1175 Inland Empire

Message

toiletduck! · #176 Post by **toiletduck!** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:22 pm

It's about to begin a run in Chicago on the 26th. A two week, one theater run. In Chicago. Tough sell, indeed.

Still, it could be worse. Tideland, also by a reputable filmmaker with a broad history of wide releases, only got one week, one theater.

-Toilet Dcuk

Michael · #177 Post by **Michael** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:25 pm

jorencain, I noticed that you're in southern Georgia. Where did you see Inland Empire? Less compelling than Mulholland Dr.?

#178 Post by **Matt** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:41 pm

I've already resigned myself to having to wait for DVD to see it, even though I live near one of the top 15 metropolitan areas in the US. Apparently Lynch's approach to distribution is just as straightforward as his approach to narrative.

justeleblanc · #179 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:49 pm

joren, it's actually much simpler than mulholland, but you're right that it's less compelling. at times it feels much like an op-art painting by escher, maybe the one with the stairs or the elephant with 4 and then 5 legs. the movie isnt as much about the narrative (which lynch pokes fun at many times) as it is about how the scenes join together. it does feel too long, though because the film is such a stylistic shift for lynch (who at one time seemed to be stuck in his own aesthetic) its worth seeing. even if you live in minnesota i'd sugget taking a drive to where it's being shown.

Andre Jurieu · #180 Post by **Andre Jurieu** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:00 pm

Michael wrote:David Lynch is a reputable filmmaker and Mulholland Dr. is possibly the most discussed American film made in the past few years. Why is it that Inland Empire is having such a low-key, quiet release? I looked everywhere and still have no clue whether it's coming to Florida or not.

I'm not even sure how anyone could expect anything other than a low-key release for Inland Empire, considering Lynch is distributing the film himself. Are we really expecting Lynch to fork over enough money to pay for high profile TV spots, lavish newspaper ads, and/or gigantic billboards, or create "buzz" on Access Hollywood?

Also, Mulholland Drive might be much discussed among movie-enthusiasts, but it's hardly a movie on everyone's mind.

Fire Walk With Me and The Straight Story might have received a wide release, but they probably only played at a few theatres, on a few screens, and for a few weeks.

Barmy · #181 Post by **Barmy** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:04 pm

I think comparing MD and IE is a bit apples and oranges. If I wanted, I could argue that IE is more complex than MD (because of the multiple possible narrative interpretations), more compelling than MD (because it's less campy), and not too long.

Just my opinion, natch.

I think IE and MD are the two best American films of the last 10 years. I'm more lukewarm on earlier Lynch.

dadaistnun · #182 Post by **dadaistnun** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:19 pm

Matt wrote:I've already resigned myself to having to wait for DVD to see it, even though I live near one of the top 15 metropolitan areas in the US. Apparently Lynch's approach to distribution is just as straightforward as his approach to narrative.

Same here, as much as it pains me to say it. One can always hope, though.

Antoine Doinel · #183 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:31 pm

Barmy wrote:more compelling than MD (because it's less campy)

Really? To me, the whole film played like on long campy gag with a terrible buildup but a great punchline.

justeleblanc · #184 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:45 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote:
Barmy wrote:more compelling than MD (because it's less campy)
Really? To me, the whole film played like on long campy gag with a terrible buildup but a great punchline.

I kind of agree, though I did still love it.

Barmy · #185 Post by **Barmy** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:50 pm

Admittedly, the vagina wall hole thing reeked of camp.

miless · #186 Post by **miless** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:58 pm

Barmy wrote:Admittedly, the vagina wall hole thing reeked of camp.

and was hilarious!

toiletduck! · #187 Post by **toiletduck!** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:02 pm

Yeah, I deleted this. What, you wanna fight about it?

-Toilet Dcuk

Michael · #188 Post by **Michael** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:06 pm

I'm not even sure how anyone could expect anything other than a low-key release for Inland Empire, considering Lynch is distributing the film himself. Are we really expecting Lynch to fork over enough money to pay for high profile TV spots, lavish newspaper ads, and/or gigantic billboards, or create "buzz" on Access Hollywood?

Any reason why Lynch is distributing the film himself instead of getting Universal (the US distributor of Mulholland Dr) involved? Does that also mean that the DVD will be distributed only from his company?

miless · #189 Post by **miless** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:49 pm

Michael wrote:
I'm not even sure how anyone could expect anything other than a low-key release for Inland Empire, considering Lynch is distributing the film himself. Are we really expecting Lynch to fork over enough money to pay for high profile TV spots, lavish newspaper ads, and/or gigantic billboards, or create "buzz" on Access Hollywood?
Any reason why Lynch is distributing the film himself instead of getting Universal (the US distributor of Mulholland Dr) involved? Does that also mean that the DVD will be distributed only from his company?

Universal/Canal+ (Canal+ financed it) passed on distributing it, saying that it was too long, and required significant cuts. Lynch purchased the rights for it himself, saying that he could release it the way he wanted to. Rhino (the Warner record company) has struck a deal with Lynch to distribute IE (their first proper film release) on DVD... with Mr.Lynch overseeing every step of the process from his camera to your hands (essentially)... It will not be released by Absurda (his company)

#190 Post by **Mr Sausage** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:23 pm

Michael wrote:
Mr_sausage wrote:I don't know anyone who saw Mulholland Drive in theaters.
Well I saw Mulholland Dr. at a local multiplex when it came to Orlando only a month after its release in NYC.

I wasn't counting people on the internet.

jorencain · #191 Post by **jorencain** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:03 am

Michael wrote:jorencain, I noticed that you're in southern Georgia. Where did you see Inland Empire? Less compelling than Mulholland Dr.?

I was in NY last week (I can't imagine this making it's way through GA).

I feel like I spent 3 hours trying to piece together clues that didn't lead to anything substantial. It became less compelling as I began to feel the length of the film. Actually, in hindsight, I feel like the excess material was mostly in the first hour (before things started to get strange). I think there is a lot about the film that's great, but it's mostly about creating a mood. It didn't have the power that "Mulholland Drive" has for me.

blindside8zao · #192 Post by **blindside8zao** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:42 am

is anyone on here who's in GA a college professor or anything cool like that?

oh yeah and, um... I can't wait for IE to come out.

jorencain · #193 Post by **jorencain** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:14 am

blindside8zao wrote:is anyone on here who's in GA a college professor or anything cool like that?

Yes, but in music.

Roger_Thornhill · Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:19 am

jorencain wrote:I feel like I spent 3 hours trying to piece together clues that didn't lead to anything substantial. It became less compelling as I began to feel the length of the film. It didn't have the power that "Mulholland Drive" has for me.

I agree, IE is great at setting a creepy and unnerving mood, and is genuinely frightening at times, but I oftentimes found myself rather bored. It felt as if IE was one scene after another of Laura Dern, mouth agape, walking into a room/hallway/movie set/alley set to moody music that reveals a whore/man with a lightbulb in his mouth/a flashing light/more whores, etc...but overall it's such a bizzare and incomprehensible film that I sort of admire it for those very reasons. It certainly makes me want to see it again, although perhaps on DVD so I can take a break every now and then.

I'm curious to read the dozens of theories that have probably popped up about IE, but perhaps Lynch just wanted to make the ultimate mindfuck and leave it at that.

But yes, IE had far less of an impact on me that Mulholland Drive or Lost Highway, neither of which I understood the first time I saw them but I was still fascinated the entire time.

chaddoli · #195 Post by **chaddoli** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:11 pm

I can't predict the future, but I highly doubt David Lynch will ever make a better film than Mulholland Dr.

Having said that, I do still find Inland Empire to be incredible. I think part of the mystery lies with the Polish woman, crying alone in the room, watching the film unfold. I assume she is the original slain actress, and Nikki/Susan must find her. When she does, they kiss, and Nikki/Susan disappears - what a beautiful moment!

miless · #196 Post by **miless** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:12 pm

chaddoli wrote:I can't predict the future, but I highly doubt David Lynch will ever make a better film than Mulholland Dr.

or at least not a better looking film

Barmy · #197 Post by **Barmy** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:57 pm

If he continues with cheap digital, it is all downhill from IE. Even the highest grade digital, such as Apocalypto, cannot substitute for film, although maybe in a few years that will no longer be true.

Also Lynch's apparent decision to abandon any attempt to reach a wider audience will not be good for his art.

IE to me is a great film, but there is no need for him to make another film of this ilk.

Barmy · #198 Post by **Barmy** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:03 pm

I don't dare start a thread for Jennifer Lynch, but I noticed she appeared in Eraserhead when I saw it at MoMA last weekend. I looked her up, and her second film, "Surveillance", is in pre-production according to IMDB.

Yes, there is a God.

marty · #199 Post by **marty** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:53 pm

Barmy wrote:If he continues with cheap digital, it is all downhill from IE. Even the highest grade digital, such as Apocalypto, cannot substitute for film, although maybe in a few years that will no longer be true.

I think you will find that 35mm film will soon disappear and will only be used by purist directors. The day will come when digital video will be the norm and digital projectors will be in all cinemas and thus cutting the ridiculously exorbitant costs of prints that distributors have to bear.

Barmy · #200 Post by **Barmy** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:22 pm

Agreed. I just hope that, once this happens, museums and the like continue to project 35mm for films shot on film.

Internal Resources

External Sites

Specialty Labels

Site Menu

1175 Inland Empire