David Lynch - Classic or Dud

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1548 of them)

rad!

― charleston charge (chaki), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:26 (nineteen years ago) link

I love Laura Dern (and have some sort of feeling approaching something like fondness for Lynch.) It'll probably come out in 2015 though knowing him.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:27 (nineteen years ago) link

1) Obviously very excited for a new Lynch film. In fact, when I clicked on the thread, I thought, "I hope it's an announcement about a new film."

2) Skeptical about Lynch's fascination with DV. I really hope it looks good. Disappointed that he's abandoning film altogether.

3) I know it's Variety and all, but "world preempreem"? Gag.

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:27 (nineteen years ago) link

"It's about a woman in trouble, and it's a mystery, and that's about all I want to say about it," he comments diffidently.

I'm glad to see he's breaking into new territory!

― kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:31 (nineteen years ago) link

As for the quality of the DV image, Lynch says, "It looks different. Some would say it looks bad. But it reminds me of early 35mm, that didn't have that tight grain. When you have a poor image, there's lots more room to dream."

Gotta love him.

― d'ngullberry (noisemeltdown), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:34 (nineteen years ago) link

re: jaymc's thoughts

1) very excited too, also wished/hoped this would be about a new film
2) very excited about this. i'd much rather see what lynch can do with this stuff than george freakin' lucas. also: collateral
3) wasn't sure if that was a cut&paste error but if not i love it

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:34 (nineteen years ago) link

Skeptical about Lynch's fascination with DV. I really hope it looks good.

I was kinda worried about DV until I saw Collateral - in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, format is increasingly becoming irrelevant.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:37 (nineteen years ago) link

elvis knows what i'm saying.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:38 (nineteen years ago) link

slocki maybe if you start using that word people will think you're some "hollywood dude" who's "in the know"!

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:38 (nineteen years ago) link

Montreal is the way and truth, man.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:39 (nineteen years ago) link

oh I forgot about collateral! i love collateral!

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:41 (nineteen years ago) link

this is fantastic news... however I was really hoping this was gonna be an announcement about complete Twin Peaks DVDs finally coming out.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:41 (nineteen years ago) link

Ha, Shakey Mo, you kidder. (Besides, it's only coming out in a double pack with The Complete Blade Runner.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:43 (nineteen years ago) link

there was a blade runner tv show?

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:44 (nineteen years ago) link

when's the preempreem for that?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:44 (nineteen years ago) link

Anyone see the piece he did for the Lumiere film? God, that's one of the most jolting shorts ever.

― Jay Vee (Manon_70), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:44 (nineteen years ago) link

Yes, a friend of mine has done some postproduction on this and he just told me that the working title was actually "TEH INLAND EMPIRE!!!!!!!!!11111111111!!!!!!!!!!".

― Mallett McFlatFlat, Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:44 (nineteen years ago) link

yes, it was called "Max Headroom" (bah, xxpost)

― kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:44 (nineteen years ago) link

the lumiere short he did was the JAM!!! that was awesome!

worst one: peter greenaway who totally cheated!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:45 (nineteen years ago) link

yeah, his was the best short! actually that sort is one of my favorite things in the world.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:47 (nineteen years ago) link

short

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:47 (nineteen years ago) link

so amazing & perfect.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:47 (nineteen years ago) link

you can download it off the interweb, you know...

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:50 (nineteen years ago) link

i like the "early cinema" staging/framing/camera distance in the last "scene"--lynch has a great (intuitive i think) sense for how to evoke feelings through the use of antiquated stylistic devices. (see also the french impressionist film pastiches in "elephant man.)

god, i love lynch.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:52 (nineteen years ago) link

that page is wrong, those aren't cuts, it's one long take!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:52 (nineteen years ago) link

i know--he placed scrims and black boards in front of the camera to effect "cuts" i think.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:55 (nineteen years ago) link

that whole description is totally dubious. "There is no dialogue so it is totally abstract."

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:56 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm excited for this film!

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:58 (nineteen years ago) link

The title refers to the bleak residential area on the edge of the desert near L.A.

This kind of blanket description annoys me.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:58 (nineteen years ago) link

I don't think Collateral's going to be a good reference point. He references the lack of tight grain in early 35mm which sounds like there's going to be a good deal of digital noise and 'ugliness' (to some).

Collateral had almost no noise and it would be hard to argue that it didn't look pretty close to 35mm film.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 12 May 2005 20:59 (nineteen years ago) link

sort of...although it registered fast motion and light (esp. low light and quick light changes) very differently from 35mm.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 12 May 2005 21:02 (nineteen years ago) link

What's with the 35mmism, ILX? Surely one of Full Frontal, Pieces of April, Tadpole, Festen, Chuck and Buck, or Dancer in the Dark can sway you? Hasn't this argument long been settled?

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 12 May 2005 21:50 (nineteen years ago) link

The Inland Empire is where Shakey Mo Collier is from!

As well as incredibly legendary skate spots, a decent arts colony, and home of a one-time interesting music scene - Refrigerator, Nothing Painted Blue, Diskothi-Q and (file-them-in-the-Where-Are-They-Now?-Category) the Mountain Goats.

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 12 May 2005 21:57 (nineteen years ago) link

Haha wait all those movies looked pretty terrible.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 12 May 2005 21:57 (nineteen years ago) link

I think Festen and Tadpole both look good!

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 12 May 2005 22:01 (nineteen years ago) link

New David Lynch film = best news of my day. And I even bought awesome new sandals this afternoon, so. Also, in the syllogistic-premonition category: Poland is great, so this film will be great.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Thursday, 12 May 2005 22:04 (nineteen years ago) link

Haha wait all those movies looked pretty terrible.

Alex took the words out of my mouth! Dancer in the Dark, as much as I like it story and music-wise, looks awful; I never wanted a movie to be in Cinescope so much.

― kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 12 May 2005 22:08 (nineteen years ago) link

Yeah, Dancer is easily the poorest looking Von Triers movie.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 12 May 2005 22:10 (nineteen years ago) link

BTW I like DV just fine (and the idea of Lynch using a DV too.) I just don't think the above are good examples of fine looking DV movies.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 12 May 2005 22:12 (nineteen years ago) link

festen looks good in its particular one-chip way.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 12 May 2005 22:34 (nineteen years ago) link

Pieces of April didn't look completely terrible, but the gritty/doc feeling of the cinematography didn't work with the subject at all.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 12 May 2005 23:36 (nineteen years ago) link

A Lynch film on HD (ala Collateral) could be incredible, though, with the amount of color work he could do in post. When I think of my fave Lynch films there's a certain visual lushness that would be lost on noisy/flat DV.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 12 May 2005 23:38 (nineteen years ago) link

what i like about Lynch's special effects is that they are actually achieved right there in front of the camera or with film effects (for example the transformation of bill pullman into balthazar getty in Lost highway which seems to be acheived with speeded up footage and overlapped film) and don't have that fake sheen that digital effects often have. I'm still psyched about this and keen to see what he does with the medium, of course.

― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 12 May 2005 23:53 (nineteen years ago) link

most of lynch's "special effects" are like weird lighting shifts and fucked-up industrial noises. but yeah when he does do a more traditional "effect" it often has a sort of homegrown quality that calls attention to itself in an appealing way.

i really adore him without thinking any of his films are exactly perfect or even my favorites. although the short film mentioned above and the final episode of twin peaks are pretty close to perfect.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:17 (nineteen years ago) link

man i gotta do the whole twin peaks thing again sometime soon.

amateurist have you seen the "pilot" version of mulholland drive ever?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:20 (nineteen years ago) link

not am, but I have.

― gygax! (gygax!), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:21 (nineteen years ago) link

how do you know he hasn't?

just kidding. what was it like?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:22 (nineteen years ago) link

and how did you get it? ebay? torrent?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:22 (nineteen years ago) link

amateurist have you seen the "pilot" version of mulholland drive ever?

yes, my roommate ca. 2000 had it.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:25 (nineteen years ago) link

I got it from superhappyfun, weak VHS dub (plus two Lynch-directed commercials). It was almost exactly what you'd expect it to be from watching the movie (same plot, no lezzing up, minus the twist, monster (I think), silencio, etc.).

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 13 May 2005 01:27 (nineteen years ago) link

Skipping 1448 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.