criterionforum.org

Well, I finally saw it in Atlanta last night and, I hate to say, really did not care for it. Being a huge Lynch fan, that was hard to admit. Perhaps I had built up such high expectations for this film that anything would have disappointed somewhat, but I actually feel that this is one of Lynch's weakest projects. All the interviews he's given over the past year or so claiming to have fallen in love with DV with no intent to return to film is extremely disappointing. I am usually smitten by the general look of his films, but this one just looked bad. Of course I realize the man is an auteur and a perfectionist, and this is of course exactly the way he wanted it, but it was nowhere near as visually appealing as Lost Highway, Blue Velvet, or Mulholland Drive. Add to that the running time and general drawn-out feeling and I was ready to get out of there...

The dialogue, as usual, was great and the acting (particularly Dern) was pretty amazing. I will revisit Inland Empire--it probably just won't be for a while.

Sorry if this is old news, but wikipedia says the DVD will be hitting the (region 1) streets in early June.

RHINO ANNOUNCES PLAN TO DISTRIBUTE DAVID LYNCH'S INLAND EMPIRE ON DVD

Caught it last weekend in cleveland and it is, indeed, amazing. (if anyone cares what i really though, you can check out cinemablend.com for a bunch of gushing generalities on its greatness).

The Telegraph interviews Lynch.

Coming out on DVD in Iran on April 28, per wikipedia.

One of the best explications of the plot I have seen:

INLAND EMPIRE

That is an interesting theory, but even though I thought Inland Empire was a dud, trying to fit the film into a conventional, logical, plot driven framework does Lynch's work a disservice. I believe the film is far more idea driven, then plot driven. It's about celebrity, image, Hollywood and the development of those ideas seem to be of primary concern to the film, driven by the actions of the characters. I don't think you need to understand the plot to "get" the film as it offers a wide array of visual, musical and ideological themes that develop throughout the film.

I agree there is some (or maybe a lot of) "shoehorning" going on in that piece. But the author I think successfully unscrambled the film into a coherent narrative, and I just thought the exercise was pretty impressive. The one specific point I did agree with was that the Hollywood part of the film is Sue's fantasy while dying.

Also it appears the author wrote that after just one viewing. Pretty amazing.

Finally saw this after a miraculous second coming to Minneapolis. I am totally stunned. Completely terrifying and emotionally draining. And now I'm listening to "The Locomotion" on repeat.

A bit shocked to see this opened in Vermont on Friday. 150-mile round trip here I come!

Yeah, it finally opened here in Milwaukee as well (for a one week run at the Times Cinema). It certainly is impressive but in all honesty I'm going to need to return to it in order to gauge it properly. It's exhausting and clearly that's part of its intended effect but I don't think I'll be able to get myself back to see it while it's here. I can't help but feel that home viewing will be more ideal for this, despite the obvious big screen themes it traffics in. So I'll have to wait till video to be able to post any more cohesive thoughts but I will say that I was very pleased by the look of the thing. Lynch made the most of the technology and the aesthetic of IE feels completely justified by the content. It's far more inventive and compelling in its design than people are giving it credit for.

I should probably also add that I have no idea where Antoine Doinel and justeleblanc are coming from when they suggest that this is simple at its core. Antoine seems to think that its intent is quite self-evident and narrow, which I doubt, and justeleblanc seems to think that it's somehow a simpler piece because it's less about narrative and more about the way in which the scenes are connected, the associative reasoning behind its construction. But this wouldn't make it simpler, would it? Anyway, barrym71's approach is more to my liking, privileging as it does the influence of theoretical abstraction. But Lynch's work is unified in that way; it's as simple or as complicated as you let it be.

I have an inkling that some of the movie deals with the "process" an actor goes through in taking on a role and performing it, but I'm sure that doesn't provide a tidy answer for everything in the film. Honestly, I have no idea what's going on in the film and I'm more than happy to keep it that way. Even in grad school for film studies, I resisted the "interpretation" of films. Now--especially when I'm not required to perform interpretation in any way, shape, or form (except for the rare instance of reviewing something)--I appreciate being able just to accept a film as it gives itself to me.

Last week I drove to Gainesville (2 hours) to see IE. I loved everything I saw on the screen but I decided that it's best not to say anything too much about IE until after I watch it two or three more times.

Driving home, I was so exhausted and energized at the same time with IE rattling so hard all over inside me. At one point, I had to pull over at a gas station so I could break down crying. It's just that the experience of visiting IE was so overwhelming ....even just seeing Laura Dern back starring in a David Lynch film was incredibly overwhelming (at least for me). I never forget the sheer thrill and passion I felt as a very young man discovering Laura Dern in Blue Velvet and Wild at Heart on the big screen and more than 15 years later, IE was a dejavu for me - all the emotions I had back then rushing back.

David Lynch made another masterpiece.

My trusty car has held up through all my undergraduate years in Georgia until this semester. Couldn't find anyone else willing to drive to Atlanta, unfortunately, though it does make my heart flutter to know that something exciting came to this state.

Michael wrote:even just seeing Laura Dern back starring in a David Lynch film was incredibly overwhelming (at least for me).

I didn't have quite the same reaction, but I had a huge grin on my face when Diane Ladd showed up. I had forgotten she was in this. She should have won ALL the Oscars for her work in Wild at Heart (a movie of which I'm otherwise not all that fond). Can you believe fucking Whoopi Goldberg won for Ghost instead? I'll bet she'd trade it in for Flooz now if she could (she already lost it once).

I had a huge grin on my face when Diane Ladd showed up.

Same here. Unlike you, I was and still am way super fond of Wild at Heart for personal reasons (seen it at least 50 times and I know every dialogue by heart!) Its theatrical release was perfect timing for me - at that stage of my life when I was breaking away from my family, finding myself, etc. I was the same age as Jeffrey and Sandy when Blue Velvet came out. Same thing with Sailor and Lula a few years later. So it always felt like Laura Dern was a close friend to me. And more than 15 years later, here I saw her back in the world of David Lynch. This time more grown up, just like where I am right now. Dern was so phenomenal in IE!

Does anyone think IE is Lynch's best film to date? Better than Mulholland Dr.? Every Lynch film is a masterpiece in its own right.

Dune is a masterpiece of set design at least.

Michael wrote:Does anyone think IE is Lynch's best film to date? Better than Mulholland Dr.?

I think it ranks up there with his best, which for me are Eraserhead, Blue Velvet, The Straight Story, and Mulholland Drive. It might even be better than these. But, then again, what's "better" mean...?

It's an astounding work of cinema.

That was a stupid question. Sorry.

I saw Inland Empire back in february at the International Film Festival Rotterdam - and I thought it was great!

I had to get over the digital look the first few minutes (usually, digital cameras tend to try looking like real film) but after that it was one hell of a ride. I loved the use of music, and although I love Badalamenti's work (he's one of my favorite film composers), I think Lynch did a great job here using music by these Polish composers, with the occasional use of songs.

Lost Highway is still my favorite, but that's because I've seen it 10 times, analysed every aspect of it, written an article on it and think that I know what it's about

Oh for Christ's sake! How come this movie is still undistributed in Canada, while Borat is still shown everywhere! Is there still any hope for a wider theatrical release, or should we just wait for the dvd?

BusterK. wrote:Oh for Christ's sake! How come this movie is still undistributed in Canada, while Borat is still shown everywhere! Is there still any hope for a wider theatrical release, or should we just wait for the dvd?

That's strange - It's even playing here in Holland already, next week (beside of the earlier festival release). IMDb doesn't seem to have any info either...

BusterK. wrote:Oh for Christ's sake! How come this movie is still undistributed in Canada, while Borat is still shown everywhere! Is there still any hope for a wider theatrical release, or should we just wait for the dvd?

Fly to Vancouver next month to see it then ...although I think if my city gets it, Montreal should too.

BusterK. wrote:Oh for Christ's sake! How come this movie is still undistributed in Canada, while Borat is still shown everywhere! Is there still any hope for a wider theatrical release, or should we just wait for the dvd?

Good news Buster K! Us Montrealers are getting a complete David Lynch retrospective in May including Inland Empire.

Details here.

Antoine Doinel wrote:Good news Buster K! Us Montrealers are getting a complete David Lynch retrospective in May including Inland Empire.
Details here.

So great! Not only a theatrical release, but a whole retrospective?! The wait was so worth it...