Yeah, it’s a pretty self explanatory question…is it meant to be real, or is it David Lynch’s idea of a cruel joke?
Nothing made sense! I watched w/ my parents and we’ve concluded it’s even worse than “Memento” (which, in our family, is pretty damned bad).
Seriously, is David Lynch on crack or just mentally ill? Or is it the studio that allowed him to make this movie? And all the people who gave it good reviews- are they sane?
The whole thing flew over my head. Is there supposed to be a point? And if someone here knows what the point is, please, enlighten me! I just wasted 147 minutes of my life watching what doesn’t appear to be a real movie!!!
Yeah, I got “Memento”- I just thought it was really badly done…Anyway, that’s not the point. I’m just comparing Mulholland Drive to a movie that I thought was complete and utter drivel. At least “Memento” had a plot that you could follow if you paid some attention…“Mulholland Drive” didn’t even have that.
I’m still wondering. Is this real or is it just an acid trip of a movie that David Lynch bribed someone to make?
I don’t think you understand David Lynch’s intentions. He doesn’t believe in plots or resolutions or any of that sort of stuff. To him, a movie is an experience, a mood, a feeling, an evocation of a different time and place, an excuse to leave the painful prison of reason that we spend most of our lives in. Like a Haiku. NOT a story. NOT supposed to end, or tie up loose ends. Very non-linear. I’m not saying you have to like it, but that is his goal and his intention. If you can’t appreciate them on that level, you won’t like them. All his movies are like that…Timmy
[spoiler]The whole first part is the dream of the girl who killed herself. The last part shows the real events that led up to the killing.
Notice how “Rita’s” limo ride and car accident are similar to Diane’s limo ride to the party. Diane is upset that she lost the movie role to Camilla, and doesn’t want to admit that Camilla was the better actress, so she invents a conspiracy that forced the director to choose Camilla. Other parallels abound.[/spoiler]
If you look at IMDB’s message boards for this movie you can find all kinds of interpretations.
Yeah I saw a whole interpretation of it at salon.com…so I sort of get it now. I mean, I’d heard his films were all terribly bizarre, and I know he’s the guy behind “Twin Peaks” but I had no idea HOW weird. I think I’ll be staying away from David Lynch- for the next ten years at least.
Part of the intent of the film was to confuse you so that you would understand a little of what the character was feeling. I thought that it was one of the most innovative movies that I’ve seen in recent times. I’ve just ordered the DVD so that I can watch it backwards scene by scene. Then I will watch it again as it was intended.
I have seen one other movie that was told backwards, but it was done in four sections I think. Something with Jeremy Irons.
I like movies that are not just passive experiences.
I can understand how many who watch this film do not understand it, but that’s not the same thing as saying there is no plot or no point.
Mr2001 has pointed out the main “idea” of the film in his spoiler, and given you a good starting point for reading further interpretations about the film.
I didn’t fully understand the whole movie while I was watching it, but in discussing the movie afterwards it made more and more sense. I admit that it helped to have seen the movie with others who did seem to get it quicker than I did, and we were able to remember enough about various details afterwards to “piece” together what actually occurred.
This movie is not a simple dumbed-down Hollywood movie that tells you what to think and how you should think it. It requires some intelligence and afterthought to go back and re-think what you have already seen after you have been clued in that what you have seen is not what you originally thought it was.
I have enjoyed other David Lynch films, but because I have seen this sort of thing in other of his movies, I had to re-assess what I thought were just absurd stylized ways of filming (for no other reason than to be wierd and visually interesting) and came to realize that these wierd and stylized shots were actually coherent acurate portrayals of what was occuring and made perfect sense in retrospect.
i’d much rather watch a film that forced me to think about it for days than just see some entertaining pablum. and it did make some sort of sense if you invested the time to think.
I thought Mulholland Drive and Memento were both fabulous. But, then again, I don’t mind thinking while watching a movie. I could see how someone who watches mostly mainstream drivel might not “get it.”
I disagree. Memento was fabulous, but Mulholland Drive was drivel. Surealism can be entertaining, but this movie was just boring pointless surealism with a few lesbian sex scenes thrown in so some people would be more inclined to see it.
Um, I’m not someone who watches mainstream drivel. I like things that are new, interesting, etc…but I do like movies to be entertaining as well. For me, there’s no point in watching if I’m not having fun, and for Mulholland Drive, I was lost for the entire thing, so all in all, not a good viewing experience.
You’ll be doing yourself a disservice if you avoid all of Lynch’s work based on Mulholland Drive. You might want to try Straight Story – a delightful movie that is linear and (more or less) plot driven with distinct Lynchian touches. It’s a quiet film.
Other Lynch classics, like Blue Velvet, can be disturbing, and interesting to deconstruct, but not too hard to follow.
I wouldn’t recommend Lost Highway for you, tho’ I liked it.
I’m not a big fan of Mulholland Drive. I think it would’ve been a fun TV series, but it’s not a great Lynch movie.
IMO, Lost Highway does it much better. To me, it’s the ultimate embodiment of a Lynch film. I still prefer watching Twin Peaks or Straight Story, but Lost Highway was a tight little experience. I don’t think he pulled off Mulholland. It’s a little too tacked-together.
I’ve got a Lynch weirdness scale. From most to least:
Eraserhead
Lost Highway
Mulholland Dr.
Twin Peaks
Blue Velvet
Wild at Heart
Dune
Elephant Man
Straight Story
Out of interest, do you have a cite for this as the division between the TV pilot and the film? It’s pretty much also my guess for what he added to the pilot, but despite the film’s history being much discussed in the media, I’ve yet to see any useful account of how the two differ (the pilot, of course, not having been seen outside a select circle).
My own theory is that the ending is what was added as a way of indicating to the audience that plot resolution isn’t what he’s working towards in the original version. It’s a sort of alternative rendering of the work in which the key elements are rejuggled. Sort of saying “This was always primarily about limos on the Drive, mysterious guys in cowboy hats, annoying Midwestern tourists etc. rather than some “solution” and the plot, and their role in it, could have been completely different, so don’t worry about it.”
I liked M.D., though I liked Lost Highways a bit better. Still, I think the singing of “Crying” in Spanish (“Llorando,” I think) is just a beautiful sequence.
Mulholland Drive isn’t supposed to be “understood.” It operates on dream logic and is intended to hook directly to your emotions and your subconscious. Memento works similarly, but in a much more subtle fashion. I thought both of them were excellent.
Anyway, don’t spend a lot of time trying to untangle Mulholland Drive to “figure out what happened.” Notice that within a few seconds of the film’s beginning, the camera slides over a sleeping body and pushes into a pillow. That’s all you need to know.
In order to “get it,” turn off your cognitive mind and open yourself to letting the film wash over you. Some people can’t do this, and that’s fine. Just don’t make the mistake of thinking that a movie that doesn’t appeal to your particular taste is therefore artistically bankrupt. It doesn’t work for you. For others, there’s plenty there to enjoy.