Question:
Talk about the wierdest film I've ever seen....!
So what.....is it an exercise in wierdness or something?!
:nuts:
Yes.
Did you get it direct from the man himself or the R2 P&S version?
It's pretentious and overrated.
Originally posted by Kif
It's pretentious and overrated.
I certainly don't think it's "overrated", as it's my favourite film bar none.
"Pretentious"? :shrug: I don't find it pretentious... I find it evocative, hilarious and moving by turn. The most immersive film I've ever watched (and re-watched ad nauseam) and still worth talking about over a decade since I first saw it. If that's pretentious then give me more pretentiousness... :thumbs:
Originally posted by Cornelius
Did you get it direct from the man himself or the R2 P&S version?
Right, now I'm confused. I thought this film was always fullscreen? You mean my R4 4:3 copy is cropped??? Or is this open matte land again?
Can we get a rundown once again on what the davidlynch.com version offers over the standard release? Is it just a cleaner print?
:confused:
David Lynch has had every frame digitally cleaned which is why it is taking so long to get the disc out to buy from Davidlynch.com.
Shouldn't be too long now, but it will be the definitive version (though expensive at around 50-60 pounds incl. shipping).
Originally posted by feverpitch96
Right, now I'm confused. I thought this film was always fullscreen? You mean my R4 4:3 copy is cropped??? Or is this open matte land again?
Can we get a rundown once again on what the davidlynch.com version offers over the standard release? Is it just a cleaner print?
:confused:
I was always under the impression that the UK video release was open-matte. It's 1.85:1 at the cinema, but the video release seems to show more above & below the theatrical framing - particularly if you compare the theatrical version's title sequence to the video release... just my impression though...
The Lynch release will be the intended theatrical ratio, remastered and, apparently, with a 90 min documentary (according to Dl.Com chat)...
Originally posted by pmdf
I certainly don't think it's "overrated", as it's my favourite film bar none.
If you don't mind me asking, exactly what did you enjoy about it, especially to make it your favourite film?! There's certainly an element of humour, but more in the way that I was always waiting for Graham Chapman to walk on screen and say "stop that, it's silly.....!" I kept laughing, but in a completely bemused, wtf is going on here type way!
:nuts:
There's nothing wrong with weird, imho, as long as there's a purpose to it.
Personally, I believe I have quite an open mind when it comes to movies, and enjoy watching films of all genres, but I do tend to prefer a movie to have some sort of point, whether it's provocative, or just mindless pulp. To me, this just seemed to be completely pointless; a complete case of style (in the very loosest sense!) but no substance.
Discuss.....!
It was the R2 4:3 version, btw.....
Eraserhead + The Man Who fell to Earth = :confused: :| :confused: :dork: :zzz: :oh-hum: :confused: :confused: :( :confused:
Originally posted by Emanef
If you don't mind me asking, exactly what did you enjoy about it, especially to make it your favourite film?!
As I stated- it's the most immersive film I've ever seen, and that's probably the single thing that I love most about it. There's something about the pacing, the soundtrack and the overall vibe that draws me right into it.
As for being "style over substance" - if that was the case then that's not necessarily a bad thing in my book. One of my other favourite movies is Suspiria which is definitely a case of "style over substance". Cinematography is perhaps my main interest in a movie, to the extent that I can overlook a poor plot if it's particularly visually stunning. I'm very shallow in that respect... :p
However, having said that, I don't think Eraserhead is "style over substance"... I've spent hours discussing the movie with friends and other fans. I still see new things in it even now, 10 years or so after I first saw it. Despite what some would have you believe, Eraserhead does have depth - Lynch spent a long and painful time making the movie, which he still claims is his most personal.
Check out some of the many sites dedicated to unravelling the movie if you're interested in what it's all about... http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/2093/papers/wolfe.html is a good place to start. However, if you find symbolism and analysis to be "pretentious" then I recommend you avoid like the plague, as there's plenty of pontificating on many of these sites. The good thing about Eraserhead is that it's a still a great movie to watch even if you don't believe there's any depth to it at all!
Originally posted by Emanef
If you don't mind me asking, exactly what did you enjoy about it, especially to make it your favourite film?! There's certainly an element of humour, but more in the way that I was always waiting for Graham Chapman to walk on screen and say "stop that, it's silly.....!" I kept laughing, but in a completely bemused, wtf is going on here type way!
:nuts:
There's nothing wrong with weird, imho, as long as there's a purpose to it.
Personally, I believe I have quite an open mind when it comes to movies, and enjoy watching films of all genres, but I do tend to prefer a movie to have some sort of point, whether it's provocative, or just mindless pulp. To me, this just seemed to be completely pointless; a complete case of style (in the very loosest sense!) but no substance.
that pretty much mirrors my view exactly!
i started a similar thread straight after I watched it.
there's just odd things that I can't get my head around like the radiator and why his g/f's mum starts groping him?? :confused:
People read far too deeply into Lynch's dull, surrealist drivel. Eraserhead is weird for the sake of weird, and that's as far as it goes. Miike Takashi's Auditon is a far better example of how surreal sequences can be used effectively and with meaning, rather than just to confuse an audience and impress half-witted critics trying to look intelligent and sophisticated. It would have been better suited as an entry for the Turner Prize, along with the unmade beds and the screwed up bits of masking tape.
cheers pmdf - I've had a read of that link you gave - quite interesting.
It may have even prompted me to another viewing!
Originally posted by Kif
Miike Takashi's Auditon is a far better example of how surreal sequences can be used effectively and with meaning, rather than just to confuse an audience and impress half-witted critics trying to look intelligent and sophisticated.
And [Audition] was a thoroughly enjoyable film....
Originally posted by Kif
People read far too deeply into Lynch's dull, surrealist drivel. Eraserhead is weird for the sake of weird, and that's as far as it goes.
It would have been better suited as an entry for the Turner Prize, along with the unmade beds and the screwed up bits of masking tape.
You seem to have been reading my mind....! It does seem like it was more to provoke reaction without actually being good or having any purpose, much like modern 'art' (oop, please don't start me on that one!), and it did have me thinking of the nonsense people pay 'artists' like Tracy Emin for such rubbish.
You do wonder if, when he started out (it was his first 'movie' wasn't it?) if he thought he'd have a better chance of a decent career if he came up with something so completely absurd, but very arty. "Ya, ya, the imagery was just wonderful....."
Everyone has their own opinion, but I must say I was constantly wathing the time on the dvd player thiking when's this $#!t going to end!
Not on my essential purchase list.....!
:D
I will have a look at the links you mentioned though, pmdf....
I love Eraserhead. I think David Lynch has made better films, but none are as surprising as the 'Head. I first saw it in a cinema in London on its rerelease (1993, I think) and at very high volume - it was simultaneously terrifying and uproariously funny. I can't think of another film that is so bleak in its outlook and yet revels in the absurdity its own depression.
If you think the film is silly, it's because it is. All of Lynch's work is shot through with a surreal comedy which helps it to function, and makes it human. Even Lost Highway, disturbing, threatening and violent as it is, is also one of his funniest films. Actually, I'd really like to see Lynch make a film where the comedy is the focus: what an audience splitter that would be. :lol:
Originally posted by Emanef
And [Audition] was a thoroughly enjoyable film....
It was sickening and appalling in places, but it was completely absorbing, fantastically original and acted, and if you didn't know what to expect- as I didn't- it's an enormous shock when things suddenly start going wrong.
That essay gives a good explanation of the film, but before reading it I found it completely incomprehensible. So basically it's about a seriously mad and depressed bloke who has issues, regularly contemplates suicide, then finally (and not before time!) succeeds.....!
So, all you guys who think it's a great film.....did you really understand what the hell it was about before reading up on it?! Come on, be truthful....!
I bet it's been the subject of many an English class......!
Actually, although it's an interesting read, I disagree with a number of interpretations in that essay. That's the beauty of a film like Eraserhead, though... whatever your thoughts on it, no-one can ever prove you wrong... :p
Give it another viewing sometime, Emanef. I certainly like it more now than I did just after seeing for the first time, when I was too blown away to be able to make head or tail of it...!
I don't think that there are right and wrong answers as to what it's about really. I mean, it's patently not about a Carribean water skiing tournament, but Lynch structures his films to invite a degree of free interpretation. It certainly is confusing, but I don't think that it's obtuse for the sake of it. The mood, pace, and the visual and sound design are consistent and - I feel - give a clear indication of subject matter.
I though it was about loneliness, and how an industrialised, compartmentalised society might breed a fear of physical contact. I think Terry Gilliam's Brazil has much in common with Eraserhead - both are about dreamers trying to escape an oppressive society. In Brazil the hero is an optimist, in Lynch's film, he's a pessimist - drawn through despair to an idea of death (the girl in the radiator, a ridiculous parody of a cherubic angel, unconvincingly trying to reassure us that "In heaven, everything is fine") and away from his child, a horror he has created. It's the constant crying he can't stand rather than the way it looks... I suspect that more than a few parents would identify.
arggh i want to see this film now.
but £50-60 for the DVD ?
Pwooah, David Lynch kiss my ....... :P
nah, why is it so expensive ?
£50-£60? Surely you can get it cheaper than that, or is the R2 4:3 no good?
As has been noted in the past - I fall into the 'self-indulgent pap' camp when it comes to Eraserhead. To be fair budgetary constraints probably let Lynch down I am sure but nevertheless.....
Along with Highlander 2 - worst film I have ever seen.
I haven't seen it in over a decade, but I saw it pretty regularly throughout the 1980s, and one of the many things I love about it (it's comfortably one of my all-time favourite films) is the way it seems to go in a different direction on every viewing.
I think Wong Fei Hong has hit the nail pretty much on the head (insofar as you can with this particular film) - Lynch wrote the screenplay during a period of extreme depression when he was stuck in a particularly nasty part of Philadelphia with his wife and a club-footed child who was the result of an accidental pregnancy when the Lynches had only just entered their twenties.
All this fused with his interest in dreams, biology, sexuality and heavy industry to create the final film - which uses the same approach towards unconscious impulses and dream-logic that the Surrealists promoted in the 1930s, even though I don't think Lynch became seriously interested in Surrealism until after he'd finished the film and people started drawing comparisons between <I>Eraserhead</I> and the likes of <I>Un Chien Andalou</I>.
But I didn't know much (or any) of this the first two or three times I saw the film - as with Buñuel's films (which I discovered at roughly the same time), you just have to go with the flow: there's no point expecting it to "make sense" because that's not how they work: indeed, both Lynch and Buñuel have confessed to deliberately making sure that their scripts <U>don't</U> make logical sense, because they have a horror of neat capsule interpretations of work that's essentially drawn from their subconscious.
It's impossible to persuade anyone to "like" <I>Eraserhead</I> - like people who sit stony-faced through <I>Withnail & I</I>, you either get it or you don't, and if you don't you either give up or watch it a few more times until it clicks. I wouldn't recommend it as a first Lynch film, though - it was my second, after the far more accessible <I>The Elephant Man</I>, and I saw <I>Eraserhead</I> precisely because I loved the more abstract dream sequences and had heard that <I>Eraserhead</I> was pretty much a feature-length version!
As for the price of the new DVD, I suspect it may have a wee bit to do with Lynch personally cleaning it up frame by frame. Obviously, if you're not enamoured enough of the film to want to pay that kind of money, you've got plenty of alternatives - but personally I can't wait! (I haven't seen any of the current DVDs, as I heard that they were less than wonderful quality).
i think ill try and pick up the R2 first.
this film sounds very interesting as im pretty interested in surrealism.
hopefully i will be able to enjoy the film if not appreciate it at least.
the R2 is 4:3, is that cropped or full frame ?
So what.....is it an exercise in wierdness or something?!
:nuts:
Answers:
Yes.
Answers:
Did you get it direct from the man himself or the R2 P&S version?
Answers:
It's pretentious and overrated.
Answers:
Originally posted by Kif
It's pretentious and overrated.
I certainly don't think it's "overrated", as it's my favourite film bar none.
"Pretentious"? :shrug: I don't find it pretentious... I find it evocative, hilarious and moving by turn. The most immersive film I've ever watched (and re-watched ad nauseam) and still worth talking about over a decade since I first saw it. If that's pretentious then give me more pretentiousness... :thumbs:
Answers:
Originally posted by Cornelius
Did you get it direct from the man himself or the R2 P&S version?
Right, now I'm confused. I thought this film was always fullscreen? You mean my R4 4:3 copy is cropped??? Or is this open matte land again?
Can we get a rundown once again on what the davidlynch.com version offers over the standard release? Is it just a cleaner print?
:confused:
Answers:
David Lynch has had every frame digitally cleaned which is why it is taking so long to get the disc out to buy from Davidlynch.com.
Shouldn't be too long now, but it will be the definitive version (though expensive at around 50-60 pounds incl. shipping).
Answers:
Originally posted by feverpitch96
Right, now I'm confused. I thought this film was always fullscreen? You mean my R4 4:3 copy is cropped??? Or is this open matte land again?
Can we get a rundown once again on what the davidlynch.com version offers over the standard release? Is it just a cleaner print?
:confused:
I was always under the impression that the UK video release was open-matte. It's 1.85:1 at the cinema, but the video release seems to show more above & below the theatrical framing - particularly if you compare the theatrical version's title sequence to the video release... just my impression though...
The Lynch release will be the intended theatrical ratio, remastered and, apparently, with a 90 min documentary (according to Dl.Com chat)...
Answers:
Originally posted by pmdf
I certainly don't think it's "overrated", as it's my favourite film bar none.
If you don't mind me asking, exactly what did you enjoy about it, especially to make it your favourite film?! There's certainly an element of humour, but more in the way that I was always waiting for Graham Chapman to walk on screen and say "stop that, it's silly.....!" I kept laughing, but in a completely bemused, wtf is going on here type way!
:nuts:
There's nothing wrong with weird, imho, as long as there's a purpose to it.
Personally, I believe I have quite an open mind when it comes to movies, and enjoy watching films of all genres, but I do tend to prefer a movie to have some sort of point, whether it's provocative, or just mindless pulp. To me, this just seemed to be completely pointless; a complete case of style (in the very loosest sense!) but no substance.
Discuss.....!
It was the R2 4:3 version, btw.....
Answers:
Eraserhead + The Man Who fell to Earth = :confused: :| :confused: :dork: :zzz: :oh-hum: :confused: :confused: :( :confused:
Answers:
Originally posted by Emanef
If you don't mind me asking, exactly what did you enjoy about it, especially to make it your favourite film?!
As I stated- it's the most immersive film I've ever seen, and that's probably the single thing that I love most about it. There's something about the pacing, the soundtrack and the overall vibe that draws me right into it.
As for being "style over substance" - if that was the case then that's not necessarily a bad thing in my book. One of my other favourite movies is Suspiria which is definitely a case of "style over substance". Cinematography is perhaps my main interest in a movie, to the extent that I can overlook a poor plot if it's particularly visually stunning. I'm very shallow in that respect... :p
However, having said that, I don't think Eraserhead is "style over substance"... I've spent hours discussing the movie with friends and other fans. I still see new things in it even now, 10 years or so after I first saw it. Despite what some would have you believe, Eraserhead does have depth - Lynch spent a long and painful time making the movie, which he still claims is his most personal.
Check out some of the many sites dedicated to unravelling the movie if you're interested in what it's all about... http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/2093/papers/wolfe.html is a good place to start. However, if you find symbolism and analysis to be "pretentious" then I recommend you avoid like the plague, as there's plenty of pontificating on many of these sites. The good thing about Eraserhead is that it's a still a great movie to watch even if you don't believe there's any depth to it at all!
Answers:
Originally posted by Emanef
If you don't mind me asking, exactly what did you enjoy about it, especially to make it your favourite film?! There's certainly an element of humour, but more in the way that I was always waiting for Graham Chapman to walk on screen and say "stop that, it's silly.....!" I kept laughing, but in a completely bemused, wtf is going on here type way!
:nuts:
There's nothing wrong with weird, imho, as long as there's a purpose to it.
Personally, I believe I have quite an open mind when it comes to movies, and enjoy watching films of all genres, but I do tend to prefer a movie to have some sort of point, whether it's provocative, or just mindless pulp. To me, this just seemed to be completely pointless; a complete case of style (in the very loosest sense!) but no substance.
that pretty much mirrors my view exactly!
i started a similar thread straight after I watched it.
there's just odd things that I can't get my head around like the radiator and why his g/f's mum starts groping him?? :confused:
Answers:
People read far too deeply into Lynch's dull, surrealist drivel. Eraserhead is weird for the sake of weird, and that's as far as it goes. Miike Takashi's Auditon is a far better example of how surreal sequences can be used effectively and with meaning, rather than just to confuse an audience and impress half-witted critics trying to look intelligent and sophisticated. It would have been better suited as an entry for the Turner Prize, along with the unmade beds and the screwed up bits of masking tape.
Answers:
cheers pmdf - I've had a read of that link you gave - quite interesting.
It may have even prompted me to another viewing!
Answers:
Originally posted by Kif
Miike Takashi's Auditon is a far better example of how surreal sequences can be used effectively and with meaning, rather than just to confuse an audience and impress half-witted critics trying to look intelligent and sophisticated.
And [Audition] was a thoroughly enjoyable film....
Originally posted by Kif
People read far too deeply into Lynch's dull, surrealist drivel. Eraserhead is weird for the sake of weird, and that's as far as it goes.
It would have been better suited as an entry for the Turner Prize, along with the unmade beds and the screwed up bits of masking tape.
You seem to have been reading my mind....! It does seem like it was more to provoke reaction without actually being good or having any purpose, much like modern 'art' (oop, please don't start me on that one!), and it did have me thinking of the nonsense people pay 'artists' like Tracy Emin for such rubbish.
You do wonder if, when he started out (it was his first 'movie' wasn't it?) if he thought he'd have a better chance of a decent career if he came up with something so completely absurd, but very arty. "Ya, ya, the imagery was just wonderful....."
Everyone has their own opinion, but I must say I was constantly wathing the time on the dvd player thiking when's this $#!t going to end!
Not on my essential purchase list.....!
:D
I will have a look at the links you mentioned though, pmdf....
Answers:
I love Eraserhead. I think David Lynch has made better films, but none are as surprising as the 'Head. I first saw it in a cinema in London on its rerelease (1993, I think) and at very high volume - it was simultaneously terrifying and uproariously funny. I can't think of another film that is so bleak in its outlook and yet revels in the absurdity its own depression.
If you think the film is silly, it's because it is. All of Lynch's work is shot through with a surreal comedy which helps it to function, and makes it human. Even Lost Highway, disturbing, threatening and violent as it is, is also one of his funniest films. Actually, I'd really like to see Lynch make a film where the comedy is the focus: what an audience splitter that would be. :lol:
Answers:
Originally posted by Emanef
And [Audition] was a thoroughly enjoyable film....
It was sickening and appalling in places, but it was completely absorbing, fantastically original and acted, and if you didn't know what to expect- as I didn't- it's an enormous shock when things suddenly start going wrong.
Answers:
That essay gives a good explanation of the film, but before reading it I found it completely incomprehensible. So basically it's about a seriously mad and depressed bloke who has issues, regularly contemplates suicide, then finally (and not before time!) succeeds.....!
So, all you guys who think it's a great film.....did you really understand what the hell it was about before reading up on it?! Come on, be truthful....!
I bet it's been the subject of many an English class......!
Answers:
Actually, although it's an interesting read, I disagree with a number of interpretations in that essay. That's the beauty of a film like Eraserhead, though... whatever your thoughts on it, no-one can ever prove you wrong... :p
Give it another viewing sometime, Emanef. I certainly like it more now than I did just after seeing for the first time, when I was too blown away to be able to make head or tail of it...!
Answers:
I don't think that there are right and wrong answers as to what it's about really. I mean, it's patently not about a Carribean water skiing tournament, but Lynch structures his films to invite a degree of free interpretation. It certainly is confusing, but I don't think that it's obtuse for the sake of it. The mood, pace, and the visual and sound design are consistent and - I feel - give a clear indication of subject matter.
I though it was about loneliness, and how an industrialised, compartmentalised society might breed a fear of physical contact. I think Terry Gilliam's Brazil has much in common with Eraserhead - both are about dreamers trying to escape an oppressive society. In Brazil the hero is an optimist, in Lynch's film, he's a pessimist - drawn through despair to an idea of death (the girl in the radiator, a ridiculous parody of a cherubic angel, unconvincingly trying to reassure us that "In heaven, everything is fine") and away from his child, a horror he has created. It's the constant crying he can't stand rather than the way it looks... I suspect that more than a few parents would identify.
Answers:
arggh i want to see this film now.
but £50-60 for the DVD ?
Pwooah, David Lynch kiss my ....... :P
nah, why is it so expensive ?
Answers:
£50-£60? Surely you can get it cheaper than that, or is the R2 4:3 no good?
Answers:
As has been noted in the past - I fall into the 'self-indulgent pap' camp when it comes to Eraserhead. To be fair budgetary constraints probably let Lynch down I am sure but nevertheless.....
Along with Highlander 2 - worst film I have ever seen.
Answers:
I haven't seen it in over a decade, but I saw it pretty regularly throughout the 1980s, and one of the many things I love about it (it's comfortably one of my all-time favourite films) is the way it seems to go in a different direction on every viewing.
I think Wong Fei Hong has hit the nail pretty much on the head (insofar as you can with this particular film) - Lynch wrote the screenplay during a period of extreme depression when he was stuck in a particularly nasty part of Philadelphia with his wife and a club-footed child who was the result of an accidental pregnancy when the Lynches had only just entered their twenties.
All this fused with his interest in dreams, biology, sexuality and heavy industry to create the final film - which uses the same approach towards unconscious impulses and dream-logic that the Surrealists promoted in the 1930s, even though I don't think Lynch became seriously interested in Surrealism until after he'd finished the film and people started drawing comparisons between <I>Eraserhead</I> and the likes of <I>Un Chien Andalou</I>.
But I didn't know much (or any) of this the first two or three times I saw the film - as with Buñuel's films (which I discovered at roughly the same time), you just have to go with the flow: there's no point expecting it to "make sense" because that's not how they work: indeed, both Lynch and Buñuel have confessed to deliberately making sure that their scripts <U>don't</U> make logical sense, because they have a horror of neat capsule interpretations of work that's essentially drawn from their subconscious.
It's impossible to persuade anyone to "like" <I>Eraserhead</I> - like people who sit stony-faced through <I>Withnail & I</I>, you either get it or you don't, and if you don't you either give up or watch it a few more times until it clicks. I wouldn't recommend it as a first Lynch film, though - it was my second, after the far more accessible <I>The Elephant Man</I>, and I saw <I>Eraserhead</I> precisely because I loved the more abstract dream sequences and had heard that <I>Eraserhead</I> was pretty much a feature-length version!
As for the price of the new DVD, I suspect it may have a wee bit to do with Lynch personally cleaning it up frame by frame. Obviously, if you're not enamoured enough of the film to want to pay that kind of money, you've got plenty of alternatives - but personally I can't wait! (I haven't seen any of the current DVDs, as I heard that they were less than wonderful quality).
Answers:
i think ill try and pick up the R2 first.
this film sounds very interesting as im pretty interested in surrealism.
hopefully i will be able to enjoy the film if not appreciate it at least.
the R2 is 4:3, is that cropped or full frame ?
1 2