I've seen every David Lynch film known to man. Why? Because, like many others, I was captivated by the driven, innovative hybrid of beauty and horror, good and evil that is evident in Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks. These films blew my mind. Between the story, the music, the visuals, and just the downright bizarre nature of these pictures, I was spellbound. David Lynch is a master of atmosphere, and as a painter, he has moments of cinematic genius. I was so moved and amazed by Lynch's earlier works that I found myself watching films that I wasn't even interested in, films that I knew may not be good, just because he directed them. I kept getting disappointed, but I didn't give up. I bought the best of davidlynch.com, I saw his short films, I listened to his CD, and I even sat through every minute of his very slow, very experimental three hour movie...
Where do I begin? This film tries so hard. It actually tries to recapture some of the horror and the oddness that made his earlier films so engaging, but it never feels the same. The eerie atmosphere is there, but there's never any plotting, or any substance to support it. It starts off with possibility, but it ends up feeling forced, and even arbitrary at times. I normally try to give a plot summary in a review, but what we have here is simply a very dark and strange movie about an actress. That's it. There's no continuity, there's no logic, there's very little justifiable conflict, and there's no story arc. This film is literally an incoherent, episodic jumble of weird scenes.
It's kind of like Eraserhead in a way, but guess what? Eraserhead was only 85 minutes. It feels like 120. By this particular scale, Inland Empire seems to go on interminably. Eraserhead was equally surreal, abstract, and disturbing, but unlike Inland Empire, an intelligent viewer can actually make connections with the scenes in Eraserhead—not inherently logical connections, but connections nonetheless.
Even among fans, I think it's pretty much unanimous that Inland Empire is so utterly disjointed that it's futile to even attempt an analysis. It is simply devoid of any traditional story whatsoever. I can see what the movie was trying to accomplish; it is meant to create a very bizarre viewing experience unlike anything else, and it does do that, but it takes far too long to do so. I will admit this movie had its moments. It has a couple scenes that made me jump, and one more that made me regret watching it while I was alone in the house; however, these few moments of terror are wedged between hours of plot less, stagnantly paced scenes that require too much patience to sit through.
I appreciate artistic films, but I like artistic films to get their point across within a reasonable period of time. I think some reviewers, me included, wouldn't have been so hard on this movie if it were about 40 to 60 minutes shorter. I enjoy odd films as well, but I like odd films to make sense, and if they don't make sense, if they break the bonds of logic, they need to justify this decision with something intriguing and original. I like the idea of an experimental film. I am even interested in a film that imitates the flow of dreams, and I admire a director for trying; however, as far as I'm concerned, this is nearly impossible to pull off, as, too often, ambitious filmmakers abandon the tried-and-true effectiveness of a classic story, and instead get carried away and ultimately drunk on their own meandering vision.
Where do I begin? This film tries so hard. It actually tries to recapture some of the horror and the oddness that made his earlier films so engaging, but it never feels the same. The eerie atmosphere is there, but there's never any plotting, or any substance to support it. It starts off with possibility, but it ends up feeling forced, and even arbitrary at times. I normally try to give a plot summary in a review, but what we have here is simply a very dark and strange movie about an actress. That's it. There's no continuity, there's no logic, there's very little justifiable conflict, and there's no story arc. This film is literally an incoherent, episodic jumble of weird scenes.
It's kind of like Eraserhead in a way, but guess what? Eraserhead was only 85 minutes. It feels like 120. By this particular scale, Inland Empire seems to go on interminably. Eraserhead was equally surreal, abstract, and disturbing, but unlike Inland Empire, an intelligent viewer can actually make connections with the scenes in Eraserhead—not inherently logical connections, but connections nonetheless.
Even among fans, I think it's pretty much unanimous that Inland Empire is so utterly disjointed that it's futile to even attempt an analysis. It is simply devoid of any traditional story whatsoever. I can see what the movie was trying to accomplish; it is meant to create a very bizarre viewing experience unlike anything else, and it does do that, but it takes far too long to do so. I will admit this movie had its moments. It has a couple scenes that made me jump, and one more that made me regret watching it while I was alone in the house; however, these few moments of terror are wedged between hours of plot less, stagnantly paced scenes that require too much patience to sit through.
I appreciate artistic films, but I like artistic films to get their point across within a reasonable period of time. I think some reviewers, me included, wouldn't have been so hard on this movie if it were about 40 to 60 minutes shorter. I enjoy odd films as well, but I like odd films to make sense, and if they don't make sense, if they break the bonds of logic, they need to justify this decision with something intriguing and original. I like the idea of an experimental film. I am even interested in a film that imitates the flow of dreams, and I admire a director for trying; however, as far as I'm concerned, this is nearly impossible to pull off, as, too often, ambitious filmmakers abandon the tried-and-true effectiveness of a classic story, and instead get carried away and ultimately drunk on their own meandering vision.