Title: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: Flick James on April 30, 2010, 03:26:19 PM I'm in the mood for "wierd," and David Lynch always fits the bill. I love the DL wierdness. Inland Empire is the only DL film I've never seen. I understand it is way beyond bizarre. I read that the cast member were handed new script every day of shooting, and that DL had no idea how the film was going to end up?
I like the wierdness, but even his most bizarre films, as enigmatic as they are, have some kind of story and meaning. Does Inland Empire have any meaning at all? I get the impression it doesn't. That doesn't mean I'm opposed to watching it. Who has seen it who would like to comment? Title: Re: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: Rev. Powell on April 30, 2010, 03:40:59 PM You can check out my rather long review (http://366weirdmovies.com/inland-empire-2006/) if you like.
In short, there is really no story (there's a shred of one but it's abandoned). Yes, according to Lynch it was written scene by scene, with no grand plan. It is complete and total surrealism, and a little much at times. I liked it, but then again I'm "weird." :bouncegiggle: Frankly, like you I prefer I little more plot. If not more plot, then a shorter running time. Title: Re: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: Doggett on April 30, 2010, 04:19:15 PM It was weird for the sake of weird.
Title: Re: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: Rev. Powell on April 30, 2010, 04:24:28 PM It was weird for the sake of weird. Why do people always say that like it's a bad thing? People never review a comedy by saying "it was funny for the sake of funny." Title: Re: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: The Burgomaster on May 02, 2010, 04:20:51 PM I bought the DVD awhile ago. Although the story (if there is any) is nearly impossible to follow, the movie is very engrossing and hypnotic . . . you MUST watch it until the end (but you won't know why). Definitely not the type of movie where you buy a couple cases of beer and invite the boys over. This one is best watched alone. You'll want to drink afterward. If you're a David Lynch fan, you should definitely see it.
Title: Re: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: Doggett on May 02, 2010, 04:33:15 PM It was weird for the sake of weird. Why do people always say that like it's a bad thing? People never review a comedy by saying "it was funny for the sake of funny." I didn't mean it in a bad way. It's also pretty spooky at time. Title: Re: Inland Empire (2006) Post by: Rev. Powell on May 02, 2010, 07:23:41 PM It was weird for the sake of weird. Why do people always say that like it's a bad thing? People never review a comedy by saying "it was funny for the sake of funny." I didn't mean it in a bad way. It's also pretty spooky at time. Eh, I wasn't sure you did. But people usually do use the phrase that way, and it's a pet peeve of mine. Anyway, I definitely recommend Flick watch it. |