The Criterion Collection

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I'm not so sure that a second viewing would make much difference.

Mulholland Drive is about as weird as weird movies get.

I humbly disagree. MD is definitely a film that deserves at least a second viewing. When you watch it again with the knowledge of how it unravels after the opening of the box, you make the connections for many of the scenes and characters, and allowing for some level of dream-logic, it comes across a more comprehensible and richer experience. I disliked MD when I first watched it, but on a couple of re-watches I think it's in most part an excellent film.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I humbly disagree. MD is definitely a film that deserves at least a second viewing. When you watch it again with the knowledge of how it unravels after the opening of the box, you make the connections for many of the scenes and characters, and allowing for some level of dream-logic, it comes across a more comprehensible and richer experience. I disliked MD when I first watched it, but on a couple of re-watches I think it's in most part an excellent film.

I can't really disagree with that.

But then again, some movies you just don't relate to, no matter how many times you watch them.

You couldn't pay me enough to watch Freddy Got Fingered again.

...there's no amount of money.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by ray jackson

i can't really disagree with that.

But then again, some movies you just don't relate to, no matter how many times you watch them.

You couldn't pay me enough to watch freddy got fingered again.

...there's no amount of money.

$5?

[Knaldskalle]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

You make some interesting points, but I'm not totally sure I get where you're coming from when you say Noe is too obvious about manipulating the audience's emotions with the rape scene.

How else should he have done it?

I'm going to have to put a chunk of this in a spoiler tag, just in case...

[Show spoiler]It's quite clear that the rape scene is the "center piece" of the movie. It's the pivot point to the second half and the explanation for the things we've seen up to that point. By the time the rape actually is shown we already know what has happened due to the reverse chronology. Just before the rape scene there's the scene where we see her battered face as she's carried into the ambulance and a guy says "somebody raped a wh*re".

On top of that we have the preceding violent scenes which (we realize, as the movie progresses) are the friends' search for revenge. It's in this part that the emotional manipulations take place, they build up to the crescendo that is the rape scene.

That scene is left "raw" and free from overt manipulations (it probably helps strengthen its impact that it's the just about first time in the movie that the camera isn't swirling around), but by then you're clearly already supposed to be upset and your knowing what is going to happen makes everything in that scene have a heightened emotional impact.

Now, a good director will make that emotional manipulation happen without you noticing it, but Noe made me feel keenly aware of the manipulations and the fact that I was watching a movie. That will inevitably detract from my experience of the movie.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I can actually think of a few films that I didn't like on the first viewing, where the second viewing was completely different and I ended up loving it.

But Mulholland Drive is pretty out there.

...I might give it a second chance, because you never know.

Have you watched Picnic At Hanging Rock yet?

Actually, a second viewing probably helps at least some people understand it better. I never had an issue "figuring" it out, because the blue is right there in the opening shot.

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by Reddington

Fair point, Ray. I'm not really from the school of "second chances" when it comes to film anyway. I've always mostly considered one's gut reaction trumps any supposed appreciation that may be developed through multiple viewings or intellectual analysis; if you don't like it, you don't like it. But throw in the odd bit of peer pressure from the sages round here, and never say never, right?

I am with you about gut reaction, that is how I rate all the movies I see, but sometimes the intellectual analysis comes in the first watch if something is throwing me out of a movie and I need to justify it to someone.

As for second viewing chances, I get how it is a problem when one is trying to watch all the great films ever made, there is not enough time unfortunately, but I think it is a fact that second viewings can change our appreciation of a film, people change over time, their tastes get more specific or broaden, our expectations affect our reactions, there are too many factors and it has happened to me too many times to not accept it, even if I too would like to just see each film once and be done with it if I didn't like it enough.

[Arch Stanton]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

The best description I've read of Mulholland Drive is Raymond Chandler meets Alice in Wonderland.

Sunset Boulevard meets The Wizard of Oz would be mine!

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This hurts my heart, because Dune is my favorite David Lynch film to date. I know that everyone involved has issues with the theatrical version, but I think that it is a quintessential science fiction film with fantastic visuals.

Do you think? I wish I could enjoy it tbh, I just find it a tedious slog with horrible visuals and an impossible script.

[CriterionBlues]

I think a better comparison is Sunset Blvd meets Persona, directed by David Lynch. I can understand someone not reacting well on a first viewing, and normally I'm not the type to say "watch it again." As said above, gut reactions are important. But Mulholland Drive is so deeply layered that you do see a lot in the second viewing. It wouldn't hurt for you to skim one of the Internet theories as to what happened to inform your second viewing.

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by CriterionBlues

I think a better comparison is Sunset Blvd meets Persona.

We looked at films about filmmaking in one of my MA semesters and the whole thing was bookended by screenings of Sunset Blvd. and Mulholland Dr. It's been suggested that Mulholland Dr. is named as a nod to the Wilder film.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This hurts my heart, because Dune is my favorite David Lynch film to date. I know that everyone involved has issues with the theatrical version

If you want to see some real issues, check out the extended version!

[The Great Owl]

I really cannot stand "click-bait" links on Facebook, and I generally hide them from my news feed as soon as they show up.

This particular Criterion-related stock photo image put a smile on my face this morning, though...



I'm not sure what Monica Vitti's photo has to do with sarcasm as a measure of intelligence, but it's nice to see her photos under any circumstances.

[filmmusic]

If it is sarcasm towards someone's self, I agree.
But if it's sarcasm towards others I would say it's a bit mean and that person has some problems that he has to solve.
ESPECIALLY when it's addressed to people you don't know and on the internet!
(I mean, I would be a bit more lenient towards people who make sarcastic remarks on longtime close friends etc.)

[Banned User]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I can never seem to predict when someone's going to get upset about the lack of spoiler tags.

I mean does anyone not know that Rosebud was the

[Show spoiler]sled?

...but I try be respectful.

...though I don't always succeed.

[Show spoiler]William Randolph Hearst knew what Rosebud was and it wasn't a sled.

[Show spoiler]**edit** Take it no one got this. In case you didn't know Rosebud was rumored to be Hearst's nickname for a certain body part on his Mistress

As far as the other topic" IMO second viewings can very well make a poorly received film move up a notch or two. I know I've seen a few films where the first viewing left me cold or uncaring about a film only for it to become a masterpiece in my mind on a second viewing. Whether it is going into the first viewing with the wrong expectations or in the wrong frame of mind or simply because a lot subtleties went unnoticed until after viewing the ending or the final destination of the characters and/or plot.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I can never seem to predict when someone's going to get upset about the lack of spoiler tags.

I mean does anyone not know that Rosebud was the

[Show spoiler]sled?

...but I try be respectful.

...though I don't always succeed.

He's dead.
He's really a guy.
It's a sled.
He's his father.
She's her daughter and her sister.
It's a cookbook!

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

90s Lynch is where it's at, IMO. From Fire Walk With Me onwards it's just totally uncompromising and all regard for the mainstream is gone.

Well, except for The Straight Story...

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by jayembee

He's dead.
He's really a guy.
It's a sled.
He's his father.
She's her daughter and her sister.
It's a cookbook!

El Diablo!!!!

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This hurts my heart, because Dune is my favorite David Lynch film to date. I know that everyone involved has issues with the theatrical version, but I think that it is a quintessential science fiction film with fantastic visuals.

Can't agree. I think it's just ghastly. Just about everything in that film is completely wrong-headed. Worst part about it is that it has a phenomenal cast overall, and so many great actors are wasted in badly directed performances.

(Seriously, you cast Linda Hunt, a year after she's won an Oscar for her extraordinary performance in The Year of Living Dangerously, and she's reduced to a single line -- "I am...the housekeeper" -- and have her deliver it in the corniest, low-budget-horror-film way possible?)

The theatrical version was bad; the extended TV version was worse, because there was more of it.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by CriterionBlues

I think a better comparison is Sunset Blvd meets Persona, directed by David Lynch. I can understand someone not reacting well on a first viewing, and normally I'm not the type to say "watch it again." As said above, gut reactions are important. But Mulholland Drive is so deeply layered that you do see a lot in the second viewing. It wouldn't hurt for you to skim one of the Internet theories as to what happened to inform your second viewing.

Persona is the most obvious influence to Mulholland Drive imo.

I think of it as Persona meets Blue Velvet/Lost Highway.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Persona is the most obvious influence to Mulholland Drive imo.

I think of it as Persona meets Blue Velvet/Lost Highway.

I think MD is more similar to Altman's Three Women. Have you seen that, Ray? If not, you should.

[Scottie]

Let's just say that Mulholland Drive is a hodgepodge of many films with psychological elements to them.