So far from what I've seen
>Eraserhead = Kino
>Mulholland Drive = Kino
>Twin Peaks (all of it) = Kino
>Elephant Man = Didn't like
What else of his is worth watching? What one should I watch next?
David Lynch
So far from what I've seen
>Eraserhead = Kino
>Mulholland Drive = Kino
>Twin Peaks (all of it) = Kino
>Elephant Man = Didn't like
What else of his is worth watching? What one should I watch next?
Blue Velvet, possibly the most kino of them all
Wild at Heart is dread kino. It LYNCHED even lynchgays
You're the winner, I'm watching Blue Velvet next.
Blue Velvet
Straight Story
Wild At Heart
Lost Highway (different angle on Mulholland Drive structure)
You'll hate Inland Empire.
Dune's wacky at least.
>You'll hate Inland Empire.
What makes you think he'll hate it when the one Lynch he didn't like so far is the very anti-thesis to Inland Empire? If anything, I'd argue he MIGHT find The Straight Story uninteresting.
>I'd argue he MIGHT find The Straight Story uninteresting.
Ktim
She...wore...
Yes, she prostitute.
>Elephant Man = Didn't like
It’s mid
Mulholland Drive is one of the worst movies ever made, you are a MORON.
>inb4 lynched
Unironically lynched and also probably moronic
It's not possible for a film with hot topless lesbians feeling each other up and making out to be a bad film.
>hot topless lesbians
Not lesbians. At least one of them is bi.
youre doing this predictable "reverse elitism" thing where you treat canonical or highly celebrated art as not that good, maybe to affirm your feeling of independence, but it's absurdly wrong. it's not praised for no reason. the fanbase for lynch tend to be sincerely engaged in the arts
I don't get it either but we have both seen worse
The Straight Story, Lost Highway, Blue Velvet and Inland Empire. His book adaptations, Dune and Wild at Heart, you can take or leave. They have their moments but they are by fat his weakest works.
Wild at heart is fricking great. It's Lynchkino and Cagekino at the same time.
>Wild at heart
Blue Velvet Lite
I did not care for Blue Velvet
>Elephant Man = Didn't like
Lost Highway
Not as good as Tron Legacy
>Elephant Man = Didn't like
Elephant Man isn't "really" Lynch, it's just a good Hollywood flick directed by Lynch. He didn't write it and he didn't cast it. He just filmed it, gave it a bit of Lynchean subtext with his own choices, gave it a bit of Lynchean atmosphere with his visuals.
Personally, I consider it a weaker part of his opus than his Dune, for those reasons. But I do understand why Dune was the worse experience for Lynch himself, with him not getting final cut and thus losing creative control in the latter stages.
>What else of his is worth watching?
All of his work is.
>What one should I watch next?
Try going for some of his shorts. Maybe even his TV commercials.
Elephant Man weaker than Dune. The opinions you come across on this shithole of a site.
Certainly less lynchean, yes.
Dune's only problem is the editing in the second half.
>Certainly less lynchean, yes.
So what? How does that translate to weaker? Is the Twin Peaks pilot less "lynchean" than Inland Empire?
>Dune's only problem is the editing in the second half
It's not just the editing. Lynch ain't the sort to helm an epic. There's some beautiful work in the film, but it's not very good.
>How does that translate to weaker?
It's the closest Lynch ever came to making standard Hollywood Oscarbait. Still good, but missing the ambitious approach his more surreal endeavours have, while also being less intimate and immediate than his more grounded projects.
I'd rather watch an autheur's very original work than him trying to distill the best out of someone else's script.
>Is the Twin Peaks pilot less "lynchean" than Inland Empire?
Why would it be? Can you present a compelling argument anyone could make for that claim?
>Lynch ain't the sort to helm an epic.
You're not even making any points here. Just unfounded claims.
>It's the closest Lynch ever came to making standard Hollywood Oscarbait.
It is, and it's still sufficiently weird and effective.
>Still good
Yeah, still good. In fact, manages to be better than most of his other movies.
>but missing the ambitious approach his more surreal endeavours have,
Yeah, it has a traditional structural narrative. Lynch should try that more often.
> while also being less intimate and immediate than his more grounded projects.
Such as...
>I'd rather watch an autheur's very original work than him trying to distill the best out of someone else's script.
Good for you. For me, it all depends. In the case of the Elephant Man, it works out in the film's favor, because it's excellent.
>Why would it be? Can you present a compelling argument anyone could make for that claim?
I was being ironic.
>You're not even making any points here. Just unfounded claims.
I could say the same about your own post. Unfounded claims! Source? Excuse me!
>In fact, manages to be better than most of his other movies.
>traditional structural narrative. Lynch should try that more often.
See, that's how I can tell that you prefer trite Hollywood storytelling to actual art. You have every right to do so, but it means that we're not on common ground at all when it comes to film discussions. Sure, we might not be as far apart as a capeshitter would be from an Alain Resnais fanatic, but more like, say someone who loves Tarrantino is from someone who loves Peter Weir.
>Such as...
Straight Story, obviously. But also some of his smaller projects, like The Cowboy and the Frenchman. Oh, and even just something as simple and emotionally effective as the following:
>I was being ironic.
You were being facetious, not ironic. Your joke was not gounded on facts, not was it a good parallel to the argument you were trying to mock.
>I could say the same about your own post.
My own post explained at length how Dune has more of Lynch's handwriting than The Elephant Man, and why that makes the former more interesting from an artistic standpoint than the latter.
Your "muh Lynch can't do epics" claim is just that: An empty claim, that you did not even try to reason for.
I just wanted to pitch in and say I very much understand your point about Dune and Elephant man. He does his own thing very well, and can even do great movies with someone elses script and casting- like The Elephant Man. But when he's allowed to run the whole deal is where he really shines- Like Blue Velvet. .
And I think Lynch directing an epic would be fine if he was given control of it, now that makes me think of how many other genres he could do. A Lynch Western, a war film, a romance- Lynch had a way with romance in some of his stuff.
>a romance
Some of his films arguably are romance first and foremost. Wild at Heart and Blue Velevet.
The Cowboy and the Frenchman is an excellent western.
It's what westerns could be if they generally were more ambitious.
But I think what anon had in mind was more along the lines of spaghetti westerns, i.e. chanbara films set in the American wild west, where lone cowboys are depicted as ronin-type characters.
Yeah, a spaghetti type Western would be neat in a Lynch style, but I can even see him doing a more hokey Roy Rogers type as well. I can see a Western akin to The Straight Story, which already has a lot of rural imagery, and it is quite family friendly.
The thing is, with Twin Peaks he really captured/created something with the Pacific Northwest feel-or at least what people imagine it to feel like. Something I think I havent seen anywhere else. Would be cool to see more original stuff with forests and other Northwest things featured. The ubiquitous American Southwest setting in westerns has been featured/captured plenty of times, not that its bad, I like the desert. Just cool to see different settings really captured in their glory.
>See, that's how I can tell that you prefer trite Hollywood storytelling to actual art.
Not mutually exclusive. And we're talking about David Lynch here. He's one of the most popular directors alive. You're not special for liking him.
>we're not on common ground at all when it comes to film discussions.
True, but not for the reasons you think.
>Sure, we might not be as far apart as a capeshitter would be from an Alain Resnais fanatic,
Far apart? They're both majorly boring.
> but more like, say someone who loves Tarrantino is from someone who loves Peter Weir.
People love Peter Weir?
>Straight Story, obviously.
I like the Straight Story. It's a film that, for whatever reason, I can't convince people I know to watch, even among those that like Lynch. That said, the Elephant Man is a much better film, and saying that one is more intimate and immediate than the other is probably down to which works better for you.
>You were being facetious, not ironic.
Not mutually exclusive. I was being ironic.
>Your joke was not gounded on facts, not was it a good parallel to the argument you were trying to mock.
You're really pretentious.
>My own post explained at length how Dune has more of Lynch's handwriting than The Elephant Man, and why that makes the former more interesting from an artistic standpoint than the latter.
You said Dune didn't work because of the editing in the latter half. That's an unfounded claim. Where is your source?! Hello, source?! Back up your claim! Where's the science?
>Your "muh Lynch can't do epics" claim is just that: An empty claim, that you did not even try to reason for.
I gave my opinion. The same thing you did. I'd substantiate it if I felt like I was talking to someone who was worthy of it.
>And we're talking about David Lynch here. He's one of the most popular directors alive.
That's beside the point, anon. We could be talking about fricking Steven Spielberg here, who's not only more poular, but by his own nature far more mainstream than Lynch, and nonetheless debate whether he's better when he works on his own things rather than other people's.
>not for the reasons you think.
What reasons do you see that I don't?
>Far apart? They're both majorly boring.
You're being facetious again. Just because you dislike two things, that doesn't mean they are in any way similar. One can like or dislike different things on wildly different grounds.
But, yes, that you just brush off Resnais as "boring" does fit with the general mentality that you've displayed. You're just not the type for autheurs doing their stuff, that doesn't conform to the conventions you've gotten used to.
>People love Peter Weir?
Yes.
>You're really pretentious.
You should look that word up. It doesn't mean what you think it means. (Just like irony isn't what you think it is.)
>You said Dune didn't work because of the editing in the latter half.
No, I said that the editing in the latter half was its major weakness. It does work nonetheless.
>That's an unfounded claim. Where is your source?!
And you're being facetious again. Do you really want me to cite all the critics that agree with me? And what then? You'd claim that all those are still opinions, not "facts"?
Discussion about film works in opinions. But well-reasoned opinions about details, not broad blanket statements like yours.
>I'd substantiate it if I felt like I was talking to someone who was worthy of it.
And now you've outed yourself as a dishonest arsehole. Of course.
One more post here before I go to bed.
>That's beside the point, anon.
That's true, but my point is that Lynch is not a director who has really pushed the form. Elephant Man might be his more conventional piece, but it's still very much in line with his other films, much more so than a regular studio film. Ultimately, even at his most experimental, Lynch is an entertaining filmmaker that has broad appeal. Your underhanded disdain for the Elephant Man comes off as absurd and pretentious.
>Just because you dislike two things, that doesn't mean they are in any way similar.
Again, I don't think you got the joke. In fact, I don't think you get much. It has nothing to do with what I like or don't like. I was jokingly commenting on people that were fans of superhero movies, and those who were "Alain Resnais fanatics." Do you understand the difference?
>But, yes, that you just brush off Resnais as "boring" does fit with the general mentality that you've displayed.
I didn't say anything about Resnais.
>You're just not the type for autheurs doing their stuff
Why do you spell it autheur?
>You should look that word up. It doesn't mean what you think it means. (Just like irony isn't what you think it is.)
Again, I don't think you get things.
>No, I said that the editing in the latter half was its major weakness.
Which is an unfounded claim. Source?!
>Do you really want me to cite all the critics that agree with me?
Appeal to authority. Not hard evidence.
>You'd claim that all those are still opinions, not "facts"?
Basically. It's almost like I'm lampooning you.
>Discussion about film works in opinions. But well-reasoned opinions about details, not broad blanket statements like yours.
How is "editing doesn't work" any less of a broad blanket statement than me saying that Lynch isn't suited for epics?
>you've outed yourself as a dishonest arsehole.
Not true. I'm an honest butthole, which I'm fine with. You're a boring gay with bad opinions.
>Lynch is not a director who has really pushed the form.
Lynch is way more experimental than you give him credit for. He doesn't care about "pushing the form" in the first place. He just does what he wants to do.
>even at his most experimental, Lynch is an entertaining filmmaker that has broad appeal
I have to assume that you've never seen his early shorts, or even just Inland Empire. Those certainly do not have a broad appeal.
>Your underhanded disdain for the Elephant Man
I literally called it good. How is that disdain? Just because I consider it Lynch's worst? That doesn't mean it's bad.
Just like when I say that Terminator 2 is Cameron's best, that doesn't mean it's great.
>pretentious.
Here's that word again that I told you to look up. I see that you didn't.
>I was jokingly commenting on people that were fans of superhero movies, and those who were "Alain Resnais fanatics."
You need to work on your jokes then. That one was neither funny, nor did it make sense.
>I didn't say anything about Resnais.
What were you talking about then?
>Which is an unfounded claim. Source?!
See, you're still being facetious.
>It's almost like I'm lampooning you.
Yes. Which is what compeltely destroys any semblence of an argument you ever might have had. You're just shitposting now.
>How is "editing doesn't work" any less of a broad blanket statement than me saying that Lynch isn't suited for epics?
Because you can watch the film and withness that the editing is a mess and completely destroys the pacing. It's a very specific claim about one particular aspect of the film, that can be discussed without adding in much external context.
Whereas your "X isn't suited for Y" sounds more like a conclusion that depends on lots of different observations you've made, none of which you are willing to elaborate on. Probably because it isn't actually based on any observation, but just something you threw out there.
Lost Highway on repeat 24/7
It's really telling when all lynchtards are redditors
>when all lynchtards are redditors
Well, that's not the case. Are you projecting, perchance?
Mainly because of Twin Peaks
>Brings up reddit out of nowhere
Go back and stay there, homosexual
Inland Empire should be watched last
it is a summary of all his films, pushed beyond any of them, past satire and into something new and terrifying.
>it is a summary of all his films, pushed beyond any of them, past satire and into something new and terrifying.
And that's just the scenes with the rabbits!
I'm sorry but Elephant Man has one of, perhaps the greatest endings of all time.
>The stream flows,
>The wind blows,
>The cloud fleets,
>The heart beats,
>Nothing will die.
>Eraserhead = pretentious trash
>Dune = epic trash
>Twin Peaks season 1 = comfy trash
>Mullholland Drive = surreal trash
>Blue Velvet = lazy trash
>Elephant Man = legitimately good
LYNCHED: The Post
>this homie didn't watch Lynch at his most Lynchian
go watch Inland Empire right fricking now
lost highway is pretty good
ON THE AIR
https://vimeo.com/660141002
Now watch his best film
hes a hack with autism. dogshit movies all of them. prime example
>dune
>hes asked to make dune movie
>fricks it up its came out looking like a straight to video tape movie that was laughable like The Room
>competent non-autistic filmmaker gets dune
>its kino and a hit
frick david lynch, his movies are for low iq people that think its all hidden meanings and intellectual stuff when in fact its the ramblings of an autist.
>fricks it up its came out looking like a straight to video tape movie that was laughable like The Room
Can you try again in English. Or French, German, Italian, Japanse? Or any sensible language, really?
gonna cry? you thought that you were smart because you liked that hacks movies didnt you? lol. cope some more brainlet. his movies are ALL trash.
That was somewhat better. You're still lacking proper capitalization and punctuation.
You can do it, anon. I believe in you!
>competent non-autistic filmmaker gets dune
>its kino and a hit
You're not talking about Villanova's DUNC, are you? That moron's a complete sellout with no artistic sensiblity, who's also completely butcher Dune's story in his Part 2. Won't even include Alia.
Got a light?
>Elephant Man = Didn't like
Are you a psychopath?
Lynch is so damn overrated.
>Eraserhead
I refuse to believe people actually like this shit. It's one of the most annoying and nonsensical movies I've ever watched. The droning sound literally gave me a headache.
>Straight Story
Boring.
>Wild at Heart
Alright. Some bad/cheesy acting and a story that has been done to death though.
>Elephant Man
His best work. But its super depressing and I'll probably never watch it again.
>Twin Peaks
It starts good but it goes to shit once it becomes obvious he had no plan for the main mystery
I've seen Dune, Mulholland Drive, and Blue Velvet too but I don't remember them enough to have a solid opinion of them.
Just watch Lost Highway and ascend out of plebhood
It's my queue and I plan on giving Mulholland Drive and Blue Velvet another chance too. I think originally years ago I hated Eraserhead so much that it sort of soured me on him as a whole and made me biased.
>I don't remember them enough to have a solid opinion of them.
Don't worry, the opinions you gave on any of the other ones isn't particularly "solid" either.
David Lynch making quinoa and broccoli for dinner
?si=JZmorsKcumCDkik4
David Lynch fanboys are the worst part about David Lynch. You can't criticize him or call him anything other than a genius without having them jump down your throat and call you a dimwit who just doesn't understand his work.
Oh, you can criticize him. But if you make yourself sound like a "dimwit" by insisting that he's bad for not making conventional mainstream shit like Nolan or Michael Bay, then don't complain that people call you out for that.
You know, there is sensible critique, and then there is the kind of "but it should cater to my capeshit sensibilities" screeching that gets posted on Cinemaphile.
>paulliiiie he wore a red shirt
Finished Blue Velvet. It's pretty kino. I'll probably watch Lost Highway next. Also, what's up with all the anons getting lynched ITT?
Lynch is a nutcase but he might know something