Man, you just destroyed the 90s for me :) So I was fooled into looking forward to the next episode of Twin Peaks every Friday night during high school? Dang! Didn't you even enjoy The Straight Story?

(On second thought: I haven't seen any of his recent movies. Last one was Mulholland Drive.)

I don't post much, but I had too.

The fact you you can find nothing worthwhile in a david lynch film is proof that you have no idea what makes a movie valid or worthwhile. David Lynch doesn't tell straghtforward and obvious stories, his films are more about mood and a creeping sense of dread. Just because thats not what you look for in a movie, doesn't make them less valid or crap by any means.

There's no fooling anybody in Lynch films, there is just the story that he tells, which is unconventional, but not crap by any means. You make something even remotely close to what he makes and then you can talk. What have you contributed to the film world that is even remotely close to what Lynch has?

Also, the fact that you would never work with anybody who likes Lynch is ridiculous, and sad. If I ever found my self on a crew with you, I would walk out and never look back. People like you are what is wrong with the film industry right now.

I´m sorry but you are out on a limb here. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course. And post-modernist narrative may not be your cup of tea. But there are no similarities between mr brainwash "art-work" and david lynch films. None whatsoever.

For a guy who supposedly is

fucking dumbass, no talent, deficit on anything resembling a valid and enriching storytelling aesthetic

he has a remarkably coherent and consistent filmography.

(Mind, I have never met the guy in person so I can´t say much about him)

As for geniuses.. well, as westerners we live in a culture which idolises individuals and that alone is stupefying. When it comes to culture – really good works are very, very rare.

@shian

If you don't like Lynch style, you can enjoy The Elephant Man and Straight Story, that are not maked in Lynch style and they have 3 acts, a solid story and no surreal-onirics thinghs that you don't appreciate in Lynch work. Other discriminatory positions against Lynch's fans (or any other person or group of persons) in the dramatic way you had put them, are out of this present, or i strongly force myself to believe, every day, that they are. That makes you a fool in my eyes. I'glad you are into color correction and not into politics :-)

We're talking about Art. Now the inherent problem with Art is that it is subjective. But what is bullshit to me, is when people refer to a certain artist's vision as "GENIUS" simply because it is odd or offbeat.

What Banksy exposed was that most people - whether they be fans, critics, artists, etc - don't have a fucking clue what they are talking about. They can't distinguish brilliance from garbage. And most, when confronted with garbage, are afraid to call it such because some pretentious snob will tell them, "Oh, you poor troglodite. You just don't get it." So they go the complete opposite and call it "Genius". But there is a default setting that any time even you yourself don't "get it", declare it to be brilliant so people will think you are brilliant for "getting it."

Banksy is brilliant. MBW is a fucking idiot. Most people can't tell the difference. Lynch is the film equivalent of MBW.

If you can't tell the difference between MBW and Banksy - don't paint. If you can't tell the difference between Lynch and Terry Gilliam - don't tell stories.

And I mean in a blind test - if each artist were to create an original work, and not put their name on it, and then Show/Screen the work I'd really love to see how many people would be absolutely wrong, and then afterwards say, "Oh, that makes total sense, I absolutely see it now." Fuck off.

By declaring trash to be genius you devalue genius.

For the record - I'm referring to his original works, not adaptations or directing other people's stories.

You don't have to take all of Lynch with joy and admiration -- Twin Peaks bored this viewer to death, if anyone cares to know -- but can you really watch, say, Mulholland Drive, with its highly inventive arrangement of material, and take no interest in it at all?

Yeah, there was nonsense and silly mystification in Mulholland Drive as well, but we're talking about mass-market movies, a medium whose popular dramatic conventions were exhausted about 90 years ago, not a classical art form for a small audience.

David Lynch and Terry Gilliam are completely different filmmakers, and comparing the two of them only disproves your point even further. Gilliam makes fantasy movies, and Lynch makes frightening movies. I don't mean frightening as in horror either. Lynch makes movies about frightening aspects of life that are told through surrealism and unconventional means.

Again, you make something that even compares, and then you can rant about filmmakers.

Don't confuse intelligence and creativeness, with genius. I will give you that many people use the word genius too loosely. I am a David Lynch fan, but I don't say he's genius. Just a damn good filmmaker, who could run circles around your abilities any day of the week.

And if you can't admit that as the truth, then you're hopeless. Anybody, myself included, who hasn't had a feature with a theatrical release could take a lesson from any filmmaker who has, for the most part.

Oh, come off it, guys. There are always strong and idiosyncratic opinions in the arts. Everybody dishes everybody else. Taking it all as religion, the Pope's ring to kiss, is only for consumers.

Dune is a masterpiece (codpiece)!

LOL - This is awesome!

I've been using Lynch to determine things I need to know about film people for a long time. You can tell a lot about a person depending on which way they lean. Jarmusch works, too. As do a few others.

It's like the interview question where after they've asked you what your strengths are, they get cute and ask you what your weaknesses are. When they ask, I usually get up and walk out, or attempt to walk out - I always get a 2nd interview. If they asked why I walked out, I say, "You know already know the answer." If they say "No, I don't," I leave again.

I get the gig 85% of the time.

Why? You already know the answer.

I saw Mulholland Drive in my twenties and I remember the feeling of it being a puzzle and the author challenging the audience with clues. Well, I realized this after seeing the extras on the DVD which said: "Clues" or "Keys" or something like that. Being the first film to break the narrative surface for me as a consumer of films (up to this point, films used to be either cool or boring to me), this made me watch the movie over and over again, trying to decipher it. Not that I came to any final conclusions besides the obvious one that the film wasn't about two girls meeting up in a flat :) It was fun though (and maybe a waste of time, but then again so is writing down stuff online sometimes). If Art is something created within a culture that bears meaning, then Lynch succeded in making me more interested in storytelling in general. In the words of Matisse: "Would not it be best to leave room to mystery?"

this thread is awesome...

While I can only speak for myself, I like Lynch in the same way that people like Salvador Dali, it's not really supposed to be entertaining or even make sense, it's the surreal and twisted take on the everyday mundane. I don't necessarily think of it as "art" anymore than taking a photograph can be "art" but it's the skill of manipulation of the viewer that is the "art". Some people find meaning in various forms of art but it's really just a form of forced introspection. If it doesn't speak to you, then it doesn't, but being overly angry might also be a form of the art manipulating you, just a more subconscious way.. :)