You lost me, David.

Rating: 5/10 (29 October 2001)

Let me first say that I thought "Blue Velvet" was one of the greatest movies ever. I loved that film and I kind of became a Lynch fan as a result. I was a little letdown by "Wild At Heart", I thought it was all style and no substance. I was more letdown by "Lost Highway", one of the worst movies ever made. I did not care for "Dune" or "The Straight Cut" (I think that was the lawn mower movie?). Well, it got me thinking, is Lynch in a rut? Or is he just not much of a filmmaker? Well, I am going with the second one. The man cannot tell a story, he can't. He has to get far out and carried away, because it conceals the fact that the story is not nearly as clever as he would have you believe. I know there are a lot of these "artist" types that are going to tell me that I am not advanced enough to understand the nuances of this last story, but that is a bunch of crap. Mulholland Drive comes apart like a poorly wrapped christmas present. I wanted very badly to like this film and I would say that I was going to go thumbs up through the first hour and fortyfive minutes. However, this film falls apart so badly in the last 45 minutes, that I went thumbs down. It is a classic style of filmmaking. Come up with some nonsense ending and let all of the self professed artists out there read their own ending into the film. Of course if you were to ask Lynch what the ending meant, he would have no idea what to say. Probably give you some bull about interpreting the art on your own. Yeah right! Fool me once, shame on you, fool me four times, shame on me. Be advised, this is more Lynch nonsense that will leave you shaking your head as you ponder asking for your money back. If you are one of Lynch's brilliant disciples that can interpret his psychotic illusions, have a good time. But save your "how deep" lines for your buddies at the coffee house.