tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post2061691157912161325..comments2023-06-03T07:55:31.975-04:00Comments on The Subway Rambler (Online): The Eternal StruggleDave Koppermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09292071349686573917noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-15729938325922520872007-06-19T15:52:00.000-04:002007-06-19T15:52:00.000-04:00Works for me. I don't need Freddy Got Fingered, b...Works for me. I don't need Freddy Got Fingered, but I would like to rewatch the Tom Green SNL now and then.Dave Koppermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09292071349686573917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-56613062271020676332007-06-19T15:38:00.000-04:002007-06-19T15:38:00.000-04:00Alrighty. You can keep your A.I. and Matrix Reload...Alrighty. You can keep your A.I. and Matrix Reloaded, and I'll keep my FWWM and Ghost Dog.<BR/><BR/>And Freddy Got Fingered, eh, we can split custody.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07411375926696127093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-80977683431437893042007-06-19T15:04:00.000-04:002007-06-19T15:04:00.000-04:00Well, I already presented all my arguments for why...Well, I already presented all my arguments for why it couldn't and wouldn't be regarded as a David Lynch film, so there you go.Dave Koppermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09292071349686573917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-146505840081784092007-06-19T14:49:00.000-04:002007-06-19T14:49:00.000-04:00What I mean is it's typically not what one expects...What I mean is it's typically not what one expects. There are always emotional cul-de-sacs, lulls that are intended to keep the viewer firmly submersed in the mood. His movies are meant to be experienced purely, like experiencing a dream, without any sort of excuse for the experience (e.g. excessive plotting or character development, or any recognizable thematic structure besides, you know: "a young girl in trouble.").<BR/><BR/>That gets back to my overriding point that it's unfair to judge FWWM as a "failed" big-screen continuation of the series. It was "a David Lynch movie" doing it's best to serve that purpose. That is, in my opinion, the only fair way to judge it.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07411375926696127093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-11364715550955740962007-06-19T14:31:00.000-04:002007-06-19T14:31:00.000-04:00Not a TP geek? You're talking to the ONE person o...Not a TP geek? You're talking to the ONE person on Earth who bought <B><I>The Secret Diary of Laura Palmer.</I></B> I think I still have that fucker, somewhere. And, you know? That damn thing acutally got more into the character and eventual decline of Laura Palmer better than the film and Sheryl Lee.<BR/><BR/>I think David Lynch's daugther wrote it? I'll have to check that.<BR/><BR/>Sadly, I don't own the "Diane Tapes."<BR/><BR/>If you're saying that a David Lynch film is supposed to be a disappointment, well, I guess I don't have an argument to mount against you - if only becuase, as a defense, it's kind of a non-defense.Dave Koppermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09292071349686573917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-89217568645710353442007-06-19T12:16:00.000-04:002007-06-19T12:16:00.000-04:00I suppose I just don't recall you being a big Twin...I suppose I just don't recall you being a big Twin Peaks fan. Sorry.<BR/><BR/>To continue my response to your post:<BR/><BR/>I think the issue of the film as "a David Lynch movie" vs. the film as a big-screen Twin Peaks episode is interesting. Much of the continuity leading into the first season is there, very strong and detailed. The molestation of Laura. Harold Smith, and the hiding of the diary. "Bobby killed a guy once." The one-armed man. Theresa Banks. If anything this aspect was too subtle, too intricate. It was quality Twin Peaks screen-time, which could certainly be finely parsed by any true fan of the show, it just wasn't what most people wanted or expected to see. I realize probably no one really cared about seeing Harold Smith again. But... this was the story of Laura Palmer, and Lynch had to be true to it. As you said, he goes with the theme and story he goes with. And, as I've said, he was making a movie, and he has his certain way of doing that. So I think the film for most TP fans was achingly close to what they wanted (the opening 20 minutes), but then unreachably out of phase with their "geek" desires. Sort of like a depressing dream one might have had of what the movie would be like the night before it came out. But isn't that what a David Lynch film ideally is meant to be?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07411375926696127093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-36593343221397168412007-06-19T10:16:00.000-04:002007-06-19T10:16:00.000-04:001. Sure, why not? "Backbeat" was genius work. G...1. Sure, why not? "Backbeat" was <B><I>genius</I></B> work. Genius.<BR/><BR/>2. Okay, great. <BR/><BR/>3. Ray Wise was quite good, no denying. <BR/><BR/>3.5. I saw the full film once, in the theater. (I have reviewed segments over the years.) From where do you get the idea that I watched it dispassionately? "Devoid of or unaffected by passion, emotion, or bias." I really don't think you're using that word right. Anyone who spends 1300 words writing about how much something bugged them probably is anything other than dispassionate.<BR/><BR/>For the record: I was stoked to see the film, ignored the negative reviews, saw it opening night and yelled at the screen in dismay when it was over.<BR/><BR/>D.Dave Koppermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09292071349686573917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2457411005352662997.post-35605356022613017912007-06-19T10:01:00.000-04:002007-06-19T10:01:00.000-04:00I disagree on many points:1. Sheryl Lee delivered ...I disagree on many points:<BR/><BR/>1. Sheryl Lee delivered an excellent, riveting peformance. She's a good actress. <BR/><BR/>2. The story of Laura Palmer WAS told well. And it was moving and interesting.<BR/><BR/>3. Your point about the absence of Frost and MacLachlan is a good one, but then you completely discount one of the other "souls" of the show, Leland Palmer, who is in the film a lot. Ray Wise is phenomenal in the role (especially in FWWM). You obviously have only watched the movie once, dispassionately. To have neglected any mention of Ray Wise in your analysis says volumes about your lack of real consideration for the film.<BR/><BR/>I have to go to a production meeting. I'll pick this up later.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07411375926696127093noreply@blogger.com