ahead, always into something that no one has heard of. Lots of people have heard of Lynch. You can hear housewives talking about Twin Peaks on the bus. This just won't do. You can't be into what they're into.

So he becomes the "Spielberg of Weird". The pretend, manufactured version of alternative. You think you genuinely enjoy Lynch films? HA HA HA. How little do you know.

The internet has made most of this posturing pointless. These days, hardly anything is truly obscure. As soon as you mention an artist to someone, they can go and read all about them and get the whole discography/filmography. So maybe we can stop trying so hard and just enjoy things for what they are. David Lynch's films are very good.

[BlodwynPig]

As ever, Pube nails it.

[Urinal Cake]

The way I see it is that he's Bunuel for dummies. He is the Noel Fielding of cinema.

And I saw Bunuel before Lynch!

[checkoutgirl]

Can't stand Lynch myself, I'm not proud of it and I don't want to hate him but I do. What annoys me most is his refusal to explain any of his objectively incomprehensible films. Even seasoned critics and film buffs are divided on just what the fuck his films mean and I know it's art and art is in the eye of the individual and all that but films aren't poems and shouldn't be opaque and open to endless interpretations.

The first Lynch film I ever saw was The Lost Highway and talk about starting at the deep end. To this day I haven't a clue what that film is about. It restarts half way through the film with different actors playing....I still don't know. It's deliberately confusing.

Then I watched Eraserhead,  same thing again, hadn't a clue what I was watching. I've read synopses and shit but it didn't help with my enjoyment or understanding of the film.

Not to be disheartened I dove into Mulholland Drive at the behest of my mate who is a Jeremy Clarkson fan (I know). I think he must have been winding me up because aside from a few interesting scenes (I liked the coffee drinking scene and the scary man with the blue key scene) it was more of the same Lynch schtick, i.e intentionally confusing and utterly bereft of narrative. This is when I turned on Lynch in my brain and no amount of Empire magazine praise could convince me to give Lynch a chance again. I will make an exception for The Elephant Man (which I haven't seen) as it's supposed to be good and I think it's handled like a normal film with a beginning, middle and end.

Why won't he explain his films ? Films are not Tracey Emin's bed, they're supposed to make some fucking sense and tell a story and have some value or merit. If he has to be all arty and clever he could at least tell us what he was aiming for. But no, not David, that would be too fucking easy. Fuck David Lynch.

[Urinal Cake]

Eraserhead is just, 'I like sex, I got a girl pregnant, now that she's pregnant, I feel like I can't be with the girl next door dreams since I have to be a father, children they ruin everything!' dressed up in some fancy clothes.[nb]memory is hazy[/nb]

[checkoutgirl]

Eraserhead is just, 'I like sex, I got a girl pregnant, now that she's pregnant, I feel like I can't be with the girl next door dreams since I have to be a father, children they ruin everything!' dressed up in some fancy clothes.[nb]memory is hazy[/nb]

You forgot the bit where he has a mortal fear of his radiator for some reason.

I like the idea of Lynch, a maverick creating stuff that 99% of directors don't seem to be even attempting. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating and if it tastes like ass then that's a problem.

[Pube]

Why won't he explain his films ?

Mulholland Drive:

Spoiler alert

The films begins where it ends. Betty has shot herself and her life flashes before her eyes in her final moments. However, it's a re-imagined, idealised version of her life. Because she's a wannabe actress in LA, it's all mixed up with Hollywood tropes and iconography. Eventually, reality and death catch up with her, and the dream falls apart.

[close]

Lost Highway:

Spoiler alert

He killed his wife and he escapes into a fantasy where she was a wanton whore and it was all her fault. Again, reality catches up in the end.

[close]

Eraserhead:

Spoiler alert

Actually, I dunno.

[close]

[Urinal Cake]

You forgot the bit where he has a mortal fear of his radiator for some reason.

I like the idea of Lynch, a maverick creating stuff that 99% of directors don't seem to be even attempting. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating and if it tastes like ass then that's a problem.

The white lady he goes towards her at the end? I thought it represented death- gassing himself or something. Any way use protection fuckwit!

[BlodwynPig]

Mulholland Drive:

Spoiler alert

The films begins where it ends. Betty has shot herself and her life flashes before her eyes in her final moments. However, it's a re-imagined, idealised version of her life. Because she's a wannabe actress in LA, it's all mixed up with Hollywood tropes and iconography. Eventually, reality and death catch up with her, and the dream falls apart.

[close]

Lost Highway:

Spoiler alert

He killed his wife and he escapes into a fantasy where she was a wanton whore and it was all her fault. Again, reality catches up in the end.

[close]

Eraserhead:

Spoiler alert

Actually, I dunno.

[close]

Lost Highway -

Spoiler alert

I assumed the final scene was him in the electric chair being executed for the murder(s)

[close]

Anyway, art doesn't have to make sense Checkoutgirl, you are completely wrong on that front. Plus, all his films have a neat narrative and are straight forward but told in a dream like or unusual / non-linear way - apart from INLAND EMPIRE, which I think is deeper into the subconscious of the participants.

[acrow]

films aren't poems and shouldn't be opaque and open to endless interpretations.

what an absolute load of wank.

films don't have to be one thing.

[Phil_A]

Lynch isn't the "Spielberg of weird", that's Tim Burton - the weirdo b-movie obsessive who became a hugely powerful figure in mainstream films, but still masquerades as the same film freak outsider he stopped being a long time ago.

I don't buy the idea that Lynch is "Hollywood's pet eccentric" either, how does that even follow? If that's the case why isn't he at the Oscars every year hamming it up for the cameras with the rest of them? Why aren't the major studios falling over themselves to produce his films?

I do think what Lynch does for the most part is a fairly safe, mainstream form of experimentalism. He's certainly not the most avant-garde film-maker out there, but that doesn't invalidate him creatively. He's like the Tom Waits of film, if that makes sense. That said, INLAND EMPIRE is pretty out there even by most director's standards, and the surprisingly hostile, confused reaction it got from many at the time seems to support that. Some people just want their hands held, I guess.

Reducing Eraserhead to a list of plot points is pretty ridiculous, especially for a film that is more concerned with atmosphere, sound and visuals rather than story. Would you do the same with Kubrick? The Shining, that's just some bloke going mental in a hotel and trying to kill his family, and then dying. Rubbish, right?

[checkoutgirl]

films don't have to be one thing.

Yes they do. Do you know what that thing is ? Entertaining. They have to be entertaining. Non linear films with no explanation or coherence do not entertain me so they get on my nerves. Other people are entertained by that shit and will defend it. Other people are entertained by disagreeing with me on a forum without offering anything in the way of opinion and no elaboration.

To each his own.

[Thomas]

I bought a load of David Lynch DVDs recently. I watched Eraserhead first. Enjoyed it for whatever it is and it made me feel physically chilled towards the end.

Interesting that you mention The Shining, Phil_A - if I'm not mistaken, Kubrick made the cast watch Eraserhead before filming so they knew what tone he was aiming for. That's what I liked about Eraserhead. A 'whole lotta,' as Elvis might have said, tone.

And I'm enjoying Lynch's camerawork and soundtracks. As I said in the Spielberg thread, the fulfillment I get from a stationary long take is bizarre.

[mcbpete]

Am I right in thinking/interpreting that Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive & INLAND EMPIRE have pretty much exactly the same story arc, though with different protagonists ? (ps I love all three, that's not me being dismissive of them)

[Canted_Angle]

I do love everything Lynch has done (except maybe Eraserhead). He has an amazing talent for making slow zooms into half open doors absolutely petrifying!

I've recently watched Twin Peaks from start to finish and despite how dark it is it always leaves you feeling somewhat cosy.

He has an uncanny ability to balance so much so well. My advise is to just let his movies wash over you on the first viewing and then come back to them after a while and they seem to just work so well. I think Mulholland Drive is my favorite.

[finley]

There is a lot I admire about Lynch, but I don't see much of it in either Eraserhead or Blue Velvet (although I don't think they are bad films). What I think he excels at is focusing on the subconscious of the characters, which you can see best in Lost Highway or Mulholland Drive. If you accept this as a deliberate storytelling choice, rather than trying to be "weird" or "deliberately confusing", you will enjoy his films more.

On an aesthetic level, some of the shots he comes up with are truly distinctive and the soundtracks (which he mostly works on himself) are always subtle and immersive. The guy fully deserves his reputation as a great filmmaker.

[Blumf]

You fuckers want it neat and tidy, then take The Straight Story, beautiful to look at and easy to follow, yet maintains it's distinct Lynch-ness.

[Noodle Lizard]

Lynch isn't the "Spielberg of weird", that's Tim Burton

Yes, you're very right.  "Scorsese of weird" may have been more fitting, but we were in a Spielberg thread.  All I meant by it was that a lot of people just settle for Lynch, which is a bit of a shame.  It's almost as if they'll force themselves to sit through something like 'Mulholland Dr.' and go "right, that's our dose of weirdness, now we can do similes", which is a shame because I'm sure Lynch himself would be the first to agree that there are plenty of other "weird" filmmakers who are just as worthy of people's attention.

I'm not saying by any means that most people who profess to be David Lynch fans really are David Lynch fans, but his is a name thrown out by particularly tedious cunts (particularly on IMDb) who want to appear smart and knowledgeable about films when everything else about what they say betrays those characteristics.  So as I said, it's less about Lynch himself than the "legend of Lynch", as it were.

Also, writing this has just reminded me how cunty it sounds to refer to him as "Lynch" ... again, not his fault, but come on.