David Lynch

[El Virus]

Keep on the quiet, Charie. I haven't seen the film yet.

Ah, don't worry, he hasn't revealed much.

 

Just remembred a decent TV show. How do you feel about The X-Files? I must have seen most of the episodes when I was a kid.

 

I've heard about Serenity, now that you mention it.

 

Oldschool Star Trek wasn't that good but Next Generation was pretty strong. Now, that being said, I'm not recommending the show, I was just wondering if you're into it. I can't get into shows that don't have arcs and stories longer than an episode, and Star Trek was always pure standalone. Yet some of the standalone stories were really strong science fiction. It's fun to watch when on, but I wouldn't go out and try to find the DVDs.

 

I heard that the First Star Trek was cancelled due to lack of ratings. Most shows today are standalone, and do not include ever-evolving stories as "Twin Peaks" did (remember?, this was the original topic!), others mix both, like "Cowboy Bebop".

 

Feel like talking Eraserhead?

[Charie]

El Virus, what do you mean 'he'?! I'm very much 'she' and proud of it .

It is certainly a nearly perfect film, very deep and meditative.

Besides, hilarious as hell. Me and my father, who's a huge fan of all Tarkovsky, are constantly quoting our deaest Writer .

Not like my father, besides Stalker I've only seen Solaris by Tarkovsky and still didn't get it wholly. You need to be in a special mood to watch films by that director, I suppose.

 

JofaGuht, don't worry, indeed. Stalker isn't about the plot at all.

[JofaGuht]

I know Charie. I was just warning you before you did say something I shouldn't know.

 

In discussion of Eraserhead.....I don't know. There can be very many topics to sprout from it. Any particular point of the film you want to get into? To say one thing, perhaps my favorite part of the film is the final shot, right before it blacks out. I think it's got to be the one of the best final shots of a film period.

 

X-Files was again mostly standalone. But along with Star Trek I enjoyed it for the intriguing Science Fiction plots, and the chemistry between Duchovney and Anderson. I also recall hearing a recent interview about how if X-Files would've started now it would easily be cancelled in less than a season. Back in the early nineties when people were taking risks though, the x-files lead to be on for nine years. As for the original Star Trek, it had a strong three years that lead to six films and four spinoffs and four films of one of the spinoffs. So I'm really not one to go about how a network screwed them over. I mean technically Angel was cancelled too but I wouldn't have it any other way because it was on for five great years and ended perfectly.

[El Virus]

El Virus, what do you mean 'he'?! I'm very much 'she' and proud of it .

 

Oh, then much better . Once again, let me apologize for my mistake.

 

Besides, hilarious as hell. Me and my father, who's a huge fan of all Tarkovsky, are constantly quoting our deaest Writer .

Not like my father, besides Stalker I've only seen Solaris by Tarkovsky and still didn't get it wholly. You need to be in a special mood to watch films by that director, I suppose.

 

I haven't got around to see Solaris, but Mirror (Or Зеркало, its original title I think) is excellent.

My father got me into him, he adores Tarkovsky's works.

 

You know, Charie, I think you'll be a good asset to the forum (unlike me).

 

In discussion of Eraserhead.....I don't know. There can be very many topics to sprout from it. Any particular point of the film you want to get into? To say one thing, perhaps my favorite part of the film is the final shot, right before it blacks out. I think it's got to be the one of the best final shots of a film period.

 

The ending is very good, but the ambientation of the whole movie is excellent. It's very symbolical, at least it seems to. I enjoyed the radiator scenes, it has a meaning.

 

X-Files was again mostly standalone. But along with Star Trek I enjoyed it for the intriguing Science Fiction plots, and the chemistry between Duchovney and Anderson. I also recall hearing a recent interview about how if X-Files would've started now it would easily be cancelled in less than a season. Back in the early nineties when people were taking risks though, the x-files lead to be on for nine years

 

It's a shame no more risks are taken. Last show I liked was "Dead Like me", but you already know that. Let's hope for a good show to come in the next years.

[Charie]

El Virus

a good asset to the forum (unlike me).

You are fishing for compliments:).

 

As for Зеркало - my father also constantly tries to force me to watch it... All right, you two win, I'll watch it this week. It's just that I really rarely watch something new.

[El Virus]

You are fishing for compliments:).

 

Was I too obvious? I just try to be nice to new members

 

As for Зеркало - my father also constantly tries to force me to watch it... All right, you two win, I'll watch it this week. It's just that I really rarely watch something new.

 

Excellent,then. You will enjoy it; but as you said, you need to be in a special mood to watch Tarkovsky.

[JofaGuht]

I enjoyed the radiator scenes, it has a meaning.

 

And again, quite subjective. My dad found the Lady to be God and her squashing the sperm to be "clearing him of his sins", and he's dead and in heaven in the end. Others find the Man in the Planet to be God and the Lady to be death. I saw the Lady to be the manifestation of all of Henry's fantasies, both sexual fantasies and fantasies of another life, and the end is Henry gone completely insane and "embracing" the fantasy world in his head.

 

The Tagline for the film was "A dream of dark and troubling things". I think that's the other reason I really loved the end. It felt like the suddenness of waking up from a dream.

 

Also, who else was completely freaked out of the bull moving around the room at the end? Ooosh....nightmarish that was.

[El Virus]

And again, quite subjective. My dad found the Lady to be God and her squashing the sperm to be "clearing him of his sins", and he's dead and in heaven in the end. Others find the Man in the Planet to be God and the Lady to be death. I saw the Lady to be the manifestation of all of Henry's fantasies, both sexual fantasies and fantasies of another life, and the end is Henry gone completely insane and "embracing" the fantasy world in his head.

 

I'm one of thsoe who viewed the girl as death, and the man as G*d. I haven't thought about Henry's fantasies, but the most troubling thing in all the film has got to be that baby-like creature (I do not know why people describe it as a a worm, it seems more of a vulture to me).

 

Also, who else was completely freaked out of the bull moving around the room at the end? Ooosh....nightmarish that was.

Pardon me?, if you are still talking about Eraserhead, then I must have missed that.

[Charie]

El Virus

I just try to be nice to new members

Don't you think that's wrong? Lies are very inconvenient, I reckon.

 

--Sorry for offtop. I'm already leaving.

[El Virus]

Don't you think that's wrong? Lies are very inconvenient, I reckon

 

It was no lie, you have posted many interesting messages since you joined; unlike me, who posted many useless things.

 

Sorry for offtop. I'm already leaving.

 

Wait, what do you mean? (It isn't an insult or anything).

[Charie]

El Virus

 

The most interesting things are just the entirely useless ones, usually, don't you think?

 

Wait, what do you mean?

Oh, I've meant only what I said: that my inappropriate remarks on remote matters pollute, so to speak, your clever movie talk, thus I had an intention to retreat peacefully. What's bothering me is that I continue off-top'ing at the present moment.

[JofaGuht]

When it comes to useless posts, I have you all beaten by a mile.

 

Quick new topic till new Lynch film is seen.

 

I was thinking about overrated filmmakers that I don't like very much. So, Quentin Tarintino....how come everybody thinks this guy is the best thing that's ever happened to film? He's not very good. Okay, the Kill Bills were great, but other than that, he doesn't deserve the hype.

[El Virus]

The most interesting things are just the entirely useless ones, usually, don't you think?

Ironical but somewhat true.

 

Quick new topic till new Lynch film is seen.

 

I was thinking about overrated filmmakers that I don't like very much. So, Quentin Tarintino....how come everybody thinks this guy is the best thing that's ever happened to film? He's not very good. Okay, the Kill Bills were great, but other than that, he doesn't deserve the hype.

 

I get what you mean; I never liked Pulp Fiction that much, and I only liked the first Kill Bill; however, Reservoir Dogs is excellent. Over all, I think Tarantino's style is not improving.

 

Overrated filmmakers, well needless to mention that I abhor Spielberg & Cameron.

 

Peter Jackson (the King Kong re-maker and the guy behind the overrated "Lord of the Rings Trilogy") is in my opinion the XXIst century's alternative to D.W. Griffith.

But Griffith actually brought about some important changes to cinematography, still visible today.

 

EDIT: Just remembered a good TV show: Deadwood; unfortunately they stopped airing it here, and I lost track of it.

[Charie]

El Virus

These 'overrated filmmakers' you mentioned, apart from being producers for a great number of blockbusters, have made, I suppose, some of the most expensive public chewing gum, highly promoted product 'for everyone to love'. And the mass of 'everyone' does love; I'm amongst them. Some films of theirs are masterpieces, so to speak, of the tear-squeezer genre, with a little cuteness here, a breeze of drama threre, and huge SPECIAL EFFECTS. Not deep, maybe, but undeniably entartaining. A prefect condiment to take with pop-corn, or vice-versa, and an eye-candy for weary mind.

No wonder they are popular. Popularity, in itself, is a tricky thing. I'm always amazed at how really good, beautiful works are similarly admired along with an utter scum, by some people.

 

Not that I claim to have a good taste in such things.

By the way, I've never watched Tarantino. A half of 'Pulp Fiction' doesn't count.

[El Virus]

It depends on which way you understand the term 'filmmaker'.

I was especially talking about directing, and being a creator of blockbusters does not mean being a good director, but actually knowing how to exploit the likes of the masses.

Now, if by filmmaker you understand producer/writer/director all together, then what you said is true.

I think that if some of these directors actually cared to do something of their own, not for the likes of teenagers (not that there is anything wrong, just not my taste), but art, they could potentially be better.

 

But I think that a filmmaker is an artist, and I don't believe a person who just makes things to earn a profit to be much of an artist as he would be a businessman. Of course the end of the concept 'art' is only defined by philosophy.

 

It all depends on your likes. I reckon I do not have much love in my heart for popular things, and try to avoid going to big cinemas and 'blockbusters' (though I have to watch them to criticize them).

 

I will never give in on Cameron and Spielberg; nevertheless, I never explicitly said that I did not like the rest, I just compared them to an old director.

 

By the way, I've never watched Tarantino. A half of 'Pulp Fiction' doesn't count.

 

He's not that bad of a director, but they have made too much fuss about him. Pulp Fiction is a very good independant film, you should see it one of this days.

[Charie]

El Virus

He's not that bad of a director, but they have made too much fuss about him. Pulp Fiction is a very good independant film, you should see it one of this days.

I just meant I can't judge him, along with Spielberg&Cameron, since I've never seen his works. As for Pulp Fiction - if I recall correctly, I didn't see the second half of the movie because the first one managed to leave me with a feeling of dirt all over me. Not my theme, I suspect.

 

You are indisputably right that the film creators should be artists; movies are a form of art, after all.

However, as I've alredy mentioned earlier, I'm not much of a moviefan. I only re-watch sometimes what I've seen before, and to watch something new for me is a big event, usually. I've seen some works by Cameron and Spielberg (in my golden childhood, when I'd still turned on TV from time to time) only because those were hard to miss, televsion constantly broadcasting them.

[El Virus]

You are indisputably right that the film creators should be artists; movies are a form of art, after all.

 

In my opinion an underrated art, few people give it the recognition it deserves.

 

However, as I've alredy mentioned earlier, I'm not much of a moviefan. I only re-watch sometimes what I've seen before, and to watch something new for me is a big event, usually. I've seen some works by Cameron and Spielberg (in my golden childhood, when I'd still turned on TV from time to time) only because those were hard to miss, televsion constantly broadcasting them.

 

Of course, I watched tons of those movies when I was a child as well as Disney (argh); probably why I'm sick of them now.

 

-------------------

 

Not to ruin the hole Lynch and Overrated Filmmakers and OT Conversations, but-

Anybody into Class-B or C movies? There are three great cycles in TV down here (in I-Sat & the Retro channel), Called Euro Trash (Junk European cinema), Cine Zeta (Argentine movies which do not even qualify as Class-F), and the occasional old "horror and Science Fiction" movie.

But some of the 1940s Class-Bs are great, like the Big Combo.

[Charie]

El Virus

In my opinion an underrated art, few people give it the recognition it deserves.

Maybe they just didn't see anything really good.

 

I watched tons of those movies when I was a child as well as Disney (argh); probably why I'm sick of them now.

I've seen only very few, mostly accidentally, so I physically can't be 'sick' of them. I've watched old USSR movies all the time, instead (and I still love them ).

You don't like Disney?? I didn't get much of that when I was a kid, either, but I've always considered old Disney cartoons great. Classic, y'know.

 

------------------------------

Are there any illustrious class-B movies? I don't clearly understand what they are: low-budget small productions?

[JofaGuht]

Peter Jackson (the King Kong re-maker and the guy behind the overrated "Lord of the Rings Trilogy") is in my opinion the XXIst century's alternative to D.W. Griffith.

Jackson used to direct b-horror films before his Ring trilogy. Ironic. But I'm not sure he's that bad of a director, I just can't get into him because of the "grandiose" is just something that never compelled me. Not to mention Howard Shore's (who's usually good) sorry excuse for a film score was just plain isolating and headache-inducing.

 

But I will dig into Jackson for this: the plain overuse of CGI. It's ruining movies and he's one of the front-seat drivers. I mean, Jim Hensen was able to create excellent and epic fantasy films, and he didn't need CGI.

 

Just remembered a good TV show: Deadwood; unfortunately they stopped airing it here, and I lost track of it.

Did you and I ever talk about Carnivale? If not, let me say that was quite a good show as well. It took me a long time to get into it, though.

 

movies are a form of art, after all

I've said this before. While I agree on a certain level, I do plan to make films someday, but I'd never really consider myself an artist. I'd always be just a storyteller.

 

Anybody into Class-B or C movies?

I would indulge in Mystery Science Theatre 3000 from time to time, but I'm not huge into B movies other than that. I do have some old Bela Lugosi collections (a couple of which were his less "successful" films). Oh, and I can't live without my Evil Dead.

[El Virus]

I've watched old USSR movies all the time, instead (and I still love them ).

 

I remember that my father would take me to this movie theatre that only showed Soviet movies, but I haven't gone there in a while.

Soviet cinematography is outstanding, too bad it has been margined in the Western society.

 

You don't like Disney?? I didn't get much of that when I was a kid, either, but I've always considered old Disney cartoons great. Classic, y'know.

 

About Disney, I'm not too fond of the corporation and the movies they create.

But when I was a kid, I loved all of those cartoons.

 

Are there any illustrious class-B movies? I don't clearly understand what they are: low-budget small productions?

 

Back in the old days of cinematography, more than one film would be broadcasted per session. But there was one main movie and then a second one, of less importance, known as B-Film.

 

Since nowadays that is not done any more, the term refers to low-budget films, or those performed by unknown actors & directors.

 

Illustrious ones? Well most of the independent and art films in general can be considered low-budget, and in my opinion they are better than the ones made in big studios.

 

------------------------

 

But I will dig into Jackson for this: the plain overuse of CGI.

 

That and the 'grandiose' is what I meant by comparing him to Griffith. Computer generated imagery is not my forte, but it will expand the frontiers of movie making in the years to come.

Concerning his style, I don't like the movies he has made.

 

Did you and I ever talk about Carnivale? If not, let me say that was quite a good show as well. It took me a long time to get into it, though.

 

I thought you could have liked that show, but I didn't bring it up because Home Box Office broadcast it so I only got to see the first episode. Here, Deadwood was shown on Fox, as they thought it would be a hit, but they cancelled it after a season. I guess that is why they won't pass Carnivale now.

 

What was your final impression on both shows?

 

I've said this before. While I agree on a certain level, I do plan to make films someday, but I'd never really consider myself an artist. I'd always be just a storyteller.

 

I think it is very difficult for an artist to self-proclaim himself as one. Critics and public usually coin the term.

But the limits of the word 'art' are controversial, as I've said earlier.

 

Oh, and I can't live without my Evil Dead.

 

Evil Dead? I used to like that film. It is probably the most bizarre horror film series so far. I haven't watched them all, though.

[Charie]

El Virus

But when I was a kid, I loved all of those cartoons.

I've seen only very few, and that was sort of long ago, so I wonder what would I think of them now. However, I have a copy of Aladdin and watch it from time to time. A great way to cheer up, for me. Along with 'Some like it hot'.

Hm, I have a suspicion now: do Disney Productions count as Disney?.. 'Cause even if I've seen the original Walt Disney's cartoons - I don't remember them at all.

 

I think it is very difficult for an artist to self-proclaim himself as one. Critics and public usually coin the term.

I've always thought the opposite. Only the artist himself truly knows what he is and can name it.

Well, people are different, creators even more so. Perhaps that's individual for every one of them.

[JofaGuht]

do Disney Productions count as Disney?..

Not really, since Miramax was basically Disney for some time (not anymore, of course). Not to mention that Pixar, for their first handful of films, was said to be a Disney/Pixar film, and Disney really didn't do anything other than merchandising, Pixar made the entirety of their films, and Disney took 51% of the profit. As Pixar grew to be more powerful, they finally fought to change that, which is why when you see a TV spot it's no longer a "Disney/Pixar film", now it's Disney presents a Pixar film. Very different things.

 

Of course I only know these silly facts because of tidbits on film business, ho ho ho.....what? Okay! So I'm a fan of Pixar! It's out in the open. Monsters Inc. was amazing. Stop looking at me.

 

Only the artist himself truly knows what he is and can name it.

Just because an artist is an artist (even a brilliant one) doesn't always mean they can't be an egotistic ass.

 

What was your final impression on both shows?

Deadwood was one of those shows where I said, "Oh, I'll need to see that" then didn't because I forgot. This can happen to me on a week-by-week basis.

 

Carnivale was very hard to get into for me. It had great atmosphere and a rich story, but a little too many characters and it didn't pull me in or involve me. I had to concentrate to get into it. But then the second season happened, and I can tell you the specific episode where that all changed. I think they got too much into the atmosphere in the first season and forgot about the emotion, but when they finally brought the emotion in come mid-way second season I realized how truly excellent the show was.

 

...And after that revelation, of course they cancelled it five episodes later.

[El Virus]

I've always thought the opposite. Only the artist himself truly knows what he is and can name it.

Well, people are different, creators even more so. Perhaps that's individual for every one of them.

 

I agree, only him knows what he is; but I think it wouldn't be well received if he spoke it out loud.

 

By the way, you said that you liked Surrealism, on another thread. You would enjoy the works of the Spanish director Luis Buñuel; or even perhaps those of David Lynch.

 

Of course I only know these silly facts because of tidbits on film business, ho ho ho.....what? Okay! So I'm a fan of Pixar! It's out in the open. Monsters Inc. was amazing. Stop looking at me.

 

Pixar has a great potential, they are making some great animations; I just wish they made some more serious projects.

However, I thought they had gone solo completely. Did you actually know that Pixar started with Lucasfilm?

 

Just because an artist is an artist (even a brilliant one) doesn't always mean they can't be an egotistic ass.

 

Unsurprisingly enough, many artistic geniuses are the most eccentric and egotistical people out there.

 

...And after that revelation, of course they cancelled it five episodes later.

 

Yeah, they tend to do that to decent television shows.

[Charie]

El Virus

Unsurprisingly enough, many artistic geniuses are the most eccentric and egotistical people out there.

That only makes them even more interesting. As for proclaiming themselves Geniuses - that would be recieved as another special artistic extravagancy, I gather.

 

you said that you liked Surrealism, on another thread. You would enjoy the works of the Spanish director Luis Buñuel; or even perhaps those of David Lynch.

I certainly like Surrealism, maybe even 'love', for although I favour many different genres and pieces of art, Surrealism shots straight to the very soul. This doesn't mean I often allow myself to enjoy it. Besides, I've encountered the type I love best mostly in literature.

 

By David Lynch, I've seen Mulholland Drive (didn't understand a thing, and wasn't too eager to try to figure something out), Dune, Elephant Man (that one I liked), and a couple of Twin Peaks episodes (I didn't have a chance to see the whole series, plus, I'm reluctant to watch series).

I don't think I've heard anything about Luis Bunuel; I'll need to ask father .

[JofaGuht]

I just watched "The Forbidden Zone". It's a complete callback to a lot of the 1930s films (which was why it was originally banned from theatres in the 80s for using blackface), and the sets were purposely two-dimensional to echo German Expressionistic films (Cabinet of Dr. Caligari coming to mind....). It was fun, and quite hilarious.

 

Unsurprisingly enough, many artistic geniuses are the most eccentric and egotistical people out there.

Back to David Lynch: the guy, as weird as his films are, is supposedly a pretty down-to-earth guy. I know on his website he visits the chatroom from time to time, and a couple folks from the chatroom he invited into his home once for lunch. They say he's not like his eccentric and "spacey" persona that the media and interveiweres tend to project on him.

 

On the other, my favorite Filmmaker, the only one beating Lynch and Kubrick to this day, is Terry Gilliam. And he's one artistic genuis, and while many say he's not as insane as some he is, he is definitely getting pretty nutsy in his old-age. He recently went up to speak at a premiere, which both Michael Palin and Terry Jones were at, and went on and one about how he's the only Python that ever did anything great and said the all the other Pythons were "washed up has-beens". Many concieve that since a couple of the other Pythons were there, it was meant as a practical joke, but even if that was a joke, it's still pretty nutsy. Not to mention that in an interview, talking about the infamous mud scene in the Brothers Grimm, that he felt "connected to the mud, as if it was a being". Hm...old people. He's still brilliant through.

 

Mulholland Drive (didn't understand a thing, and wasn't too eager to try to figure something out),

 

Mulholland Drive was a weaker one because, even though all his films can be considered nonsensical, they still all follow a structure that one can become involved in. Lost Highway was much better. In fact, let me list my favorites (it's a little crass, yes, but I'm still gonna do it).

 

1. Fire Walk With Me (10/10)

2. Lost Highway (10/10)

3. Blue Velvet (8.5/10)

4. Eraserhead (8/10)

5. The Straight Story (8/10)

6. Mulholland Drive (6.5/10)

7. Dune (6/10)

8. Wild At Heart (5/10)

 

However, I thought they had gone solo completely.

 

They did. Only Pixar makes Pixar films, but "presents" just means "distributed by".