Is Diane obsessed with Camilla?

Exclusively reserved for discussion regarding David Lynch's 'Mulholland Dr.'
User avatar
ctyankee
 
Posts: 196
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Status: Offline

Re: Is Diane obsessed with Camilla?

Postby ctyankee » 10 Nov 2010

vicster111 wrote:I guess I'm just not explaining myself very well.

Think of an artist who paints a subject using one style, and then paints the subject again using a different style.

We go and look at this art and try to determine what the subject is.

************

I've been told that I'm 'misusing' the word symbolism. I won't use it any longer. I'm not that educated in the art department and therefore don't know artsy lingo. :)


Neither do I. But when I go to see art, I invariably see an artist painting in one style not two. The same subject painted in different styles by the same artist? ... rarer still. What artist/subject did you have in mind?

User avatar
vicster111
 
Posts: 281
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Status: Offline

Re: Is Diane obsessed with Camilla?

Postby vicster111 » 10 Nov 2010

A painting is just one scene, so it would only make sense that only one style is used. Film contains many scenes. And this artist, David Lynch, decided to use more than one style of story-telling in his art of telling a story. Once you look at it this way, DL (very blatantly, in my opinion) tells us when he is switching styles.

I also believe it is more important to 'zoom out' instead of 'zoom in' to understand what he's telling us. Once you zoom out and get a general idea of what is being shown, you interpret it from there. All of the posts regarding his films, all of these years later, are people still 'zooming in'. Picking at the tiniest details...even doing frame by frame analysis. I'm guilty of doing this, myself.

This way of story-telling may be something he has done in all of his films and is why, for the most part, we still don't 'get' them. We're walking the earth, with a magnifying glass, looking for clues instead of viewing the earth from the moon.

I'm just offering a different way of 'seeing' his film. If you do not see what I see, that is fine. I am not trying to force my idea on you. :)
Last edited by vicster111 on 10 Nov 2010, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
vicster111
 
Posts: 281
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Status: Offline

Re: Is Diane obsessed with Camilla?

Postby vicster111 » 10 Nov 2010

By, the way I just want to reiterate here (I talked about this in another thread) that I am still considering the notion that the second half of the film is either a 'mirror' or a 'retelling' of the same story we see in the first part of the film. The second story is a shortened version of the first (Camilla mentions a 'shortcut'). If this is the case, then we could be seeing the same story, told twice, with two different styles.

User avatar
blu
 
Posts: 605
Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline

Re: Is Diane obsessed with Camilla?

Postby blu » 11 Nov 2010

vicster111 wrote:By, the way I just want to reiterate here (I talked about this in another thread) that I am still considering the notion that the second half of the film is either a 'mirror' or a 'retelling' of the same story we see in the first part of the film. The second story is a shortened version of the first (Camilla mentions a 'shortcut'). If this is the case, then we could be seeing the same story, told twice, with two different styles.

Ok, so ..... imagine this:

The ENTIRE point of this is that you are being told two stories that are the same. The point of Mulholland Dr is for you to take things that you have learned in one part and apply them to the second. Or upon contemplation apply whatever to whatever.

Have you ever tried to solve a jigsaw in the mirror?

Two dreams, both the same ....

When I first saw MD and subsequently hunted down a message board to talk further, I swayed between opinions. For a while I was CONVINCED that the most of the film was a death dream. TOTALLY CONVINCED. It all made sense that way. Then I looked a little deeper and realised that there were a few things that didn't quite fit with that explanation.

Hm

:hmm:

Then I understood/realised/gathered that believing in the standard/classical/whatever "explanation" for the film did the complete opposite of limiting you. In fact it frees you. Once you have a framework to consider things in, there are a million possibilities. Without the framework you spend too much time looking at the hole and not the doughnut.

When you're worrying about the point of Laney, maybe you miss where Laney fits in.

This is a strange and disjointed post. I guess my reason for posting this is to say keep your eyes wide open. Don't miss or dismiss things or bend them to fit with your view. Be objective.

Don't be a slave to a theory (not just you Vic, everyone).

User avatar
vicster111
 
Posts: 281
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Status: Offline

Re: Is Diane obsessed with Camilla?

Postby vicster111 » 11 Nov 2010

Don't be a slave to a theory

You don't have to worry about me. Lol!

Since my 'Dan Selwyn' theory I've come up with about 4 more possibilities. I probably had 2 or 3 before the Dan theory. And, at the time, I was 90% sure I was 'right' with Dan.

I'm about as open-minded as you can get. And I love hearing ideas from others...especially when they open up a new way of looking at this film for me. It's very refreshing to me when someone sees a scene very differently than I had been seeing it. It keeps this film fun and all the more enjoyable.

So keep it coming y'all.

Previous

Return to Mulholland Dr.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron