Tuesday, May 5, 2009

What is Wrong With This Man?

David Lynch is an odd dude and to be honest, he kind of gives me the heebie-jeebies. Even his "G" rated Disney film is pretty damn strange (check it out, it's called Straight Story and is still totally "Lynchian" despite the rating). I love saying "Lynchian", makes me seem like I'm "in the know" or something. Check out that hair... what a wack-job.
Anyway, first time I watched Mulholland Drive I said it sucked and that it didn't make any sense. Then I watched it again and realized I was a fool - "everything links up perfectly, this is like the best movie ever!" Then I watched it again and thought about it waayyy too much and kind of got sick of it. Then watched it again in class and loved it again. That's a lot of a movie that upon first viewing seems to be complete nonsense. However, further examination reveals that it is anything but nonsense.

Mulholland Drive is not a light read. As far as I can see (and feel free to disagree) the parts of the film that actually happen are as follows in chronological order: Woman (Naomi Watts) wins a dance competition, goes to Hollywood to become and actress, meets another woman, falls in love with her, fails as an actress, gets her heart broken, has her ex-lover killed, then blows her own head off.

The first 2/3rds of the film are basically a glimpse of this womans hopes and dreams. We get that shot of som
eone sleeping after the opening dance scene. We also get some clues that what we're watching is in fact a dream in the restaurant scene with the two men. He says "in the dream you're always standing right there" then later the man stands up and goes to that exact spot.

Naomi's dream life is much like a murder/mystery, which makes perfect sense because she is so infatuated with Hollywood and being an actress. Her dream is a life unlike her reality; a reality filled with failure as an actress and woman that doesn't love her.
Instead her dream begins with her (star-struck) arriving to Hollywood in obnoxiously cheesy fashion (she's on an escalator, I don't remember the lines exactly but they are hilarious).

She comes to Hollywood and immediately she is thrown into this fantastic noir-esque mystery where the woman she loves is completely dependent on her. They embark on a mission to find her identity and Naomi is even having success as an actress.

The most interesting aspect of the film to me is not the comment on Hollywood but the statement the film makes on the way the human mind works... the power of a fantasy compared to reality and the devastating effects
that can come when what you fantasize doesn't coincide with reality.

I liked a girl once or twice or thr- whatever, that's beside the point. What I'm getting at is, we all know what it is like to want something so bad that it almost exists for real... even if it is in your mind. Most of us also know what it feels like when fantasy and reality diverge and what you want comes crumbling apart.

That first 2/3rds of the film seems like Naomi Watt's character's last plea for what she wanted so badly... an acting career and Rita. It's her last pathetic, delusional hope for the way things could have been, and it only exists in her head.

But the point is (and I'm just speaking for myself) sometimes what goes on in our heads can be as real as anything. Som
etimes there is almost no separating a persons thought process from reality...which is exactly the kind of shit that this film digs into; blurring the lines between reality and fantasy. And on another level that's kind of what the film industry does too.

It's a scary thing to think about how a persons mind can become so infatuated with an idea or a person and having that same idea/person not pan out the way they intended can leave a person broken.


Have you ever dreamed something that you wanted to happen then woke up and been devastated when it wasn't reality? Then had to cope with that reality all over again? I have but thankfully I dealt with it better than Naomi.

The film is tough to keep track of (whodathunkit?) but it DOES make sense. Characters and objects from her r
eal life seamlessly slip into her dreams but don't necessarily play the same role they would in reality (ie. Cowboy dude, Coco, the key).

This is one of my favorite aspects of the film and it is this implementation of characters from reality into fantasy that makes this one of the most accurate representations of a dream on film. However, it is this very thing that puts many viewers off. It is frustrating at first but it is very impressive to witness and grasp upon subsequent viewings.


The key (not the blue one) to understanding the film is to not get caught up in trying to make everything fit perfectly. Have you ever had a dream where you were like, "why did that happen? Why did that guy I saw at Wal-Mart show up as a talk show host in my dream last night?" That's the kind of stuff about dreams that Lynch embraces with this film. Dreams don't always match up, and while it may seem kind of like a cop-out, neither does this film.


I've seen a bunch of Lynch films and this one works the best for me. It makes the most sense and packs an emotional punch that I can totally relate to. It's a brilliant film that is instantly recognizable as Lynch to anyone familiar with his work. It is also a very bleak vision of Hollywood and a cautionary tale of the potential of the human mind. I think.

In conclusion, I think it takes quite a dude to make a film like this and I mean that as a compliment. The man is unquestionably brilliant (in my mind anyway, which might as well make- eh, never mind). I'm not sure if I want to know what is bouncing around in that noggin of his, but I will say that he makes a damn interesting movie. Someone told me Eraserhead is his most personal film and is his closest to being autobiographical. Watch that movie, keep that in mind and someone please tell me what the hell is wrong with this man?

Outside Reading:
Straight Story
Eraserhead
(why am I recommending this movie?)

Murder is Messy (but so are chicken wings and I love those)


Thank you for tuning in to this weeks broadcast of
Overly Indepth Discussion of Film and its Effects on our Nation. This weeks topic: Murder! God, I love a good murder, it's just so sexy. Manson was totally bad-ass.


First up: A true American Cowboy Hero, a man who can boast extreme drug use, a knack for violence, and many sexual partners (most of whom were willing).... Oliver Stone.

Here's a guy that always warrants a reaction and while his films are largely hit or miss for me, this one is a home run that soars high over the fence, smashes an unassuming geezer on the head causing him to bleed to death all while some lucky reporter catches the whole thing on his camera and gets it played over and over and over on Sports Center for the entire next day. Did that make sense?


When
Natural Born Killers was released it got a reaction, which at the least seems to be the intention. Some proclaimed "genius!" some cried "rubbish!", and some literally went out and killed people.

The reading talks about the meanings of the words
sacred, power, and medicine. It defines something that is sacred as anything "that is filled with the intangible but very real power or force, for good or bad" and then draws parallels to our media.

It also seems to be saying that our interaction with the media is a very active one. Like a ceremony, our interaction with the media is something that we take part in and even help shape and evolve... we "feed"
it . I like to picture the media as Jabba the Hutt, sitting on his throne, laughing away, eating big slices of New York Style Pizza with globs of hot cheese pulling off and slapping him in the chin (I hate when that happens). Anywayyy...

Then the reading talks about this dude named Hogan who compares film to medicine because it has the power to heal and hurt. The way he describes medicine doesn't really go with how we think of medicine now-a-days. He says it's more like something that can be good for some but bad for others. Medicine is a powerful tool that can be liberating or destructive. And so in that sense, he says film is like medicine. And I agree!

He says many films get us ass-deep into the madness, but never take us back. Thus, leaving us stranded in a swamp full of West-Nile Virus mosquitoes without the antidote. Does Natural Born Killers leave us stranded in the muck, surrounded by deadly mosquitoes without the antidote? I feel an itch comin' on! We'll be right back with the answer after this short commercial break...

(Indistinct Static)

"Yes, John, but we have to be conscious at all times of the potential for destruction that this great invention has. Let us not forget the destructive powers of a scientific triumph like the atomic-"

(Indistinct Static)

"Gone savage for teenagers with
automatic weapons and boundless love. Gone savage for teenagers who are aesthetically pleasing in other words fly. Los Angeles beckons the teenagers to come to her on buses; Los Angeles loves love. It is 5am and you are listening to Los Ang-"

(Indistinct Static)

"This broadcast of the film Natural Born Killers has been edited to fit your TV screen, as well as for content that some viewers may find objecta-"


(Indistinct Static)

"This has been a message from Smokey the Bear, watch out for forest fires kids... and quit burning up all the Northern Lights, I gotta have some fun too."

(Indistinct Static)

And we're back! When we left, I posed the question, Does Natural Born Killers provide us with the antidote, or simply show us the sickness?

And the answer is... I don't know.

On one level the film is clearly knocking the obsession our culture and media has with violence, but what is the
active role that this film plays? The reading says that the film, "makes evil attractive", and I whole heartedly agree. Much like our culture, Natural Born Killers, worships the violence it critiques, which is precisely what makes it so brilliant, I think. It's a mirror that shouldn't be so god damn fun to look into. However, if understood correctly, it should make us take a good long look at ourselves and what we idolize.



Outside Reading:
Badlands - by Terrence Malick