Quote:
Originally posted by Bones
its just a david lynch movie...its one of those things where you throw enough shit at a wall, some of its going to stick.
he could make a 4 hour movie of a clown masturbating and people would read into it so much it would be about 1400 different things that are SOOOOOOOOOO deep.
honestly, this was the first movie that i ever watched.
sat 2 1/2 hours through it and afterwards, i still had no idea what was going on.
|
Simply not true. This film is very well plotted, and has a very definite meaning. Admittedly that meaning is purposely obscured, but thats the whole fun of the film. Trying to figure it out. Have watched it three times so far, and each time I got more and more out of it. Totally plan to watch it again!
Admittedly, this movie is not for everyone. Now I don't mean that in a pretentious "you're to stupid to understand" kind of way. But rather some people enjoy this type of movie, others do not. I love a puzzle.
Now, i am not the sort of person who reads too much into things. I am always aware of this. I despise all of Warhols "films" becasue to me they are just a pretentious twat taking the piss out of his audience. What I hate even more is the fact that dumbass "arty" (read: pretentious) types enjoy reading so much into a 6 hour long film of a skyscraper, claiming that Warhol is "reinterpreting the role of film as a visual mediem". Bullshit!
That being said, I could write a hell of a lot about my interpretation of Mulholland Drive. the film is so incredibly dense, every single tiny detail has some bearing on the overall "whole". however, I am not reading too much into it. Lynch has obviously placed all of these things here. I certaintly wouldn't give the credit to my feeble immagination!