David Lynch’s ambitious, sprawling, digital-to-the-max 2006 feature flopped in theaters in 2006 but has stubbornly refused to disappear from the conversation.
As I noted when I re-watched this a few years back, it's hilarious that Lynch went to the trouble of renting a Panavision Panaflex camera for this shoot only to use it as a prop for the film Irons is directing.
The first time I saw this movie was in the very early days of streaming and it was on a bad connection and I could barely tell what I was looking at.
The second time I saw it was this restoration on the big screen last year, and now I could tell what I was looking at but couldn't understand most of what was happening.
At some point here in the next couple of months, I'll watch the Blu-Ray I just purchased. Perhaps that time will be the charm?
I should note that this is my least favorite Lynch film just below Wild at Heart. I just saw Wild on the big screen (i'm up to six out of his ten films seen theatrically now) and confirmed that I dislike it just as much now as I always have, so the odds are not necessarily in Inland's favor.
The third time was kind of the charm for me with this one, though this is still in the back half of my Lynch rankings. It's interesting to see Wild at Heart's slow drift down the charts since winning the Palme, and I kind of get it. Obviously, the Cage factor has great appeal to me. (I love both his performance and Dern's.) But I feel like that air starts to leak out of that movie at a certain point. Still, it has one of my favorite scenes anywhere in the Lynch filmography. ("Sailor Ripley, you get me some music on that radio this instant! I mean it!") I dunno. I don't think there's any director whose individual films have made my opinions ping-pong quite like Lynch's.
I absolutely loved Wild at Heart when it came out — saw it at least twice in theaters, and at least twice on VHS — but it tumbled quite a bit when I finally rewatched it a few years ago. Still enjoyable, but more a collection of cool things than a fully realized movie IMHO.
That said it was a reminder of how great Sherilyn Fenn is and makes me wish she'd gotten better opportunities after Twin Peaks.
Same. I do still like Wild at Heart, and have great memories of watching it on breaks when we showed it at the theater I worked at when I was a teenager. (Funny story: Only four of our eight houses could handle 2:35-1, and the four narrow theaters that couldn't would simply cut off the sides of the frame. So when Wild at Heart was moved to one of the narrow houses-- over my objections-- the title credit read ILD AT HEAR.) But it's been interesting to see how the film's reputation has floundered in relation to stuff like Lost Highway and Twin Peaks: FWWM, despite it winning the Palme.
I will say, I struggle to imagine being a Lynch fan and actively disliking Wild at Heart. It's got SO MUCH going for it. The car crash scene alone is worth the price of admission
He's one of those filmmakers where his lesser efforts are preferable to so many people's best, but the films of his that I love hit me on at least some sort of emotional level and Wild is all surface to me.
The car crash is definitely the highlight, that and the robbery.
speaking of great scenes: I hope there's a re-release of Industrial Symphony at some point just so I can have the intro phone call between Cage and Dern
A filmmaking partner I hung with in the mid-00s hated this movie so much it pushed me away from ever checking it out. I feel like I might be in the right frame to appreciate this as much as I can and this has pushed me toward it. TP: The Return really increased my acceptance-bordering-on-joy with Lynch's manner of denial.
I was one of the faithful that saw this film in the theatre. I remember it being a difficult watch at the time, but it has lingered with me over the years. (As most Lynch does)
I once heard this film described as “Mullholland Drive, if found behind a dumpster at Hollywood and Vine” and that feels accurate to me. Its appeal (and scares) for me feel similar to the cursed video in “Ringu” and the forbidden room in “Pulse”. It feels like a haunted film. Something you shouldn’t be watching and the technology used to make it connects us to that feeling.
Sure, it has a cast of big stars and is made by a big director, but all that makes it feel like it an artifact found from another dimension.
I was going to include this detail but I couldn't track down the original quote. I know someone once described the final stretch of Mulholland Dr. as the "dub remix" version. This kind of feels like the chopped and screwed mix of some Lynch movie you've never seen.
I was able to see this twice when it came out in theaters and I loved the first time and then even more the second time. I still don't really 'know' what is going on plot-wise but to me, that's part of the magic for this one - it's the logical endpoint of Lynch pushing the "interpret it how you want to" feeling of so much of his work and works very similarly to Eraserhead in that way.
Visually, I have never understood people complaining about this movie - to me, it looks pretty amazing. Is it 'cinematic' in the way that, say, Wild At Heart is? Nope - this thing is indeed murky. But that is obv. intentional and, I think, even a reflection of what's going on it it, narratively and thematically. Also, this looks so much like so much of Lynch's visual art, something that basically stopped happening in his movies after Eraserhead - it's absolutely Lynch Uncut.
I'm in the midst of rewatching "The Return" right now and was struck by how there are parts that look a lot like this - Lynch clearly loves this visual palette and in that, he finds a way to incorporate it without alienating people. (Our expectations for how things look may have also drifted since 2006.)
Still need to watch this — was hoping the theatrical release last year would get to Portland but I don't think it did.
But I definitely feel your side comment about being interested in rewatching minor works in a director's oeuvre — I occasionally feel bad about spending time tracking down third-rate Hitchcock (or rewatching second-rate Hitchcock) when there are so many "better" movies to see, but in the end I just really like his vibe.
Watched the re-release of this last year in theaters--my reaction was the same as Homer Simpson had watching Twin Peaks. "Brilliant! I have absolutely no idea what's going on."
I watched this at the Brattle Theater premiere? and remember thinking it was the scariest movie I had ever seen, and a really great mind-f of a movie. I can't wait to re-watch to see how it feels 20 years later.
My wife and I also caught it at the Brattle! I remember not being able to follow a lot of what was going on, but being creeped out by almost everything. It sounds like it's time for a revisit.
Just watched this for the first time, courtesy of Netflix's soon-to-be-discontinued mail-in DVD service. Genuinely chilling stuff, and the home-video aspect makes it even creepier -- making it feel less like a manufactured entertainment, and more of a haunted document somehow.
As I noted when I re-watched this a few years back, it's hilarious that Lynch went to the trouble of renting a Panavision Panaflex camera for this shoot only to use it as a prop for the film Irons is directing.
The first time I saw this movie was in the very early days of streaming and it was on a bad connection and I could barely tell what I was looking at.
The second time I saw it was this restoration on the big screen last year, and now I could tell what I was looking at but couldn't understand most of what was happening.
At some point here in the next couple of months, I'll watch the Blu-Ray I just purchased. Perhaps that time will be the charm?
I should note that this is my least favorite Lynch film just below Wild at Heart. I just saw Wild on the big screen (i'm up to six out of his ten films seen theatrically now) and confirmed that I dislike it just as much now as I always have, so the odds are not necessarily in Inland's favor.
The third time was kind of the charm for me with this one, though this is still in the back half of my Lynch rankings. It's interesting to see Wild at Heart's slow drift down the charts since winning the Palme, and I kind of get it. Obviously, the Cage factor has great appeal to me. (I love both his performance and Dern's.) But I feel like that air starts to leak out of that movie at a certain point. Still, it has one of my favorite scenes anywhere in the Lynch filmography. ("Sailor Ripley, you get me some music on that radio this instant! I mean it!") I dunno. I don't think there's any director whose individual films have made my opinions ping-pong quite like Lynch's.
I absolutely loved Wild at Heart when it came out — saw it at least twice in theaters, and at least twice on VHS — but it tumbled quite a bit when I finally rewatched it a few years ago. Still enjoyable, but more a collection of cool things than a fully realized movie IMHO.
That said it was a reminder of how great Sherilyn Fenn is and makes me wish she'd gotten better opportunities after Twin Peaks.
Same. I do still like Wild at Heart, and have great memories of watching it on breaks when we showed it at the theater I worked at when I was a teenager. (Funny story: Only four of our eight houses could handle 2:35-1, and the four narrow theaters that couldn't would simply cut off the sides of the frame. So when Wild at Heart was moved to one of the narrow houses-- over my objections-- the title credit read ILD AT HEAR.) But it's been interesting to see how the film's reputation has floundered in relation to stuff like Lost Highway and Twin Peaks: FWWM, despite it winning the Palme.
I will say, I struggle to imagine being a Lynch fan and actively disliking Wild at Heart. It's got SO MUCH going for it. The car crash scene alone is worth the price of admission
He's one of those filmmakers where his lesser efforts are preferable to so many people's best, but the films of his that I love hit me on at least some sort of emotional level and Wild is all surface to me.
The car crash is definitely the highlight, that and the robbery.
speaking of great scenes: I hope there's a re-release of Industrial Symphony at some point just so I can have the intro phone call between Cage and Dern
A filmmaking partner I hung with in the mid-00s hated this movie so much it pushed me away from ever checking it out. I feel like I might be in the right frame to appreciate this as much as I can and this has pushed me toward it. TP: The Return really increased my acceptance-bordering-on-joy with Lynch's manner of denial.
I was one of the faithful that saw this film in the theatre. I remember it being a difficult watch at the time, but it has lingered with me over the years. (As most Lynch does)
I once heard this film described as “Mullholland Drive, if found behind a dumpster at Hollywood and Vine” and that feels accurate to me. Its appeal (and scares) for me feel similar to the cursed video in “Ringu” and the forbidden room in “Pulse”. It feels like a haunted film. Something you shouldn’t be watching and the technology used to make it connects us to that feeling.
Sure, it has a cast of big stars and is made by a big director, but all that makes it feel like it an artifact found from another dimension.
I was going to include this detail but I couldn't track down the original quote. I know someone once described the final stretch of Mulholland Dr. as the "dub remix" version. This kind of feels like the chopped and screwed mix of some Lynch movie you've never seen.
Sorry "dub remix version of the first part."
I do like that description.
I was able to see this twice when it came out in theaters and I loved the first time and then even more the second time. I still don't really 'know' what is going on plot-wise but to me, that's part of the magic for this one - it's the logical endpoint of Lynch pushing the "interpret it how you want to" feeling of so much of his work and works very similarly to Eraserhead in that way.
Visually, I have never understood people complaining about this movie - to me, it looks pretty amazing. Is it 'cinematic' in the way that, say, Wild At Heart is? Nope - this thing is indeed murky. But that is obv. intentional and, I think, even a reflection of what's going on it it, narratively and thematically. Also, this looks so much like so much of Lynch's visual art, something that basically stopped happening in his movies after Eraserhead - it's absolutely Lynch Uncut.
I'm in the midst of rewatching "The Return" right now and was struck by how there are parts that look a lot like this - Lynch clearly loves this visual palette and in that, he finds a way to incorporate it without alienating people. (Our expectations for how things look may have also drifted since 2006.)
Still need to watch this — was hoping the theatrical release last year would get to Portland but I don't think it did.
But I definitely feel your side comment about being interested in rewatching minor works in a director's oeuvre — I occasionally feel bad about spending time tracking down third-rate Hitchcock (or rewatching second-rate Hitchcock) when there are so many "better" movies to see, but in the end I just really like his vibe.
Watched the re-release of this last year in theaters--my reaction was the same as Homer Simpson had watching Twin Peaks. "Brilliant! I have absolutely no idea what's going on."
I watched this at the Brattle Theater premiere? and remember thinking it was the scariest movie I had ever seen, and a really great mind-f of a movie. I can't wait to re-watch to see how it feels 20 years later.
My wife and I also caught it at the Brattle! I remember not being able to follow a lot of what was going on, but being creeped out by almost everything. It sounds like it's time for a revisit.
Just watched this for the first time, courtesy of Netflix's soon-to-be-discontinued mail-in DVD service. Genuinely chilling stuff, and the home-video aspect makes it even creepier -- making it feel less like a manufactured entertainment, and more of a haunted document somehow.