| eraserhead |
[Sep. 19th, 2006|10:10 pm] |
David lynch is weird. And this is a weird film. In the special feature on the dvd called “stories”, lynch said that no one has ever provided an interpretation of the film which matches his own. And I will say no one ever will.
The sounds of this film are phenomenal. And that thing. I don’t what it was supposed to be, but it looked real. I wonder if spielberg was at least slightly influenced by this when he designed ET. But ET looked obviously fake, whereas this thing looked like the real deal, and it’s not even real! And of course it’s in beautiful black and white. Lynch talked about the painstaking detail it took to light everything- and it shows. But alas, I don’t really like this film. Not my type of film. It just seemed to linger on and on. Maybe I need to see it with an audience. Cause there are certain scenes which I think I could’ve laughed at or enjoyed, but didn’t for whatever reason. Sometimes watching with others helps.
I liked the "stories" special feature more. Lynch talks about how his teacher at afi didn’t like the film, but defended it to the point of resigning from afi. If that’s true, then that’s awesome. To have such belief in art, even art you don’t personally like, wow, that’s out of site. Unlike some buffoon I’ve encountered, who would prefer certain films to have never been made simply because it didn’t cater to his tastes.
The stories feature had some hilarious bits. Particularly when lynch is talking about sticking the dead cat into a jar of formaldehyde (“after that I went up to have lunch”)- I m paraphrasing, of course, but that was in essence what he said. i dont know; it was funny when he said it. I also liked the story he told about how he tried to get the film into cannes.
The guardian once named lynch the most important director working today. I don’t know about that. Actually, Im not sure who I would name as the most important director working today. But I can respect that title (lynch was given this title by the guardian a few years ago; it would probably change if the guardian had to write that article today). What I do know is that they named Scorsese as the second most important director (this list came out before aviator was released) and that is dead wrong. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=91.7){kind=small}
anonom's journal
