Mulholland Dr. (2001)

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

Mulholland Dr. (2001) – D. Lynch

Is this David Lynch’s best movie or simply his most enjoyable?  A mystery that at first seems unfathomable but with repeated viewings may be unlocked?  Naomi Watts plays Betty, a young woman who moves from Canada to Hollywood in search of stardom, but who immediately stumbles upon a mysterious woman (Laura Elena Harring) who has been in a car accident and lost her memory and is now hiding in Betty’s aunt’s bungalow (where Betty is staying while her aunt is out of town).  Together, they seek to find out the woman’s identity (she is called Rita because of the Gilda movie poster in the bungalow) but end up falling in love (?).  Running alongside this plot is another one:  a young director (Justin Theroux) is forced (by the mob) to choose a particular actress for the lead role in his highly anticipated film.  (These separate plots might just come together on the other side of the looking glass). Lynch is a master of suspense and manages to captivate the audience with camera movements and music alone – but, of course, his main ploy is weirdness (as one of the characters says “It has been a very strange day and getting stranger”).  The WTF moments pile on, one after the other, but somehow they seem to cohere in this movie unlike some of his others – we are invited to draw conclusions from the weird moments that can help us to better understand Betty’s experiences (and later those of Diane, also played by Naomi Watts).  The sleeve of my DVD came printed with 10 clues from David Lynch that are advertised to help you figure out the movie (such things as “pay attention to the bathrobe, the ashtray, and the coffee cup” or “how many times does the Cowboy appear?”)  Truly, these puzzlers made the film even more enjoyable.  There may be links, too, to other parts of the Lynchian universe – this film was originally meant to be a TV series following on from the success of Twin Peaks (but the pilot was not picked up and Lynch went on to film a conclusion that “wraps” it all up, even after the original sets and costumes were destroyed).  For example, you might think about whether there is a resemblance between the creature behind the Winkies and the possibly evil hoboes from Twin Peaks (Season 3 in particular?).  Even more enjoyable in an “8 ½” sort of way is seeing the film as a condemnation of Hollywood from Lynch’s point of view as a director who has had his share of troubles and interference.  Take that one step further and you can see this as a parable of the people drawn to Hollywood’s dream factory that end up with their lives in tatters (what might a young girl end up doing as the dream fades?).  Regardless of whether all the pieces fit (although I have finally grasped the blue key!) this is a ride well worth taking – Lynch’s masterpiece in my book (and more enjoyable than some of his harder-to-watch films).