I enjoyed, for example, the way the two stories in Mulholland Drive tunneled into each other, and I thought, of that aspect of that movie, that leaving the, what, peculiarity of it ‘open’ was effective, because exegesis would’ve marred the story of the stories, as it were.
But I feel that – or at least wonder if – he’s being weird for the sake of it, that he tries to be ‘weird’. Blech. —not that he fails to gratify a craving for neatness, but rather, that his effects are, for me, diffused by the very energy of their disposition.
(Remember all the blah-blah in Stalker? that gets you – or me, anyway – not much purchase on or even intimacy with understanding “the Zone”? That morose, chatting-with-the-kitchen-table explication was perfectly weird.)
Really enjoy the tunneling as well. I don’t get the feeling that Lynch ever tries for weirdness–the situations seem too naturally, unavoidably weird, if that makes sense. I also think the refusal to explain is crucial.
Yeah. I watched a Lynch movie because my sister brought it home. I didn’t get it. And then felt (or rather attempted to be made to feel) stoopid because, not that I didn’t get it, but that I didn’t get it because I was engineered to like a particular type of movie. Whatever. I still don’t dig his shit. But, each, own, their.