Elizabeth’s post made a reference to Isabella Rossellini’s Interview that came with Blue Velvet, and I realized how much of an impact that interview had on me. The first couple of times I saw Blue Velvet, I could not bring myself to understand why a person would consent to play a role like that of Dorothy’s. In a way I saw Isabella as a woman with no morals or self respect. Initially I had thought that for her to expose herself like that, it had to be some extension of her profession. That in some way this is what she was used to doing, so that was why she agreed to do something like that. That was one of the many reasons I did not like the movie. It seemed like a pack of wild people with no self respect let themselves loose on film. I watched the Interview more than 3 times, and Isabella Rossellini’s part is still one of my favorites. That interview made me see that I had been all wrong, and she had sacrificed her feeling because she felt she was doing something that was bigger than them. She said she was embarrassed at having to be naked in the lawn scene, and to me that made her human. That interview allowed me to get past what was happening, to be able to focus on why what was happening did, and what it meant as part of the movie.
Looking back to the very first time I saw Blue Velvet, I think I felt morally superior to the characters and because of that, unconsciously distanced myself from anything the movie was trying to get across. If I had not seen that interview, I would still hate Blue Velvet. This leads me to a topic we had been taking about in class, about how a work must be able to stand on its own. I am not sure how many people in class finally came to the point of liking Blue Velvet, but what I want to know is if that state was attained by simply watching the movie over and over again? And if it wasn’t does that make Blue Velvet any less deserving of merit than it already is, or are movies in a completely different category?