Return of the RECENT VIEWING

..and why not?
User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32127
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 16 Jan 2018, 10:29

Image

The Ninth Configuration

This is a funny one. Written and directed by William Peter Blatty it’s an odd mix of surreal comedy and angsty theology. It’s a bit messy and the shift in tone halfway through the movie is odd but there are some funny lines, some good performances and memorable images although I found the angsty theology stuff a bit alien. Oh, and a great bar room fight with a hilarious homoerotic undercurrent.

Recommended perhaps if you want something a bit off the wall and weird.


Image

Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation

I liked the first Mission Impossible movie but had little time for what came after until Brad Bird took the reins for Ghost Protocol which was hugely slick and enjoyable pop corn nonsense with fantastic stunts. Rogue Nation carries on in the same vein and it has a pleasing physicality that is sometimes missing from this sorta movie. I know Cruise is a wanker in real life but he's great at this sorta shit.

There’s a new one out this year and the same director is in charge. I’ll watch it.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
CAN
hounds people off the board
Posts: 17594
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby CAN » 16 Jan 2018, 10:34

Matt Wilson wrote:Image
Father Goose

Grant's penultimate film is a silly romantic comedy which isn't really either. He thought he might win an oscar if he pulled a Bogart a la The African Queen so we see him here scruffy and cranky with a woman thirty something years younger than he is. I think even he was embarrassed, but then he cast her so there's that. Yes, it's somewhat charming because he always was - and it made a lot of money in 1964, so he knew what he was doing. But no oscar, not even a nomination. He finally did get an honorary one years later. It made him very happy.


It's one of those films that always seemed to be on TV in the afternoons when I was a kid. I must have half-watched it a dozen times, and it has real sentimental appeal for me. Not that I've seen it in 30 years...

CG is always fun tho'. Especially when he's middle-aged and slightly harassed.
mission wrote:the self-satisfied smug cunts like that moron Copehead

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 29321
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 16 Jan 2018, 14:33

Do you have a blu ray player, John?
Thinking about Mexican food.

User avatar
CAN
hounds people off the board
Posts: 17594
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby CAN » 16 Jan 2018, 21:04

I do, yeah.
mission wrote:the self-satisfied smug cunts like that moron Copehead

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32127
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 17 Jan 2018, 10:52

Image

Satan’s Slave

The lass had Virgin TV now so she can record shit which basically means we can record all kinds of crap now. This had a 1 star rating but it wasn’t completely crap. In fact it had a few moments and a twisty ending that elevated it to the realms of at least average horror for this period. The acting and script were predictably wooden although Michael Gough added a touch of class. The plot is full of holes: a young woman, who happens to also be a bit psychic (of course!) leaves her boyfriend in the city to visit her uncle with her Mum and Dad but both are killed in a tragic car crash (this happens in her Uncles driveway at, like, 5 miles an hour). Satanic foul play has to be involved and her uncle and son, in particular, are creepy cunts and clearly wrong uns (we know this because the movie opens with some SATANIC RITUAL most likely featuring the UNCLE and then follows that with a scene where the son trying to rape a woman before letting her escape and LAUGHING) but the poor lass has no idea and for some reason doesn’t seem that upset about the tragic death of BOTH PARENTS in a very slow car crash. So she stays at her Uncles big house in the country MILES AWAY FROM EVERYWHERE and in turns out her uncle was a FORMER DOCTOR who recommends she should rest there for an indeterminate length of time with his creepy son and some woman who apparently is a secretary but who is also in love with the rapey son. During a psychic vision the lass sees some “witch” being tortured in the garden and herself burning at the stake but despite the creepy doc, rapey son and terrifying vision she agrees to stay and ends up falling in love with the RAPEY SON despite the fact that he is no personality and is clearly a RAPIST (must be his very good cheekbones). The Doc gives her drugs to help her sleep to help her get over the death of BOTH PARENTS IN A VERY SLOW CAR CRASH and she has nightmares about Satanic rituals (could these nightmares be in fact real?). The SATANIC DOC and RAPEY SON are clearly up to mischief and it turns out the doc and his son are necromancers who want to use the poor lass to bring back the docs dead wife who apparently was a very powerful witch or sorcerer or terrific cook or some shit. Etc.

It has that cheap exploitation quality. Lots of breasts, some gore and violence (actually quite stabby) and of course some attempted rape thrown in for good measure. The lead lass is a terrible actress but rather attractive with beautiful blue eyes (you also see her breasts. Hurray for horror!) and the ending is downbeat and better than most of what’s come before. It's not good but it's alright, you know?
Last edited by Goat Boy on 17 Jan 2018, 15:51, edited 2 times in total.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 5461
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 17 Jan 2018, 12:10

Spoilers?
Like fast-moving clouds casting shadows against a hillside, the melody-loop shuddered with a sense of the sublime, the awful unknowable majesty of the world.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32127
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 17 Jan 2018, 12:38

Like any cunt is gonna watch it!
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
the gorton gollum
cultural defective
Posts: 16565
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 00:32
Location: lording it

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby the gorton gollum » 17 Jan 2018, 12:41

It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.

Diamond Dog wrote:I do however have a very good friend - John Reynolds...married to Sinead O'Connor


User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32127
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 17 Jan 2018, 12:48

I think I'll watch it again!
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 5461
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 17 Jan 2018, 15:41

I was only taking the piss :lol:

Your post was better without the spoiler tags, and I'm literally the only cunt who might watch it. One star horrors are my staple diet.
Like fast-moving clouds casting shadows against a hillside, the melody-loop shuddered with a sense of the sublime, the awful unknowable majesty of the world.

User avatar
pcqgod
Posts: 16839
Joined: 11 Apr 2010, 07:23
Location: Texas

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby pcqgod » 17 Jan 2018, 20:44

Image

Dunkirk (2017)

Refreshing to see a taut, tense war movie with no extended exposition, no excess of character moments, no protracted scenes of politicians and generals sitting around a table discussing strategy, nor love stories for that matter.
Where would rock 'n' roll be without feedback?

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 5461
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 18 Jan 2018, 09:28

Image

Essentially pointless violent ballet, which is lovely to look at. Not bad at all.
Like fast-moving clouds casting shadows against a hillside, the melody-loop shuddered with a sense of the sublime, the awful unknowable majesty of the world.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32127
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 18 Jan 2018, 16:07

Image

The Lady From Shanghai

I have to say I was a bit bored watching the first part of this on the boat but when they get back onshore Welles cranked it right up and it really took off, becoming increasingly weirder and more intense until the delirious climax. Welles Irish accent jarred at first and I wasn’t entirely sure about his performance (I didn’t quite buy into his relationship with Hayworth (yes I know they were married). Some of the humour didn’t quite work for me either although I liked the barely concealed contempt at the rich wankers Welles is sailing with but there are moments of real brilliance and genius here. I loved the shift in tone after they get back onshore where it starts to get real twisty and turny. The court sequence was great with all the little individual moments from the crowd and the climax where Welles ends up at some amusement park is incredible.

I didn’t realise just how much was cut from this movie by the studio (Welles hated the score apparently which I can understand) so what you’re seeing of course isn’t Welles original vision which is a tragedy but par of the course for poor Orson. Imagine producing this stuff and having studio arseholes rip it to shreds. I’m amazed he didn’t kill one of ‘em.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52730
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Snarfyguy » 18 Jan 2018, 20:05

Image

Natalie P. doesn't really look anything like Jackie Kennedy, but the arresting thing about the performance is her elocution. She must have trained for months and she did a remarkable job (and perhaps she actually slightly overdid it). It's not (just) an accent, but a very distinctive pattern of speech you would only hear in rarefied enclaves of Long Island and Massachusetts, and which may in fact no longer exist.

The movie's pretty good, I thought, except for the ending, but don't ask me how it ended because I already forgot.

I do wonder about the historical accuracy of her having spent so much time alone in the immediate aftermath of the assassination. Didn't she have a big family?

Anyway, um yeah.
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 29321
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 19 Jan 2018, 00:53

Goat Boy wrote:Image

The Lady From Shanghai

I have to say I was a bit bored watching the first part of this on the boat but when they get back onshore Welles cranked it right up and it really took off, becoming increasingly weirder and more intense until the delirious climax. Welles Irish accent jarred at first and I wasn’t entirely sure about his performance (I didn’t quite buy into his relationship with Hayworth (yes I know they were married). Some of the humour didn’t quite work for me either although I liked the barely concealed contempt at the rich wankers Welles is sailing with but there are moments of real brilliance and genius here. I loved the shift in tone after they get back onshore where it starts to get real twisty and turny. The court sequence was great with all the little individual moments from the crowd and the climax where Welles ends up at some amusement park is incredible.

I didn’t realise just how much was cut from this movie by the studio (Welles hated the score apparently which I can understand) so what you’re seeing of course isn’t Welles original vision which is a tragedy but par of the course for poor Orson. Imagine producing this stuff and having studio arseholes rip it to shreds. I’m amazed he didn’t kill one of ‘em.


I love that movie. In terms of what was cut out, consider The Magnificent Ambersons, Dougie - originally about 2 1/2 hours, and cut down to less than 90 minutes. And even in its truncated form it's still a classic. I think this is too. Studio honchos were always fucking with Orson, to the extent that he left Hollywood in the late '40s for Europe only to return ten years later for Touch of Evil - and even then only upon Charlton Heston's recommendation.

Image
Absence of Malice

Pretty good treatise on moral ethics in journalism. Should reporters print stories which might hurt people if you can't prove they're not true? There's much more to it than that but I'm not going to go into it. Good performances and this is one of Newman's nominated roles.

Image
The Odd Couple

The second collaboration (and biggest hit) between Lemmon and Matthau is still enjoyable although it's probably a better play. Possibly Neil Simon's greatest achievement.

Image
Young Mr. Lincoln

Criterion's upgrade of their old DVD is one of Ford's better pictures, actually. With Fonda doing admirably despite his false nose, which is a distraction in some scenes. It's important to realize that Ford made this, Stagecoach, Drums Along the Mohawk, Grapes of Wrath, The Long Voyage Home, and How Green was My Valley all in three years. I'm not sure there was ever a greater burst of creativity which yielded such high results from any other filmmaker.
Thinking about Mexican food.

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 5461
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 21 Jan 2018, 20:00

Image

A fairly strange take on the vulnerable women in an isolated house under attack shtick. Fairly understated, but not quite clever enough to be convincing, especially as it reveals more of the supposed sinister backstory.
Like fast-moving clouds casting shadows against a hillside, the melody-loop shuddered with a sense of the sublime, the awful unknowable majesty of the world.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32127
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 22 Jan 2018, 15:09

Image

Inland Empire

This was the second time I’d watched it after only seeing it at the cinema when it came out. It’s safe to say that if you’re not a fan of the direction Lynch took from Lost Highway onwards (Straight Story excepted) then you should give this a wide berth because this is the furthest out Lynch has ever gone. For some this was clearly too far and I get that. I was frustrated when I first watched it in a way I wasn’t with Mulholland Drive where despite all the dream narrative and Lynchian bollocks there still felt like a clear narrative twinkling underneath the surface that wasn’t impossible to get at. Inland Empire feels even more opaque even if its themes are recognisable and recurring (dark side of Hollywood, brutalisation of women, the creative process, the relationship between artist and audience). This perhaps isn’t surprising given the fact that there was no complete screenplay and instead Lynch wrote dialogue on the day of shooting so it was an experiment on Lynches part. It lacks the unified vision of Mulholland Drive where you felt like Lynch was in control of what was going in. Here there’s a sense of enveloping madness and loss of control which may not be intentional but maybe more a happy accident given Laura Derns journey. The films second half in particular is heavy work where multiple stories and timelines converge, characters play multiple roles and fantasy and reality blend in one giant unforgiving maelstrom. So let’s start with the first half which is pretty straightforward:

Laura Dern is an actress who lands a great part in some Hollywood melodrama which is at least partially about marriage infidelity and its consequences. It turns out however that the movie is a remake of an earlier Polish project that was meant to be cursed and which lead to the two main actors being murdered. We also see a young woman (also a prostitute) called “the little girl” watching telly in what looks like a hotel room. On the telly is some kind of weird sitcom starring human sized rabbits who speak in bizarre non sequiturs and who clearly have some kind of significance but who knows what. Prior to finding out she’s got the role a new neighbour visits Dern to tell her she will get the role and that there is going to be a murder. She also tells Dern of two stories: one featuring a little boy who caused “evil to be born” and one featuring a little girl who went through a door and discovered a “palace”.

The movie goes ahead and pretty soon reality and fantasy start to blur as Dern gets lost in the role and an affair between her and her co-star develops (despite Derns husband warning the co-star of consequences should this happen). At this point the movie disappears down the rabbit hole as Dern stumbles upon a door marked “naxxon” (a reference to the opening scene where a gramophone plays the “the longest-running radio play in history) and suddenly multiple story lines appear involving eastern European prostitutes and Dern playing seemingly multiple roles. Dern has to be “little girl” who goes through the door but who’s the little boy? What is the evil that was born? Who is this mysterious figure called The Phantom who appears to the prostitutes pimp? Who the hell are all these prostitutes anyway and what is Inland Empire? What is the “longest running radio play in history?”

I’m not going to pretend I know exactly what the hell is going on here. Maybe, like Mulholland Drive, you can join up the dots and come up with some kind of linear narrative but more so than ever with Lynch I think that’s a pretty futile exercise although one that predictably many have attempted. Unlike Mulholland Drive I’m not interested in what it exactly is happening here, and I’m not convinced Lynch intended the movie to be viewed this way anyway. What you have here is a series of stories and scenes with overlapping themes and characters that Lynch has returned to again and again throughout his career and which on Inland Empire he combines into one phantasmagorical whole.

Going on what Lynch said around the time of the movie it appears he was very disenfranchised with the cinema and I’ve read one quote where he actually says “film is dead”. I think on one level Inland Empire is ultimately a tribute to the power of the cinema and its ability to influence peoples lives. We see the prostitute in the room watching the telly including seeing Laura Dern perform and there appears to be some kind of symbiotic relationship between the two to the point where possibly Dern is acting out her life (through a previous role? The prostitutes fantasy world?) and in the end Dern actually appears to magically liberate her from The Phantom so she can be reunited with her husband and child in the moving closing scenes. On another level the movie appears to be about the brutalisation of women by men (a long running Lynch theme that we find on Blue Velvet and, of course, Twin Peaks). Is the “longest running radio play in history” men’s ill treatment of women? Is this the evil the boy inadvertently created? Is the Phantom a supernatural manifestation of this abuse?

On another level it appears to be about infidelity and the madness of love, or maybe more accurately lust (“strange what love does”). Interestingly Lynch split up with his long term partner Mary Sweeney after a month of marriage in 2006. Was there infidelity there? Is this a reflection of Lynches personal life? Actions have consequences is a line said on more than one occasion during the film.

On yet another level it appears to be about the creative process an artist embarks upon and I think you can see Laura Derns journey down the rabbit hole as a representation of this journey in all its neurosis, confusion, frustration and, hopefully, ultimately triumph. In this way Lynch touches on movies like Persona (the movie within a movie) which goes back to my point about Inland Empire being a tribute to the power and imagination of the cinema. Is this the Inland Empire of the title? The part of the subconscious where creativity and imagination reside? Is the movie about the creative process of making a movie itself and its ultimate goal of connecting with its audience?

If you’re looking for answers then you won’t find them in Inland Empire but I do think there are clear themes and ideas here and some stellar moments of Lynch weirdness and Laura Derns performance is absolutely great. In some ways it feels like culmination of Lynches career but I’m not sure I would declare it a masterpiece. I think I’ll wait a couple of years and watch it again to see if it merits that honour. I think at the very least it deserves to be watched again.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 11417
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby The Modernist » 22 Jan 2018, 18:25

Darkness_Fish wrote:I was only taking the piss :lol:

Your post was better without the spoiler tags, and I'm literally the only cunt who might watch it. One star horrors are my staple diet.


Oh I'll watch any UK horror from the 50s-70s although I don't always post them up on here.

User avatar
jimboo
Posts: 6769
Joined: 29 Dec 2005, 17:43
Location: taking a foxy kind of stand

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby jimboo » 22 Jan 2018, 20:06

Goat Boy wrote:Image

Inland Empire

This was the second time I’d watched it after only seeing it at the cinema when it came out. It’s safe to say that if you’re not a fan of the direction Lynch took from Lost Highway onwards (Straight Story excepted) then you should give this a wide berth because this is the furthest out Lynch has ever gone. For some this was clearly too far and I get that. I was frustrated when I first watched it in a way I wasn’t with Mulholland Drive where despite all the dream narrative and Lynchian bollocks there still felt like a clear narrative twinkling underneath the surface that wasn’t impossible to get at. Inland Empire feels even more opaque even if its themes are recognisable and recurring (dark side of Hollywood, brutalisation of women, the creative process, the relationship between artist and audience). This perhaps isn’t surprising given the fact that there was no complete screenplay and instead Lynch wrote dialogue on the day of shooting so it was an experiment on Lynches part. It lacks the unified vision of Mulholland Drive where you felt like Lynch was in control of what was going in. Here there’s a sense of enveloping madness and loss of control which may not be intentional but maybe more a happy accident given Laura Derns journey. The films second half in particular is heavy work where multiple stories and timelines converge, characters play multiple roles and fantasy and reality blend in one giant unforgiving maelstrom. So let’s start with the first half which is pretty straightforward:

Laura Dern is an actress who lands a great part in some Hollywood melodrama which is at least partially about marriage infidelity and its consequences. It turns out however that the movie is a remake of an earlier Polish project that was meant to be cursed and which lead to the two main actors being murdered. We also see a young woman (also a prostitute) called “the little girl” watching telly in what looks like a hotel room. On the telly is some kind of weird sitcom starring human sized rabbits who speak in bizarre non sequiturs and who clearly have some kind of significance but who knows what. Prior to finding out she’s got the role a new neighbour visits Dern to tell her she will get the role and that there is going to be a murder. She also tells Dern of two stories: one featuring a little boy who caused “evil to be born” and one featuring a little girl who went through a door and discovered a “palace”.

The movie goes ahead and pretty soon reality and fantasy start to blur as Dern gets lost in the role and an affair between her and her co-star develops (despite Derns husband warning the co-star of consequences should this happen). At this point the movie disappears down the rabbit hole as Dern stumbles upon a door marked “naxxon” (a reference to the opening scene where a gramophone plays the “the longest-running radio play in history) and suddenly multiple story lines appear involving eastern European prostitutes and Dern playing seemingly multiple roles. Dern has to be “little girl” who goes through the door but who’s the little boy? What is the evil that was born? Who is this mysterious figure called The Phantom who appears to the prostitutes pimp? Who the hell are all these prostitutes anyway and what is Inland Empire? What is the “longest running radio play in history?”

I’m not going to pretend I know exactly what the hell is going on here. Maybe, like Mulholland Drive, you can join up the dots and come up with some kind of linear narrative but more so than ever with Lynch I think that’s a pretty futile exercise although one that predictably many have attempted. Unlike Mulholland Drive I’m not interested in what it exactly is happening here, and I’m not convinced Lynch intended the movie to be viewed this way anyway. What you have here is a series of stories and scenes with overlapping themes and characters that Lynch has returned to again and again throughout his career and which on Inland Empire he combines into one phantasmagorical whole.

Going on what Lynch said around the time of the movie it appears he was very disenfranchised with the cinema and I’ve read one quote where he actually says “film is dead”. I think on one level Inland Empire is ultimately a tribute to the power of the cinema and its ability to influence peoples lives. We see the prostitute in the room watching the telly including seeing Laura Dern perform and there appears to be some kind of symbiotic relationship between the two to the point where possibly Dern is acting out her life (through a previous role? The prostitutes fantasy world?) and in the end Dern actually appears to magically liberate her from The Phantom so she can be reunited with her husband and child in the moving closing scenes. On another level the movie appears to be about the brutalisation of women by men (a long running Lynch theme that we find on Blue Velvet and, of course, Twin Peaks). Is the “longest running radio play in history” men’s ill treatment of women? Is this the evil the boy inadvertently created? Is the Phantom a supernatural manifestation of this abuse?

On another level it appears to be about infidelity and the madness of love, or maybe more accurately lust (“strange what love does”). Interestingly Lynch split up with his long term partner Mary Sweeney after a month of marriage in 2006. Was there infidelity there? Is this a reflection of Lynches personal life? Actions have consequences is a line said on more than one occasion during the film.

On yet another level it appears to be about the creative process an artist embarks upon and I think you can see Laura Derns journey down the rabbit hole as a representation of this journey in all its neurosis, confusion, frustration and, hopefully, ultimately triumph. In this way Lynch touches on movies like Persona (the movie within a movie) which goes back to my point about Inland Empire being a tribute to the power and imagination of the cinema. Is this the Inland Empire of the title? The part of the subconscious where creativity and imagination reside? Is the movie about the creative process of making a movie itself and its ultimate goal of connecting with its audience?

If you’re looking for answers then you won’t find them in Inland Empire but I do think there are clear themes and ideas here and some stellar moments of Lynch weirdness and Laura Derns performance is absolutely great. In some ways it feels like culmination of Lynches career but I’m not sure I would declare it a masterpiece. I think I’ll wait a couple of years and watch it again to see if it merits that honour. I think at the very least it deserves to be watched again.


Mmmmmmm, it's , well, you know.

Jeez , something is happening here. Good write up Dougie. I doubt many will stick with it to be honest. I doubt Lynch even knows where he is going with this one. I don't know what is truly going on but you made some pretty good points above. It ain't easy being a Lynch fan.
Goat Boy wrote:Oh, do fuck off, prog boy.

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52730
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Snarfyguy » 22 Jan 2018, 20:20

^^^ Yeah, I saw that in the cinema when it came out and found it utterly baffling.

Nobody else seemed to be able to make any sense of it either (although it does have some wildly enthusiastic fans), but I do look forward to taking another crack at it & will surely have a closer look at your write-up after having done so.
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.