Rating: 
Summary: One of Lynch's better films
Review: Keeping in mind that we're talking about David Lynch here, this film was avant garde without being too out there - at least in relation to his other works (Blue Velvet comes to mind....) I don't know how to praise this film without giving too much away so I'll just say the whole "reality" issue was interesting and well done. All in all, a dark movie that stands up to repeated viewings. This movie takes the viewer on one heck of a wild ride and keeps your attention glued to the screen until the rolling credits - can't ask for better than that.
Rating: 
Summary: Awesome
Review: This movie, by far, is David Lynch's finest film. I was so mesmerized by the film the first time around and I went to see it two more times at the theater. The movie, to me at first, was a little hard to follow, but was rather enjoyable. The music also kept me intrigued. The movie has a great way of keeping you in suspense all the way through. It's the best 2+ hours spent watching the movie each time. If you don't have the DVD, I highly recommend that you get it. It's worth every penny spent on this fantastic film.
Rating:
Summary: My favorite David Lynch movie.
Review: Mulholland Drive is one of the best thrillers i've seen in a long time, i love twisted movies that don't make much sence to people who don't understand how David Lynch's mind works (hes brilliant). To understand this movie you must have 3 things, #1 an open mind, #2 a good imagination and #3 love for the art of a director's work. This movie isn't for everyone just for the people who like David Lynch's movies, if you did enjoy this movie i recomend (Lost Highway) to those who have the strength to sit threw one of the strangest movies ever created.
Rating:
Summary: A Note.
Review: ....with what I've established about the story from many of these great reviewers here (the story is Diane's Dream, the reality comes when the cowboy sez, "Wake Up...') what catches my craw is this. If Camilla and Adam were already 'rubbing' it in about how much a loser Diane was (i.e. the scene where Adam is showing the male lead how to kiss-act and Diane is urged to stay and watch) and Diane rebuffs her (i.e. the scene where Diane is pushing Camilla out the door...) the viewer is left to wonder why Diane chooses to take the limo down Mulholland to the party for the final insult on her emotions. that's the real mystery here.(Were Kesher and Camille the 'In-Hollywood Crowd' rubbing it in on all the other losers in LA?) That further rubbing in the face is what pushed the girl over the edge, not necessarily the loss of Camille, and probably would have made anyone resort to murder...why didn't she opt for going for Adam, too..is a good question. Good film. See it again.
Rating:
Summary: in the best tradition of bunuel
Review: any time a movie with even an iota of artistry comes out we get reviewers like Ir97 that want to start yelling 'pretentious, incoherent, arthouse crap'.
american audiences in general seem to 'have to have a story which follows the basic literature 101 plot formation formula'.
and of course, it has to be coherent.
i'll be frank in that i don't completely 'get' this movie. i know it deals with the illusion of hollywood and that there are subtle references to the black delilah and other scandals from mullholland drive.
the erotic surrealism is in the best tradition of the bunuel classics like belle de jour and that obscure object of desire.
the problem with passionate negative reactions to avant garde art is an old one.
the patrons like the before mentioned are the same type of patrons who reacted to the impressionists, to picasso, schoenberg, pollock and to the 'degenerate artists' in early twentieth century germany.
those patrons wore their badge of unpretentious prentention proudly and insisted that the artists' work had to be narrative and easily understandable.
and naturally they want to start bellowing that those who support such drivel dont get it either and that theyre just being pretentious.
this type of stereo typing towards the 'art types' should be outdated, but alas, we see it all too frequently.
and, what is the most frustrating thing of all when dealing with these stereo types is the assumption that we declare we immediately 'get' what the artist is saying.no, but there really are people that like to be challenged.
one can truly enjoy artists such as kandisnky, joyce, willem breuker, bunuel, kubrick, or lynch because these artists entertain you by challenging you.
while people in general have accepted the avant garde in painting and the types who so vehemently protested those artists now rightly seem ignorant and naive, film is still an infant medium and mass audiences have very pre concieved notions regarding 'movies'.
this film requires repeated vieiwngs and upon each viewing it unfolds new treasures and wonders.
Rating: 
Summary: I don't get the facination. Boring non-coherent movie
Review: I'll probably get alot of "unhelpfull" about this review but I'm going to state MY OPINION about David Lynch JUNK MOVIES and the "warping of his viewer's minds" into THINKING or believing they just seen a great "artistic" movie. How anybody can call this movie "artistic" is beyond me. I just don't get it. David Lynch can take dog doo and make a movie out of it and his "fanatic fans" will "analyze it" and make something out of a "nothing coherent story". "Mullholand Drive" in MY OPINION IS just that, a story with not much of a story. I've read numerous reviews on this movie just to TRY and understand WHY people liked this movie. I am glad for those people out there that enjoyed it and found it intresting or entertaining and "facinating", but I found it VERY SLOW, dull and not to mention very boring. David Lynch's REAL GOOD movies such as, "Blue Velvet", "Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me", and "Wild At Heart" had depth, good story telling, and most imortantly,---as an average film go'er, I could "FOLLOW" what the heck is going on, unlike this movie or his last one "Lost Highway". I was waiting impatiently to see a GOOD David Lynch movie, then this one came out. However, after surviving through, and most importantly,--wasting over 4 hours of my life watching his last 2 UNEXPLANABLE "non-artistic" garbage of movies--"Lost Higway" & "Mullholand Drive", I am so disgusted with David Lynch being "high on himself" and his non-coherent movies, that I will probably never see another one of his movies. I THINK (in my opinion), David Lynch must THINK his movies are "art work", and has been sucessful enough to make himself believe that he is "A legend in his own mind" or something, and is unfortunatly allowed by Hollywood to make anything he wants on film. And most importantly or sadly, Hollywood allows this because HIS FANS buy tickets to see this kind of bologna nothing-makes-sence story making. They (Lynch fans) come out in amazement of what they witnessed. How extrodinary it was. Love to ANALYZE his "Art work", and they figure out a way to explain Lynch's own madness of suppossed film making when it's actually garbage. No way will the Lynch fan admit the movie stinks. Even if mediocre at least. They just call it "artistic film making" when it stinks. I guess that is what Lynch's version of "Dune" was. Another fine work of his art. Me, I just don't get it I guess. In this latest BOMB, I was more bored than "Lost Highway". Don't get me wrong, I do love Lynch's GOOD movies of "Twin Peaks", Wild At Heart", and "Blue Velvet". BUT, David Lynch's success from just those 3 movies has blinded his current and latest attempts at film making, even worse than his first bomb "Dune". I know I'll get alot of flack for this review but as a movie go'er (and in my opinion) I want to be entertained. I don't mind having to think about what's going on in a movie (some movies have been excellent in that regards), but to try and figure out what's going on in a director's mind or some writter's mind that doesn't come out coherent by the end, doesn't entertain & makes for a bad movie. I believe that Lynch probably didn't have anything written down or no actual script when he filmed "Mullholand Drive". I think he must have been allowed by the studio to just film away knowing that his fanatic fans will buy into anything he puts on film. Coherent or especially non-coherent. IN MY OPINION this movie bored me to death and had nothing to offer except cheesy lesbian scenes to titilate those that might give up trying to figure out what the heck is going on during this overly long slow paced B-rate movie that should've ended up as a TV Movie on the Playboy Channel.
Rating:
Summary: what cinema should be
Review: I have hesitated to write a review of this film for several years now. The chief reason for this is that "Mulholland Drive" is my favorite film ever, and I despaired of ever getting the proper emotional distance required to review the film. However, it has now been several months since I've had a chance to see the film, and I think its strengths and weaknesses have settled fairly well in my memory. This film is quite simply a triumph of expert filmmaking. I will admit that David Lynch's record was spotty up to this point. I found "Blue Velvet" captivating but thought "Eraserhead" was too deliberately misanthropic and offputting. But Lynch has finally found the right idiom and plot for his unique style of filmmaking. The first strength you notice about this film is that it is positively dripping with atmosphere. Lynch's strong use of color drenches every frame in a wash of film-noir paranoia; it is obvious just from looking at the screen that something is not right here. Fabrics and wallpaper are just never THAT bright; foliage and jewelry leaps off the screen with its vividness. The film's second strength is incredible acting, particularly from Naomi Watts. Her failure to receive an Academy Award for this performance was the beginning of my current distrust for the Academy's choices. Watts is here required to play two different roles, one vastly different from the other. It is a feat she accomplishes flawlessly, shifting from one character to the other so completely that at first I didn't realize it was the same actress playing both roles. Laura Harring lends capable support, her face and acting style a throwback to a thirties melodrama. It is only appropriate that she chooses her character's name from a Rita Hayworth poster. And now, for what I consider to be the final strength, but what some will call the first weakness: the plot. (I will attempt not to spoil the film for those who haven't seen it.) The plot is what has caused this to be a hotly-debated film among my fellow film junkies. There are numerous ways of interpreting the plot, but you'll have to watch the film at least twice to get a grasp on anything that's going on. As the film opens, we meet Betty (Watts), a Canadian fresh off the plane to become a famous Hollywood actress. Meanwhile, Rita (Harring) escapes an attempted assassination and a car crash with amnesia but no physical injuries and wanders into the apartment where Betty is staying. Once Betty gets over the shock of finding Rita in her apartment, she decides to play detective and help Rita find out who's after her and why. After a few scenes of typical movie detective work, the film takes a 180-degree turn and you are forced to question whether any of what you've just seen even happened. Wound into this complex plot are threads dealing with an uber-hip movie director, a sinister cowboy, a dreadlocked monster living behind a tacky diner, and a film whose casting is directly controlled from above by a Mafia midget. (Hey, it's a Lynch film; you knew the midget had to turn up eventually!) The film is not easy to follow. As I mentioned, it requires multiple viewings before sense can be hammered out of the film. The list of plot elements above will give you a fairly good idea of how eclectic and challenging this film is. It is also disturbing, with themes and occasional images of death abounding. Lynch has made a serious movie for people who are serious about their movies, and therein I believe lies the reason why so many are put off by this film. Although I love it dearly, it is probably one of the least purely entertaining films I have ever seen. The first few times you see it, you will be hunched beside the screen with a furrowed brow, piecing it all together. It becomes more entertaining once you have your interpretation of the events and can simply sit back and watch. It is not a film that will make you relax. It will quite possibly disturb you. It is a powerful film. And yet, if you let it, it can be the most rewarding viewing experience you will have.
Rating:
Summary: Very very bad or very very good
Review: I understand how people either despise this film or love it. If you're looking for a traditional film with a linear, logical plot, look elsewhere. You'll have a hard time liking this film. If, on the other hand, you like nightmare dream-logic, this is for you. A lot can be gleaned from one viewing, but it's best to watch it two or three times, because of the disjointed story. But, in a nutshell, it's about the relationship of love, hate, envy and jealousy, and how all can drive people insane. It's also about Lynch's view of the lunacy of Hollywood. Part of it, such as the incompetent hitman, are actually very funny. Others will show you what it's like to go insane from love and envy and jealousy. In some ways a great movie, it's certainly not an easy one.
Rating:
Summary: I WISH BETTY HAD BEEN DREAMING
Review: Call me a sap, but I loved "Betty." I find myself trying to piece the movie together so that, at least to me, Betty is the dreamer. This movie is engrossing. Naomi Watts is stunning in her meta-acting. Laura Harring smolders in her sultriness.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best films ever made.. if learn to appreciate it.
Review: I'm not a Lynch's fan because Mulholland Drive is the first and only film I've ever watched from him, so I hope this can be considered an impartial comment. This movie is PURE ART! It moves your deepest emotions completely, including fear, jealousy, sadnes, intrigue, hate and (a little) love with great picture and awsome dialogs, music is sometimes an important element too. However in my experience, the process of appreciating this movie was slow. The first time I watched Mulholland Drive, in the movie theater, it ended and all I had in my mind was a big question mark. What was this all about??!! However I did not dislike it and months later I gave it a second chance, on DVD, and this time I was shocked. This big question mark inside my head became many small question marks and, after watching it several times, many of them are still there. But that is one of the things that makes Mulholland Drive so GREAT, it's complexity and the enigmas that remain open and may be answered in so many ways. It is also full of symbolic elements that would have no sense if you watch it like any traditional movie, their meanings, however, are not cleared during the movie, you'll have to discover them yourself and it's not easy to do it. That's why I'd say this one is for intelligent watchers only. I'll not describe the story because you'll find it in other comments, but I think this is for people looking for an emotional-artistic experience, and not for people who want an "interesting story". If you like the kind of movies that stays away from conventional Hollywood trash; if you enjoyed, for example, Memento or PI, then this is the next one you MUST watch.
|
