Mulholland Drive

It’s been almost two years since we went looking unsuccessfully for Mulholland Drive on DVD. Kept looking for it during that time, but no luck, apart from one aged looking VHS copy spotted recently.

Finally though, a copy turned up on DVD. Oh, the anticipation.

By about midway through, I was beginning to wonder what the fuss was about, and starting to get suspicious that in David Lynch terms, this was not another Twin Peaks (which I loved), but rather more in the Eraserhead mould (which I loathed).

Now, I don’t mind things being all mixed up, and some confusion ensuing. I don’t mind having to think about what’s happening, rather than having it all spelt out for me. But with a movie that long, there has to be a reasonable pay-off for the time invested. I’m sorry, but “it was all a dream” is not a reasonable pay-off for two and a half hours of plodding narrative.

Oh, it was beautifully shot and acted, no doubt. But the words “prentious claptrap” don’t seem amiss here. I feel ripped off (and I didn’t even pay for the rental).Thumbs down

By Daniel Bowen

Transport blogger / campaigner and spokesperson for the Public Transport Users Association / professional geek.
Bunurong land, Melbourne, Australia.
Opinions on this blog are all mine.

10 replies on “Mulholland Drive”

I believe that some of the juicier scenes were removed by Lynch from the DVD release at the request of one of the actors, though I don’t think that the scenes in question were crucial to the movie.

Daniel, I enjoyed this movie immensely, but I understand your reaction. However, it is not an “it was all a dream” movie. The narrative is essentially woven from “reality” and the central character’s delusional view of the world and is a very powerful comment on the Hollywood dream. It also contains some absolute gems – the scene where Naomi Watts is auditioning with some old soap stars is a brilliant exposition of the actors’ craft.


After hearing that at the end of the movie, my wife and I looked at each other and said, “What the –?!”

I have to agree with you in that we didn’t enjoy the film. We like a good art film once in a while but this movie was like a bad boring dream to me. Sure the acting was great and all but still, I felt like I wasted my time watching it.

The only reason why I endured it all through the end was because people said it was good. While watching, I kept on hoping that the climax would redeem the whole thing. But it didn’t, for us. Ugh.

I’d have to say I fall into the “I liked it, but can get why other’s wouldn’t” mould. Trying to retrofit all the fragments of the story and work out what had really been going on that inspired the dream was a fun game at the end.

And man, how often do you get a sinister cowboy?

I liked it and thought Naomi rocked. It’s a David Lynch movie so you gotta expect that some people will love it and others will hate it. I saw another one of his movies (forget the name now) with Patricia Arquette in it. Also think maybe Nicolas Cage was in it but cannot be sure and it was the most inane movie I have ever seen and I ended up walking out 3/4 of the way through. Bit vague about the details but maybe my subconscious has tried to block out the bad memories of it lol.

It’s not a dream. At least, not a dream in the traditional sense. Most of the film is actually a visual respresentation of what’s going through Diane’s mind at the moment she pulls the trigger and commits suicide. The car crash at the beginning is the gunshot. The rest of the “dream” is her brain dying and trying to make sense of all the events that have led her to commit such an act. Finally, “Silencio,” is exactly what it says. The end. Silence.

For those of you who think there’s one serious flaw in this interpretation, remember that a dream can feel like hours but occur in a split second…

Comments are closed.