Mulholland Drive (movie) ?

[mips]

http://www.mulhollanddrive.com/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0166924/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulholland_Drive_(film)

Has anyone seen this movie ? I saw it on tv last night and was horribly confused. Also thought this must be the work of David Lynch as it reminded me of Twin Peaks which I watched years ago and I was right after I looked it up today.

What is your take on the movie ?

[Tundro Walker]

You're in for a world of confusion.

Ok, the take my sister and I got from some site talking about it is...

Some girl (the blond) goes to Hollywood to try to make it big. The movie starts off with her being very successful, finding love, being the center of attention, etc, etc. Then, mid-way through the movie, when they're at the house seeing the dead body (I think), we're taken back to the start and how it really happened. The blond girl isn't famous and the center of attention...the brunette is. The blond's fantasy (1st half of the movie) was her fantiscizing that she was living the brunette's famous life. In actuality, she's a 2nd rate actress that isn't making it, and (I think) ends up on drugs, has a tragic love affair with the brunette, who breaks up with her because she's (the blond's) a wacko. At the end, I think the dead girl is the blond. I can't remember how she died.

Watching that movie was like watching a train wreck. You want to stop, but for some God-awful reason, you can't. We watched it all the way through, and were utterly confused by it at the end. I understand how screen-writers and such want to get all fancy with plot and things, but if 99% of the folks who watch it get lost, then it's not a good film. I think only the really out-there, artsy-fartsy film critics who were bored with everything under the sun said it was really exceptional. But I think it's undeserved praise...while a nice-looking film, it's just too confusing.

Go rent Memento instead.

[qpieus]

I watched it because I like David Lynch stuff like twin peaks and blue velvet. I remember nothing about the movie other than the fact I was thoroughly confused.

[Tux Aubrey]

One of my all time favorites! It gets even better with re-watching. Once you realise whose point-of-view you are getting and that she's genuinely delusional, you'll be fine.

Momento is good too (if you really LIKE being confused!)

[urukrama]

Try Lost Highway...

[p_quarles]

Try Lost Highway...
+1

That movie is not for the easily offended, though.

[undine]

but if 99% of the folks who watch it get lost, then it's not a good film.

I don't think that argument holds any weight whatsoever. The best works of art are often the most challenging, not only because their contents are necessarily demanding, but because challenging the viewer to use their mental and emotional faculties to a greater degree (or maybe even a greater number of them), can be important in a functional sense.

Many of David Lynch's films are simply impenetrable when approached with common methods of interpretation, because they are not structured according to the normal logic of waking/conscious thought. What they resemble, to a far greater extents, are dreams; in that, as Freud observed, the language is primarily a 'visual' rather than 'verbal' one, and everything that appears in the film/dream has a symbolic function. Also, like dreams, the narrative proceeds more in accordance with the movement through psychic states and affects rather than in a strictly causal sequence. For example, in any given dream, you might dream of a vase of roses somehere in the scenery, and this in turn triggers a memory of a high-school sweetheart with an accompanying affect which then suddenly transplants the dreamer into a high-school setting, in a way that will not strike the dreamer as unusual, but would appear illogical and confusing to the conscious mind.

IF you want to interpret David Lynch's films then, it is necessary to approach them in the same way as one would approach the interpretation of a dream. There have been many books written on the subject, but most are bogus. Freud's The Interpretation of Dreams is still the most fundamentally important work, but Jung also opened the way to some viable methodologies as well. The most important step, though, is to not try to interpret the movie during the first viewing. Just appreciate the aesthetic and emotional qualities of the film, and don't get hung up on trying to unravel its mysteries. Instead, just remain mindful of how different scenes make you feel, and where they lead your mind to wander. After the first viewing, sleep on it for awhile, and then come back to it with the objective of exploring the various symbols and so in greater depth. At this point, you will still be primarily using your intuitive function, but give yourself license to start thinking about, and 'amplifying' (see Jung) the symbols, and also begin constellating the various elements of the film into a cohesive whole.

It may take several passes over the film in order to sketch out an interpretation which hangs together and makes sense, but like any skill, it's a matter of practice; and the more practiced you are, the less time and effort the process requires. I remember really struggling with Mulholland Drive and Lost Highway when I first saw them, and it took me many repeat viewings before I was able to interpret their meaning, but I eventually got there. As a result of this practice, Inland Empire, which is even more demanding than these two, was far more accessible to me, and it only took a couple of viewings to get the gist of it. Now all that being said, there is another way in which Lynch's films are like dreams, and that is in that all the symbols are 'overdetermined', and there is, at the 'navel' of the movie, a certain impenetrable core which is simply off-limits to the conscious mind in its entirety. What this means is that no single interpretation is ever going to exhaust all the meanings inherent in the work, and no understanding can ever be said to be 'complete.' The important thing, is not really a 100% complete understanding of the dream or movie in question, but rather the ongoing process of interpretation and insight which throws light on regions of one's own psychic makeup. For instance, you may respond in an emotional way to some particular scene (which is why I suggested keeping track of these responses), without really knowing why; but after going through the interpretative process, the reason becomes apparent, and perhaps you just might find out something new about yourself as a result. Freud did not call dreams 'the royal road to the unconscious' for nothing, and I think that Lynch's films have approximately the same value, aside from being great works on the level of cinematography and storytelling.

[michaelzap]

Just in case you get to the point where you think that you understand it:
http://www.mulholland-drive.net/studies/theories.htm

[Dimitriid]

99% of the folks who get lost were too busy trying to figure out either every little single detail and/or trying to rationalize why is this happening instead of what is happening to this characters.

While lenghty discussions are welcome and encouraged, its not rocket science to just follow Diane/Betty around and figure out she is a very disturbed person.After that all the little details just click.

If you think Mulholland Dr. was hard to follow try Inland Empire. That certainly made my head spin a lot more, but in a good way ( when it comes to Lynch, there is such a thing ).

[odiseo77]

I watched it last year, and though I'm not a fervent David Lynch fan, I liked it a lot and consider it maybe one of the bests films Lynch has made. It's indeed very confusing -like mostly all the films by D. Lynch- but has some kind of enigma; some subtle mystery air well accomplished. The only thing I really didn't like was the last part, when the little old couple enter from behind the door and start scaring the girl (found it like out of place).

By the way, I just come from watching the first half of "Inland Empire" a few hours ago and will continue watching it tomorrow... I don't know how it will end, but if you found Mulholland Drive confusing, then you'll think Lynch was delirious when making this one (typical of the films made by Lynch)... haven't finished watching it, but so far, I'm kind of disliking it (well, the weird thing is, I like some parts, but really dislike others :-? ...some kind of repulsion/attraction at the same time).

[batbuntu]

FWIW, these are the hints Lynch gave about understanding the film in January 2002 for a contest Guardian Unlimited was running:

1) Pay particular attention to the beginning of the film: at least two clues are revealed before the credits.

2) Notice appearances of the red lampshade.

3) Can you hear the title of the film that Adam Kesher is auditioning actresses for? Is it mentioned again?

4) An accident is a terrible event... Notice the location of the accident.

5) Who gives a key, and why?

6) Notice the robe, the ashtray, the coffee cup.

7) What is felt, realised and gathered at the club Silencio?

8) Did talent alone help Camilla?

9) Note the occurrences surrounding the man behind 'Winkies'

10) Where is Aunt Ruth?

Good luck!

[TeaSwigger]

/tangent

Something bugs me about naming a film or TV show (and it seems as if it simply must cover horrible people and criminal cruelty and violence) after some well known but innocent noun best known for something else very different. Grand Canyon, The Californian, The American, Orange County etc and so on. If Hollywood made some movie or TV using my town, street, nationality, religion, or beloved place to try distinguishing their ten billionth "study" of a serial killer or something, well I wouldn't appreciate it.

/tangent

Back to the regular programming...

[Erdaron]

I saw this movie a while ago and loved it. Yeah it made my head spin, but it was good. Though confusing and chaotic it had seemed, there was some kind of method to its madness.

My personal theory is that it is a study of different things that happen to a person who comes to Hollywood in pursuit of a successful acting career. The same person (incarnated as either a name or a body) is successful actress and a waitress in a local diner still trying to nail her first audition. The affair, to me, means self-infatuation, an ego trip which inevitably ends in disaster.

Although, I don't know. Lynch is well known for non-linear storytelling that doesn't really follow rational logic. Like undine said, it's more like a dream than a traditional story. It makes emotional sense, not logic sense.

I don't think any of the characters are insane and the story is just a delusion. This seems like too easy an answer.

All else aside, it's a very well acted and shot film.

[undine]

/tangent

Something bugs me about naming a film or TV show (and it seems as if it simply must cover horrible people and criminal cruelty and violence) after some well known but innocent noun best known for something else very different. Grand Canyon, The Californian, The American, Orange County etc and so on. If Hollywood made some movie or TV using my town, street, nationality, religion, or beloved place to try distinguishing their ten billionth "study" of a serial killer or something, well I wouldn't appreciate it.

/tangent

Back to the regular programming...

That's a tangent alright, since it has nothing whatever to do with Mulholland Drive, or any of Lynch's other works.

[Spike-X]

I saw it a few years ago. Didn't really 'understand' it as such, but loved it nonetheless. Certain scenes, and the whole feel of the film in general, haunted me for weeks afterward.

[gn2]

I watched it at the cinema when it was released, it's an excellent film. I liked it so much I bought the DVD.

I enjoy pretty much anything David Lynch, especially The Straight Story and Wild At Heart, both of which I found very moving, one of which actually made me cry.

[TeaSwigger]

That's a tangent alright, since it has nothing whatever to do with Mulholland Drive, or any of Lynch's other works.

It has from the moment they chose to use the name Mulholland Drive. No, unlike the film itself, I don't think the name was artistically inspired. I know I shouldn't care. It's a bad habit. I'd probably care less if it wasn't as good a film. The title just bugs me.


My personal theory is that it is a study of different things that happen to a person who comes to Hollywood in pursuit of a successful acting career. The same person (incarnated as either a name or a body) is successful actress and a waitress in a local diner still trying to nail her first audition. The affair, to me, means self-infatuation, an ego trip which inevitably ends in disaster.

Although, I don't know. Lynch is well known for non-linear storytelling that doesn't really follow rational logic. Like undine said, it's more like a dream than a traditional story. It makes emotional sense, not logic sense.

I don't think any of the characters are insane and the story is just a delusion. This seems like too easy an answer.

Interesting theory! Only after it appeared to be established that she's one disturbed person (or so my interpretation went) did I think the earlier portions felt "off" but how much is colored by that was something it made me wonder. Which is good. If that makes sense lol. If one takes it as being that "unliteral" in the logical sense, it could be a sort of expose of self-infatuation rather than duality or a tale of two characters... hm.

[CronoDekar]

To be quite honest, I watched it in theaters, and... didn't really like it. Mainly I just didn't get it, and I really had no desire to watch it again.