Coherence (2013)

Emily (Emily Baldoni) is heading off to a dinner party on the night a strange comet swoops very close to earth. On her way to the party her phone’s screen shatters. Upon arriving at the party she finds that several other guests had a similar experience. They start talking about other events that occurred when comets got too close to earth, including a strange instance where a woman insisted that the man in her house was not her husband… because she killed her husband the night before.

Suddenly the power goes out, and while the group is gathering candles and glow sticks, they notice another house down the street has power. They send a couple of guests to head down to that house to see if their phone works. That is when things get really strange. They find a bizarre note on their door. Other people seem to be moving around outside the house. And eventually a box full of cryptic clues is discovered. As the night progresses people start to behave strangely and Emily wonders if she is losing her mind or reality is losing Coherence.

Good Points:

• Presents an intriguing mystery that does not give its secrets easily
• Some excellent performances by the cast keep you guessing
• Creates an eerie and uncanny feeling

Bad Points:

• Some of the characters are annoying (on purpose)
• It takes some time to really get rolling
• The camera work and editing are often distracting

Overall:

What a neat surprise this turned out to be. The film was a bit slow to start off, and some of the party guests were a bit on the insufferable side. But once the mystery kicked in, I was invested. Baldoni gives a great performance as she tries to navigate the oddities around her. Also kudos to Nicholas Brendon for poking fun at himself and providing an intense performance. The film would be a hidden gem if it weren’t for the camera work and editing. Because the movie is dialogue heavy, the camera work is constantly shifting focus, moving and cutting in strange ways to keep things interesting. Instead I was annoyed and distracted by it. I really wished they stopped trying to spice things up. But if you can look past that, you’ll find an engaging low budget thriller with a neat sci-fi angle… or is it?

Scores (out of 5)

Visuals:  4

Sound: 3

Acting:  4

Script:  4

Music: 3

Direction: 3

Entertainment: 4

Total:  4

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Enjoying the content? Click and ad before you go and support this blog.

Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)

So Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) should be feeling pretty good about capturing criminal mastermind Solomon Lane (Sean Harris) back in Rogue Nation. Alas a whole new set of rogues is taking up Lane’s cause and are threatening to unleash some serious destruction using nuclear devices. Hunt teams up with his crew of Stickell (Ving Rhames) and Dunn (Simon Pegg), but the plan falls apart and now there is a bomb to recover. As usual the head of the CIA , Erica Sloane (played with intensity by Angela Bassett) doesn’t think the IMF is up to the challenge. So she sends her watchdog, August Walker (Henry Cavill) to keep an eye on things.

And boy is there a bunch to keep an eye on. Turns out Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) has an impossible mission of her own – is she working with or against Hunt and his team? There is also a black market dealer known as the White Widow (Vanessa Kirby) who wants a piece of the action. And that action ramps up with a battle royale in a bathroom, an insane car/motorcycle chase in Paris and one of craziest helicopter pursuit put to film.  As the mission gets more and more impossible even Hunt has to wonder – have they actually bit off more than they can chew?

Good Points:

• Top-notch action scenes and thrills
• Some excellent performances
• Keeps the plot moving with intensity and intrigue

Bad Points:

• Goes for the full serious approach to the franchise 
• Goes for a more grim visual style
• The score’s more modern approach may not work for everyone

Overall:

This series just keeps delivering solid thrills and action. This film makes for a fine follow-up to the last film. It also manages to work in elements from all the previous films. It was great to so many familiar faces returning (Baldwin is back and he’s a blast). But the overall tone is so serious and grim, that the fun nature of the previous installments is missed. Still, had a great time with this one, and while I think I enjoyed the previous installment a bit more, Fallout is well worth seeking out.

Scores (out of 5)

Visuals:  4

Sound: 4

Acting:  4

Script:  4

Music: 3

Direction: 4

Entertainment: 3

Total:  4

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Enjoying the content? Click and ad before you go and support this blog.

The Open House (2018)

So we decided to have a double feature horror film viewing this weekend. We had two flicks in our Netflix cue. One was this movie that sounded like a fun thriller by the description. But in the back of my mind, I remembered seeing that Chris Stuckmann had worked on a riff track for the film. I figured that just means this could be a “so bad its funny” movie, right?

Summary:

After Logan’s (Dylan Minnette) father is killed right in front of him in a freak accident, he finds himself struggling with grief. His mother Naomi (Piercey Dalton) decides to move the two of them to her sister’s massive house in the mountains. She hopes that it will help them work through their sadness.

Unfortunately the house is up for sale, and the pair has to keep leaving the building because of the numerous open house events. Soon enough, strange things start happening around the place. The water heater is tampered with. Logan’s phone vanishes. Other lost items end up in different rooms. Could it be the odd neighbor Martha (Patricia Bethune) messing with them… or did someone stay inside the giant home after The Open House?

Good Points:

• Lovely location shooting in and around Big Bear in California
• Solid acting for most of the film
• Martha was an entertaining character 

Bad Points:

• Confusing editing drains all tension from the film
• The score overplays its hand over and over again
• The ending was very unsatisfying

Overall:

This movie is a bit of a mess. There are elements of an entertaining and thrilling film at the heart of this, but the senseless editing, horribly overloud and obvious score and an ending that just leaves you exasperated add up to a bad film. But if you are in the mood for a movie for riffing, there are plenty of laughs to be mined. Want a good thriller from Netflix, check out Hush instead.

Scores(out of 5)

Visuals:  2

Sound: 3

Acting:  3

Script:  1

Music: 1

Direction: 2

Entertainment: 2

Total:  2

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Enjoying the content? Click and ad before you go and support this blog.

The Cloverfield Paradox (2018)

Introduction:

So there is now an official Cloverfield trilogy which is blossoming into a full-blown “series” as of this writing. So far these films all share some element of surprise in their marketing. When it comes to this film, the surprise was along the lines of “where the hell did this come from?” because I didn’t know anyone who even heard this was in the works. Springing fully formed from the head of Zeus and onto Netflix we have a sci-fi horror hybrid. But is it worth checking out?

Summary:

Earth is in trouble. Natural resources are running scarce and a new source of energy needs to be found. So the Cloverfield space station is launched. Using technology based on particle accelerators, the science team believes they can create an endless source of energy… they just need to get the damn thing to work.

We meet Ava Hamilton (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) the communications officer aboard the station. She is dealing with some personal tragedy in her life and is finding it hard to focus on her job. She will need to focus, because a freak accident causes the station to malfunction and be hurtled to a mysterious location in space. While trying to figure out what is happening the crew realizes that they have opened a dimensional door. That caused all kinds of horrifying and bizarre things to occur. This includes finding a living person inside a wall, strange emanations of magnetic fields, and eyeballs just not behaving in sockets. As the horrors mount the crew becomes certain that they actually crossed dimensions and being in an alternate reality may create a paradox… a Cloverfiled Paradox so to speak. David Oyelowo, Daniel Bruhl, Chris O’ Dowd, Zhang Ziyi and Elizabeth Debicki round out the cast.

Good Points:

• Some solid acting by the cast
• Some excellent visual effects and sets
• Manages to build up some solid thrills and WTF moments 

Bad Points:

• Feels very disjointed and messy at times
• The story is very, very, very familiar
• Connections to the previous films in the series feels like an afterthought

Overall:

There are elements of a top-notch sci-fi thriller buried in this movie. It’s got a solid cast that does its best with a messy script. But the whole thing feels very uneven. It also is highly reminiscent of Event Horizon and similar films. Not a bad time for lazy Sunday viewing, but certainly the least of three films currently bearing the Cloverfield moniker. 10 Cloverfield Lane is easily the superior film.

Scores(out of 5)

Visuals:  4

Sound: 3

Acting:  4

Script:  2

Music: 4

Direction: 3

Entertainment: 3

Total:  3

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Enjoying the content? Click and ad before you go and support this blog.

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Introduction:

I’ve always wanted to see a sequel to Blade Runner or at least an expansion of the world we see in the 1982 film. But I figured that was just a daydream, even if I did hear rumors about it from time to time. In 2017 we got a follow up that looked promising from all the trailers. Director Denis Villeneuve was at the helm of this endeavour, and I’ve found his work to be pretty interesting. Maybe we had a second excellent sci-fi film in store for us during 2017 after the magnificent War for the Planet of the Apes.

Summary:

K (Ryan Gosling) is a Blade Runner, an officer working for the LAPD that hunts down rogue Replicants. Usually these artificial humanoids are older models with a tendency to rebel against human masters. During his latest assignment K comes across some clues that hint at the impossible: a Replicant giving birth to a child. K’s superior, Lieutenant Joshi (Robin Wright), fears that if news of Replicants being able to procreate got out, then there would be mass panic in the already unstable world. K is tasked with finding and retiring this “miracle” child.

K starts his investigation, finding and putting together clues. His girlfriend Joi (Ana de Armas) offers her take on the case, as well as some moral support. He meets with the creator of stable Replicants, Niander Wallace (Jered Leto) who keeps things close to his chest. The case gets very dangerous, as it becomes apparent that others are looking for this child, and will murder to get it. Eventually his search leads him to seek out the old Blade Runner, Deckard (Harrison Ford) to find out his role in these mysterious events. What revelation will be unearthed when K finally discovers the answers, and will they change the world as he knows it?

Good Points:

• In nearly every way, expands and evolves the world of the previous film
• Delves into the future noire concept with both feet, and also twists it in interesting ways
• Excellent performances by the entire cast

Bad Points:

• If you don’t like the original film, than you won’t like this one
• Moves at a deliberate pace, focusing on clues and characters over action
• Some of the music is so overpowering and loud that it distracts

Overall:

This sequel takes everything from the previous film and expands and builds on it. From a production point of view it is startling, pulling us back into that world with ease. It has a measured pace, that fits the tone and style of the movie. The themes it explores are familiar. Even more impressive are all the layers to explore in this movie. Some of the music overplays its hand, but other times it feels like a perfect continuation. All told, this fan of the original film loved the sequel. I can’t wait to revisit and explore it again.

Scores (out of 5)

Visuals: 5

Sound: 5

Acting: 5

Script: 4

Music: 4

Direction: 5

Entertainment: 4

Total:  5

In Depth Review

More human, than human? You decide.

I’m going to do my best to keep this review spoiler free, and will either revisit or write some in depth posts in another blog after the movie comes out for home viewing.

Blade Runner 2049 pulls off one of the trickiest issues for a sequel. It keeps things familiar and yet expands and develops on what came before. The film is closely tied to the previous film from a narrative and thematic sense. But it also acts as a mirror or bookend of it. Some scenes, shots, dialogue and confrontations are taken from the previous film and replicated (pun sorta kinda intended) in a way that changes the meaning for the new film. In that way, to get the most out of Blade Runner 2049 requires intimate knowledge of the 1982 film.

But even if you’ve only seen the original film a couple of times, Villeneuve makes sure that you can follow this film from its main detective plot, as well as the side plots dealing with Joi and Wallace’s role in the whole film. And just like the previous film, this movie focuses more on K’s hunt, his character and the way the case changes him.

Rough day at the office for K.

That search is what drives Blade Runner 2049 in many of its production decisions. This is not an action film. This is a detective drama set in the future. It moves at a measured pace, with a few action scenes to punctuate moments. But this is not a thrill ride. It was never intended to be one. But the film is pretty long, and I can understand why some folk may feel it drags in places.

Villeneuve is a fan of Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner and it really shows. He is dedicated to bringing the world presented in that film back to life in nearly all aspects. He advances some technology and design for the 2049 setting, but all those changes are based off of what was presented in the 1982 original. So you still have some very analogue technology in the film, but pushed forward a bit in places. There are now holograms of various sizes through out the city, something that actually was more inspired the cityscapes of Akira.

And you thought Vegas couldn't get gaudier.

The film does move outside of Los Angeles into some of the battered landscapes near San Diego and into Las Vegas. Seeing these new locations adds a bit of spice to the familiar locations of the previous film, and reduces some of the claustrophobia you feel. But visually it is a twist on the original film. Deckard was a man lost in the mire and filth of the crowds of Los Angeles. K is a man lost in the desolation and loneliness of the vast world. There are many shots of K standing in stark relief to these deserted locations, offering an interesting visual contrast.

The visual effects are truly impressive. You get a great mix of miniatures, computer images and fully fleshed out sets that are full of detail. It is a tribute to the original film’s dense production design, and it gives Blade Runner 2049 the same realistic feeling. This world feels lived in, it feels beaten up, it feels like it may be on the very edge of collapsing. I was never pulled out of the film because of some incongruous visuals.

I'm not touching you. Does this bother you?

Instead Villeneuve is uses unreality of visual effects to his advantage. Holograms play a key role in the story and themes of this film. At times they can appear realistic, at other times they look incomplete and unresolved. That imperfection against the reality of the sets and human characters makes them stand out on purpose. Sometimes that flickering gives them a forlorn feeling. Other times they feel uncanny, and not to be trusted.

The sound effects in Blade Runner 2049 build on what we heard in the original film. Most of this is real world sound effects with only some unique sci-fi sounds added in for the vehicles or some of the technology used.

Both Blade Runner films build thier unique sonic world with the scores. The original was composed by Vangelis, and is a score that is immediately feels like part of city. Nothing else really sounds like Vangelis’ score, not even other Vangelis albums from the period. There is a darkness to the score that really comes through.

It is still raining in L.A. even in 2049.

For the sequel Villeneuve ended up dropping his regular composer Johann Johannsson and went with the duo of Benjamin Wallfisch and Hans Zimmer. These two composers do a fine job of using Vangelis’ style and tone and expanding it in a more modern way. They use many of the same vintage keyboards and synth sounds that Vangelis utilized, and they even carry over his Tears in Rain theme from the previous film. But what fans of the older score will notice is that the tone and atmosphere feels almost perfect.

I think he is attempting to use his Scanner powers!

There are two changes here. The first is that the score for 2049 lacks some of the blues/jazz influences that Vangelis utilized in key scenes. It doesn’t hurt the film, but it does make the listening experience of the album feel a bit too samey at times. I know, film score fan first world problems. What I’m not a fan of is the HORN OF DOOM effect that is used in the score. You get those long sustained portentous whole note blasts of sound in this score. We first heard this in Inception and it was ridiculous there (at least in my opinion), but by the time we hit 2017 this effect is so tired and stale. Nearly three quarters of all trailers use that ridiculous HORN OF DOOM effect. To hear it invade the Blade Runner world is a disappointment. The problem also becomes troubling in the sound mix of the film, because these blasts are so invasive they draw attention to themselves and pull the viewer out of the film.

Now to be clear this kind of thing appeared in the original score and mix to the earlier film. But, it seems like the new composers picked up on the single track that this did occur in and proceeded to sprinkle it a bit more in this film. I found it distracting, and there were a few moments where it seemed dreadfully out of place. Why the music was blasting away at a few characters walking toward K, I’ll never know. Just an odd bit of scoring. In some ways it may work better as a listening experience as part of a Blade Runner concept album.

I hear no body walks in L.A.

It is a bit tricky to talk too much about the acting without spoiling some of the plot revelations, so I’m going to keep this a bit more surface than I normally would. The entire cast does a really great job in their roles. Each character is a shade of grey in this film, and that keeps everything slightly off balance. It can be a tough role for an actor, but everyone steps up to the challenge. Gosling in particular has some very tricky balancing to pull off. His performance feels restrained, but always with something simmering underneath. When things get brought to a boil, the emotion feels earned because we’ve seen him holding it in for a good chunk of the film. It is one of those performances that may seem a bit dry when the movie starts, but it really seemed to evolve for me over the course of the film.

It is great to see Ford playing Deckard again, and he does a very good job. That bitterness that we saw in the previous film seems to be amplified by his life after the first film ended. Ford plays a key role, but don’t expect him to have a lot of screen time, just enough for it count. And he gets a great scene with Jered Leto (who balances mysterious and disturbing perfectly) that puts Deckard through the ringer.

She looks nice and helpful now... but just wait.

But my favorite performance in Blade Runner 2049 has to go to Sylvia Hoeks as Luv. She’s the femme fatale of this future noire, and man does she play it to the hilt. This is one replicant you don’t want to get on the wrong side of, and of course K finds himself on the wrong side of Luv. Without giving too much away, I will say that she does a good job of keeping you feeling off center. When she’s on the screen early in the film, you are uneasy. But when she starts showing up in the final half, you get tense – because you know she is willing and able to do just about anything. She makes for a great antagonist.

Now the challenging part, the writing and direction. It is really hard to cover these without any spoilers, but I really think that if you are interested in the film you should check it out first. I’ll cover what I like about these elements, but avoid diving into the themes and plot points too much.

Deckard has seen some Dangerous Days indeed.

Blade Runner 2049 was made by fans for fans. You can tell that everyone involved in the film wanted to make a sequel worthy of the previous film, one they hold in high esteem. It starts with the plot. You could have gone so many different ways with a follow up, and they could have taken a quick and easy action packed movie set in the world fashioned in the previous film. But instead, they decided to carry over the detective noire concept as well. In fact I would say the case at the heart of this film is more engaging than the one in the previous film (which was really an extended bounty hunt). In 2049 we get more investigation and personal links that act as clues. K must engage and understand each person he encounters if he is to solve this mystery. These plot points are intriguing and carry the viewer along with him. As K closes in on the truth it starts to impact his view on the world and how he sees himself. But like everything in this universe, the writers keep it all in shades of grey. Truth is a tricky thing, and just like the previous film, when the case closes some questions are still left unanswered, not just for K, but also for the viewer.

What is great about the script is that it really does work as a standalone film, with K acting as an excellent protagonist. But the writers know Blade Runner very well, and use the new story and characters to impact how we view the original film. It really does take themes from that film and shape and twist them in new ways. Not an easy task to pull off, but the script manages it. This film feels like it needs to exist, not like it was thrown together just to get another movie based on 80s nostalgia.

Replicant prostitutes... of the FUTURE!

Villeneuve handles the entire production with amazing skill. He gets great performances out of the cast. He keeps the production feeling true to the original film. But he also takes a very good script and makes it even more impressive in the way he lays out scenes and constructs the movie. I sound like a broken record here, but I’m really impressed with the way the new film, in all of its aspects, enhances the previous film and pushes things forward. It takes someone with an eye for details (and in the older film Ridley Scott’s obsessive fascination with production design make it even more challenging) to craft a film like this. It can be watched by casual fans and enjoyed. But if you are one of those more obsessive fans (which I admit, I’m one) you’ll find so many layers and levels in this film. It is a remarkable achievement.

"All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."

Is it a milestone in science fiction, or one of the greatest movies of the century? I wouldn’t go that far. In fact, I think this movie has a very specific audience. You have to have enjoyed the original film, and there are plenty of people out there who don’t like it at all. You have to be willing to watch a film that is slow paced and just as concerned about visual storytelling and letting the atmosphere soak in, as it is about moving the plot along. I’ve seen some people call it a super expensive art film, and yeah I think that is a good description. It is not a summer blockbuster. I’m frankly surprised the film got made the way it was. But I’m very happy that it was. I can heartily recommend seeing it (and on a big screen to soak in that atmosphere), but only if you meet those caveats. Blade Runner 2049 is a journey well worth taking and revisiting.

Enjoy this review? Click an ad and support this blog.

I warned you. Don't get on the wrong side of Luv.

Exploring a Scene – Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me

David Lynch is one of those directors who makes use of just about every film making element to create maximum impact in a scene. I’m going to take a look at a scene from Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me, because I don’t think it has been discussed too much, and because I had to remove this part from my already long review of the film.

The scene that interests me is the opening titles for the film. Yeah it is mostly music over a slow pull back camera move. But it shows off many of the elements that make a typical David Lynch scene, including the multiple layers of meaning the simple scene takes on.

The first thing we see is a wash of blue, grey and black motion all across the screen. It isn’t immediately obvious what we are seeing, but as the camera begins its slow pull back we see that we are looking at a television showing a screen full of static. It is an interesting choice that we are seeing blue static, not grey or white static as we expect to see on a blank screen. The color blue has a deep significance for Lynch. A blue rose appears later in the film. Electricity is specifically mentioned and in other Lynch films blue lighting and electricity go hand in hand. I usually interpret this to mean that blue and "abstractions" are tied in his films. We are getting into a case tied to the supernatural or to put it in Lynch terms, the abstractions are taking over. 

Now let’s take a listen to the music. Angelo Badalamenti’s score plays a slow paced saxophone lead piece. We aren’t hearing any familiar music from the TwinPeaks television series. This is a new piece of music that is filled with a melancholy feel. But it is still done in the jazzy style that Badalamenti crafted for the series.

Even something as simple as the lettering in the credits is unfamiliar. Gone is the brown outlined with green from the television series. Instead it is white and tilted slightly. We are not getting what we expected visually or aurally.

Then there is sudden eruption of sound. A woman in distress, a brutal male grunting, and the television is smashed by a blow from an axe and the woman cries out in terror as the screen goes dark. What does it all mean?

The next shot mirrors the iconic opening sequence of the television series, where we see a body floating down a river - a body wrapped in plastic. At this point the viewer may be wondering if we are seeing a sequel, or a prequel. Is that Laura Palmer? No. The subtitle appears to tell us this is Teresa Banks, and this is all foreshadowing to the fate of Laura.

From the entire opening credit sequence, you can read a couple layers beyond simple foreshadowing. Twin Peaks the television series is gone, nothing but static. The axe crashing down gives that a further finality (Twin Peaks the television series is dead). It also implies that this film is going to smash through the barriers of the televisions series and go somewhere else. Where? The screams of horror and the violence we hear are the hints. This movie is going to a dark violent place that the television series could never go. The melancholy music hints at the tragedy that is going to unfold. 

But the next shot tells us this is all familiar and yet not what we expected at all.

All this from a simple opening credits sequence and a single shot.

Movie Musing: The (sur)real appeal of David Lynch

It is like he's trying to tell us something...

A friend of mine once called Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me one of the most bloated and pretentious films he’d ever seen. Being a big fan of David Lynch’s work I had to disagree with him. But the thing is, I completely understand why he feels that way.

At the risk of sounding pretentious myself (I know, way too late for that), David Lynch’s films are not for everyone. I think the angry reaction that comes from many viewers toward his films is that they feel stupid for not understanding the film. I don’t think it is David Lynch’s intent to make anyone feel stupid. All the interviews I’ve ever read or seen show a man who is not full of himself, or thinking he is God’s gift to film. He seems like a genuine guy who has a very particular (and peculiar) outlook on life. The thing is, there are two key elements to David Lynch that explain his film making techniques. He distrusts words and he loves mysteries

What are words for?

I don't think Henry is quite sure what it all means either.

David Lynch was a painter before he was a filmmaker. It was out of a desire to make one of his paintings move that he picked up a camera. Lynch comes from a background of visual arts first, and often speaks of his inability to articulate concepts using words. He feels that words often diminish things, especially emotions. To Lynch only a gifted poet or lyricist can do them true justice.

This means that Lynch doesn’t put any particular weight into the actual words his characters are saying. The script is a framework and source for the ideas the film will become. It is not the end product. To paraphrase Lynch, if the script was the end product then you could release that and be done with it.

One of the strangest conversations in sci-fi cinema.

Things start with the script, but Lynch will often allow his actors to improvise, suggest other courses of action or reaction and even take accidents that occur on the set and turn them into key moments in his film. The character of Killer BOB in Twin Peaks only occurred because of a series of accidents during filming. Frank Silva happened to be reflected in a mirror during filming a crucial scene and Lynch used that as the kernel for creating this abstraction of a character.

So if Lynch isn’t concerned about keeping to the script, how is he approaching filmmaking? His background as a painter means that he focuses on visuals first. Lynch has a very particular way of lighting scenes, staging them and using framing and camera movement. He deals in visual contrasts, often with shadows and colors. Most scenes in a Lynch film are set up to have some kind of visual impact, or to hint at a mood.

One hell of a road trip, or a road trip into hell?

Mood is the key word for David Lynch. More important than the words being spoken is the mood the scene creates, the emotions that are running underneath. Lynch uses his actors, set and camera work to create the mood and atmospheres he is going for. He uses pacing and editing to continue to develop those feelings. Lynch’s films can move at a slow pace, but often this is done to create a feeling of unease or tension. There will be strange pauses in conversation, giving the viewer the feeling that something isn’t right.

Something is about to go very wrong.

Another key element of his films is the approach to sound. With Eraserhead (and his student films before) sound is used to create atmospheres and textures in the world of the film. Lynch wants the sounds to evoke feelings and tensions on their own and building on the performances and visuals. Lynch isn’t going for realism – ever. All of his films occur in their own worlds, dreamworlds maybe, that have their own feel. He is working with fiction and is using all the tools in his command to put you into that fiction.

The final key element is the music. Lynch loves music and uses it to great effect in his films. Perhaps his most successful use of score and songs is for the stories set in Twin Peaks. The score by Angelo Badalementi is so unique and specific to that place that you couldn’t mistake it for anything else. Add to that the songs performed by Julee Cruise and it adds to the idea that Twin Peaks is a fleshed out place.

Definitely one hell of a road trip.

One thing I rarely hear commented about when it comes to music in a David Lynch film is his ability to pick just the right song for just the right moment. He is up there with Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarantino in that regard. In Twin Peaks you have Julee Cruise’s ethereal voice. But Blue Velvet takes Roy Orbison’s In Dreams and turns it into nightmare fuel. I love David Bowie’s voice in the darkness singing how he is Deranged during the opening credits to Lost Highway. Even something as odd as taking Roy Orbison’s Crying translating it into Spanish and having Rebekah Del Rio belt it out a cappella fits that key scene in Mulholland Drive so perfectly, I can’t imagine it any other way. Lynch really understands how these songs can act beyond the surface needs of a scene and provide additional layers to the film.

A phone call you don't want to get.

All these things feel effortless when you watch a David Lynch film, and yet they are all carefully managed, as much as the performances from his cast. But because he puts so much care into each of these, and combines them with his focus on visuals he crafts something that we just don’t see too much of in big budget Hollywood films – mood and atmosphere.

Because Lynch doesn’t trust words to deliver what he wants in a scene, he relies heavily on creating and manipulating the mood of scenes. That is why a character can be saying one thing, but the deep rumble just barely audible to us, the way the shadows are oozing into the frame and the way the curtain is moving slightly behind her and those too ruby red lips all point to something else, something hidden and secret.

Mysteries of Love?

You want to see the man behind the mask?

David Lynch was once asked why he used so much black in his paintings. He said that he loves shadows and darkness because you can suggest something without really showing it. It creates a mystery and the person looking at the art will want to solve it.

Most of Lynch films work on the same principle. They all have some kind of mystery at the core and Lynch invites you to step up and dive into the mystery. He suggests many things using all the elements of filmmaking. But he trusts his viewers to absorb and feel the film, and to enjoy the dark mysteries within.

Is that really a mystery you want to uncover?

From Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me forward, Lynch’s films seem to be about simple personal issues. For example you could say that Lost Highway is the exploration of a man whose anger and jealousy drive him to terrible acts and that the film pushes deep into his mind as he tries to sort out how he could have allowed those feelings to destroy everything around him. It is the way Lynch tells that simple story that makes it more interesting, and I’d argue more impactful.

As a viewer you are actively participating in the film. You are taking in those moods created by visuals, sounds and music. You are untangling the mystery. You are participating in the film. Because of that, the film can then strike deeper than a more traditional narrative. Fire Walk with Me deals with such dark and disturbing things and it really hits me each time I watch it. I always wonder at how strong that reaction is, when you look at the surface elements of the film it can seem like a mess. But fused together all those things create a very haunting film.

I like to remember things in my own way…

Agent Cooper and Audrey with some coffee talk.

Of course, the mystery element doesn’t work for everyone. The clues that Lynch leaves in his movies come across like taunts. The performances seem too bizarre to be relatable. The artificial nature of the lighting, the pacing and the music annoy instead of attract. Some people just find the whole exercise as futile at best and frustrating at worst.

I think the logical mind starts demanding that symbolism and narrative have clear structures and goals. Logic is black and white. No room for suggestion.

If you understand that Lynch is going for that then you might be more open to his approach. I see many people say his work doesn’t make any sense. But I disagree. His films follow a path. It may not be recognizable at first, but it is one that you feel not think about. You follow the moods and emotions of the scenes, not the structure of the script. You start to see patterns in his images, in his music, in his scenes. You start to see that strange acting choices Naomi Watts makes in one part of Mulholland Drive make sense with what happens after she opens that blue box near the end of the film.

Trapped in an abstraction? The color blue may be a key.

You also have to understand that Lynch uses characters he calls “abstractions”. These characters are often unique in appearance and speech. The score and sounds cape will change when they are around. These are not actual human characters, but usually some kind of physical manifestation of an emotion or inner conflict. Lynch has been using them since Eraserhead and often they can add a layer of confusion to the narrative because they seem like they walked in from a dream.

Going deeper into the Inland Empire.

I love the surreal touch the “abstractions” add to his films. It is one of the big draws to me in regards to David Lynch’s style. Very few people can execute that uncanny dream style like Lynch does. His films feel like anything is possible, because there is an element of uncertainly to them. It was one of the reasons I was disappointed to the dream worlds created by Nolan in Inception, they were too structured, too clean. Dreams are messy filled with mystery and uncertainty.

So I get why some people don’t like his work. That’s fine. I just get annoyed when they write it off as pretentious and nonsensical. There is meaning in his films, they are trying to make us feel something and understand something, and they are using nontraditional methods to do that, because to Lynch the impact is greater if the message isn’t delivered by words, but by getting you to feel what the characters are feeling. If the approach doesn’t work for you, that’s fine. But don’t slam it because of that.

The Sleeper has Awoken

Dream or abstraction? Maybe both...

One more thing I love about David Lynch’s films is seeing the craft on display. When I see a filmmaker who not only understands all the tools at his disposal, but uses all of them and with such skill I can’t help but be impressed. I also love the mysteries he presents in his films. I want to go down those rabbit holes and dig into the moods and atmospheres as well as his eclectic characters. He captures the feeling of a dream world and dream logic that I have rarely experienced in film. That feeling of the uncanny, the familiar but alien, is something that seems easy to pull off when Lynch does it.

So, yeah, David Lynch is making art films. But I don’t think he’s trying to confuse or aggravate people. He is telling stories in a unique way and one that I find completely absorbing and intriguing. That is why I have a space for him on my shelf right next to other filmmakers I admire like Kurosawa, Spielberg, Kon, Fincher and Miyazaki.

Enjoy this musing? Click an ad and support this blog.