If Mulholland Drive Is A Rorschach Test, Participation Is Insanity

Rorschach Test
Nope.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On no universe is Mulholland Drive a good movie.

“So me and a couple of my art-school buddies were sitting around the other day, we were discussing the intellectual and financial benefits of going to school for a doctorate in 14th century poetry, and getting a custom minor in abstract philosophy.  That is when I had the brilliant idea to hold a viewing of what I think is the masterpiece of my generation; ‘Mulholland Drive’. The symbolism in this movie is among the best I have ever seen, and I love discussing the theories behind the movie. It leaves the viewer confused in a good way. I know that when I turn off the movie that is not the end of the experience.”

The person above is probably a weirdo. I cannot begin to tell you how positive reviews of Mulholland Drive make me want to beat the homeless, and with an 82% on Rotten Tomatoes I am in the minority. I guess only 18% of people can see through bullshit.

There has got to be aspects of groupthink in the positive reviews. “Well reviewer A loved it, and reviewer B loved it. I respect their opinion so fuck it! I loved it too, now let’s go impersonate dead people at the polls and vote Obama.” (This person was writing his review in 2008.) This movie is not that good. Maybe all the positive reviews are because there were some good tits in this movie. There is no way they were 82% good, but maybe 63% good.

Watch this movie and tell me what the fuck was going on, and I will find you an unemployed art school major who thought the opposite. A good director can integrate symbolism and different levels of meaning into a coherent narrative. David Lynch does not. I don’t care how much your English professor told you differently, when something does not make sense, it just does not make sense. This movie sucks.

Taken right from the Wikipedia page on Mulholland Drive:

One night, I sat down, the ideas came in, and it was a most beautiful experience. Everything was seen from a different angle […] Now, looking back, I see that [the film] always wanted to be this way. It just took this strange beginning to cause it to be what it is. – David Lynch, 2001

Really? The film willed itself? You one of them ‘autistics’?

And this (David Lynch On the ‘clues’ in the film):

  1. Pay particular attention in the beginning of the film: At least two clues are revealed before the credits.
  2. Notice appearances of the red lampshade.
  3. Can you hear the title of the film that Adam Kesher is auditioning actresses for? Is it mentioned again?
  4. An accident is a terrible event — notice the location of the accident.
  5. Who gives a key, and why?
  6. Notice the robe, the ashtray, the coffee cup.
  7. What is felt, realized and gathered at the Club Silencio?
  8. Did talent alone help Camilla?
  9. Note the occurrences surrounding the man behind Winkie’s.
  10. Where is Aunt Ruth?

This is the same post-modern bullshit that every undergrad English major jizzes himself over.

  1. “Right, the 2 clues… In my opinion it was probably when we saw them titties of the 2 lead women. It really made me think about imperialism and the war on a woman’s autonomy.”
  2. “The red lampshade was OBVIOUSLY significant. Red means passion or violence, and the passionate scene between the two women gave me a violent boner.”
  3. “I did not hear the title, was that significant?”
  4. “The accident happened on a hill, you know what hills look like? Boobs.”
  5. “Did you notice that the key was put INTO the keyhole, obvious phallic implications as well as a shockingly obvious nod to the colonization of India.”
  6. “Did you notice those 3 things!? Holy shit they were basically smacking me in the face! The robe meant something you wear, the ashtray is where you put your ash (I think) and the coffee cup was for coffee to be put into. Take the 1st letter of each of those. R.A.C. which is a homophone for ‘Rack’ and the Naomi Watts had a nice one.
  7. “I don’t know man, this sounds like bullshit to me.”
  8.  “I mean is this actually relevant?”
  9. “This scene was weird as shit, I mean what the fuck? Just a fucking zombie behind the fucking dumpster? Explain that shit. NO no no no no don’t give me that ‘it mean this’ routine. What. The. Fuck. Was. A. ZOMBIE. doing at Winkies?”
  10. “I don’t fucking know, was she at her house? Watching a movie that was enjoyable?

You can ascribe any meaning to this movie that you want. None of the 10 clues given on the Wikipedia site actually mean anything. I guarantee it. When you have to explain symbolism it is not symbolism. The meaning is lost. Ask David Lynch what he meant and he will give you the abstract run around about something or another, (It will most likely contain the word ‘transcendentalism’) which will leave you scratching your head and wishing you were as smart as him, which is EXACTLY what he wants.

Click this link:

http://thatsmathematics.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/mathgen-1389529747.pdf

See how smart that looks? And ‘golly, gee, gosh I cannot make heads or tails of this’. That is because no-one can, the paper is gibberish, that paper is the David Lynch of math. The above paper was sent by a professor to a math journal and was ACCEPTED and PUBLISHED. People are so self-involved that if some creation contains the right content (The 3 way intersection of Hip, eccentric, and seemingly-smart)  and looks like it has a deeper meaning they will regurgitate it, not understanding what it is, but really really trying. Not understanding this movie does not mean that you are stupid, quite the contrary, it means you are sane.

“Well you just don’t get it.”

That guy exists, is sexually confused, and gives head to the guy in the first paragraph.

It is the job of a director to make something that people can digest. If Mr.Lynch set a plate of Poison Oak leaves and wood shavings in front of me, covered it in raspberry vinaigrette and told me it was a salad, I still would not eat it. I went to college, I’ve read books, hell I have even watched a Fellini movie and enjoyed the shit out of it. I have not smoked nearly as much weed as you but I bet we have a pretty even playing field. However, by saying “You don’t understand this movie” you do 3 things:

  1. You keep intact whatever bullshit meaning you have attributed to this.
  2. You put yourself on an intellectual pedestal.
  3. You look like a jackass.

If you like this movie you probably think too highly of yourself. If you know people who like this movie you should castrate them, and if all of your friends like this movie, put the knife down and schedule some therapy. A red lampshade is a red lampshade.

Check Also

It Comes At Night Review

It Comes At Night is a riveting, tension thrilled film from Trey Edward Shults, starring Joel Edgerton and Carmen Ejogo.

One comment

  1. Fucking awesome article, I hated that piece of shit of a film. I want to hit every faggot who thinks that movie is not the worst movie of all time. I seriously think I would have shot myself had it not been for the tatas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: