Mulholland Drive

[bix171]

Though it’s far more coherent than its predecessor “Lost Highways”, David Lynch is beginning to show signs of repetition and this noir fantasy-nightmare is so reminiscent of other Lynch films that it ends up signifying nothing. Still, nobody does David Lynch better than Lynch: he’s an artist when it comes to evoking dread and the film is never less than morbidly fascinating. There's very little point in going over the plot because it’s far more of a mood piece than anything else; suffice it to say the primary issue here (much like “Lost Highways”) is shifting identities. To that end, the characters are blank though gorgeous. Worth seeing as long as you recognize you’re spinning your wheels.

[Perfume V]

I couldn't disagree more. I think Mulholland Drive is the single greatest film I've ever seen. Of course, the key to our disagreement rests on a more-or-less semantic point - that what you see as repetition, I see as Lynch's Fanny and Alexander - a stunningly personal compendium of every lasting image and idea that has passed through Lynch's darker films, as well as adding new material, most notably refuting the silly accusations of misogyny that have occasionally been flung at him with fully formed female characters and a very real sensuality.

It certainly scores over Lost Highway by being broader and deeper (though some may see this as less focused), and thankfully restores the man's defining sense of humour that was painfully absent from the 1997 film. What he does next is still a mystery, but I'd like to see him do either something truly extreme and bizarre in an Eraserhead vein, or another Straight Story, simply because the particular vein of inspiration mined in Blue Velvet, Wild At Heart, Twin Peaks and Lost Highway has probably - no pun intended - come to the end of the road with Mulholland Drive.

[Ilker81x]

I think it is unfair to compare "Mulholland Drive" to "Lost Highway" simply because the two, at least in my view, come from two different standpoints. Yes, both have the signature Lynchian motifs: references to classic Americana, i.e. the cool jet-black Cadillac, great songs from the '50's, the seedy underbelly hiding beneath the seemingly perfect suburban ideal, the blond/brunette connection that has been popping up in everything Lynch has done since "Blue Velvet." Both movies reused ideas from previous films that Lynch was unable to utilize ("Song to the Siren" was supposed to be in "Blue Velvet," but ended up in "Lost Highway." "Crying" was his original choice for "Blue Velvet," but ended up in "Mulholland Drive."). These are all just the slightest examples of how both are quintessential David Lynch films. BUT, I do not think the two movies come from the same place in Lynch's mind.

I think the fact that Trent Reznor worked on the soundtrack to "Lost Highway" says a lot about where "Lost Highway" comes from. The soundtrack to that film is enough to prove my case (let alone the entire atmosphere of the movie itself). Nine Inch Nails, Rammstein, Barry Adamson, Marilyn Manson, all on a soundtrack that is as mysterious as any of his other films, but far more malevolent in my mind because of that industrial twinge. "Lost Highway" is far more a tale of insanity and the depths of human depravity (pornography and murder), whereas "Mulholland Drive" is little more than a tale of insanity because of unreciprocated love. Sure it can be argued that "Lost Highway" was about that as well, but I think whereas "Mulholland Drive" was more about despair, "Lost Highway" had more of an evil side to it.

Most of "Lost Highway" is black. Mostly at night, mostly subdued lighting with very high contrast (in a film sense), mostly black clothes (okay that's nothing new, but they take on a more blackened sense in "Lost Highway." I don't know if that's because of the film used, but I think it's just the atmosphere). The use of fire in "Lost Highway" is also far more malevolent because it's not only used to a greater degree (a burning house), but it also manifests itself into a person, a character so ugly and so mysterious he can only be described as evil incarnate (Robert Blake of course). While most of his other films just have a few flames or a candle blowing out, "Lost Highway" has an inferno. I can't even remember "Mulholland Drive" having any fire in it.

Yes there are thematic similarities between the two. A mysterious blue light that occurs when a change is about to happen (the light in Fred Madison's cell before he transforms into Pete Dayton, and the light at Club Silencio before Diane's fantasy ends). Both movies seem to deal with insanity as a result of unrequited love, but while "Mulholland Drive" is somewhat sympathetic and more about Diane's despair, "Lost Highway" is a darker tale of Fred Madison's descent into denial and evil. There will always be similarities between Lynch's films, always. He's an artist, and I've said before that every artist has a style, a motif, a method of approaching a work that is different each time and yet consistent with what that artist is attempting to portray, that part of the artist's psyche that comes to fruition when he completes a work. Every movie Lynch makes will have something to do with a previous one, but it's unfair to compare them and to say he's reached a deadend because you're missing the point.

There was an episode of "The Simpsons" when Isabella Rosselinni thought Homer was an artist because he made trash into weird shapes. Then he became unpopular because he kept doing the same thing. I think it funny that Isabella of all people would be the guest voice in this episode because the same statements have been made towards Lynch before, and I think they are simply not fair. One expects an artist to be consistent, but always challenging. I think "Mulholland Drive" was challenging, but not nearly as much as "Lost Highway." "Lost Highway" has no resolution or explanation. "Mulholland Drive" does (albeit because he filmed Diane's story two years after the rest to wrap it up as a theatrical film instead of a TV pilot). People can relate to Diane in the sense that we've all be jilted once or twice, and we all react differently to it. I could sympathize with Diane because it's easy to feel sorry for someone whose chance in life was screwed. It's harder to relate to Fred Madison. He's a jealous murderer who has fallen into a pit of denial and continuous identity crisis, ultimately succumbing to his own evil. I think for "Mulholland Drive" to come out AFTER "Lost Highway" might seem strange since I felt "Lost Highway" was a natural direction to go in this day and age of technophobia and post-industrial madness. But...that's just me.

Personally...I think Lynch is doing just fine and I await his next film with much enthusiasm.

[just_dial_666]

Wow, people seem to love using really big words on this thread! :)

Anyway, Mulholland Drive is the only piece of Lynch's work I've seen, and I have to agree that the most memorable aspect of the film was the atmosphere created, particularly through the tremendously moody soundtrack (who actually composed the score for MD? It's got to be one of the best I've heard, right up there with Pleasantville) and some of the very unusual camerawork.

Granted, I've watched the film about six or seven times now and I'm still not quite sure what the significance of Diane was (can someone help me out with that?). What struck me most was the depiction of the entertainment industry given in the movie - where it's shown as something of a spiralling dog-eat-dog world with strings attached to almost everything.

But seriously, I never quite picked up the entire concept behind the movie - part of why I love it, it's so complex. What was Diane's connection to Betty and Rita?

[Perfume V]

I have a sneaking suspicion that Betty didn't exist, but I'll leave you to be tormented by how that would work yourself. ;) Seriously, I'm not sure I like explaining Mulholland Drive. The joy is that every time I watch it, I pick up on at least one detail that completely negates all of my previous ideas.

The score - which is indeed ace - is by Angelo Badalamenti, who also cameos in the film, slowly dribbling an espresso into a napkin. He does the scores for most Lynch movies, and plenty of others, too. Reccommended further listening would include his collaborations with Tim Booth in the mid 90s (as Booth And The Bad Angel), and his soundtrack to the Twin Peaks movie, which includes him rapping on one track!

[Ilker81x]

Angelo Badalamenti composed the score for "Mulholland Drive," along with some additional composition by David Lynch and another musician whose name I can't remember since I don't have the CD in front of me. Angelo Badalamenti has been composing scores for Lynch's films ever since "Blue Velvet."

Diane's connection to Betty and Rita...well...it's basically about how Diane's life sucks because she loves someone who doesn't love her back...she she plots to have her killed, and goes a bit insane to the point where in her mind she relives her life as she wishes it could've been.

If you want to get into specifics, you'd have to break each character down into two categories...real life and Diane's dream. It's all part of Diane's own little world where she tries to make everything alright...but since it's a dream, there are hints to the truth...and eventually it breaks down and reality kicks in.

I'd be happy to give my interpretation if you really want it...but it might be a huge post, as I'm sure anybody's interpretation of that movie would probably be.

[seven_of_nine]

Seems I'm always saying this, but boy, does this film qualify: I personally go to see films that entertain/provoke/stimulate me, it's what a movie is supposed to do! When I saw M.D., I walked out of the theater like I'd been hit with a bat! The amount of sheer bizarre information injected into the watcher is incredible. Each strange little part of the movie is like it's own whole weird little idea, all acting together at the end of the movie to make your head swim with weird imagery and confusion. Some might not call it film making, but I suspect at achieving this battered psychological effect on the viewer Lynch might be unparalleled. I've been a fan from the beginning, mind you, but not since Blue Velvet did he blast me as good as this movie. At least it's not a film you come out of saying "it was all right", I'd suspect most reactions are on either end of the spectrum. If you want to go to films that will have you saying "it was all right", that's fine. Me, I'll skip those and watch TV for that!

[oscar jubis]

Mulholland Drive may be my favorite in a short list of recent great American movies. Let's see...American Beauty, Kundun, Happiness, Dead Man. A coupla others. Personally what I love most about it is how empathetic Lynch made me feel toward both women, flaws, warts and all.
Key to my take on this film is its production history. Lynch shot a 2-hour pilot(86 min. or so +commercials) for ABC. It was rejected. The seeds of many hours of future episodes were planted in those 86 minutes. There is no way everything can be explained in the 50 min or so Lynch shot after getting $ from french producer Alain Sarde. So the film contains characters, clues, themes, and symbols left undeveloped and unresolved but palpable enough to serve as fodder for the projection of the viewer's imagination. What multiple viewings led me to conclude is that everything that happens prior to the Cowboy waking up Diane is a dream fueled by drugs,alcohol, and a river of tears. A dream contains truth, subconscious projections, sexual fantasies, maybe wishful thinking and exchange of identities. This conceptualization is flexible enough to incorporate what we observe without a complete loss of verisimilitude. I enjoyed reading everybody's comments here. Perfume V calling the film Lynch's Fanny and Alexander seems particularly inspired to me and 81x's comments about Lost Highway seem well thought out. Thanks.

[Ilker81x]

It's pretty much common knowledge by this point I think that "Mulholland Dr." was a pilot episode for a tv show that ended up being canned because it was "too strange." Oh, and if it's not common knowledge, it should be. But yes, the point of the tv show was to reveal more and more clues to Diane's dream over time as each episode went on.

There is no way everything can be explained in the 50 min or so Lynch shot after getting $ from french producer Alain Sarde. So the film contains characters, clues, themes, and symbols left undeveloped and unresolved but palpable enough to serve as fodder for the projection of the viewer's imagination.

- Oscar Jubis.

Who says Lynch was TRYING to explain everything? I think by shooting the additional 50 minutes, Lynch was providing a resolution (not an explanation) that would encompass the symbols and metaphors of the original pilot into an ending that provided not an explanation, but more clues to the truth. Lynch has never felt the need to explain himself or his art, leaving viewers to see it for themselves and then pick up the pieces and draw their own conclusions and interpretations. Sure that first pilot episode was something to start from, but to make it a movie unto itself, he had to provide that one last clue...Diane's life. Without it, there's no way to see the pilot portion for what it was...a dream composed of the twisted fragments of Diane's psyche. BUT, that's NOT an explanation...it's one more clue to the mystery. It's not a neat-little-package, but I think he did an excellent job with those last 50 minutes because it really wrapped everything up and made the story whole.

I also think it's a testament to Lynch's craft as an artist, that he can pick up the pieces of a project that didn't work (not failed, just didn't work at the time), and use those pieces to make a new composition that works unto itself. "Mulholland Dr." doesn't NEED to be a series because with those 50 minutes into Diane's life, the whole movie comes together and becomes it's own. I think it would ultimately fail as a series, not just because it's too strange, but because even "Twin Peaks" wasn't all written and directed by Lynch...and while it's a great show, I think it didn't last long because there were too many elements, all drawn out too much, by different people with different visions than Lynch. I think that over time those different elements get lost in the shuffle a little...I watched every episode of "Twin Peaks," and some things I got lost on and had to re-watch certain episodes. Even by the end, I still wasn't sure of a few things. I think "Mulholland Dr." would suffer the same problem. Not that everybody would get lost, but I'd like to think that I'm an intellectual and that I can think as well as anybody...if I get lost, I think a good number of other people will too. Not to sound elitist or anything...

Of course in a series (and in film too), there has to be a sense of cooperation and compromise, and Lynch understands that I think. BUT in doing so, the original vision of the writer/director is lost. I think if "Mulholland Dr." became a series, Lynch's original story would become something else by the time he came to that point of resolution, a few episodes later. Maybe that would be a good thing, but Lynch is an artist and I think an artist's original vision should only be changed by the artist. Sure he has help and input from fans and coworkers and producers, but it's still HIS work.

I think "Mulholland Dr." is great as a movie, and I like the lore behind its creation, a new movie made from a rejected tv show...only Lynch could do such a thing and get an Oscar nomination for it.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Ilker81x
Who says Lynch was TRYING to explain everything?

Certainly not me. That'd be most un-Lynch-like. Let's read again: THERE IS NO WAY EVERYTHING CAN BE EXPLAINED IN THE 50 MIN OR SO LYNCH SHOT AFTER GETTING $...

Translation: It is not feasible to develop/resolve/interpret all the characters/symbols/subplots/themes introduced during the pilot(no matter who was directing).
I am trying to convey how unnecessary it is for the viewer to attempt to do so because it is impossible, regardless of the director's intentions. I realize this has been a source of frustration to some, when it is clearly the wrong way to approach this most moving of Lynch's films.

[Ilker81x]

It is NOT unnecessary to do so though. Otherwise, why watch it? Lynch may not explain his movies. He may not make everything simple and cut-and-dry, but he is an artist. Part of creating art is that it is to be seen by others, and as such others ARE going to try to analyze and interpret the movie. I watch movies to be entertained, and if it has a story like "Mulholland Dr.", then I WANT to interpret it and draw my own conclusions. Sure not all of them will be right, but that's the fun of the movie. I make my own interpretations, and I LIKE them because that way the movie makes some sense to me beyond being some bit of nonsensical trash. The difference between me and Roger Ebert in this case is that I DO consider that Lynch is trying to convey something, he's trying to send a message and communicate something. The fun I get is trying to figure out what that message says to ME. Ebert didn't seem to get this in his review of "Blue Velvet," because to me it sounded like he wasn't considering the kind of artist Lynch is. He was approaching it from the perspective that Lynch is just another filmmaker, when he clearly isn't.
I won't disagree that it's not feasible to understand everything in the pilot, but when you include "in the pilot" I think you're missing the point of the movie. As a whole, both pilot and later additions, the movie works very well and everything comes together...not really in a clear way that we can all tell what was dream and what was reality, but in a way that can conceivably make sense. The pilot is irrelevant...from the few clues we are given in the last 50 minutes, it becomes easier to figure out what the movie is about and what Lynch is saying. We're not going to get everything, and I agree that we shouldn't try to...but it is necessary to TRY to understand SOMETHING of the movie's symbolism.
If I'm misinterpreting you oscar jubis, I'm sorry. But I don't think it's unnecessary to try to resolve and interpret at all...it's futile to try and get EVERYTHING, true. But like I said before, if I can reach some sort of interpretation that makes the film mean something to me beyond some weird character shift and series of visuals with catchy dialogue, then it's not unnecessary. It makes me want to watch the film even more to try and figure some of those other things out. Whether or not I ever get them is beside the point...I get the fun out of watching the movie. I don't think it's impossible to resolve everything from the pilot either because in Lynch's mind, I'm sure he did...or at least he resolved those things from the pilot that he felt were worth resolving...and resolution is not the same thing as explanation. I know you're not saying it is, oscar jubis, BUT artists call a work complete when they have done as much as they feel is necessary and within their abilities. From this, Lynch DID do what he set out to do with the last 50 minutes of "Mulholland Dr." and thus made it a full movie. Anything he left unresolved was because he wanted it that way...and as such he knows that audiences will watch it and make some attempt to figure it out.

[tabuno]

One of the fascinating coincidences is that both Mulholland Drive and A Beautiful Mind came out the same year and that both Ron Howard who directed A Beautiful Mind and David Lynch who directed Mulholland Drive were nominated for best director by the Academy Awards.

[spoiler]

From Ilker81x's posts, he seems to have grasped the essential nature of Mulholland Drive. What makes Mulholland Drive quite exceptional is Mr. Lynch's incorporation of Diane's mental imagery as a result of Camilla's rather loose attitudes towards affection and Diane's apparent infatuation with Camilla. Unlike A Beautiful Mind where the lead character, John Nash, suffered from schizophrenia that was revealed much later in the film's rather disquieting revelations that, in part, caused it to be awarded Best Picture at the Academy Awards, much like The Sixth Sense' twist at the end. In Mulholland Drive there is a much more subtle and more fantastic imagery that of course David Lynch is famous for. Yet his typical approach to movies is perfectly suited to a movie like Mulholland Drive (or rejected television series) that would not be so apparent with someone with a full blown case of schizophrenia.

In Diane's case in Mulholland Drive, her case seems more aptly described as dissociative disorder that would be consistent with the use of Mr. Lynch's strange dreamlike, fantastic sounds, sights, visual effects, and mixed identities. In some ways, Mr. Lynch had the more difficult job than Ron Howard because of the need to infer strangeness rather than just apparent actual belief in something unreal as would be the case of schizophrenia. With dissociative disorder one might suspect seepage of reality, mixed with imagination and fantasy a much more complex directorial job.

What Mulholland Drive successfully accomplishes is the superb presentation of the dissociative state of mind in its dreams and hopes, dispair along with the monsters from the id and ideals long for but unattainable. In some ways, after a third viewing, this movie is relatively simple in its actual explanation as Ilker81x
has already described, but much more layered and densely conceived in order to produce such a compelling and fascinating movie.