Blue Velvet

I pretty much agree with everyone else. I didn't really like this movie... at all. Honestly I've never been happier for a movie to be over. I thought it was really tedious. After about an hour I was ready for the movie to be over. I don't think any of the characters are realistic, or have any real value at all. They were completely ridiculous. Also that stupid song got stuck in my head for forever.

Letters to a Young Poet

I was planning on blogging on Blue Velvet, but after watching it, I don’t think I understood enough of it to even scrounge a few sentences. So instead, I’m writing about the passage from “letters to a young poet” Krzys read us last Tuesday:

“You ask me if your verses are good. You ask me. … I beg you to give all that up. You are looking outwards, and of all things that is what you must now not do. Nobody can advise and help you, nobody. There is only one single means. Go inside yourself.”

I was rather struck by that line, and have since been reading (admittedly slowly) Letters to a Young Poet. Rilke often focuses on this idea, that we are inescapably alone in our experiences, and that writing is a necessarily solitary activity. However, as with seemingly every idea we cover in this class, it is not just black and white. If we take this statement at face value, it seems to suggest that we’re wasting our tuition, and that we’d learn much more about English by cooping up in a cave and writing all day without showing anyone. Although certainly I wish I had the courage to write and not care about what other people think, that’s not really the way the world works. If I’m working at a newspaper and I blow off my assignment to write ‘whatever comes out from inside me’ I will probably lose my job. Or if I blow off my next assigned work sample and instead write a blank verse poem about my favorite food (olives), I probably shouldn’t expect an A. The point being, while it is a nice ideal to write for only yourself, we must balance being true to ourselves with writing things that other people are going to want to read. Right? Or is writing something in a way that is intended to please the reader betraying the integrity of the text? Is there a fundamental difference between books that were meant to be mass-marketed (modern thriller or bestseller novels) and books that weren’t written with publishing in mind (posthumously published works, personal Journals)? If no one experiences life the same, then how can we meaningfully discuss a work of literature/can we ever understand a book the way the author meant it?

Anyway, all of this Letters to a Young Poet stuff inspired me, so here’s a little haiku (when it comes to poems, I cling to structure) I wrote. But no feedback please, I am now looking inwards :p

Things in my pocket

wallet phone keys bic
blue fountain pen receipt dime lint
;your love letter, torn

Blue Velvet...Meh.

I like odd films. I like everything I've ever seen by Stanley Kubrick, for God's sake. And yet, I can't make myself like Blue Velvet yet. I almost feel like it was trying way too hard. Like it was trying to make itself out to be something that it simply wasn't. I don't think it revealed any huge ideas about the human condition, nor do I think that the symbology was quite as subtle and ingenious as Lynch might have thought it was. 

It was, however, entertaining. The pure absurdness of it made it fun to watch, and the acting, for the most part, was pretty fantastic (hats off to Dennis Hopper, wow). The sexual aspect was interesting, and quite a bit over done, but I didn't find much of it particularly shocking. Maybe the social norm in the 80's was a little less risque than it is today, but I just didn't get a huge shock from the vulgarity. I'm probably a tad desensitized ever since I saw Salo (now there is a banned movie, damn). 

I'm hoping that I simply missed a whole bunch of the point of the movie. Obviously there is a reason we're watching it, and I'm open to the possibility of changing my mind, of being enlightened, but I'm not very optimistic. To me, Blue Velvet was a movie that tried way too hard and ended up sending a love letter to its own foot. 

Re: everyone that has already said this.

I think "what the fuck" is an adequate descriptor. I wish I had more to say! I wish I had positive things to say! I wish I didn't sound like such a negative, critical fuck, but this was just so weird. I swear I have legitimate taste in films, sometimes. I'm holding off on further analysis since we were just supposed to watch. Also because I had two other films to watch for class that required more related work/analysis plus tons of reading plus a biology exam. I really will have more to offer later. But... and I know this is way simplistic... FRANK IS SUCH A CREEP.

Blue Velvet?

The only definitive statement I can make about the film Blue Velvet is that I enjoyed watching it. I’m at a loss for words when trying to describe the movie, because other than obvious observations, I’m not sure if what I’m inferring is right, or at least what the director was trying to convey. I have many more questions about Blue Velvet than I do any solid answers.

The underlying message the movie leaves the viewer with is that so many of us are completely oblivious to so much that’s going on right under our noses. Until Jeffrey stumbles upon the severed ear and begins to look into the case, he would have never been aware of the atrocities happening in his picture-perfect town. Jeffrey’s flawless world is turned upside down after finding the human ear and meeting Dorothy. For the majority of the movie, Jeffrey’s idealistic life and his new, dangerous life seem fairly separate, implying that there is evil, but it is possible to disconnect one’s self from it. Then near the end of the movie when the Yellow Man walks into Detective William’s house, it seems like the entire town, even the supposedly genuine law enforcement, is corrupt. This furthers the idea that there is no way to escape the constant impurities of life.

The number one thing that confused me in the movie is the use of blue velvet. Over and over again blue velvet is used and I don’t know why blue velvet, as opposed to any other fabric, is so important. Dorothy sings the song Blue Velvet and says that she likes singing the song. Frank is obsessed with blue velvet. Blue velvet is used for the background of the opening and closing credits. The movie is named Blue Velvet. Other than the link between Frank’s bizarre obsession with blue velvet and him forcing his new slave, Dorothy, to wear the blue velvet robe and her singing that song, I do not understand what the deeper meaning is. I don’t see the significance of blue velvet and I would love if someone could explain its importance.

The rampant use of blue velvet in the film is not the only aspect I am puzzled about. There is a frequent use of the color red, such as with the red tulips in the beginning of the movie and the flowing red curtains in Dorothy’s apartment. Is this just a sign that is used in important or critical scenes? Also, the blind employee who works with Jeffrey, Double Ed, seems like he should contribute some sort of insight to the film. With most books at least, I feel like a blind character, no matter how minor, demonstrates some sort of blindness towards the matter at hand. Does Double Ed’s blindness symbolize our society’s blindness towards what’s happening all around us?

Blue Velvet-not a fan

I watched Blue Velvet this afternoon (thanks to Clint and his hospitality!) and my initial reaction was, "what the fuck?" Sorry for the vulgarity, but that was my honest reaction. I know I was not alone because the people I watched with had similar reactions as well. I thought that as the movie progressed-or at least towards the end-everything would fall into place. That
definitely was NOT the case. My initial confusion continued throughout the whole movie. At the end, I was left not understanding many (most) aspects of the movie and I had no idea what the whole point was. Blue Velvet didn't leave me disturbed, happy, sad, or satisfied. I'm not really sure what to feel.

I have to agree with Belinda--definitely not one of my favorites.

Umm.. What.

I am going to also be brief because I have to rewrite Harry Potter in French. But I was confused with some of the questions that go along with the literary theory.
So then, I watched Blue Velvet.
And well, I just watched it because we were not supposed to analyze it yet. Just watched it for what it is. I'm gonna be honest, not my cup of tea. I can't help asking myself so many questions about this movie, but I have no words. So it will be an interesting class discussion tomorrow, because I am not really sure what to think.