BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


David Lynch's INLAND EMPIRE

 
  

Page: 12(3)4

 
 
PatrickMM
21:29 / 11.03.07
I've gone and done it, here's the spoilers thread. As for MD, I see it as something of a greatest hits album. It's a great film, and my second favorite Lynch, but it's less groundbreaking than his other work. But, it's a great intro for new viewers because it contains elements from all the periods of Lynch's work, and isn't as esoteric as Inland or Lost Highway. But, I think it was the end of an era, and I'm glad he went in this more abstract direction for Inland Empire. Mulholland Dr. felt like it was surging to break out of the restrictions of traditonal filmmaking, and Inland Empire is that glorious burst into the abstract and pure subjective.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
23:11 / 11.03.07

Sorry Boboss, yes, I meant Mulholland was mediocre within canon.

I call it mediocre because it is probably the least adventurous film he's made to date, he was working very much within his comfort zone. There was little in Mulholland Drive that hadn't been well explored previously, particularly in Twin Peaks and Fire Walk With Me. This was disappointing for a director so well known for his originality and experimentation.

As I said, I'm a much greater fan of The Straight Story. With that film Lynch was doing something against type, working within constraints (making a Disney film!), and so forcing himself into creating something that was very unique and couldn't have been conceived by any other mind.

I think INLAND EMPIRE, leans more towards the latter as he is experimenting within stylistic constraints here, those imposed by Digital Video. Although DV has obviously also allowed him greater production freedoms (which is probably why the film is three hours long).
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
23:27 / 11.03.07
No. The film is three hours long because everything happens REALLY SLOWLY. Anyone else, given a shooting script (had such a thing existed), would have made that film about ninety minutes. Which would have been balls, to be honest. Lynch uses time like Swans used to. The menace is all in the build-up.

All being well, I'm going to see it again tomorrow. It's that good.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
09:52 / 12.03.07

Patrick, Mulholland Drive could be seen as the end of an era if, as Lynch has been saying in interviews, he's never going back to celluloid now. It may be his last 35mm film.

But, now he's only releasing a film every four years, each film could be regarded as an era in and of itself.

re: spoilers. Is there really anything you can say about the plot of INLAND EMPIRE that might spoil it for a first time viewer? It's possible to actually see the whole film without spoiling the plot
 
 
Mon Oncle Ignatius
17:30 / 12.03.07
In the spirit of enthusing which Stoat channels above, I will add in my own GoshWowSenseOfWonder moment. Inland Empire is actually awe-inspiring, never mind being just awesome.

Ever since Stoatie and I went to see it on Friday - and we had to go and see it the day it opened, as it seemed right not to wait a mere few days for the cheap night - I've been buttonholing everyone I know and telling them just how great a film it is.

Twig: re: spoilers. Is there really anything you can say about the plot of INLAND EMPIRE that might spoil it for a first time viewer? It's possible to actually see the whole film without spoiling the plot

I for one am really glad I didn't know about certain bits before I went to see the film, as it made them so much weirder. Obviously, I won't say which bits here, but the example which immediately springs to mind would have been ruined if I'd read the Guardian review which showed them in a nice big picture.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
20:57 / 12.03.07
I just saw it for a second time, and it was equally amazing, though more confusing. Mind you, I did also discover that one of my work colleagues makes wicked hash fudge, so my judgment is probably more than a little impaired.

Whatever else one can say without fear of spoilage, Laura Dern is one fucking incredible actress.
 
 
ghadis
08:58 / 13.03.07
Saw it last night and was blown away. Fucking amazing wonderful film. Lynch's best i'd say. It's easy to see it as the third part of a trilogy that started with Lost Highway and continued with Mullholland Drive, in fact it's easy to see it as the latest part of one film just as Burroughs talked about his novels. Haven't got many thoughts around it yet but like LH and MD i'm veering between joining up the many imaginary dots and actually thinking the whole think is really just as simple as an M.R James short story. Thats the genius if Lynch's films. They're like one of those magic eye pictures. But a magic eye picture that fucks you over everytime you think you've got it.

Laura Dern is fantastic and should have won many many oscars if they were good enough for her. Also, the Bus to Palona scene has shot to number one in my best film moment ever.
 
 
rizla mission
13:07 / 13.03.07
It's reassuring to find others are as awed / enthused with 'Inland Empire' as I am, having read so much whinging and bafflement from critics, idiots etc.

Having seen in on Sunday night, I would suggest it is hands down the best film released so far this century (certainly the best I've seen).

I shall be brief as I don't have much time to write this post:

In Lynch terms:

'Inland Empire' is Mega-Lynch, Uber-Lynch, more unrefined Lynch than one could ever hope to see, the towering pinnacle of Lynchitude. Thus far, this is the apex of Lynch with all that entails. There is enough Lynch-meat to keep Lynch scholars chewing for years to come.

In technical/cinematic terms:

Absolutely STUNNING. Going on the singularly grumpy and misleading advance word on the film, I was half-expecting some patience-testing marathon of blurry black & white, wobbly camera-work, abstract long-shots etc. Well not a bit of it!

In purely visual terms, this is the most thrilling, imaginative, beautiful and unique thing I have seem at a first-run cinema since, well... ever. There are sections where I swear I could have been watching some bizarro Lynch-world reinterpretation of (Fellini's) '8 1/2'. If Digital Video allows people to get their artistic vision across with this much power and clarity, then bring it on, and a bit of pixilation be damned!

In terms of emotional reaction:

I realise this should hardly be a surprise given his previous work, but for a film allegedly lacking in any conventional narrative (I don't believe it is, but more of that later), the range of powerful emotions 'Inland Empire' commands from the viewer is incredible. Even when you've lost any solid grasp of who characters are or what they're doing, the film nonetheless keeps you profoundly connected to them and the feelings they're experiencing, a connection which is only intensified by the masterfully expressionistic cinematic technique.

People have been saying this is a 'dark', 'nightmarish' film, and yes, obviously it is, more deeply so than any other film you're likely see this decade.... but it is most definitely NOT a cold or alienating film; for every moment of tormented misery or stark, screaming terror there is another of spell-binding beauty or utter hilarity...

...ah yes, the hilarity: there aren't quite as many laffs in 'Inland Empire' I would have appreciated (being a particular fan of Lynch's oft-misunderstood sense of humour), but the ones which are there are absolutely EXQUISITE. I laughed myself half to death in places, before being terrified to the point of blackout by the very next scene... did all these people proclaiming it "boring" actually watch the same film I did??

Explanation / Plot Interpretation:

Oh, I've gotta go - I'm not even gonna START on this one yet!
 
 
Spaniel
13:29 / 13.03.07
I hate to bring the thread down (I really, really, really do) but I've heard reports, from an enthusiastic, intelligent, avowed Lynch fan, that it is perhaps a little too long.

Thoughts?
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
13:55 / 13.03.07
I'd heard that too, but didn't find it to be the case at all. I went in expecting some kind of endurance test, even as a huge Lynch fan, and came out wishing it could start all over again. (So I went back a couple of days later...)

It seems long, sure, but it doesn't seem three hours long at all.
 
 
rizla mission
13:59 / 13.03.07
I certainly didn't find it too long - the film kept me sufficiently captivated that it scarcely seemed like three hours at all.

And I should point out, I'm not usually a fan of long films; unless it's something really special, I tend to consider 90 minutes about optimum film-length, and start to get annoyed if some piece-a-crap goes on longer.

But 'Inland Empire' is something really special; it's one of those films where if you're fully engaged with it's headspace, it might just as well go on forever. As referenced in my above post, I think the equally long-but-not-boring '8 1/2' is a good comparison.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
14:03 / 13.03.07
Yeah, I was definitely getting an 8 1/2 vibe from it too.
 
 
Spaniel
14:07 / 13.03.07
(Didn't like 8.5, but I was nineteen when I saw it)
 
 
Mon Oncle Ignatius
15:23 / 13.03.07
A further voice in the chorus of "me too" says, no, it didn't feel too long at all. I decided deliberately not to look at my phone to see how much time had passed, so I wouldn't be anticipating the arc of the story at any point. There are definitely sections which move less fast than others, but not unendurably so, as there are enough swerves and slides in the narrative to keep things flowing along.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
15:24 / 13.03.07
Three hours is too long for a film, there's no question - I missed the last bus home the night I saw it. No film should be longer than two hours, two and half tops. Life's too short. No exceptions. None.

But it has to be said it didn't feel like three hours, and that has to be a good sign. Real time and 'experience time' never translate exactly, and sometime a poor 90 minute film can feel like an eternity. IL didn't feel like three hours, it just felt right.

So, yes INLAND EMPIRE is too long, and no INLAND EMPIRE is not too long. Hope that clears it up.
 
 
The Natural Way
17:26 / 13.03.07
On the too long thing - was that me, boboss? Forget what I said. I was really exhausted and hung over and nauseous when I saw the film, so I was going to find sitting in a cinema for 3 hours, as opposed to lying down in bed and sleeping, rather difficult. It's a fucking brilliant film and all I can think about right now - all I can think about - is when I'll be able to see it again. It's a bloody crime that it's not running at the Duke's for longer.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
19:42 / 13.03.07
The Dukes? You people live in my town? Some of you were probably sat behind me on Friday night.
 
 
Spaniel
15:56 / 14.03.07
There are quite a few of us about, actually.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
16:29 / 14.03.07
Now you're just trying to scare me.

Just seven screenings for a brand new film though. They obviously weren't expecting an overwhelming demand for this one. I doubt I'm gonna be able to get back for a second viewing before the final screening tomorrow night.
 
 
Spaniel
17:45 / 14.03.07
Well, they sometimes do what amount to tester weeks, with the intention of bringing the film back for another run if it turns out to be popular. I'm hoping that's the case in this instance otherwise I can't see me seeing IL in the cinema.
 
 
The Natural Way
18:01 / 14.03.07
Which is a crime, really. It's all about the big screen.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
19:06 / 14.03.07
I have to say, and I'm gonna get shot down for this, but the picture quality of IL didn't look that good on the big screen in this case. You can see the pixels.

But it's always worth seeing Lynch films in the theatre for the sound. And the sound design in IL is one of his best.
 
 
Mon Oncle Ignatius
19:16 / 14.03.07
I think the whole point is being able to see the pixels. It adds another layer of otherness to the experience, along with the flattened colour palette and depth of focus.

The sound is very special, and really worth going to see the film in the cinema for too. BIIIIG sound. And the production numbers sound good too.

I was pleasantly surprised to find IL is still on at the local cinema here (well, Dalston) for another week. So I might go and see it again.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
20:59 / 14.03.07
As will all good Lynch movies, it's doing more in my head now, days later, than would ever have been possible onscreen.

Go and see it. NOW. Nobody works the fear of the spaces in-between like Lynch. Lynch does existential terror like nobody since Lovecraft. And Lynch is much funnier.
 
 
Spaniel
21:04 / 14.03.07
And is capable of creating real beauty and lovliness. 'S one of the things that I love about 'im. Whether I get to see this at the pictures is sadly out of my hands.
 
 
The Natural Way
13:53 / 15.03.07
I don't think it matters in the slightest that you can see the pixels. I mean, so what? It's not that I want to shoot you down, Twig, it's just that I can't understand anyone experiencing the images in IE and not just finding them incredibly beautiful. As far as I'm concerned it looks and sounds amazing.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
19:21 / 15.03.07
Fair enough, but wouldn't those images have looked better if it were shot on film? Would you have still found the images beautiful if he'd shot it on his mobile phone?
 
 
ghadis
23:43 / 15.03.07
I think he could have shot it on his mobile and it would still have been quite wonderful. One of the things that i love about a lot of Lynchs films are that they are truly immersive. You sink into them. The act of watching them makes you an important part of the process. An important part of the film. The many scenarios of theatres, film sets, video casettes delivered to the front door. They all make us complicit in the act. The Blue Box and Blue Hair of the woman in MD. The audience. I see the use of video and pixels 'being seen' as another part of that. Its kind of Brechtian in a way. Just as Brecht insisted on any stage lights not to be covered by black drapes during his plays so Lynch refuses to allow 'us' to remove ourselves from what is going on on screen. He does this fucking amazingly well.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
00:21 / 16.03.07
Yeah. I found the DV actually added a lot- like when you see a TV drama shot on video and it seems more immediate, more like the news...

The close-ups were as grotesque as an invasion of personal space is in real life, without the sheen of film. Grace Zabriskie's scene, for example... this woman was IN MY FACE, rather than just being filmed very closely.

Also worth remembering that without the DV, this movie would never have existed at all- who's gonna put up cash for a three-hour movie that has no major box-office draws, on the surface makes no sense whatsoever, and an hour of which is in Polish?

Even if it had been shit, I'd love him for trying. As it is, I love him for succeeding.
 
 
Twig the Wonder Kid
11:55 / 18.03.07
That's a good point stoatie. And for all my moaning about picture quality I'm much happier that the film exists for me to moan about than not.

I still wonder what Ronnie Rocket might have been.

Or Lynch's Return Of The Jedi.
 
 
Spaniel
16:50 / 18.03.07
The what now?

Fuckeye, I've never heard of that little possibility.
 
 
Earlier than I thought
21:14 / 18.03.07
Ah, he never really seriously considered it, or so he reckons nowadays. I think he got offered it after the success of Elephant Man. Though he did take Dune. Threadrot: the ultra-straight family who lived next door to me as a child went into the wrong cinema back in the early 80s and accidentally saw Dune instead of The Karate Kid or something of that ilk. The thought makes me smile.

And as for IE - a disturbing number of people I know are echoing a couple of the above posts - no-one can stop thinking about this bloody movie. Me, I reckon it was about the best thing I've ever seen.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
22:54 / 18.03.07
no-one can stop thinking about this bloody movie. Me, I reckon it was about the best thing I've ever seen

I agree on both counts. It's running round and round in my head, working its magic LONG after I left the cinema (the second time!). And I'm notorious for over-enthusiasm, so I'm loath to say it's the best film ever in case I retract that the next time some great shiny bauble comes along, but... well, it really might be.
 
 
Spaniel
08:18 / 19.03.07
Again, having not seen it, I'm getting very frustrated by the slew of simple minded journalists using words like

Pompous
Pretentious (hate, hate, hate the way that term is overused in general)
Willfully opaque
Nonsensical (in a perjorative sense)
Illogical (in a perjorative sense)

To describe this film and Lynch.

David Lynch must be the least pompous, least pretentious director I've ever seen interviewed.
 
 
CameronStewart
14:00 / 19.03.07
The more I read of this thread, the more it's frustrating me that there's no Toronto release date in sight...
 
  

Page: 12(3)4

 
  
Add Your Reply