The Criterion Collection

[Arch Stanton]

Originally Posted by Reddington

I've seen Mulholland Drive once, when hit first hit home video. Did not care for it at all. Equally, I found Eraserhead,The Elephant Man, and Dune all a real slog to get through. Seeing only these four films hardly qualifies one as a Lynch expert, but they are no doubt indicative of his style.

To me, his genius is evident in Twin Peaks - but that may be because it was a co-creation. But with Mulholland Drive being trumpeted by most around these parts, it is tempting to give it another go - maybe during the B&N sale.

Dune is barely a David Lynch film tbh, not even worth mentioning. Elephant Man I've never totally loved like a lot of others do - never found it particularly sad or harrowing, but I admire the artistry of the setting, Hurt's performance and the Lynchian flourishes e.g. the smokestacks and factories, evident even in what is not really his script.

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.

[Scottie]

As much as I love Mulholland Drive and I mean I really, really, really, really, really love it, I think Lynch's crown jewel will forever be Twin Peaks. It's so well-crafted and it's so haunting that it's almost impossible to forget.

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Yeah this is where you and I are just going to have to politely agree to disagree.

I don't know if Irreversible is a great movie or not.

But that particular scene is shockingly well done as far as the realistic depiction of

[Show spoiler]rape and all its brutality.

No cuts, no editing of any kind...just one long ten minute take.

Monica Bellucci appears as though she's actually experiencing what's being done to her.

...I'm not exactly sure how much more they could've done to realistically convey the horror of such an event.

I go back and forth on whether or not it needed to be as graphic as it was. On one hand, it does seem like the director was going for gratuitous shock value. On the other hand, if you're going to depict a

[Show spoiler]rape in a movie

then why not depict it for the brutal nightmare that it really is.

No stylization of any kind.

I saw Irreversible a few years back & honestly found it a bit boring. Even that particular scene didn't really shock me or anything.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

Dune is barely a David Lynch film tbh, not even worth mentioning.

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.

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by darkness2918

I saw Irreversible a few years back & honestly found it a bit boring. Even that particular scene didn't really shock me or anything.

I'm the same. I saw it on release and have revisited a number of times since, but the fact that I can't remember much about it outside of the rape and the extinguisher says everything about how much of an impact the movie has had on me. Noe has always struck me as a bit of a phoney.

[pedromvu]

So just out of curiosity decided to try the collection matcher feature here on the site, and turns out my highest matching percentage with a fellow CC forum poster is Andrew13 with 42%, quite high I believe considering he has 643 titles.

I am sure someone has to have a higher percentage with someone over here though, since some collect every title in the CC.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by Knaldskalle

Two takes, actually. They move and the camera cuts to an opposite angle about 3/4 of the way through. I saw it a couple of weeks ago for the first time.

I didn't like it, but I didn't think the infamous scene was "that bad". Noe clearly attempts to manipulate the emotions of the audience and pulls no punches (pardon the pun) to achieve what he wants. The problem is that he's so obvious about it that it takes me right out of the suspension of disbelief and I become very aware that it's a movie I'm watching and aware of what it is I'm supposed to be feeling. I also didn't like the "precognition"/destiny element of the story, that seemed needless and in some respect relieves the characters of responsibility for their actions (and reactions). This in a movie where the actions are so drastic and with such horrific consequences all around.

"Noe clearly attempts to manipulate the emotions of the audience and pulls no punches (pardon the pun) to achieve what he wants. The problem is that he's so obvious about it that it takes me right out of the suspension of disbelief and I become very aware that it's a movie I'm watching and aware of what it is I'm supposed to be feeling."

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?

It's a brutal, horrific rape scene where a woman is being violated in the worst possible way. I haven't seen it in many years, but I don't remember there being any music in the scene, or fancy editing or dramatic camera movements or any other stylized cinematic technique that made it seem as though the director was trying to tell the audience what they should be feeling.

It may have been too graphic, in fact it probably was.

But that kind of stuff actually does happen in the real world. Actually much worse things happen in the real world.

...read a story about sexual violence in African conflict zones if you don't believe me.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by Reddington

I've seen Mulholland Drive once, when hit first hit home video. Did not care for it at all. Equally, I found Eraserhead,The Elephant Man, and Dune all a real slog to get through. Seeing only these four films hardly qualifies one as a Lynch expert, but they are no doubt indicative of his style.

To me, his genius is evident in Twin Peaks - but that may be because it was a co-creation. But with Mulholland Drive being trumpeted by most around these parts, it is tempting to give it another go - maybe during the B&N sale.

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

Mulholland Drive is about as weird as weird movies get.

I guess it's not so strange that someone said they didn't like it.

...it is one of THOSE kind of films.

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

"Noe clearly attempts to manipulate the emotions of the audience and pulls no punches (pardon the pun) to achieve what he wants. The problem is that he's so obvious about it that it takes me right out of the suspension of disbelief and I become very aware that it's a movie I'm watching and aware of what it is I'm supposed to be feeling."

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?

It's a brutal, horrific rape scene where a woman is being violated in the worst possible way. I haven't seen it in many years, but I don't remember there being any music in the scene, or fancy editing or dramatic camera movements or any other stylized cinematic technique that made it seem as though the director was trying to tell the audience what they should be feeling.

It may have been too graphic, in fact it probably was.

But that kind of stuff actually does happen in the real world.

...read a story about sexual violence in African conflict zones if you don't believe me.

This reminds me of City of Life and Death, pretty great film, but once they go into the raping it is a bit hard to watch all the horrors that happen, although on this it is easier to connect that this is a representation of what actually happened at the time on that place.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

This reminds me of City of Life and Death, pretty great film, but once they go into the raping it is a bit hard to watch all the horrors that happen, although on this it is easier to connect that this is a representation of what actually happened at the time on that place.

*Note to self...add City of Life and Death to the list of films that I will never ever watch.*

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by D2Girls

I really didn't like Mulholland Dr.
Extremely disappointing movie for me.
I'm probably going to sell my Criterion blu of it, even.

I'm not a big fan of David Lynch like everyone else is. But I do think Mulholland Dr. is probably his best film along with The Elephant Man. I would keep it and watch it again in the future. Maybe you were expecting something else and you need to re-watch it.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

So just out of curiosity decided to try the collection matcher feature here on the site, and turns out my highest matching percentage with a fellow CC forum poster is Andrew13 with 42%, quite high I believe considering he has 643 titles.

I am sure someone has to have a higher percentage with someone over here though, since some collect every title in the CC.

I have a 43% match with NoirFan, who appears in this thread ever so often.

The collection statistics tools on this site are pretty fun.

Vincent Price is at the top of the Cast/Crew listing for my Blu-ray collection, since I own 34 movies starring that actor...and I've got four more Vincent Price titles pre-ordered for shipment over the next couple of months.

The Film Noir and Western genres are "strongly overrepresented" in my collection.

The 1980s is the predominant decade in my collection, since 22.3% of my movies were released during that decade.

[shadedpain4]

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.

If you're going to discuss details about a film that those who haven't seen it wouldn't know, spoiler the details. That's all.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

If you're going to discuss details about a film that those who haven't seen it wouldn't know, spoiler the details. That's all.

So basically any discussion about any scene in every film that's ever been made needs a spoiler tag?

...

[Show spoiler]got it.

[Reddington]

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 guess it's not so strange that someone said they didn't like it.

...it is one of THOSE kind of films.

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?

[Ray Jackson]

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 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?

[Edward J Grug III]

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.

Thanks Ray, I appreciate and agree with you on that point.

I think it doesn't matter how old a film/show/book is, there are plenty of people out there who haven't seen it. Why not expend a very tiny bit of effort to potentially allow someone to enjoy the film/whatever as intended.

(In this specific case, I will never, ever watch Irreversible, just that's my feeling in general)

[Reddington]

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?

I have not. Will be soon as I've just picked up a copy of the recently-released Witness, which is absolutely one of my all-time favourites. I'd rather hoped it would get a Criterion release, but happy to have it on BD. Anyway, a Peter Weir double-bill on the near horizon. I'll let you know what I think.

[ShellOilJunior]

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

[SlickDamian]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

While this whole discussion is a little odd, this statement seems to indicate you think all films are fictional and full of acting?

Groundbreaking argument, guys.