Taking the first exit off the Lost Highway...

Rating: 9/10 (23 April 2002)

***Spoilers
When watching a film like Mulholland Drive (although, with the exception of David Lynch' earlier work in general and Lost Highway specifically, there are very, very few films like Mulholland Drive), a lot of questions rise. The central one when discussing them is in how far does a movie have to be explained rationally or interpreted in a logical manner. Many people commenting on this film say it's a mosaic of dreams, present reality and flashbacks and because of the 'dream logic' of it any attempt at rationally explaining the film will be useless. But in my opinion you can still say sensible things about the movie based on what you interpret as dreams, present reality and flashbacks. Also, and perhaps even more interestingly, you can discuss the representation of those three (not necessarily discrete) elements in cinematic form. Another way of approaching this film is saying there really is a rational explanation for all of it, even if that explanation relies heavily on the idea that events are being distorted by the protagonist's subconscious.
The second approach most often (I know there are different possibilities) leads to an interpretation that says the film's first two hours are actually a final dream of the Diane Selwyn character. A dream which starts out idyllic with her finding a woman she eventually falls in love with and her career progressing steadily. A dream which mirrors her own story about what happened to her in her search for stardom, and consequently also mirrors why she didn't find it. The blue box suddenly appearing at Club Silencio forms, much like the ear in Blue Velvet, the transition point between dream and reality. In this interpretation the final twenty minutes of the film consist of flashbacks to what happened to Diane in reality. It's a reading of the film that goes far towards explaining it completely. But not all the way.

Much like Lost Highway, although it's more obvious in Mulholland Drive, there is one problem with this interpretation, which is the perspective. If you consider part of the film a dream, why does that part contain scenes the dreaming person would not have dreamt (in my opinion, of course). For instance, the alleged dream part contains a scene with two cops discussing the car crash. Could Diane have known about that? Is it possible to have a dream that spans multiple weeks? I don't think so. And that's where the questions of cinematic representation pop up. Mulholland Drive cannot be fully explained in a rational manner because Lynch allows reality, dream and flashback and narrative flow into each other. He's doesn't just resist going for the traditional narrative structure; he's not going for the traditional narrative altogether. He knows it's impossible to force dreams into that traditional narrative. Filmmaking has a logic of it's own that is not naturally imposed upon our dreams. So it's not only a case of dream logic seeping into cinema but also cinematic logic seeping into dreams. In this way Lynch turns 'the dream' into a cinematic reality with only clues to guide us to its falsehood. The movie consists of two definite and different cinematic realities, both equally important.
What Lynch is trying to do is give us an extremely dark, sarcastic view of Hollywood and the way one woman's search for stardom ends in tragedy because of the place's workings. Some ways in which he attacks Hollywood are quite obvious (the director being forced the hire Camilla), some ways are more ingenious (the different roles The Cowboy plays in 'the dream' and 'reality'). In the dream, all odds may be against Betty, but at least she has Rita to fall back on. In reality, Camilla betrays her far more strongly than Hollywood ever did. So, in Hollywood, even the one you trust most could betray you, seems to be (part of) the point. In the dream, Diane covers this fact up by resorting to dramatic conspiracy theories continually denying Rita's betrayal and her own guilt about having Rita killed over her betrayal.
This is how I read the film and certainly not the only or the right way it can be explained. But one can find some twisted logic it and it's not necessary to discard it as pretentious nonsense or to resort to saying it can never be resolved and therefore it's unnecessary to try.
But did I enjoy it? Well, any movie that compels you to think like Mulholland Drive has to have something going for it, right? And apart from that, I enjoyed every aspect of the production. The cinematography's brilliant, the soundtrack perfect, the acting more than Oscar-worthy and so-on. And trust me, I didn't have any difficulty with the lesbian love scenes either. It may have surprised me more had I never seen Lost Highway (that film may have a completely different setting but certain themes, like jealousy and betrayal are repeated and so are some of the characteristic storytelling methods) and there is the odd scene that DOESN'T work (the extended hitman sequence which plays like something out of a Tarantino flick, for instance). Still, it's a film filled with intrigue, mystery and occasional black humour, as entertaining as it is complex. Truly brilliant.
Rating: 9/10