I used our wonderful search function but I was kind of thinking there wouldn't be much written up about Blue Velvet. Someone did write a great main page!
I never really thought of Blue Velvet being an "80's" movie.....even when you watch it........it's beyond it's time or even feeling like a time period because you get so entranced in the story. Well Jeffery does wear skinny ties haha
This was my first time watching it....I went through a dark indie movie period awhile back and i'm not sure why I missed this. Maybe I saw it now so I could fully appreciate it. I watched Blue Velvet and Wild at Heart back to back........anyone want to know my thoughts on the latter?
Frank is pretty creepy to say the least and Dorothy might be a bit creepy in her own right haha Posted by Valley (Member # 1322) on :
Muffy.. I've watched "Blue Velvet" a few times. It is seen by many as a masterpiece, but for me the only words that come to mind are strange and disturbing.
Really thought Laura Dern was outstanding in this movie. And Dennis Hopper was just flat out creepy and ruthless.
David Lynch makes movies that challenge the mind and while this movie achieves that.. the disturbing factor just overshadowed the overall goal of the movie for me. And before you judge my openmindedness to 'different'.. understand that I think the movie "Donnie Darko" is an incredible mind trip everyone should try.
Posted by Muffy Tepperman (Member # 1551) on :
Valley I love Donnie Darko too a great mind trip with a great soundtrack!!
I think watching BV and knowing it's David Lynch and appreciating it for that....made me like it.....Laura Dern does have this lovableness.
His bits are so dark and quirky I laugh! The scene where they are roughing up Jeffery and there is this weird guy/girl dancing in the back.....totally got laughs out of me....and Dean Stockwell! his makeup and singing.
I watched Wild at Heart and I might have loved it more.......it had more of a "campy" feel to me and an even greater supporting cast. (Crispin Glover, Sherliyn Fenn, Harry Dean Stanton, Diane Ladd was so creepy!!!and William Dafoe!) Dern was even more over the top and lovable.
It was a pretty cool double feature.
Posted by Valley (Member # 1322) on :
Muffy .. "Wild At Heart" was a Wizard of Oz roadtrip into Sex, Violence, & Elvis! ha
Actually enjoyed it far more than "Blue Velvet".. probably because of Nic Cage's wackiness.
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
My friend absolutely loved 'Wild at Heart' when it came out.
I'm no great fan of Lynch, although I do like some of what he does. 'Blue Velvet' and 'Wild at Heart' are both enjoyable enough.
Speaking of Lynch in the 80's; it's odd that we don't mention 'Dune' very much on the site. It has all the right ingredients: based on a huge sci-fi novel; music by Toto; Sting and Virginia Madsen. What more could you want?
I'll throw it in to the Lynch roulette wheel Muffy's spinning: 'Dune'.
Posted by Muffy Tepperman (Member # 1551) on :
I never even thought that Dune was Lynch!....I loved The Elephant Man and I never think of that movie being Lynch either but it is.
Posted by Secret Admirer (Member # 3574) on :
"Heineken?! F.uck that sh.it! Pabst Blue Ribbon!"
In Dreams...
Posted by Bamersy (Member # 8808) on :
My first Lynch movie was Eraserhead-it was a fave of my good friend who couldn't get enough of it. Liked Wild at Heart-"I'm a prickly pear" but Blue Velvet not so much. I love weird movies, but the whole air mask thing was too over the top. Has anyone seen Dumbland?
Posted by Muffy Tepperman (Member # 1551) on :
I keep bringing up to people I saw this and everyone in the world has seen it and for sure gives you their opinons...."It's so weird" "I hated it" "My friend a drama teacher talks about this movie all the time" Those are some of the comments that came back to me.
Bamersy I haven't seen Eraserhead my question did you like it? Do you think I will?
Secret Admirer I cracked up at Jeffery peeing in Dorothy's apartment "oh Heineken" so random but needed to be put in there haha
Posted by Bamersy (Member # 8808) on :
Eraserhead is one of those movies you either love or hate. My friend had very "eccentric" movie tastes, and this movie was up there with Rocky Horror as one of her all time faves. She was a big Twin Peaks fan too.
It's creepy, disturbing, atmospheric and really hard to follow. Haven't seen it in years-it was out of print for a very long time. I'd watch it again, but can take it or leave it. I do think everyone should see it-at least once Posted by Kash (Member # 297) on :
There are great movies you enjoy and great movies you don't. Lynch makes the great movies you don't enjoy. How can you possibly have a good time? That's not what they're about.
Blue Velvet is as twisted as the world David Lynch inhabits, or at least as twisted a representation of the world as Lynch sees it. A movie that forces the viewer into a dark place and then locks the door for two hours: Satire, perverse psychological horror, noir, erotica and buddy movie rolled into one. Its as if Lynch chewed up the worst of the world and then spat it out on screen.
The artifice and banality of the world as it exists feeds and exacerbates the evil, but who's ultimately responsible for that world if not the people in it? Lynch gives us the classic chicken and egg scenario: was it a corrupt world that made man evil, did the evil of man corrupt the world or was it both?
Kyle MacLachlan's chracter represents society IMO: an impressionable, promising vessel that goes the way of what surrounds it. Each chracter represents something else but that's a strength and a weakness, for the symbolism is quite contrived and unsubtle. Lynch amended the flaws in Blue Velvet with Twin Peaks.
Just imagine how the movie would've been if all the stars who turned it down had accepted: Steven Berkoff playing Frank: "There was nothing but destruction in that role", said Berkoff.
Chris Issak or Val Kilmer as Jeffrey: "The script I read was pornographic" claimed Kilmer.
Molly Ringwald as Sandy, so disgusted was Molly's mother that she didn't even show her the script!
Posted by Muffy Tepperman (Member # 1551) on :
Kash you always put things in the way I WISH I COULD haha
love that you said Jeffery's character represents society...."impressionable" look how quickly he's drawn into Dorothy and her whole world and how Sandy was drawn into it also.
Interesting the casting choices at the time....by the time Wild at Heart came around you can tell actors were lining up.....What's your take on Wild At Heart Kash?
Posted by Valley (Member # 1322) on :
Great writeup Kash.
I like your statement .. "Lynch makes the great movies you don't enjoy."
Posted by Secret Admirer (Member # 3574) on :
I started with Twin Peaks and then went on to Blue Velvet. I actually enjoy the craziness, when I usually don't. So there's something about the way Lynch puts it together that pulls me in, instead of making me roll my eyes. Some of my favorite scenes are built around music, and I love that.
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:There are great movies you enjoy and great movies you don't. Lynch makes the great movies you don't enjoy. How can you possibly have a good time? That's not what they're about.
It makes me think of a Seinfeld quote:
"What's the show about?" "It's about nothing." "It must be about something." "Nothing!" "Then why am I watching it?" "Because it's on TV!" "Not yet."
Why would anyone want to watch a "great" movie they didn’t enjoy?
David Lynch makes the kind of films critics love, because they allow them to beard-stroke and pontificate. In short – he makes films people like to talk about. Unfortunately, that's part of the reason so many mainstream viewers stay away. It doesn’t matter to Lynch; he makes the movies he wants for modest amounts and they always make a decent profit.
Where do I sit on Lynch? I'm just passing through. This is someone else's discussion.
quote:Lynch gives us the classic chicken and egg scenario: was it a corrupt world that made man evil, did the evil of man corrupt the world or was it both?
The first one. No wait – both. I mean neither. Hang on… why are we blaming chickens?!
quote: Lynch amended the flaws in Blue Velvet with Twin Peaks.
First season, yes. Second season it went right off the rails (and Lynch abandoned it). It's a classic example of a show that started well and then just kind of petered out.
quote:Just imagine how the movie would've been if all the stars who turned it down had accepted: Steven Berkoff playing Frank: "There was nothing but destruction in that role", said Berkoff. Chris Issak or Val Kilmer as Jeffrey: "The script I read was pornographic" claimed Kilmer. Molly Ringwald as Sandy, so disgusted was Molly's mother that she didn't even show her the script!
They were all talking about 'Deep Throat # 4'. Someone was playing a hilarious prank.
Posted by Kash (Member # 297) on :
Thanks Muffy and Valley.
Muffy, Wild at Heart is absolutely insane probably the closest thing to straight comedy as Lynch gets. Nic Cage's Elvis impersonation makes the movie for me, the random brilliance of 'Love Me Tender' at the end, the cool driving scene with Chris Issak's 'Wicked Game' and allusions to The Wizard Of Oz (links in with that film being used in sinister mind control / occult experiments by the government).
I saw similarities between this; True Romance and Open Road (the original script that became Natural Born Killers). It takes two American film genres (i.e. couple on the run road movie and the Elvis Presley musical) and parks them in the middle of Lynch's nightmarish world of surrealism and unsettling violence.
Notice how Laura Dern always gets to utter the understatement of the film, and its always some reflection on life. Diane Ladd was also very good in this movie (she'd be ideal in your evil movie mothers thread Muffy!) but its Cage who steals every scene.
quote:Where do I sit on Lynch?
His lap, his shoulders perhaps? I find his coif a comfortable alternative to the sofa, often, he doesn't even know I'm there... Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:His lap, his shoulders perhaps? I find his coif a comfortable alternative to the sofa, often, he doesn't even know I'm there...
Lynch is a man, much like Lucas, who possesses more hair than he has a right to. Lynch on Lucas:
Good video logan, Lynch's experience at the Lucas ranch sounds like a scene from a David Lynch film.
DL didn't need to make Jedi, he directed Dune damnit!
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:DL didn't need to make Jedi, he directed Dune damnit!
Something he barely acknowledges. I wish he'd put together a special edition. I guess that's not his style.
Posted by Helen_S (Member # 5804) on :
Wow,I just watched this. It had been so long since I last did it was like new to me. It blew me away, flawless in my eyes.
Posted by Crash (Member # 7484) on :
David Lynch is one of my favorite directors, and "Blue Velvet" is one of my very favorite movies of not just the 1980's but of all time. As strange, weird, and twisted as this sounds, every time I see a David Lynch film, I feel like I am watching a movie made just for me. He's not simply a director making great movies. He's a master filmmaker creating unique works of art, substanial comments (as Kash points out) on the human condition, filled with beauty, truth, ugliness, fear, drama, and humor. I could sit in a room the rest of my life and not be able to imagine or create something equivalent to five minutes of any Lynch film. Even when he's not at the top of his game, e.g., "Dune," his imagery, dialogue, music, and symbolism are about as brilliant as it gets. My favorite line from a review of "Eraserhead" that I read many years ago went something like, "It's set in an indeterminate universe. It could Philadelphia. It could be Poland." That pretty much sums up Lynch for me. He's a brilliant, amazing guy. I'd have a coffee, milk shake, and cherry pie with him any time. :-)
Posted by HarryCanyon (Member # 9143) on :
Sorry but Dune stunk, it was just a big overblown 47 million dollar mess of a movie that makes no sense, bad acting, cheap special effects and a complete rape of a great novel as it's still a major turkey that is one of the worst movies of the 80's that ranks with Ishtar and Heaven's Gate in terms of big budget flops/stinkers.
Blue Velvet was a very good step away from that Dune disaster.
Posted by Falkor (Member # 7874) on :
I read he only directed Dune because he was contracted to make it for de Laurentiis. After that they let him make Blue Velvet where he could do pretty much what he wanted, and the end result was great. Have you guys seen Siskel and Ebert's review of Blue Velvet? It's hilarious: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jga_yqTiqhI
Also, I'm a huge fan of Twin Peaks. I haven't enjoyed Lynch's latest movies that much. When it comes to Dune i really liked the soundtrack.
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:Sorry but Dune stunk, it was just a big overblown 47 million dollar mess of a movie that makes no sense, bad acting, cheap special effects and a complete rape of a great novel as it's still a major turkey that is one of the worst movies of the 80's that ranks with Ishtar and Heaven's Gate in terms of big budget flops/stinkers.
It's all a matter of opinion. I agree that Dune was a poor adaptation, but that doesn't automatically make it bad as a stand-alone. I also agree that some of the effects were very weak. If anything Dune needed to be a longer movie, because it was trying to convey an awful lot which made it confusing. I liked Dune then and I like it now. It was a failed attempt, but Lynch made it (I believe) an honorable one.
quote:I read he only directed Dune because he was contracted to make it for de Laurentiis.
Not quite sure what that means. You make it sound like he was forced. They asked him, he wanted to do it, so he said "yes".
quote: When it comes to Dune i really liked the soundtrack.
It is a good soundtrack.
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:Sorry but Dune stunk, it was just a big overblown 47 million dollar mess of a movie that makes no sense, bad acting, cheap special effects and a complete rape of a great novel as it's still a major turkey that is one of the worst movies of the 80's that ranks with Ishtar and Heaven's Gate in terms of big budget flops/stinkers.
t's all a matter of opinion. I agree that Dune was a poor adaptation, but that doesn't automatically make it bad as a stand-alone. I also agree that some of the effects were very weak. If anything Dune needed to be a longer movie, because it was trying to convey an awful lot which made it confusing. I liked Dune then and I like it now. It was a failed attempt, but Lynch made it (I believe) an honorable one.
Also, 'Heaven's Gate' has been critically reappraised since its initial flop status. I happen to think it's something of a masterpiece. Unfortunately, it was *never* going to make its money back in the post 'Star Wars' world.
quote:I read he only directed Dune because he was contracted to make it for de Laurentiis.
Not quite sure what that means. You make it sound like he was forced. They asked him, he wanted to do it, so he said "yes".
quote:When it comes to Dune i really liked the soundtrack.
It is a good soundtrack.
Posted by Helen_S (Member # 5804) on :
Heaven's Gate, stinker? Well I never I think it's great.
Posted by Falkor (Member # 7874) on :
quote: Not quite sure what that means. You make it sound like he was forced. They asked him, he wanted to do it, so he said "yes".
What it means is Lynch only directed Dune (as a contractual thing) so that he could make Blue Velvet later on.
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:Originally posted by Helen_S: Heaven's Gate, stinker? Well I never I think it's great.
Helen, why do your posts always make me do this: ?
quote:What it means is Lynch only directed Dune (as a contractual thing) so that he could make Blue Velvet later on.
In that case I'll have to disagree. Blue Velvet only cost $1 to make. Lynch made it as an attempt to do something cheap and personal after the titanic flop of Dune. Why would he slave for three years on the hell of Dune just to get the chance to make a movie he could've financed himself or easily gotten financing for? He was a hot property after 'The Elephant Man'.
Dino: "David, if you are my slave for three years and make a horrendously difficult adaptation of a much-loved novel, 'Dune', I'll give you $1 and a box of string and let you shoot 'Blue Velvet' in my back garden. Deal?"
Lynch: "Deal!"
Dino: "He really is crazy."
[PS: Don't take any of the above as an attack on you, Falk, I'm just japestering}
[ 07. November 2010, 16:28: Message edited by: logan5 ]
Posted by Falkor (Member # 7874) on :
quote: BV's development had been one part of the deal under which Lynch had agreed to do Dune, and the latter's huge splat caused two years of rather chilly relations between Dino and Dave while the former clutched his head and the latter wrote BV's script and the De Laurentiis Entertainment Group's accountants did the postmortem on a $40 million stillbirth. Then De Laurentiis offered Lynch a deal for making BV, a very unusual sort of arrangement. For Blue Velvet, De Laurentiis offered Lynch a tiny budget and an absurdly low directorial fee, but 100 percent control over the film.
And I don't think Lynch would have had an easy time finding someone to fund a movie like Blue Velvet. I don't imagine he would have paid the 6 million budget out of his own pocket either. Under the deal with Laurentiis he had absolute control over his work, which is a rare thing in Hollywood!
Posted by Secret Admirer (Member # 3574) on :
I speak from experience here, not a good first date movie.
Posted by Helen_S (Member # 5804) on :
quote:Originally posted by logan5: Helen, why do your posts always make me do this: ?
There's a certain amount of hearsay there, and it commits the all too common error when talking about Lynch of ignoring 'The Elephant Man'. A hit as well as a critically adored movie. I don't know why people forget about it. Remember, Lynch had just been offered 'Jedi' by Lucas and turned it down in favour of Dune because he felt he could put more of his own stamp on it. Lynch was very much a wunderkind back then.
quote:BV's development had been one part of the deal under which Lynch had agreed to do Dune
It may well have been 'part of the deal', but I seriously doubt it was a deciding factor. It's just a Director trying to wring as much out of a contract that will see him lose three years of his life as possible. He probably just wanted Dino to guarantee that he would get to make his next picture regardless of what happened to Dune. Remember; nobody thought Dune was going to tank. It was only after Dune that Lynch had to salvage anything of his career.
quote:And I don't think Lynch would have had an easy time finding someone to fund a movie like Blue Velvet.
After Dune; more difficult. Before; no problem.
quote:I don't imagine he would have paid the 6 million budget out of his own pocket either.
When I said 'finance the film himself', I meant reaise the money himself, not necessarily pay it all himself. He could've done it. He still had 'Eraserhead' and 'The Elephant Man' as gold calling-cards. Many Directors with less were getting bigger budgets than that.
quote:Under the deal with Laurentiis he had absolute control over his work, which is a rare thing in Hollywood!
That is a rarity. But remember; when Lynch signed the contracts he didn't know that Dune would flop, Dino would shred his cut, and that the creative control he wanted for BV would become crucial.
I'm rambling, but my point is; there is no way Lynch made Dune so he could make Blue Velvet. Any guarantees of financing a little movie after Dune would've been incidental. Before Dune Lynch had nothing to prove, after it he had everything to prove.
Posted by Valley (Member # 1322) on :
quote:Originally posted by Secret Admirer: I speak from experience here, not a good first date movie.
Tragically funny!
Posted by HarryCanyon (Member # 9143) on :
BV Is not a date movie you know.
Posted by Secret Admirer (Member # 3574) on :
Where were you when I needed you most, Harry? Now you tell me!
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:Originally posted by HarryCanyon: BV Is not a date movie you know.
Maybe with the right girl... Posted by Muffy Tepperman (Member # 1551) on :
Logan i'd be that type of girl....."this guy is so cool and indie taking me to see Blue Velvet" haha
I'm a rarity i'm sure....."now what's the cool new Jennifer Anniston chick flick?" Posted by Crash (Member # 7484) on :
I took a date to see "Altered States." It was a disaster! We had to leave. I never walk out of movies...ever. :-)
Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
quote:Logan i'd be that type of girl....."this guy is so cool and indie taking me to see Blue Velvet" haha. I'm a rarity i'm sure....."now what's the cool new Jennifer Anniston chick flick?"
You are a rarity, Muff. Only to be found flying around the skies in the warm and balmy climate of The Rewind.
quote:I took a date to see "Altered States." It was a disaster! We had to leave. I never walk out of movies...ever. :-)
This is how you handle the 'bad date movie' situation: When you've realised that the movie either a) sucks, or b) simply isn't date material; you turn to the person you're with and say...
"This movie sucks ***. Let's make out."
... then proceed to do what the movie was actually stopping you from doing. If the movie's any good you can catch it on DVD.
Voila! No need to thank me.
Posted by Crash (Member # 7484) on :
ROFL. My choice for an 80s movie where you and your date will get through the movie (and really love it) and go make out later is "Body Heat." Trust me. It works. :-)
Posted by Burnett (Member # 9924) on :
One of my all time favourites. I like extremely stylized movies.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
?
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
