OK. Is there anyone on who is interested in beginning a discussion of INLAND EMPIRE on this forum?

    let me begin with the following thesis: INLAND EMPIRE is actually a sound-installation that uses the movie theather as its context of inscription and accompanied by an indispensable imagetrack...

    in any case, there is a lot to discuss, but i thought, in the context of, this could be a good place to begin discussing INLAND EMPIRE: by privileging the "soundtrack" and deprivileging the "imagetrack"...

    Redigerad av rummenigge den 8 jan 2007, 05:45
    • woMw sa...
    • Användare
    • 7 jan 2007, 11:13
    i haven´t seen it yet,but i´m still waiting for the german release

    • Niotku sa...
    • Användare
    • 7 jan 2007, 14:43
    ...which has unfortunately been postponed to the end of April. Rats.

  • this delay is probably because it is not distributed or produced by a major Hollywood studio. it is basically a movie that insists on not being a part of the movie industry. i actually think that this is a conscious (therefore a political/aesthetic) effort on lynch's part.

  • and i'm waiting for lithuanian release which also will be in april i think. but from the rumours i've heard that it is his best movie in career. then i can't realise how good it should be!!

  • I saw INLAND EMPIRE when it released in France. It is one of the best movie that Lynch made. A disconcerting masterpiece.

  • completely agree... even if it was a movie for his fans cf the rabbits references...and personnaly i think that it is his last movie in this style

  • I'm still waiting unless it's released in Poland [27.04.07]. One, long month =_="

  • For me, INLAND EMPIRE was more an experience than "just a movie". I haven't really taken it in yet, and have to see it several more times.
    Laura Dern was amazing, and the whole movie was just mesmerizing, no matter if you understood anything or not.

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 5 maj 2007, 14:13
    Lynch did it again. Inland Empire puts most so called "horror movies" to shame. This is another flick that will have a lot replay value. Isn't the DVD supposed to be released in summer?

  • The DVD is supposed to be released June 12th in the U.S., I think. The dvd will probably be quite exraordinary... I've heard Lynch wants it to be an artwork in itself. Can't wait until it comes out in Finland! There's so much I need to watch again...

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 6 maj 2007, 10:03
    wisheraway said:
    Can't wait until it comes out in Finland! There's so much I need to watch again...

    Niin :)

  • I don't like INLAND EMPIRE

    David Lynch is my favorite director.
    I love ALL pre-INLAND EMPIRE Lynch's films.
    INLAND EMPIRE is just a bad film.
    It makes me really happy that nowadays, at last, everyone everywhere recognizes David Lynch's talent. However, I'm really sad so many people praise him based on INLAND EMPIRE, as it is, in my opinion, his worst film.

    For those who only watched Lost Highway, Mulholand Dr. and INLAND EMPIRE - You should watch all of them now and make your own conclusions. Don't let film critics play with you.

    For me INLAND EMPIRE is an experience Mr. Lynch wanted to do. I'm glad he did it if he felt he needed it. Now I hope that with what he learned from that experience he will come back to good films again.

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 21 jun 2007, 22:52
    I think, you right that most of people just say, what the critcs want to hear.
    But in my opinion this movie is great. After I saw it I hardly could say if it was all a dream, or realy such things were said and happend in that small cinema. During the movie my fantasy began to play like a child in the kindergarten. There were so much colurs and feelings which let everyone have an other view of the movie. So it's hard to recomand the movie to other people who got no fantasy. Actualy if someone asks me how I liked the movie, I'm never gives the same answear.

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 15 aug 2007, 21:18
    Has the DVD version been delayed..? Any news?

  • In a way Inland Empire movie sucked. The most amazing thing about Lynch is the atmosphere he's creating. Everything is enchanted and there is something fascinating in almost every picture. Inland Empire however wasn't able to achieve the effect lynchs other movies did.

    On the other hand there's much in the storyline and about the sets of pictures. The latter is very interesting because it is revolving around the universe of Lynch's other movies and works. There are all those familiar faces: Laura Palmers mother, Laura Dern who played in Wild at Heart and Blue Velvet. We meet Laura Harring and even Naomi Watts is hidden under one of the rabbit-masks. All those dark corridors, the connection between different pictures and scenes throughout the whole movie etc. The storyline rings us back to Mullholland Drive. The Actor who is led or tried to lead by some obscure and influential people. And there's one more thing that is amazing: the idea to mix the perspectives so that you're not sure if you're watching a movie or a movie inside of a movie.

    I would say I didn't regret to watch the film, but on the whole it wasn't as much fun as I expected it to be.

    By the way: It would be interesting to know what made this movie so special. Everybody says: It's awesome! But why, you guys?

    • syater sa...
    • Användare
    • 5 sep 2007, 19:36
    I just came across this discussion. I posted comments on a Mulholland related board about Inland Empire a couple of weeks ago. Here are quotes from that post:

    Mulholland Drive is my favorite Lynch film. In Mulholland I think he did his best job ever of drawing viewers into a very emotionally complex, haunting world. It's quite masterful and engrossing. I have no problem with the unconventional structure of the 'plot' such as it is. In fact I relish this approach.

    As it happens I also just watched Inland Empire on DVD a couple of days ago. I'm curious what you Mulholland fans think of this new one.

    Although at the beginning of the film it seemed we were in for another wonderfully twisted ride through the dark realms of Lynch's imagination, it wasn't so long until I realized I wasn't finding it nearly as engaging as Mulholland. And after a while I felt it really bogged down.

    Laura Dern's character appears to be drawn farther and farther into her mental illness, apparently with little hope of recovery, although he does tease us with hope for her a couple of times.

    I know enough not to take Lynch at face value, so I'll likely have to watch it again. But the prospect of watching it again will involve some measure of endurance rather than real anticipation, because along with a puzzling lack of humor (the rabbits are odd rather than funny), more than any of his other films Inland Empire seems particularly plotless, like bits of ideas that occurred to Lynch all cobbled together. Maybe shooting in digital changed his process but not for the good?

  • Although at the beginning of the film it seemed we were in for another wonderfully twisted ride through the dark realms of Lynch's imagination, it wasn't so long until I realized I wasn't finding it nearly as engaging as Mulholland. And after a while I felt it really bogged down.

    That was my experience with Inland Empire as well. Lynch wasn't at all able to draw me into his world during Inland Empire.

    more than any of his other films Inland Empire seems particularly plotless

    But I disagree with the plotlessness: there's a lot going on in this movie and the problem seems to be more that there's happening too much. In Lynchs other movies there are pictures that are repeated with slight variations, so you can associate them with each other. Everything seems to be connetcted somehow and that's how Lynchs "magic" is created: there's a lot to think about, but not really a conclusion to draw.

    In Inland Empire you're not able to draw any connections, because there are too many and although it seems that the movie is very slow there are too many things at once.

    That's why I am very interested in watching it again: there seems to be something new in this movie. But anyhow it isn't something I really want to see again.

  • Mulholland Drive is my favourite movie ever. And I love everything else Lynch has ever done, with the possible exception of Elephant Man.
    I saw Inland Empire a couple of days ago and I wasn't sure what to think about it at first. The only thing I was sure about was that it was the craziest, bravest, most confusing, perhaps even the worst thing Lynch has ever done. Of course, I had absolutely no idea what the movie was about.
    But there were so many scenes I just couldn't get out of my head and the more I thought about them the closer I was to the conclusion that the movie is, in fact, quite genius.
    The scene with the chinese girl & the bum on the street is perhaps the most absurd, bizarre, hilarious thing I've ever seen.
    And the rabbits. wow. the rabbits. and the chilling laughing track. the rabbits are, I think, "the source" of the story, inapprehensible, masked consciousness. another idea : the actress, it seems, is losing herself and towards the end of the movie, the character takes over and starts its own life. it's just a rough idea, i know it sounds stupid.
    does Poland of this movie even exist? to me, it's more like a state of mind.... not the REAL place. :)
    The movie was even more disturbing than Lost Highway & Mulholland Drive.. it's scary. it's bizarre. it's completely out of control. it's just pointless to try to make some sense out of all the mess. it's enough just to FEEL it. I don't even want to try to understand it cos that would take so much magic away. It's just a beautiful, beautiful ride - it feels like Lynch's tour de force. I feel that, with this movie, he takes us further than anyone ever dared to, into the unknown.
    And now I have to see it again :)

    • Grodigan sa...
    • Användare
    • 11 sep 2007, 21:56
    there is my list

    Six Figures Getting Sick (1966, к/м, аним.)
    The Alphabet (1968, к/м).
    The Grandmother (1970, к/м).
    The Amputee (1974, к/м).
    Eraserhead (1976).

    Dune (1984).
    Blue Velvet (1986).
    Cowboy and the Frenchman, The (1989, к/м).
    Industrial simphony №1. The Dream of the Broken Hearted (1990, ТВ).
    The Elephant Man (1980).
    Twin Peaks (1990, ТВ-сериал).
    Wild at Heart (1990).
    Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me (1992).
    Lost Highway (1996).
    Hotel Room (1993, ТВ-новеллы)
    The Straight Story (1999).
    Rabbits (2002, онлайн-сериал).
    Mulholland Dr. (2001).

    Darkened Room (2002, к/м). - i haven't see ((
    at last
    INLAND EMPIRE (2007). - i like it!! all in Linch tradition, i disagree with the PedroDuarte

    • syater sa...
    • Användare
    • 15 sep 2007, 17:26
    I like RingADingDing's thoughtful post. It brought me to think about Inland Empire again. I agree with this:

    In Inland Empire you're not able to draw any connections, because there are too many and although it seems that the movie is very slow there are too many things at once.

    I think this is why Mulholland Drive works better for me. In Mulholland Lynch is more deft at luring us into the story by making us think we're on the trail of a mystery that might possibly be solved. But then of course he suddenly turns the tables on us, squeezes us through a black hole and into another dimension -- or at least opens that as a possible interpretation.

    But even then it still works as an engaging mystery, 'what the hell just happened?'

    For me Inland is only briefly seductive in this way at the very beginning, particularly when the 'neighbor' woman comes to call on Laura Dern's character, then the rehearsal for the film begins ...

    The problem with making a movie like this is that there are indeed too many connections to make. Personally I don't feel that there would be much of a payoff in taking the time to connect the dots, so to speak. There are no characters as such for me to care about one way or another. If we're going to be introduced to dreamworld characters in which identities can shift and slip the onus is on the story-teller to work that much harder to make us care about such characters. Initially I cared about the main characters only to find pretty quickly that since anything might happen for no reason at all I somehow couldn't invest much emotional value in their outcome. Maybe because there is no outcome in a meaningful way.

    And as Great Destroyer says:
    But there were so many scenes I just couldn't get out of my head and the more I thought about them the closer I was to the conclusion that the movie is, in fact, quite genius.

    I agree with the first part of the sentence, there are many scenes that stay with us, as with all of Lynch's films, and in fact many films by others work that way as well. BUT I'm still skeptical that simply stringing a series of memorable scenes together actually makes a great film in and of itself. I think in fact it does not. I think Lynch comes pretty close to doing just that in Inland Empire. Or if there is some hidden structure behind it all, lacking real character development, I just don't care to do the work of making it all come together. If someone else has enough time on their hands to do that work I'd be happy to listen to what they came up with.

    I think what Lynch mostly tries to do is tell a 'story' with images and sound to produce psychological states more than actual narratives. In his creative process and film world images trump stories (or words). I like this about his films but it's tricky to make it work well. Sometimes it doesn't.

    Note: I still haven't watched it a second time. Maybe I will some day.

  • This was Lynch's opus for sure. The greatest film in existence imo. I mean I can not think of any other time I felt so moved, disturbed and frighteningly uncomfortable by some moving pictures.

    It was insane. The sound, the tension, the atmosphere everything was incredible.
    The first time I watched the film I didn't try and understand it. Rather, I let it wash over me kind of.
    Definitely one of the most disconcerting experiences of my life.

    I've now watched the film 4 times and have come to a personal conclusion as to what actually happened in the film.

    To be able to make a film so interpretative and yet so meaningful and beautiful in every way is complete and utter genius of the highest level.

    I can not give this film enough praise. It is a feast for the mind and a hell of a ride for your emotions.

    Oh, Mulholland Drive was my favourite film before this. But I seriously doubt I'm going to ever see a better film than Inland Empire while I breathe oxygen on this Earth.

    The owls are not what they seem.
  • What do you say about OST? I simply LOVE Polish Poem (sad song on beginning and ending)...

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 3 nov 2007, 16:34
    Some Lynch fans hated this film, not to mention the rest of the people who watched it.
    Personally, I think this is his best so far, and that he 's getting better and better with his style of discontinuities and tension throughout the film.

    And trying to come up with a theory for what it means or is, is hard and not necessary. It's something to be experienced and perceived almost subconciously (at least that's how I watch his movies and it works). The first time is always the best.

    • Mohamo sa...
    • Användare
    • 3 nov 2007, 18:46
    I haven't seen INLAND EMPIRE (not released here yet), however this article could provide some useful insight to the nature of the film, and of Lynch's work in general.

    The closing quotes are quite important:
    He (Lynch) is quite clear, within himself, about the story he has told. "But why do I need to worry about saying the words?" he demands. "The words just reduce it. It's the film that is the thing."

    This is the attitude I've had to his films since my first (Mulholland Dr.), and this view has only been reinforced by the various 'explanatory theories' i've read in IMDB forums and etc. Obviously any discussion IS a good thing, however a fair few people go too far when they start presenting their theories as concrete versions of 'what really happened' - thankfully I don't see this happening here.

    One of my most memorable Lynch experiences was due to an actual mistake on my part - I thought the valve next to the radiator(?) in Eraserhead was a shadowy human face. Hopefully everyone can appreciate vastly differing interpretations, even if you believe them to be 'incorrect'.

    My final example would be to describe the aftermath upon finishing Mulholland Dr. - I completely 'understood' the film even though it was cognitively incomprehensible, and impossible for me to express in any way. It was pure expressionism, transcending explanation in words; any attempt of which would inherently and destructively oversimplify/distort the original content.

    *Edit: just saw that this is basically a superflous and long-winded agreement with fuckthechildren's post. Still, the links and quotes are good, no? :D

Anonyma användare kan inte skriva inlägg. Vänligen logga in eller skapa ett konto för att göra inlägg i forumen.