|
| . |
|
Mulholland Dr. 2001 |
Review by Jonathan Cornwell |
Directed by David Lynch
R, 146 min. (strong sexual content, nudity, violence) |
 |
Starring: Justin Theroux, Naomi Watts, Laura Elena Harring, Ann Miller, Robert Forster, Dan Hedaya, Monty Montgomery
Producers: Mary Sweeney, Alain Sarde, Neal Edelstein, Michael Polaire, Tony Krantz
Screenplay: David Lynch
Distributor: Universal Focus
Released: 10/12/01 (Limited) |
Rating:
  (out of ) |
Some would invariably compare David Lynch's latest feature, Mulholland Drive, with this year's other mind-blowing film,
Memento. While
on the surface they may seem similar, they are not. Although it seems Memento is chaotic and misaligned with itself, if you
watch the film more than once you'll begin to see an intelligent pattern developing - one that leads you to make one of two
logical conclusions. Mulholland Drive isn't just chaotic, it's a scrambled picture of images and emotions in a dreamlike state,
with no apparent logical storyline or linear imagination. It's more about feelings, a kaleidoscope of images and bizarre sideplots
that might draw the ire of the average moviegoer simply looking for their usual spoonfed popcorn flick. No matter how you
feel about the film, there's no denying the power of its surreal and incoherent themes. And, despite a bizarre and somewhat
distasteful final act, the film succeeds in transfixing the audience in a near trance-like state for most of its running length.
Lynch has always been associated with strangeness, as his previous films, Lost Highway or Blue Velvet, attest to. He
leaves the viewer with few explanations, abandoning any conventional storytellling that might lead to an obvious conclusion.
We never really know what he's thinking, or doing for that matter, but we marvel at how he somehow pulls it off. There's no
saftey net for Lynch, which is his greatness strength, but also his biggest weakness. Mulholland Drive is based on his
television series that never aired, instead ciphering the show's best parts into the mix that's used to formulate the film's
recipe. The result is a compelling, near masterful example of filmmaking that's one of the year's best pictures.
A synopsis of the storyline is nearly impossible, because, aside from a few scenes, it's open to considerable interpretation.
We meet several characters, some related, some not, who weave in and out of the story at random times. The main
characters, Rita (Laura Elena Harring), a beautiful actress who wanders into an apartment after becoming afflicted with
amnesia following a car accident, and Betty (Naomi Watts), a wide-eyed, naive Canadien aspiring actress with untapped
potential to make it big. Together, Betty helps Rita uncover her true identity, while Betty gives a stunning audition for
a part in a small film. Also, we meet a director (Justin Theroux) who is forced to cast a girl he doesn't want as his lead
actress, a dwarf in a wheelchair (Michael J. Anderson) who gives orders, and a landlady (Ann Miller) who tries to figure
out what is going on in Betty's aunt's apartment. Some make sense, some don't. Eventually, the stories deteriorate into
confusing images of sex, murder, and reality.
Whether or not you admire the film, there's no denying a moving performance by Naomi Watts. A relative unknown, she
played Guila De Lezze in 1998's Dangerous Beauty. Her portrayal of Betty is, at first, reminiscent of a typical
1950s girl dreaming of Hollywood stardom, then later, a bruising effort of a psychologically tormented woman in turmoil
over her lost love and unthinkable revenge. She gives herself completely to the role, and one scene in particular is
maybe the best of the year. She is subtle, excited, relaxed, emotional, and betrayed. Seemingly bereft by film's end,
Watts has given all she has, and what an effort it is. Harring is also impressive - a beautiful woman, very Rita Hayworth-like
in appearance and presence, and not afraid to go the distance in her role.
Some reviewers detest the way Lynch destroys his own ambiguously-constructed storyline, somewhat like destroying a rare
piece of art that has been recently completed. There's no question the final 20 minutes are difficult to follow, much less
understand. However, some of the intrigue of the film is garnered during this sequence, leading to endless questions
about it's purpose or part in the conclusion. You can probably draw your own conclusions, some of which can be logically
argued, but eventually you realize there's not much point to reconstructing the film to make sense, instead leaving it to
what is really is - a bizarre collection of ambiguous skits, each alive in its own self-constructed world of weirdness.
But it sure is fun to watch.
© 2001 Jonathan Cornwell
|
|
| Masterpiece - Classic; Movie perfection |
| Excellent - A Must See; One of the year's best films |
| Good - Highly Recommended |
| Fair - Worth seeing |
| Average - Viewable, but not recommended |
| Below average - View at own risk |
| Poor - Avoid at all costs |
| Very poor - An embarassment to the film industry |
| Zero | Awful - One of the worst films ever made |
© 2000 - present ReelCriticReviews
All movie pictures are registered trademarks and/or copyrights of their respective holders
Their use on this site is for informational purposes only and does not imply ownership
|
