Mulholland Drive

[dissention]

Originally Posted by GypsySorcerer

A gold star for you today.

Not for long, Jonathan Todd will de-star me eventually.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Serrart

As far as I know Dadaism according to Tzara's manifesto was meant to be an attack to society's conventions. Personally I wouldn't say Mulholland Drive is dadaist, but probably it wanted to create a sense of uneasiness in the audience. Not all the directors feel the urge to nest their public, sometimes a confrontational relationship can be very interesting too, I think.

Romy

Dadaism wasn't simply an attack on how intellectually stunted society became, it was also an attack on how the arts became intellectually repressed as well; Dadaists didn't like the rigidity that was prevalent in the arts. The entire principle behind Dadaism was to deliberately confuse people to try to get them to think and if Mulholland Drive isn't close to Dadaism, I don't know what is.

[Serrart]

Originally Posted by dissention

Of course he can do different things in his movies that challenge the audience, but doing those things well is an entirely different ballgame. He certainly didn't pull it off with Mulholland Drive. I'm not about to congratulate him simply because he did something outside of the norm in terms of filmmaking, because the end result came out half-baked. I'll reserve my praise for something like Greenaway's Tulse Luper Suitcase; something that is completely different and original and done well, not put together in a slapdash manner for those who think they're in the loop to praise.

I can assure you that I 'm not in the loop to praise anyone, especially David Lynch (I'm still laughing for most of Twin Peaks, Fire With me, Lost Highway while I loved The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and more recently The Straight Story). The fact that it didn't give anything to you doesn't mean that it can't offer some input to others.

Originally Posted by dissention

And I'd disagree. If we want to look at Alexander Payne as a "new director" that tries to fulfill his audiences desires with intellectualism, by all means do so. He makes movies that are funny on an intellectual level (Citizen Ruth proved as much), but he doesn't permeate his movies with an air of pretentiousness like David Lynch does. I wouldn't confuse intellectualism in films with self-congratulatory backslapping, but that's just me.

What does it mean to be funny on an intellectual level? To let some (or many) feel intelligent enough to appreciate it? You can make a funny movie or not, using certain languages or not, but the ''aren't we all enjoying this small feast'' kind of feeling is becoming a genre already.

Romy

[Serrart]

Originally Posted by dissention

Dadaism wasn't simply an attack on how intellectually stunted society became, it was also an attack on how the arts became intellectually repressed as well; Dadaists didn't like the rigidity that was prevalent in the arts. The entire principle behind Dadaism was to deliberately confuse people to try to get them to think and if Mulholland Drive isn't close to Dadaism, I don't know what is.

Because Lynch doesn't seem to me a director who loves form for the sake of the form, he tranforms it in a meaning (whatever could be). I'd say he's closer to surrealists, but there's also a lot of Nouvelle Vague in his style, and baroquisms and pop art, so maybe he could be a dadaistsurrealistgodardcopierfellinlovewithCocteauandflabbergastedbywarholwithoutforgettingfellinian dbunuelandfeelfreetoaddmore director

Romy

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Serrart

I can assure you that I 'm not in the loop to praise anyone, especially David Lynch (I'm still laughing for most of Twin Peaks, Fire With me, Lost Highway while I loved The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and more recently The Straight Story). The fact that it didn't give anything to you doesn't mean that it can't offer some input to others.

No one is in the loop to praise Mulholland Drive for much beyond the most topical of things because no one knows what it's about, they're simply either guessing or blowing hot air up our collective asses. It can offer all the input it wants, but that doesn't negate the fact that no one understands it but David Lynch. We can make all the assumptions and guesses we want, that's what makes it a rather interesting film in the first place.

I agree with you in regards to his other movies, however. I also like Wild At Heart a lot.

Originally Posted by Serrart

What does it mean to be funny on an intellectual level? To let some (or many) feel intelligent enough to appreciate it? You can make a funny movie or not, using certain languages or not, but the ''aren't we all enjoying this small feast'' kind of feeling is becoming a genre already.

What does it mean to be funny on an intellectual level? Jokes and wit that don't deal with flatulence, for one thing. It doesn't take much more than that.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Serrart

Because Lynch doesn't seem to me a director who loves form for the sake of the form, he tranforms it in a meaning (whatever could be). I'd say he's closer to surrealists,

Dadaism greatly influenced surrealism, so we may be getting somewhere.

Originally Posted by Serrart

so maybe he could be a dadaistsurrealistgodardcopierfellinlovewithCocteauandflabbergastedbywarholwithoutforgettingfellinian dbunuelandfeelfreetoaddmore director

I could agree with that.

[Serrart]

Originally Posted by dissention

What does it mean to be funny on an intellectual level? Jokes and wit that don't deal with flatulence, for one thing. It doesn't take much more than that.

What's the fun then? J/K

Romy

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Serrart

What's the fun then? J/K

Romy

The fun is in knowing that without fart and piss jokes, Adam Sandler wouldn't have a career.

[Serrart]

Originally Posted by dissention

The fun is in knowing that without fart and piss jokes, Adam Sandler wouldn't have a career.

Hey, he's just become the favourite of one of snobbiest Italian critics for Spanglish. He's a genius and we still haven't realized it. David would be really pleased.

Romy

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Serrart

Hey, he's just become the favourite of one of snobbiest Italian critics for Spanglish. He's a genius and we still haven't realized it. David would be really pleased.

Romy

*shudders*

I can't get over his voice, Romy, it drives me to drink. Sounds half-cocked and retarded at the same time.

If he's a genius, I was Van Gogh in a former life.

[amber]

Originally Posted by Serrart

Hey, he's just become the favourite of one of snobbiest Italian critics for Spanglish. He's a genius and we still haven't realized it. David would be really pleased.

Romy

Well, Tea is in Spanglish, so that's different.

[Serrart]

Originally Posted by dissention

*shudders*

I can't get over his voice, Romy, it drives me to drink. Sounds half-cocked and retarded at the same time.

If he's a genius, I was Van Gogh in a former life.

I know, he has the same effect on me, except for Punch Drunk Love which I liked; Paul Thomas Anderson can make me watch anyone in his movies.

Romy

[Serrart]

Originally Posted by amber

Well, Tea is in Spanglish, so that's different.

This Italian critic who's really strict usually, loved her even more than Sandler and said her performance is better than Meg Ryan's in When Harry Met Sally.

Romy

[amber]

Originally Posted by Serrart

This Italian critic who's really strict usually, loved her even more than Sandler and said her performance is better than Meg Ryan's in When Harry Met Sally.

Romy

Well, she's always really good. I'm not suprised.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Serrart

This Italian critic who's really strict usually, loved her even more than Sandler and said her performance is better than Meg Ryan's in When Harry Met Sally.

Romy

Did you see her in that atrocious Nicholas Cage movie The Family Man? She was *fantastic* in it.