David Lynch Friday #8 – Mulholland Drive

Lynch originally envisioned Mulholland Drive as part of the larger universe of Twin Peaks. It was a work conceived as a way to further explore the character of Audrey Horne and her adventures in Hollywood and quickly deemed a no go as a new television series. It was later workshopped as a feature and was still deemed a no go. Eventually Lynch reworked his idea into what we would eventually see on screen but upon the ramping up of the production, it was discovered that most of the sets and props had been destroyed. Almost as if the world was gathering to conspire against this project, Lynch and his team got serious and persevered. What we received is, in my opinion, Lynch’s greatest film. A puzzle box of a noir that is more inspired than most anything we could reasonably expect from the genre and one that is constantly more infatuated with the characters over the plot. I have this ranked as the number one film of the 2000s. Let’s dive in.

We open with a town car winding its way around Mulholland Drive with Laura Harring’s character in the backseat. The car stops, a gun is trained on her as she is ordered out of the vehicle. Before that can happen, two other cars careen out of control and one smashes into the town car. This results in the two men up front being killed and Laura Harring’s character stumbling around, concussed. This is THE moment in the film but a first time viewer would not know this yet. The moment is preceded by the camera laying down on red sheets until the camera blacks out. These two moments, placed together, tell the entire story of the film and I love how Lynch always drops the keys to his mysteries right in front of the viewer. This is what makes any Lynch mystery so worthwhile — there are no tricks and no logic leaps. When a viewer returns to a Lynch mystery, they will always have the tools necessary to solve it.

The first half of the film unfolds as a multi-layered classic noir-ish mystery, albeit one where the events we’re seeing are happening all out of order. There is also a heightened sense of reality throughout the first half because what we’re seeing isn’t exactly what has actually happened. The truth is hiding from us and choosing to play a game of peek-a-boo — sometimes literally as we meet death a few times in the film in the form of the person living behind the diner and when that person shows up at the apartment door. One of the keys to understanding the mystery is to give in to it and allow the story to wash over you at first. There are small touches that will stand out. Lynch’s oft used POV shots put us directly in the story. Why would different characters get POV shots? Good question and the answer is one of the keys necessary to unlocking this story.

Cards on the table, everything we’re seeing in this film is from the perspective of Naomi Watts’ character. Her name, at first, is Betty and she has just arrived in Los Angeles to pursue her dream of acting. She befriends Laura Harring’s amnesiac Rita as they try to solve the mystery of the car accident and Rita’s true identity. They stumble across a name of Diane and search her out. When Diane’s apartment is found, it’s in a funhouse mirror version of their current apartment complex. Where Betty’s life in Los Angeles has been brightly lit and full of pluck, everything suddenly shifts to muted and somber. At first, this world revolves around Betty and her life. Everyone seems so invested in her. When the key to the mystery finds its keyhole, the reasoning behind all of this will become crystal clear. Nothing in this film is where it should not be.

One quick little addition here is that Lynch infuses some of this film with hilarious slapstick humor. There’s an entire assassination attempt that goes about as wrong as it could possibly go and the hitman’s attempt to clean up his mess spirals completely out of control in the funniest possible way. There’s also another small detail in this sequence that we’ll dive into in a moment.

Back to the new apartment complex where betty and Rita meet a woman they believe to be the Diane they’re looking for. This woman is not Diane but knows her and she bears a striking resemblance to Rita. Hmmmmmm. Our two leads break into the apartment where they find Diane dead in her bedroom. The only thing we can determine from the dead body is that she was a blonde. Hmmmmmm. They also find a curious blue box that looks to match a blue key in Rita’s possession. Betty and Rita return to the nice apartment in order to figure out their next move. They comfort each other and engage in a love affair. Rita tries on a blonde wig. They are becoming one, in both a figurative and literal sense. Rita and Betty awake to Rita chanting the word: Silencio, over and over again. We’re then transported to a nightclub which goes by the name Silencio. Betty and Rita are ushered in and take their seats. Oh baby, this should have Twin Peaks fans all hot and bothered because this is beginning to directly connect with the fabled show. We’re in the lodge — the black lodge now. The red curtains and blue lights. A performance by Rebekah Del Rio. The sounds and sights of electricity. The mic turning into a pulsing blue orb. This is where souls go to be processed. What is going on? We are so close to answers. But first, the sadness begins to grip everyone involved.

Back at the apartment and Betty has disappeared, leaving Rita in a Betty wig, all alone. She pulls out the blue box and inserts her key. She opens the box to see it empty — a black hole. The camera is again POV here and we get sucked in and through the box.

The film is now completely different.

Everything is more muted and somber, the bright colors and pluck are few and far between. We’re in an alternate world or perhaps we’ve left the alternate world. Betty now goes by the name Diane and Rita goes by the name Camilla. They are lovers on the outs. Things are beginning to clear up. Lynch has partly been telling us a story about ego. We can question everything we’ve seen so far. We humans are infatuated with ourselves. We exist with the idea that we live in a fishbowl, with everyone watching and commenting on our lives. This film was released twenty years ago and it’s even more relevant today. Another relevant tidbit: Lynch stuck himself in this film. Justin Theroux’s conflicted director is Lynch himself. He wants us to understand how difficult this profession can be to navigate in a corporate world. Inspiration can be fleeting and we’re rarely on solid ground.

The film continues and we watch Diane (Watts) spin out of control. She returns to her apartment (the sad one) and throws herself on the bed. Red sheets, look familiar? Her parents are laughing and mocking her in her mind. We originally met them as strangers so full of love and hope for young Betty. Oh the tables have turned. Diane cannot quiet the voices and shoots herself dead in a fit of desperation. The room fills with smoke followed by super lit and superimposed scenes of Betty and Diane before fading out and reentering Club Silencio for good.

So what exactly happened?

What happened is that Naomi Watts starred as a young, hopeful actress named Diane who couldn’t quite catch the breaks she needed to sustain a career. Her girlfriend (Rita/Camilla) caught the breaks and they drifted apart. Diane fell deep into a depression with no end in sight and unfortunately succumbed to her depression by committing suicide. The first half of the film is a rendering of Diane’s life — somewhat as it happened and somewhat as she wished it had been. The Blue box represents the truth and once we pass into it, we’re then in actual reality. This is what happened to Diane. The second half of the film is the harsh truth. Remember the hitman? Did you notice how he had two different colored eyes? One eye was Betty and the other Rita. The first half of the film is the moment between when Diane shot herself and the moment she actually died. Still, as harsh as the story is, Lynch is telling us a love story. Sure it’s sad but you cannot have sadness without happiness, love without anger, life without death. That is the yin and the yang of life. Mulholland Drive is ultimately a film depicting the various stages of our lives. We travel from the wild eyed wonder of infancy to the adventurous spirit and mystery of growing up. We then enter our work/purpose phase and this is often where it can go all right or all wrong or everything in between. This is where the ego rules over all. Adoration can lead to doubt which can breed anxiety and then enter depression which holds the hand of helplessness and walks us up to death’s door. It’s a miracle of a film that throws everything at us and mixes it up to the point where we question our own reality but it also gives us the tools to solve its central mystery. It’s about creation and inspiration as much as it’s about depression and destruction. It’s a journey about the journey and I love it as much as it’s possible to love a film.

One last thing before we go: Naomi Watts is flat-out fucking astonishing in this film. Her performance is easily one fo the best I’ve seen in the last two decades.

Next week, Inland Empire. Until then, love each other.

David Lynch Friday #6 – Lost Highway

“In the East, the Far East, when a person is sentenced to death, they’re sent to a place they can’t escape…”

This quote, which comes late in the film, is the key to unlocking this story’s secrets. Now, I’ve seen this film a handful of times, the first time was in theaters and that didn’t go over well with my friends. This week was the second time this year that I watched this film and the first where I thoroughly enjoyed myself. This is an aspect of Lynch’s work that has been well documented by people, including myself. Lynch makes you work — he makes you earn everything. Lost Highway was a film I struggled to fully appreciate for years and it wasn’t until earlier this year where it all finally clicked for me. So this past week, when I watched it again for the purpose of this piece, it became a rocket ship of awesome insanity.

I won’t bother you with much of the plot because this isn’t even close to a plot driven film. There is the real and the quasi real and then half the film exists in no form of reality whatsoever. To be reductive, it’s a film about an angry and bitter man who murders his wife and is sentenced to death as a result. In prison, this man conjures up an alternate reality in an attempt to reconcile his own emotions with the world and his place in life. The story eventually folds back in around itself and one version of our protagonist speeds away down a lost highway, chased by the police.

To begin, Lynch’s camera during the opening credits, is a maniac. It’s a simple shot of a pitch black highway, lit only by a speeding car’s headlights. It is manic, illicit and frenzied. The credits fly at us like bolts of lightning. This is more than it seems, these little tidbits will come back around full circle by the end of the film. The story then begins proper as we’re taken to the protagonist’s home. Fred, played with restrained detachment by Bill Pullman, is a musician woken from slumber by a buzzing on his intercom.

“Dick Laurent is dead,” is all the voice says. Fred looks outside but there is nobody around. His wife Renee, played with an otherworldly sexual peace by Patricia Arquette, comes down and opens the front door to find an unmarked package on their front steps. Inside is a videotape and on that videotape is camcorder footage of the inside of their home. Unsettling. Everything Lynch does in the early going is unsettling. His camera has now slowed down to resemble security footage — as if we are the ones spying on Fred and Renee. The sound design, again (I know, broken record), is top notch and used to build an immense amount of dread. We are so confused by what is happening or the lack of anything meaningful happening. But beneath the surface resides a storm of emotion. Lynch spends most of the film exploring shadow and light. This rewatch is really hitting home that Twin Peaks: The Return was Lynch’s way of connecting and commenting on his entire career. The colors red and black are significant in this film. They represent desire and danger, violence and death. The colors can be amorphous but they are representing an extremely violent yin and yang of Fred’s world.

The more time we spend with Fred, the more we see him unhappy in life. It’s clear he doesn’t trust his wife and thinks she’s cheating on him. He’s stuck but he’s also too much of an ineffectual nothing to actually take command of anything. He is constantly retreating into shadows — into his own darkness. The film continues to explore “dark places” and when we join Fred and Renee at a party, Fred is cracking. It’s here where he first meets the white faced man, played with demonic gusto by Robert Blake. Quick side note here, Robert Blake is supernaturally good in this role. I know, I know, perhaps this hit kind of close to home for him but it is worth mentioning how incredible his performance is. The white faced man is elusive and speaks in riddles but he also serves to egg Fred on, but to what? The answer comes quick as Fred is shown a tape of himself right after he has brutally murdered his wife. Fred is arrested, convicted, and sentenced to die by electric chair. He is trapped in prison and we feel his claustrophobia. It’s also here in the film where we realize how tight everything through this point has been shot with Fred. Lynch has put us in Fred’s skin, making us crawl and fidget with how uncomfortable and closed in we feel.

It is in prison where this film goes completely crazy. Fred wakes up one morning and he is no longer Fred. He’s a young guy named Pete, played by Balthazar Getty. Nobody can figure out where Fred went and where Pete came from. Pete is returned to his parents’ house and soon continues his normal life as a mechanic. Right off the bat, the film settles down. Lynch uses a wider color palette and shoots the film in a more traditional way. Pete is normal. Pete is well liked by everyone. Women throw themselves at Pete. Pete has it all. The first part of the film feels almost sterile compared to how alive Pete is in his world. Pete gets a visit from an older rich man named Mr. Eddy, played exactly how you’d expect from Robert Loggia. Mr. Eddy loves how smart Pete is when it comes to cars. Mr. Eddy also has a woman with him played by Patricia Arquette. Her name is Alice and she’s blonde instead of a red head now. Alice only has eyes for Pete and he for her. They begin an illicit affair. This is all vitally important because it shows how wanted Pete is by Alice compared to Renee’s indifference toward Fred.

Pete begins to unravel a bit as the affair continues and Mr. Eddy begins to catch on. The air kicks up a dangerous wind directed at everyone involved. Pete begins having visions and dreams of a seedy motel with a layout like a maze. Pete eventually agrees to help Alice rob her friend Andy so they can run off together. They accidentally kill Andy and when they run, the stop at a mysterious cabin where they disrobe and have sex one final time. Pete tells Alice he wants her and she whispers in his ear, “you can never have me.” She then walks into the cabin and disappears. When Pete stands back up, he’s transformed back to Fred. This is where he again meets the white faced man and the quote from the top of the piece is uttered. Key given. Secrets unlocked. Lynch was doing inception over a decade before Nolan. Pete doesn’t actually exist — he’s a fantasy that Fred conjured up to make himself feel better. Pete is how Fred wishes he was perceived by the world. It’s the life he thinks he deserves. The film uses dreams and fantasies as a way for our protagonist to act out his deepest and darkest desires. Fred is transported to that seedy motel and arrives just after his wife Renee has slept with Mr. Eddy, who in the real world is named Dick Laurent. Fred bursts in and beats the shit out of Dick, eventually throwing him in the trunk of his car. They arrive back at that cabin where Dick tackles Fred to the ground. An unseen man hands Fred a knife and he promptly slits Dick’s throat. The unseen man is revealed to be the white faced man who then shoots Dick dead.

Several things here, obviously the white faced man doesn’t actually exist. He is either the devil or the devil inside of Fred. He is Fred’s rage manifested into human form. This is how it all happened. Fred killed his wife’s lover and then killed her in a rage. Everything else is fantasy. Lost Highway is perhaps Lynch’s most nihilistic film. He usually has an undercurrent of love or hope but this one is all rage. It’s about power and fear — specifically the fear of women and how men try to exert power over them. Lynch has a penchant for turning the ordinary extraordinary and never more so than in Lost Highway. I was reminded of two specific Lynch works when watching Lost Highway: Blue Velvet and Wild at Heart. Lost Highway is similar in theme to Blue Velvet if the world contained no love. As for Wild at Heart, Fred reminds me of Sailor in an inverted sense and if he was never able to escape his own demons. Lynch likes to circle around themes, often exploring the same ones in multiple works.

And now we come to the finale with the newly Pete-free Fred arriving at his home to ring the buzzer. Once it’s answered, he says, “Dick Laurent is dead.” Fred turns to see the police arrive and takes off in his car. The police give chase and this closes the loop of the “plot” of Lost Highway. How could Fred be two people or even three people at the same time? He can’t and it doesn’t matter because none of this is actually happening anyway. Remember the quote I used at the top? This is what it all means. This is the world Fred is trapped in. He cannot escape…or can he?

We end with Fred fleeing the police and racing down a desolate highway. The camera shifts back to what we saw during the opening credits. The frenzy has come full circle. Fred screams and shakes his head violently, we see flashes of light. The film ends. Yeah, but like what’s the deal? Simple, Fred was put to death by electric chair at that moment of his journey through his psychological prison. The only thing that could free him was the carrying out of his death sentence. Done and done. Man oh man has this film jumped up my list of Lynch faves.

Next week, The Straight Story. Until then love each other.

David Lynch Friday #4 – Blue Velvet

“I don’t know if you’re a detective or a pervert.”

The above line sums up a central theme of the film with succinct accuracy. I have vague memories of my parents renting this film when I was a child. I was not allowed to watch it at around seven or eight years old. What I do remember is sneaking into the hallway to try and see what it was I wasn’t allowed to see. I remember Kyle Maclachlan because I was obsessed with Dune at the time and I remember Dennis Hopper because he was always screaming and had that oxygen mask. As soon as I was old enough, I rented the film for myself and I rarely go long without a re-watch. I love this film. I consider it one of the very best films of the 1980s and one of my favorite films of David Lynch’s entire career.

What’s the deal?

It’s a mystery and a hyper-sexualized coming of age story all rolled into a two hour feature film. It stars Kyle Maclachlan as Jeffrey, a college student returned home after his father falls ill, who happens across a severed ear in a field and takes it upon himself to investigate. Laura Dern co-stars as Sandy, a high school senior who is the daughter of a local detective on this case. She aids Jeffrey in his own investigation and the two form a budding romantic relationship. Dennis Hopper plays a psychotic criminal who is the perpetrator of the severed ear and Isabella Rossellini stars as a lounge singer in debt to Hopper and thus subjected to his violent whims. Maybe this is Lynch’s version of a Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew mystery — more vibrant in its first half while devolving into a shadowy masterwork in its second half. There’s no need to get into plot specifics here. It’s an interesting and well-told mystery but that is all window dressing to what Lynch is truly after.

In fact, Lynch dishes his thesis in the first few moments. We see scenes of idyllic small town life, full of vibrant color and playful music — white picket fence, flowers, birds, bustling life. Then it quickly gets muddy — both in a figurative and literal sense. As Jeffrey’s father is watering the lawn, the hose kinks and as he struggles, tragedy strikes. He falls unconscious on the ground as the hose goes wild. We see the image of a gun. The dog attacks the hose like a maniac. The camera then moves below the surface of the picturesque lawn — down in the muck we see ants eating and attacking. Nature can be visceral and violent and it all hides just beneath the calm surface. It is always there.

I love how Lynch’s worlds seem off and weird but the truth is that if we were to just stop and observe our own world around us, we would see that he’s never far off from reality. Another important aspect to Lynch’s work, especially here, is his impeccable ear. He is obsessed with sound and his films reflect this — they always sound natural. He continues down this path in the early half of the film as we begin to meet the players and the mystery deepens. Maclachlan and Dern have instant and perfect chemistry — they will become Lynch’s two most indelible co-conspirators as their respective careers blossom. Lynch also infuses the first half of the film with an intense color palette — almost begging us to believe that nothing bad can actually happen.

Then we go to the slow club.

The red curtains. A singer’s introduction. The blue light hits and everything changes. Looking back now, yeah, major Twin Peaks inspiration right here. We are woefully unprepared for the second half of this film. Lynch’s camera at first was observational but now we see it differently — it is voyeuristic. The quote at the top comes back to mind because it’s not just Sandy asking Jeffrey a question disguised as an observation, it is actually directed at us. What are we about? Where are we hoping this film will go? Are we comfortable with our desires? When Jeffrey gets caught in the apartment, a stunning reversal happens. His intrusion is immediately reciprocated. The violation is returned and both involved actually get off on it. It is bold and unflinching and the film is better for it.

We think we still have a handle on the film until Dennis Hopper shows up a few seconds later. He is electrifying and terrifying in equal measure — an all-timer on the film villain list. At the same time he is a stand-in for the dog in the film’s opening. He’s crazy and commands our intention but the real shit is happening beneath the surface. He is our usher into depravity. It’s here where we begin to realize a few things. First, Jeffrey is a boy becoming a man and this is his first glimpse into adulthood. He likes Sandy because she represents the purity of childhood that he still partly craves. But he also likes Dorothy because she represents the dangerous lust he’s beginning to crave as an adult. In return, Sandy likes Jeffrey because she has not yet crossed over into adulthood and Jeffrey represents her own usher. Dorothy, for her part, likes Jeffrey because he is the only thing in her life she has a bit of control over. The real premise begins to present itself: this is an anti-hero’s journey. Jeffrey selfishly wants it all but is unprepared at this stage in his life.

Once we make this connection, everything becomes clear. Lynch is telling a story about the passage from childhood to adulthood. The film is littered with scenes depicting the clash between these two stages of life. For example, Jeffrey’s journey begins with the hospital visit to see his father. This is the moment where his innocence is lost. Even before finding the ear, this is it. Children view their parents as seemingly invincible and their entire world changes when they get smacked with reality.

Lynch drags us further down the depravity well as we spend more time in the company of Hopper’s Frank Booth and cohorts. The Candy Colored Clowns scene is oddly chilling only to be outdone by itself a few moments later in a wicked reprise of the same song. Frank is pure depravity — the dark heart of man. Like I said, he is our usher. There is an animalistic nature to mankind and it hides beneath the surface of civilized society but it is always there, waiting.

But this being Lynch, there is still hope. Jeffrey prevails over the evil Frank Booth. There are two sides to man and those sides must be balanced with precision. Jeffrey taps into his vicious side but never succumbs to it. There can be no light without dark and vice versa. The robins return to the trees and bring love back with them. Love is greater than viciousness. Through all the darkness and flame, we come out the other side more understanding of the world. If violence is a part of nature, so is love and love can conquer all.

Next week, Wild At Heart. Until then, love each other.

David Lynch Friday #1 – Eraserhead

Eraserhead. Been awhile. Like much of Lynch’s work, Erasherhead benefits from time and exposure. The more time you spend with the film, the more you will get out of it. This was Lynch’s feature film debut, way back in 1977 and in the spirit of total honesty, it’s a miracle anyone saw this film and then decided to give Lynch money to make a second feature. This isn’t a knock on the film, it’s a wonderfully complex work and supremely assured for a debut feature but the film is also a nightmarish puzzle box. It is not easily digestible and at times it’s even a bit offensive to the senses. Lynch is challenging his audience right out of the starting gate, a trait that will never abandon him.

Watching it again now, after Lynch was able to revisit Twin Peaks, it’s clear that there is a lot here that either exists in the same universe of Twin Peaks or at least the universe of the Black Lodge. Erasherhead will be a major talking point when we wrap this project up with the sure-to-be massive post featuring everything Twin Peaks. For reference:

The apartment lobby floor is the same as the Black Lodge.
Electricity is prominently displayed throughout the film.
The electric, old-fashioned humidifier looks a lot like Phillip Jeffries.
The tree growing in Henry’s apartment looks exactly like THE ARM from the Black Lodge.
There is also a small photo of an atomic bomb explosion next to Henry’s bed.

So yeah, we will be revisiting all of this because I feel like I am on the verge of some new, mind blowing Twin Peaks revelations. But we will get back to that at a later date.

One of the themes of Erasherhead is that of parenthood and specifically fatherhood. The opening scene with Henry’s face superimposed over some kind of cosmic egg is an easy to grasp metaphor for the paranoia of parenthood. Lynch loves the technique of superimposing and still uses it to this day as a filmmaker. Jack Nance also has a face made for closeups — I swear it’s as malleable as clay. It says, “what have I done?” This could also be Lynch working through his feelings on birthing an idea and creating life in art.

An undervalued aspect of Lynch’s work is how funny it often is. Erasherhead is full of body horror and psychological torment but it’s also hilariously uncomfortable. Lynch uses black and white photography to cloak the film in shadow, like there is a looming, negative force overseeing everything. This also serves to exude a silent film vibe. It’s like if Charlie Chaplin were cast in Nosferatu. I love this. The dinner scene where Henry visits his girlfriend’s family is uproariously creepy. Everything is there to be considered normal but it’s all heightened enough to be off. The catatonic grandmothers cigarette. The tiny chickens and enormous carving knife. Then comes the blood. Then comes the tiny chicken seizures. Later on, Henry literally loses his head and some kid runs over and steals the severed head. Again, wild and hilarious. The kid then sells the head to the pencil factory where they turn it into a literal eraser head. I am not making this up.

So, what could this all mean?

There is more than just a singular theme — this is true for all of Lynch’s work. Sure it’s about fatherhood but it goes deeper. It touches on how children are our soul transferred into a new being all while being born of our own faults and demons. It’s also about how alien-like babies are and Lynch establishes this in the most heightened way possible. Lynch is also commenting on nature versus industry. We are inundated with images of machinery and general industry encroaching on and diminishing nature. Lynch then gives us plenty of background scenery depicting nature attempting to reclaim its place by invading the characters’ homes.

This brings me to one final conclusion: Erasherhead is very spiritual. Lynch drives us through an intense white light and I think he’s depicting how birth and death are the same. He then pushes us through a soupy mess and into a puddle that turns into a black hole. This is him differentiating between duty and desire — daily life and intense lust. I’ve also contemplated the possibility that the barnacled man is Henry’s grown-up son who has trapped his father in some kind of nightmare purgatory of his own creation. It’s like an eternity being forced to live through all of your own failings.

In the end I think that part of the film is Henry’s subconscious shown to us as real life. Henry is full of self doubt and this is best represented by the baby. The infant is a slimy, hideous creature who resembles ET in the worst possible way. Here’s the thing: the baby doesn’t actually look like how we see it. The baby is a manifestation of Henry’s self doubt. Parents worry, especially with newborns, that there is something wrong with their child. Their baby is different in a bad way. It’s a trick the mind plays on its subject. This is where Erasherhead leaves us, with Henry attempting to free his child by murdering it — killing his self doubt. Lynch hits out at life as an all encompassing process.

Birth. Life. Failure. Sex. Duty. Murder. Death.

Next week, The Elephant Man. Until then, love each other.

I’ll Be Gone In The Dark and White America’s Obsession With True Crime

Reading Michelle McNamara’s book and then watching the subsequent HBO series has set my mind ablaze. First of all, both my wife and I are big fans of true crime. Second of all, there’s actually no second of all, we devour true crime in various formats (documentaries, tv news programs, books, podcasts, etc.). This has led me down a path of what I think is self discovery. My biggest takeaway whenever I consume true crime is a question: Why?

To put it another way: what is it about true crime that fascinates me to such a degree?

I cannot speak for everyone, not in great depth but I can say this: as a white man in America, I think it has something to do with guilt. It’s no secret that Americans are obsessed with true crime. Adding to that, specifically white America is obsessed with it. Adding a bit more, women in general (and again specifically white women) are drawn to tales of sordid reality. I think there are a few reasons. Speaking generally, white America is drawn to these stories because we are the most likely candidates for living lives of privilege. We understand, even if we don’t acknowledge it, that our privilege comes with a price. That price is the blood and forced struggle of minority Americans and the downtrodden. I for one am beginning to reckon with the awful history this country and our ancestors have created to make my life as easy as it is. I empathize and sympathize with those who are fighting back against the system, only asking for equality. It strikes me as terrifying, more than ever, that asking for equality and justice has caused such a rift in this country. But with the rift comes self-reflection. I suggest more people try this. It’s hard, I know — much easier to ignore the problem and carry on but carrying on has helped contribute to the misery of others. What white America has chosen to do is take those feelings of guilt and enabling and then exorcise them with true crime media. We say to ourselves: hey, at least this got squared away. Even when the crime in question is still unsolved, we look at the victims with pity, from our perch on high and say: these poor people, I wish I could help. Sometimes, people actually do help and sometimes the jolt of adrenaline we get from these true crime stories fades to nothing and we carry on. It is a way for us to organize this world into categories: Our lives and the horrible shit that happens to people who are not us.

As far as white women are concerned, I cannot directly speak for them but I do think I have a small amount of incite into the why of it all. I think white women are ALMOST as privileged as white men except white men will never willingly share their perch with anyone, not taken as a whole. The above statements ring mostly true for them but women also identify with the victims, which is an important distinction to make. Women in general live their lives automatically as a minority citizen, despite being in the majority. This just illustrates how dominating and demeaning the ruling class of men has always been and continues to be. Things are changing for the better but we should be much further down the path of progress than we currently stand. White women get more out of true crime than their male counterparts because they don’t consume these stories through a filter of pure pity and observation. Many women, far too many, have suffered at the hands of men and there is a camaraderie with the victims that permeates all.

This finally brings me to this week’s discussion on the brilliant mind of Michelle McNamara and her hunt for the Golden State Killer. For the record, this post is specifically about the HBO doc series that aired earlier this year.

The doc does a tremendous job conveying McNamara’s excellence as a writer. Her words come through like a loud speaker blaring morning announcements in school — you cannot escape their power. The doc somehow gives equal time to McNamara amidst her dogged pursuit of the truth, the survivors and victims of GSK/EAR’s attacks, and GSK/EAR himself. By the end of the series, and the tragic death of McNamara before the boogeyman was ever caught, we’re given even more to chew on. The doc is unafraid to dive in to McNamara’s obsessive nature in chasing the truth which led to a failed hubris with prescription drugs that ended in tragedy. This obviously ties in with our current opioid epidemic, so we’re getting four docs in one.

As each episode unfolds, we fall further down the rabbit hole on the trail of a serial killer and rapist. We become part of the hunt. We’re shown brilliant tidbits and ideas like McNamara’s thought to use genealogy sites like 23 and me in order to track and trace the dna in a different way. This was ultimately the successful method in catching GSK/EAR.

It’s in the bits sprinkled throughout the doc, chronicling the survivors, that separates this doc from most others in its genre. There is immense humanity here. In fact, as the doc wraps up, post McNamara’s death, the survivors come to the forefront. This gives us the a peak into their lives and shines a light on how a single, horrific incident can shatter a person’s life to unrepairable bits. But these survivors have more in common than simply being victims. They all, individually, possess an extraordinary amount of inner fortitude. They’ve suffered and some of them have struggled to form lasting romantic relationships in the wake of their attacks yet they are still here and still walking forward. It’s undeniably hopeful.

The last thing this doc shines a light on is GSK/EAR himself. This is a man who hid in the shadows his entire life. The title, I’ll Be Gone In The Dark, is taken from something he told to his victims. McNamara wrote about and threatened GSK/EAR with bringing him into the light.

And that is exactly what the doc does.

It brought this despicable motherfucker in the light for all to see.

We get so much detail on who he was. There are interviews with his family members who are catastrophically distraught by who their kin really was. To some, he was Uncle Joe, and that thought is fucking crazy. I was particularly struck by two stories the nephew told. The first was his recounting of what he was told about his mother’s rape at age seven — SEVEN. His Uncle Joe, his mother’s brother, was a witness. The second story was him recounting an event that happened to him. He woke up one night, as a child, to see a man in his bedroom, shrouded by a ski mask, watching him. He now realizes this was his Uncle Joe. Monsters as we learn of them in stories, aren’t real. Monsters help us to organize good and evil into categories. Monsters only exist wearing the skin of men. Shine a light on them and the illusion breaks, leaving in its wake nothing but a pathetic husk emulating a human being.

That’s all I have for this week. Next up is the HBO series, Perry Mason. Until then, love each other.

Dark – A Slice Of German Perfection

Dark is a German science-fiction show brought to the United States by Netflix. It involves time travel and the end of the world. During its three season run, it was easily the best show in the world. I’ll die on this hill, especially if that were to happen on this show where I could somehow be resurrected to continue, either in this world or another. I have wanted to write about it for a long time but I find it difficult to articulate exactly why this show is so special.

I’ll give it my best shot.

Dark began with a suicide. It would take a long time for us to understand the ramifications throughout time and space of that action but we would eventually get there. Shortly following the tragic event, a group of teenagers would go exploring a secret cave in their small town. Strange sounds would scare the teenagers away, sending them fleeing until they realized that the youngest of them was missing. This is where things really jumped off. A search would return no results. The viewer is than shot back in time to the 1980s where the missing boy has turned up 27 years in the past. This boy would grow up to be the man who committed suicide at the onset of the series.

It only gets crazier from here.

We soon learn that there are three distinct time periods where children either go missing or are murdered. People begin popping up in various timelines, changing things in the other timelines on a constant basis. A new mysterious figure emerges and is eventually revealed as one of the main characters back from the far future. The timelines begin to expand. The plot becomes more intricate and alliances are formed. It appears we’re getting something superfluous and really only about good versus evil — we are not. This entire time, we are shown that the local power plant will explode and cause the apocalypse. Two distinct sides form, trying to either prevent the apocalypse or create it. Throughout the many different characters we meet and plot lines we follow, there is one main thread — love.

Our two main characters we follow throughout the three seasons are the two teenage star-crossed lovers: Martha and Jonas. Their story is initially sweet and full of young, blossoming love. Ultimately, it’s a story full of tragedy, consequences and sacrifice. In fact, the entire story is one of sacrifice.

The way the writers layer the plot with character is extraordinary. There is so much intricate plotting done here but the overall story is always character first. This is a rare feat and one that should be applauded. I have never seen a show quite like Dark. It gave me flashbacks to LOST, another plot heavy show that ultimately ended up being a multiple character study on our highs and lows as human beings.

With that out of the way, season three was launched worldwide on the exact date of the show’s apocalypse — nifty. Where season one was largely contained, season two expanded the timelines and who travelled between them. Season three introduces new worlds. If you don’t recap or rewatch beforehand, it will be easy to get lost. Two new worlds emerge: one made of Jonas’ creation and one of Martha’s. The two, through their time travels, form opposing factions and in Martha’s world, Jonas does not exist. They find it hard to trust anyone as they are constantly being manipulated by versions of people they once knew and trusted. No matter what they have ever tried, the apocalypse still happens. There is a knot that binds everything together and one faction is desperate to undo the knot, believing the end of all things will be their salvation. The other side seeks to preserve the knot and let the world be as it will. These are wonderful ideological debates to have during a final season as everything around them is ramping up.

I’m now realizing that writing any further about this amazing show and even more amazing final season will require complete spoilers and I don’t want to do that. What I will say is that a third world is discovered and the origin it represents is heartbreakingly beautiful. We fully understand the motivation behind its creation and I totally empathize with its creator.

Where the show ends begins with amazing cosmic imagery and descends into harrowing simplicity. There is no true happy ending to this story but the ending we receive is justified. Strike that, it’s not only justified, it’s perfect. How a show so crazy can stick a perfect landing is beyond my comprehension but the entire crew behind Dark did the impossible.

Love can create and it can destroy. Simple. Beautiful. Perfect.

Next week, a show I struggled with a bit but enjoyed overall, Hollywood. Until then, love each other.

Color Out Of Space – Two Cages For The Price Of One

Sometimes everything clicks in a film — the stars align in the exact right way and you’re left with a cosmic masterpiece. Richard Stanley’s adaptation of the H.P. Lovecraft story, The Color Out Of Space is exactly this phenomenon. It is a film firing on every single cylinder, providing the viewer with an out-of-body experience like no other. Stanley has always been an interesting writer and filmmaker but I have no qualms with declaring this effort as his greatest to date — it knocked my socks off.

It starts innocent enough, like many other smaller budget horror films before it, spending its early runtime easing us into the lives of a family fleeing life in the “big city.” Seriously, Cage describes their previous residence as just that, and it’s a howler of a line. In fact, after fifteen minutes, I wasn’t sure I was even going to like this film much. The family dynamic was hokey and Cage himself was fine — nothing special. What kept me going was how beautifully shot this film was. It is gorgeous. Soon, a meteor of sorts crashes right near the farmhouse the family now lives in and from here, the film gets weird — like, really weird. The meteor is of some unexplained cosmic design and begins to produce colorful flowers all around. These aren’t normal run-of-the-mill flowers or colors — everything is heightened. Soon, strange insects begin to appear and soon after that, people begin to get infected by this new strangeness. The film takes off like a rocket from this point.

We’re treated to a few extraordinary scenes with Tommy Chong as a local whose had strange visions of what is to come. He’s the harbinger and he’s magnificent in his small role. The slow burn of the film is over and the fire is raging. Nicolas Cage quickly goes from fine to odd in the way only Cage can. It’s here where we begin to see Cage’s character fighting his own infection. It’s taking hold of him and in the process, Cage has created two distinct characters. Not many actors can go over the top like Cage can and it’s become a bit of a recent joke in his career. Here, he is in top form. Two Cages for the price of one is only the beginning.

From a technical standpoint, Richard Stanley takes off as an artist as well. The sound design is impeccable. He focuses on all of the little things, helping us to sense the horrors that await us. The shot composition and cinematography pull every last ounce of feeling from each scene. The score, for its part, is equally wonderful. You add this up and include a central Nicolas Cage performance that truly requires a buy-in and you have something unique on your hands.

For the record, this film won’t be for everyone but it was definitely for me.

Back to Cage because this film requires him to go as big as possible and at about the seventy minute mark, Cage goes completely supernova. I’ve seen Cage do this before, sometimes much more effectively than others (most recently in the awesome, Mandy) but he has never been more effective with it. It is an astonishing performance from him. And shortly after this Cage all but winks at the audience and proceeds to go super-supernova because why the hell not? I stood up and clapped. The audacity of the performance is one for the ages. The craziest aspect of Cage this time out is how necessary his Cage-y-ness for this story. Stanley requires it from his leading man and Cage delivers in spades. What they created together is a horror film for the ages, one of the best, if not the best Lovecraft adaptation, and a film destined for my year end best list.

I loved it. Loved it, loved it, loved it.

Next week it’s time I tackled my thoughts on my favorite show on Netflix, Dark. Until then, love each other.

Gilliam Friday #12 – The Wrap-Up

We find ourselves at the end of the Terry Gilliam project — twelve straight weeks of the madman’s work. We began with his Monty Python efforts and ended with his finally finished dream project, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote. What a ride. I was reminded of films I loved, found new love for films I originally struggled with, and some old loves now fell flat. Throughout this project, I was reminded that from a visual standpoint, Gilliam stands alone. His films are each unique in their own way and even more when compared to where cinema was in general when each of those films released.

But seriously, what did I learn from all of this?

Let us begin with Gilliam as a visual artist. Every single film he has ever crafted has been visually stunning. He is a true auteur, unafraid of any subject matter and uncompromising in his vision. He forces the viewer to buy in. Whatever you gain from viewing his work will always come on his terms. This is something that will shut down some viewers and keep them away. The flip side to this ideal is that those who buy in willingly, typically come away astonished. I also learned that Gilliam hates bureaucracy — hates it. Most of his films have a subtext dealing with the annoyance of red tape and failed governance. He is also an artist obsessed with paranoia and juxtaposition. You will find this on a constant basis in his films with the palettes he uses and his deep focus camera shots. Everything in his films is heightened in order to hold the viewer’s supreme focus while still keeping them off balance.

One other thing we must get to right away is that I now wonder if Gilliam has a problem with women. It cannot be overstated that his comments earlier this year about how tired he is that white men get blamed for everything, is extremely troubling. He has also thrown support behind Harvey Weinstein which is blatantly wrong-headed. I don’t sanction or agree with any of this — hard pass for me. With that said, I wonder where this stems from? And that’s the craziest aspect of all of this: Gilliam the person is still largely a mystery. We can infer all of these things we’ve already discussed but he has still managed to keep us all at bay — protecting his innermost desires to the end. I both like and dislike how he views the world. He paints in his films with a childlike wonder. Gilliam shows us worlds that are like electric carnivals used as a mask for societal rot and despair. He also shows heart here, especially with how he depicts the homeless in many of his films — the unfortunates are ignored and trampled by the powerful. This is in stark contrast to his depiction of women in most of his films. The truth is, as I’ve gone film to film, the women are mostly seen as annoying, trouble, or both. Many times they are devices to serve the plot. His visual talent is so extraordinary that I think these themes become overshadowed but they are there if you look hard enough. Two films stand out to me where this was not the case: The Fisher King and Twelve Monkeys. They also happen to be two films that Gilliam did not write. This definitely begs for further discussion.

The final thing we’ll discuss today is how Gilliam’s career is split into three sections (and hopefully an upcoming fourth). His early work is where he found his feet. Working as a member of the Python troupe allowed him creative freedom. It’s the least populated portion of his career. He followed this up with a thirteen year prime where he dealt masterful film after masterful film. This is an insane run from a filmmaker uninterested in making typical studio fare. Brazil, The Adventures Of Baron Munchausen, The Fisher King, Twelve Monkeys, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Any filmmaker would kill to make one of these films. Gilliam made them all…in a row.

Of course, with the highs come the lows. Gilliam’s disastrous attempt to make his dream project, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, derailed his career. He then entered a ten year funk where he still hit some high notes but his films felt more disjointed and angry — lacking the intrepid energy from his earlier work. He began to regain his footing with The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus and again, tragedy struck that film multiple times.

Terry Gilliam finally got the proverbial monkey off his back when his dream was finally realized. The Man Who Killed Don Quixote showed me that the madman still has the goods to be a true auteur. We will see if he has the stuff to give us some more to chew on.

I’ll leave you with this, a ranking of his solo films. This means that I’m not counting the python work. Worst to first, here we go:

The Brothers Grimm

The Zero Theorem

Jabberwocky

Time Bandits

Tideland

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

The Man Who Killed Don Quixote

The Adventures of Baron Munchausen

Brazil

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Twelve Monkeys

The Fisher King

And that is a wrap. I had fun revisiting these films and filmmaker I have adored nearly my entire life. I found it enlightening and not always in a good way. I now look at Gilliam a little differently because of his depiction of women on film — something I was either not able to see while younger or just willfully ignorant of until now. I guess I learned some things about myself as well — things I still need to work on. I’m willing to do the work.

Next up on the docket is another of my faves, Sofia Coppola. I’ll outline the project next week and then dive into The Virgin Suicides on Friday, September 18th. Until then, love each other.

Gilliam Friday #10 – The Zero Theorem

This film doesn’t work. On paper, it sounds great but in reality, it never lifts off the page. The film is set in another dystopian future, though this time it is one speckled with vibrant color. It’s definitely pleasing to the eye. I particularly liked the opening few minutes where Waltz’s character leaves his dark and dreary home and steps outside into a bright and vibrant, yet dilapidated world. Gilliam’s playfulness with lighting sells this. Now, the story follows a worker, obsessed with his own impending death, being tasked by management to prove a theory that everything in life ultimately adds up to nothing. This is known as the Zero Theorem, hence the title. If this sounds intriguing, that’s because it is intriguing but the subsequent film is a joyless affair. Everyone is either openly depressed or masking their depression. It was all too bleak for my taste.

The cast is a good one but most aren’t left with much to do. Christoph Waltz is good but his character is so dour, it’s hard to root for him because even he doesn’t know what he really wants out of life. David Thewlis, as his supervisor, injects at least some life into this film every time he is on screen. Ben Whishaw and Peter Stormare are two actors I love to see but they’re are in the film for only a few short minutes. The same can be said for Tilda Swindon. Matt Damon plays management in the film and again, I love him in nearly everything else he’s ever done but he just doesn’t mesh with Gilliam as a creative partner. His scenes are stale. This puts a lot of pressure on Waltz to carry everything off himself but the script doesn’t allow that to happen. The only people who truly come alive on screen are Lucas Hedges who plays the son of management and Melanie Thierry, who plays a sex worker named Bainsley, and Waltz’s character’s(Qohan) muse. She is electric and the only one who looks to be having any fun. I looked up her imdb page and was shocked to see that she hasn’t really broken out in Hollywood. If nothing else, this film should have launched a big career for her.

One thing I must note is that this is yet another story where the main female character is objectified and sexualized by all of the male characters. This has become a running theme throughout Gilliam’s career and something I will be certain to dive into when I write my wrap-up in two weeks.

There are cool and interesting moments in the film for sure. Qohan has a computer monitor in his home that allows him to view an expanding black hole. There’s a moment where he projects himself and Bainsley into space, nearing this black hole that is nothing if not revelatory. They discuss the idea of the soul and how life must mean something. Qohan is dealing with unknown trauma and it’s making him increasingly nihilistic. Him choosing the black hole as his favorite place to visit leads Bainsley to ask this question: Is THAT what’s inside of you? How do you live with all that…emptiness? It’s a profound question and one that Qohan doesn’t have a good answer for because he’s unwilling to accept what may or may not reside inside of him.

At first, I thought this film was an allegory about mankind becoming a slave to technology and while that is part of it, the film is actually diving much deeper. The film is really about the soul of mankind and the world that lives within us. We can become shut-ins who are desperate to remain in the dark with our secrets. It’s familiar territory for Gilliam and he’s explored it better in the past — most recently in his previous film, Doctor Parnassus.

There are neat tricks Gilliam pulls off in an attempt to excite and seduce us. As Qohan begins to unravel, the camera becomes more active — leading us off balance and jolting us awake. It’s a shame that we desperately need this push because everything else has landed so flat. Qohan proves the theory to management’s satisfaction but not his own — he is not convinced that he sufficiently proved that everything adds up to nothing. This is partly because he is in love with Bainsley and partly because he’s never let go of his old trauma. By the end, Qohan has attempted to purge himself of his pain but instead gives in. He ends in a digital afterlife where he can hopefully be content and happy with Bainsley. There is evidence during the credits that Qohan may not have been successful but it’s all vague.

The Zero Theorem is a quiet, ponderous film about the entirety of life. It has ideas but they never lift off and instead feel like a film version of reading a textbook. And this may be the point of the film, like the title suggests — but there’s no joy anywhere near it.

Again, I cannot overstate how devastating the failed project of Don Quixote was to Gilliam as an artist. Ever since his legendary struggles began with that cursed project, he flailed about. He managed to recapture some of his early magic here and there but more often than not, Quixote was an albatross, hanging from his neck and dragging him into the muck. Nearly every film in the wake of that disaster felt like his own commentary on what went wrong. The effort here is admirable but not necessarily enjoyable.

I cannot wait for next week when we’ll finally talk about the Don Quixote project. Until then, love each other.

Motherless Brooklyn – Old School Noir With A New School Skin

I’ll start by saying this: I’ve never read Lethem’s novel this film is based on. I have nothing against Lethem or his undeniable talent as a writer, he’s just not a writer I seek out. Who I do tend to seek out is Edward Norton. You take Norton and put him in a noir-ish story and I’m there twice. So I was actually looking forward to this film quite a bit.

And you know what? I liked it.

First off, the film is surprisingly funny, especially early on. The banter between Lionel and his cohorts is great and honest in the way long time friends speak with each other. The film is well cast from top to bottom. Guru Mbatha-Raw is the star of the movie, the camera cannot get enough of her and she still maintains a nuanced performance amongst a sea of scene chewing sharks. Baldwin is a terrific villain and Willem Dafoe is unable to give a dull performance — his scenes crackle. The same can be said of Cherry Jones, who the more I think about, is just like Dafoe in her ability to always be interesting. The overall score of the film is great, lending a slightly modern take on the classic, lonely jazz of an old school noir film. Thom Yorke’s contribution to the music is also great. As for the production design, great care went into this to transform the New York City area into the Brooklyn of old. The photography here is also marvelous — a very handsome production.

Now, let’s dig in and begin with the actors in a little more detail. I’ll begin with Norton, who took some stick for his portrayal of a man battling Tourette’s syndrome. I don’t want to start an argument with any experts or those suffering from Tourette’s but I worked with a man suffering from this affliction and after four years working with this man, I know what Tourette’s looks and sounds like and Norton nailed it. I understand when someone might see this film and think Norton is playing it for laughs but Tourette’s is extremely awkward for those afflicted and they often lean into it in an attempt to deflect from the affliction itself. I watched the manI worked with use his tics and attempt to turn them into little jokes. As for how his character relates the the film’s plot, he’s a great underdog early on. He is classily dogged in his pursuit of the truth but he’s physically at a constant disadvantage. Alec Baldwin hovers over the early proceedings like a malevolent specter, before exploding to the forefront in the second half. Films like this often require a huge villain and Baldwin uses his natural charisma to create a compelling one. Cherry Jones crushes her scenes as a player in this game railing against what the elite are trying to accomplish. Equaling Jones’ big performance is Willem Dafoe who is all nervous energy. This creates multiple dynamic character interactions and helps the film continue to slide right along. Then comes Gugu Mbatha-Raw who is pure bright light in this darkening sea of criminal activity. She practically walks on water. Michael K. Williams is also great in his small role — he’s always the coolest guy in the room.

Onto the story and it’s a timely one. It’s about the secret (and not so secret) power play for land in the city. We get a cautionary tale about politics and the lengths powerful men will go in order to secure more power. This is not subtle. It’s framed within a story about housing and gentrification of minority neighborhoods — something which is still going on to this day. The film is on the longer side at around two and a half hours but the length is earned. This never felt like a slog to me. It’s chock full of ideas yet never comes across as overstuffed.

Like I said at the top, I liked this film. It’s a well made plate of comfort food for me — dogged hero, huge villain, electrifying side characters, story with enough humor to provide some levity.

That’s all I have. Next week we’ll do The King Of Staten Island. Until then, love each other.