MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Lynch's latest: "It's supposed to make perfect sense

idea_05.jpgDavid Lynch gets a Golden Lion lifetime award in Venice today, and of his new movie, Inland Empire, writes Reuters, “the master of mystery and the macabre is more impenetrable than ever, prompting a journalist to jokingly ask after his mental health.” The movie blurs the boundaries between one story and the next, and between dream and reality, the unsigned report says. “Nearly three hours long, the most obvious plotline centers around the making of a movie and how the lead actress fears the wrath of her husband when she has an affair with her co-star. But where that story begins and others, including one set in Poland, begin, is impossible to tell. Asked if the film was supposed to make sense, Lynch told a news conference following a press screening: “It’s supposed to make perfect sense.” … When asked to explain the appearance of three actors wearing rabbits’ heads, one of whom stands in the corner doing the ironing, the 60-year-old replied: “No, I can’t explain that.” … “I really would like to be able to explain, but the film ends up being the explanation. That’s what’s so terrible about press conferences. It’s all about the film, not about the words.” The longtime acolyte of Transcendental Meditation also said, “You should be not afraid of using your intuition and feel, think your way through… Have the experience and trust your inner knowing of what it is.” [Illo from Steven Lapcevic, from the cover of the Lynch tribute album, “Brilliance.”]

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “Lynch's latest: "It's supposed to make perfect sense”

  1. frankbooth says:

    David Lynch…think I’ve heard of that guy. I may have to check this out.

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon