So, I saw this very anticipated movie. The brief history that I'm familiar with points to the inclusion of pieces previously only available to subscribers of David Lynch's web site, davidlynch.com. For example, the Rabbits clips have been on the site for awhile now, having been filmed after Mulholland Drive. (That's why Naomi Watts gets a voice credit.) Also, I had heard Axxon N would be the name of the new Lynch movie, before Inland Empire came out. I've never seen the Axxon N clips on the site (b/c I'm not a subscriber) so I don't know if he reshot them for this or if they're the same, etc.
Brief sidenote: it's interesting that on this movie and Mulholland Drive, Lynch is working with footage intended for other uses. "Intended" may be a misguiding word there, but Mulholland was supposed to be his TV show follow-up to Twin Peaks, which I thought helped explain all the madness in the last half of that movie. That is, he just had pieces that he was never able to flesh out. And here we have clips from the web site. It's like Tricky reusing samples from his own songs. It's unusual, but it works.
The MOVIE:
OK. I liked it. At times, a lot. The first half was consistently brilliant, and I really started getting excited when Jeremy Irons (as a director) tells his actors (Laura Dern and Justn Theroux) "The movie we're shooting is a remake of a film that was never completed. It was never completed because something happened to the two main actors." That's like something from a wonderful film noir or Polanski pic. At times, Lynch definitely can emulate the old Hollywood suspense masters.
It's hard to rate a Lynch movie the way you rate other movies. Maybe it's just my bias b/c I like his stuff, but I have to compare it more to how you rate your favorite band's albums. You pretty much like everything they do, some being better than the others, but all are better than whatever pop stuff happens to be out at the time. How do you rate Inland Empire the same way you rate The Departed, or Flags of Our Fathers, or Children of Men. They're all great, some flawed, but these are essentially genre pictures donw by great directors. David Lynch is his own genre.
Continuing the music theme: Mulholland Drive was near perfect. It was, let's see, his Nirvana. Inland Empire is his Pearl Jam. We love Pearl Jam. But Nirvana...
My only two comments/complaints about the movie: 1) I'm not sure Laura Dern really pulled off the version of her character that we'll call "the poor woman." This is the woman who tells the guy in the glasses stories about her violent history with men. I suppose I "got" that she was supposed to be some alternate Laura Dern, someone who is completely on the opposite end of the social ladder than the Laura Dern we've been growing close to the whole movie, and this somehow illuminates the overall character that is the movie/woman on the bed/the actress in the movie (as the tag line for the movie is "a woman in trouble"). Frankly, I just didn't buy Laura Dern in that roll, because her face is so absent of real physical hardship. There's a lot of psychic hardship there, but not much actual toil. Given the shifting realities of the film, I think the audience would easily accept a different actress, maybe even a documentary interview of a real woman with these experiences.
2) How about that happy ending? It's new for a Lynch film (barring Straight Story), but I like it. It's very easy to get caught up in the dread of any of his stuff and, previously, the comedic/happy moments were buried in all the other muck. This time, we go out on a high note, which is pleasant.
So, will someone else please go see this movie, so's we can rap?
RATING: Theory of Relativity
No comments:
Post a Comment