Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Re: He Missed The Point
OOo Joe, I liked your post. I also re-watched the Ebert review and found some flaws in it. He says that its not about how the actress reacts, but about how he reacts, and he doesn't like to see a woman treated like that without a point. To me, part of the point of Blue Velvet was that maybe good/evil and all that doesn't really have a point. In life, sometimes there is suffering in vain. It sucks but its true. I also read a review by Roger Ebert that reads: "And yet those very scenes of stark sexual despair are the tipoff to what's wrong with the movie. They're so strong that they deserve to be in a movie that is sincere, honest and true. But "Blue Velvet" surrounds them with a story that's marred by sophomoric satire and cheap shots." He goes on to complain that Lynch switches between these horrifying sexual scenes and fake small town chit chat. But isn't that life? Most of the time its all sort of just living, going through the motions, and every once in a while something happens that really affects and changes you (and by these events I by no means mean rape and kidnap, just something important). Or thats how my life seems at least. And one of these truly important events does happen, who really knows? Like, do I know what monumental events (if any) happened to all of you in this class this weekend? You all just came to class and acted normal, like Dorothy just goes to sing at The Slow Club, like normal. I think the point may be that when these things do happen, they're just wrapped up in the mundane everyday stuff. The more I watch it, the more I begin to admire Lynch, not exactly for the movie, but for the fact that he was true to himself when making it, like David Foster Wallace said in the longer piece we read in class.