Mulholland Drive

Film sur la pureté de l'âme humaine et sa vulnérabilité, sur les rêves de vie, le désir de réaliser les attentes qui sont placées en nous. Un film sur la peur de toucher l'idéal, sur les déceptions, le désespoir et la haine, sur la laideur du monde là-bas (en l'occurrence Hollywood). Ce film n'a pas un point clair, il n'y a pas de "clé correcte" pour le comprendre. Mulholland Dr. est une mosaïque de plusieurs idées qui pourraient être exprimées de manière plus simple mais moins intéressante et fascinante. La quantité de connexions que vous ferez dépend de vos expériences personnelles et de votre prise de conscience de leur place dans votre vie. Un savon cruel et en même temps beau. (04/10/2005)

Ma première rencontre avec David Lynch a été un vrai casse-tête. On s’attend à un dénouement, et dans les trente dernières minutes, il se passe quelque chose de complètement différent qui vous embrouille encore plus la tête... Furieuse de l’absence de dénouement et de mon incompréhension totale, je suis allée sur Google pour trouver une explication et quand le déclic s’est produit, j’ai décidé que Mulholland Drive était en fait très bon ! :D Mon admiration la plus grande va à ceux qui ont compris le film. :D (Est-ce qu’il y a vraiment quelqu’un dans ce cas ? Si oui, j’attends un message !) Naomi Watts est incroyable ici, et l’atmosphère étrange, sombre et mystérieuse ne manque pas d’attraits. D’habitude, avec des films comme celui-ci, je ressens le besoin de les revoir pour que tout se mette en place, mais là j’hésite parce qu’il s’agit d’un film plutôt long et en fait assez sinistre et lourd. Un casse-tête, quoi ! Néanmoins, je suis contente de l’avoir vu. (20/09/2017)

Lynch's Mulholland Drive is a great lesson in perception. As well as a great lesson from the power of the narrator - power over the fictional world, its inhabitants, but also over those who try to decode it. In the first part of the film, the director entices us into the trap of traditional narrative perception, into the straitjacket of the unity of time, action and characters. He unfolds before the viewer a seemingly unambiguous thriller plot about a woman who lost her memory during a car accident and, with the help of the beginning Hollywood actress Betty, tries to look for clues about what happened to her. She finds three material constants that will soon remain the only constants in the chaotic vortex of dream and reality – house number 17, the blue key and $ 25,000. The ensuing earthquake, which destroys the plot that has been carefully constructed and reconstructed by the viewer, is typical Lynch. The characters change names, and the plot and time become relative... And the key remains, which does not unlock anything for the viewer, house number 17, whose inhabitant is known and yet unknown to us, and $ 25,000, the determination of which we suspect, but we do not receive anything to support this theory of ours. What is real and what is a feverish dream? How do the strange and disturbing episodes that Lynch seems to associatively insert into the flow of narration fit into the plot of the film? What, in fact, is Mulholland Drive? I do not know the answer. It's a classic mental time bomb that confuses and annoys you, but you don't really think about anything else. Lynch created a disturbing labyrinth in which he shatters the mirrors of the classical narrative structure, in which the hypocritical and empty world of Hollywood (a masterful scene with the revival of meaningless and empty text on casting) is reflected, in which the viewer is necessarily lost if he or she perceives in a learned manner - materially, causally. A labyrinth with a brilliant and almost schizophrenic performance by Naomi Watts... Lynch is a great magician of dreams, hints and riddles. A bandleader who creates the illusion of instruments to then reveal that everything is played only from the tape - it’s fake, artificial... confusing. I am not going to give it any stars until I see the film a second time, maybe a third time... I confess without torture that I don't really know if I've actually watched a film. Formally, undoubtedly masterful (sound, editing, camera, music and the overall atmosphere resulting therefrom is freezing, dark, enchanting...), but in terms of its interior, I am still too far from its core to make any judgments. (30/07/2004)

This is either a masterpiece or a bad trip, but an excellent and unusual experience in any case. Also, since my first encounter with Lynch, I have learnt how to watch his films (to accept that most of the action doesn’t take place in the real world), so this time I’m convinced that I know what this one is roughly about, and it actually begins to make sense in the last half hour. Basically, it draws attention to feelings and conditions that are common in a person’s daily life, even if they are not always aware of them: desire, disappointment, pain, escape, revenge. PS: Or it’s something completely different. (05/03/2009)

A really tough nut to crack, even the squirrel from Ice Age wouldn't be able to handle it. Lynch plays an unequal game with the viewer and it may not be to everyone's taste. I appreciate Lynch's disregard for sales and going about his business, but I guess the distributors of Mullholland Drive weren't jumping for joy at the $7 million US box office. If I were them, I would announce a competition "Whoever understands this film wins a dinner with Lynch in person". It wouldn't cost them anything because no one would come and they would at least get some interesting advertising. Lynch not only gives no answers (and that's a good thing), but he gives no clues to understanding his visions. He only mumbles, but very skillfully. For the first twenty minutes I had a hard time getting into the action on the screen, but gradually Lynch wrapped me around his finger and I devoured one scene after another. I didn't ask for an explanation, I took the whole thing as a sequence of mini-stories that may or may not have a connection. I enjoyed putting the pieces together, I embraced Lynch's game. And why I’m not giving it five stars then? Because Lynch overdid it with the final half hour. Everything has its limits, even Lynch's riddles and plot twists. I can totally see him having royal fun over all the "what was that about" discussions. Once again he took a shot at the audience and got away with it. And by the way, Naomi Watts is amazing here, acting and visually. (16/03/2004)