User reviews

It´s a joke, right?! Lynch could not get produced this as a TV show. He was out of money, so what to do? Well, he received somehow some Dollars and "completed" the pilot and created this mess by just mixing everything together... How can anybody see a failed pilot for TV as an cinematic masterpiece?!

And now everybody is guessing about the deeper meaning!? Well, wake up, there is none! Like in that other TV series by Lynch, what was the name again? Same procedure there. Build up a mystery and then come up with nothing. I guess Lynch will repeat this concept until people will realise, the emperor has no clothes.

In Germany there is a comedian called Harpe Kerkerling. He dressed up as an opera singer and "performed" some new "art songs". Singing complete nonsense like this:

"The wolf. The lamb. On the meadow. Hurrz!"

It´s a classic now.

Anyway, afterwards he discussed it with the audience. And they were talking seriously about the deeper meaning of the wolf / lamb relationship.

You people giving this movie a rating of 8.0 in imdb.com, you people could be one of them.

So let´s say it all together: "Hurrz!"

0/10 Macaulay J. Connor

I saw Mulholland Drive expecting to see a David Lynch film. I loved Blue Velvet and the Stra, and even Lost Highway. I love "out there" movies. But this one was just boring. It's a lesbian jerk-off flick. So what? Why is this winning so many awards? It wasn't good. It was terrible and stupid. You can totally tell that he reshot all the porn crap later just to get the distribution heads to go nuts and release it. I as an audience member am insulted that this trype is considered "brilliant" or "unique". It is neither. Lynch is a hack.

I would love to write an intelligent, detailed analysis of Mulholland Drive, I really would, but since I haven't got the slightest idea of director David Lynch's intent (other than to completely confound the viewer), I'm going to have to pass. Instead, let me tell you how my week has been so far…

Monday: Work as usual. Was involved in an RTA on the way home (not my fault—an old lady drove into the side of my car). Rang insurance company. Started to watch Mulholland Drive—fell asleep not long after.

Tuesday: Dog ate a packet of ibuprofen and had to be rushed to the vets (no idea how he got them—suspect the cats were involved). Went to work. Came home. Visited the in-laws. Resumed watching Mulholland Drive—fell asleep not long after.

Wednesday: After the two previous days, this one was fairly uneventful. Dog came home, hopefully without any lasting problems. Ended the day by watching a bit more of Mulholland Drive. Perked up for the lesbian sex scene between Naomi Watts and Laura Harring, but fell asleep soon after.

Thursday: Car collected by body shop. Went to work in wife's car (being extra careful to avoid elderly drivers). Watched the rest of Mulholland Drive (managed to stay awake, largely in hope that Watts might indulge in some more sapphic shenanigans, but she doesn't).

4/10 for the sexy scene, reduced to 1/10 for the self-indulgent, pretentious, and utterly pointless surreality of the whole thing, especially the opening dance number, the incomprehensible club scene in which a woman mimes a Spanish version of Roy Orbison's classic 'Crying' before fainting (???), the weird hobo with the strange box, and the bit where two miniature people crawl out of a handbag and sneak under a door.

David Lynch is laughing at everyone that pays to see this movie. I think he is doing this weird stuff just to show (for himself) how stupid every critic that says "Oh its wonderful and so clever"

This film is like all his others...totally f*ck*d

There is no story at all and its impossible to understand anything...I bet that David Lynch doesn´t have a clue whatsoever about it himself just like in Lost Highway when he said...well I don´t know whats it about I just wanted to make a strange film......

I have never fallen asleep so many times during one movie. It's the usual puerile, masturbatory, pretentious, inane, shock value piece of drivel that Lynch always does. Obvious, infantile, horrid stuff. It has an interesting beginning and its all downhill from there. For a real nasty movie about Hollywood, see Sunset Boulevard instead. It's all there.

This movie is awful. This is why critics aren't worth anything. This is the type of movie that people pretend to like and describe as "intellectually stimulating" in order to justify the critics. In fact I created my account just to comment on how bad the movie was and to warn people to stay away from this movie. Plot is terrible and pointless. It's incoherent from the start which adds to either the "mystery" if you're a critic or plain foolishness if you're a normal person. The movie really is all over the place and ends on an even more curious note. And like I said the ending isn't truly one of those that makes people think rather people end up scratching their heads and wondering why they wasted 2 hours on the movie and also how it's rated so high on this database.

... because dreams are filled up with symbols which uncertainly indicate desires and anguishes, and it's contexts aren't clear, nor linear. This movie is actually based on a straight-forward, symbolism-free story that tricks you with the idea it's a dream by adding mysterious characters doing things you can only guess how and why, but indepedently of their reasons you can clearly understand their intentions, and by adding multi-explainable plot twists that all in all lead to nowhere.

So it's basically a film that acts like mindless suspense and soap opera at times. MY OPINION ABOUT THAT: I hate both genres, and find the represented situations in this turd unoriginal and uninteresting, so watching it soon got boring. Since it lasted two and half hours, it was quite a pain. Nevertheless I enjoyed the sex scenes.

It can be enjoyed by people who like the genres I listed above plus mindless guessing on what's happening. The photography and direction are great, the plot is awful and the "Dream-like movie" idea behind it turns out a total disaster, just like the overall quality of this one. I give it 2/10.

If I could have given this movie a '0' rating, I would have. I have better things to do than to watch a movie replete with bad acting and with a "plot" that goes nowhere. This isn't art. This is pulling the wool over the eyes of those who want to be considered "arty".

Save your precious time and skip this one! Mulholland Drive is clearly a poor attempt at a movie. The first 2/3 of this movie finds the viewer wondering what will happen, how everything will tie together. The rest of the movie draws the viewer deeper into confusion, as nothing is made clear - only more muddled. And at the end of this YOU will be saying - out loud - "WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED - WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?!" The only redeeming quality is the material this will provide for our pals at MST3K.

If this is David Lynch at his best, I'm glad I missed the rest.

This is the worst movie I have seen in a decade. I tend to like so-called "art films" and don't have any need for all of the loose ends in a movie to be neatly tied up. This movie has more loose ends than Davy Crockett's jacket.

I have to admit it was creative, but so were the words of my college roommate when he was tripping on LSD. He too, was creative, but he was neither lucid or entertaining. I still don't know what this movie (or the LSD trip) was about.

The direction was horrible. It looks like the experimentation of a sophomore film student in college. The script makes no sense. The acting, except for Naomi Watts, is horrid.

I wasn't a fan of David Lynch before this movie. Now, I am all but certain I will never waste time with a David Lynch movie again. That turkey of a writer/director owes me two hours of my life.

What a pile of pretentious bull. This movie made no freaking sense whatsoever. Before making the comment that I am just some yokel who wants to see Tom Green give elephants pleasure (which I did find funny) realize that I own a copy of Memento on DVD which was a much better plot and a much more interesting concept and I also own The Cell which is much more visually appealing that this pantload. The only solice that I take from this movie is that it was an aborted TV pilot so I now do not have to worry about flipping the channels and seeing any of this pile of garbage. I have what people like to call an open mind toward movies as I established with Freddy Got Fingered and Memento, but this was just two and a half hours of my life that I want back and I waste my life.

An pathetic attempt to imitate the plot switcheroo of "The Usual Suspects". But without any of the character development, and no characters that you can care about. The plot switcheroo at the very end has nothing to do with the excruciating hours that preceed it.

These types of films should only be attempted by those capable of subtlety. David Lynch has none, as one can plainly see by the coarsely integrated acting. Like so many other minor moments of this movie, it is a poorly executed attempt at suspense, that is not done by gradually building rapport with the viewer and proceeding with a momentum that has you wondering "where it will go?", but rather by tediously stagnating at a point until you are wondering "when will it move on?".

It also demonstrates how NOT to do mystery. A good mystery would lead the viewer through a series of incremental insights that when realized awe the viewer with how tied together the whole story is. What is unknown to the viewer in this flop throughout it's plot is the plot itself, which is unrelated to the majority of the film itself.

It is a pathetic attempt at "Jacob's Ladder" but without the directing skill needed to capture the existentialism. As far as it's existential qualities go: it has none. It's moments aren't filled with an experience of any kind. It's moments are focused on the tedious suspense, and the big question of "Why this experience at this time?" whose answer is ultimately randomness, or a contrived purpose which can only be explained by the author. Any experience that might escape that, fails to escape the horrible acting.

I laugh at the fact it was recommended to me by someone who hated it also, but was afraid to bad-mouth it because want to admit that he didn't get it. Having now seen the movie, I can say that I DO get it, because David Lynch is so obvious and tedious and unsubtle.

"Let us go to the mystery spot."

"Yes, the mystery spot. And do the... ... ...thing."

"Yes, the... ...thing."

(Actor scratches butt for 10 minutes while pointing at something that the camera never really quite shows.)

After seeing this movie yesterday I checked out IMDB to find out what this movie is all about. After reading all comments I still don't know. As far as I'm concerned it's a pretty good film except for the part where the moviemakers ran out of money and decided to make a cheap artmovie out of this plot. It's very surprising to see this movie gets an 8/10 from the viewers. Those voters must be very happy people who can stare at modern paintings for hours as well. Use your fantasy and make up the story yourself and...tell others you figured it all out. You're so smart and we're so stupid. I bet Mr. Lynch is having a lot fun right now; his viewers came up with answers he didn't even think about himself. This so called dream-flashback-mystery-flashforward-plotless-endless-lsdtrip-movie is a very convenient judgement for David (yehhhhh, I got away with it!). Please look at the movie some more times and give me more theories about what it is all about: keep on dreaming!

Had to drop in another comment. I really appreciate a wide range of views. The only people who seemed to like this movie sneer at the others as if "they" weren't capable of seeing the deep "insight" Lynch has. What David Lynch is is a cinematic con man. Disneyland on a large screen. He beautifully photographs a bunch of images and tries to deceive you into thinking there's a story there. To all of you who loved the movie and thought the rest of us dumb, please explain the plot to all of us unenlightened ones and how it ends. It's nice to know there's so many smart people out there in a world where art is in the eye of the beholder. Please spare us your college-level pseudo-intellectualism and simply tell us: What is the story? What is the point?

How do you say..."2-1/2 hrs of my life that I will never get back." Sorry, but I can't believe I wasted my evening on this worthless movie with no ending. I suppose I could make up my own ending, but then that would cause me more the loss of yet more time!

David Lynch doesn't answer any of the questions he puts in the audience's head because he doesn't know the answers. There are no answers in fact. The movie's intrigue is in that the plot in left behind halfway through and never picked up again. The movie takes off in a bizarre direction (and I use the term direction very loosely) and never makes any attempt to reconnect. The movie may be thought-provoking, but I don't think David Lynch deserves any credit for creating a confused audience by throwing out the plot. The only reason this movie received any acclaim is that people were too afraid to admit that they don't understand it. Don't be embarrassed; there's nothing to understand.

This is so low. There is no story what so ever. This is absolutely the worst movie ever made. It may be all the david lynch it wants but it is so unbelievable bad. It should be illegal to make a movie like this, it stole over 2 hours of my life! I have absolutely not one good thing to say about the movie, and I am a movie lover though. I do not care for david lynch twisted mind and in my opinion that is all this movie reflects. I do really not understand why this movie has got this high on top 250...

This is just more crap for people who love crap. It's typical David Lynch, with bad acting that would only fly in a 1950's sitcom, and a plot that is written solely to make you wonder what's next, yet really has a story behind it, and never goes anywhere.

If you liked Twin Peaks, you'll love this. Because both were `what's going on' and challenging to think about. But, as usual, David Lynch fails on all but one point. Everything is bad, everything except for one thing, he keeps you constantly asking `why?

What's bad? Well among the things that suck are, the plot, the direction, getting the best work from good actors/actresses, the discontinuity in what could be awesome visually relevant scenes, the subplots that do nothing except show their faces, the characters that seem interesting but aren't played out, etc.

David Lynch has a talent, don't get me wrong. He manages to get every single element of a good film together in one thing. But he also manages to drop the ball on ALL of them, as in most of his works!

If ANY other director could manage to collect even half of the elements in a David Lynch film into one movie, and make them work, it would be a blockbuster! David Lynch has again triumphed in getting every possible good element of a project into one effort, and then making every single element fail.

More crap. If you want to study movies, study David Lynch. He is a mast er at SOMETHING, and that is, defining and bringing the key elements, and many many of them into a project. But, don't study what he does with them, just study what the elements are in the project. He can't deliver on a `suspense', because there never is a climax and an ending. He can't deliver on deep characters, because he just keeps trying to build them, but never makes them have significant meaning to the plot. He can't deliver on the plot, because he brings a great plot to the table without ever bringing a `shocking' or `meaningful' conclusion to it.

If there is anything Lynch is good at, it's this.. He is a mold breaker, and does away with the conventions of the typical Hollywood movie. Unfortunately, the parts he does away with are the best parts. It's groundbreaking, no doubt. But if you break all of the ground and leave nothing left to walk on, you can't go ANYWHERE.

David Lynch has been successful in confusing art with just plain confusing. There is nothing deep about his films. He has taken a formula (albeit, created by him) and used it over and over again. Misfits, dark settings and the evil disabled people are his signature. He takes this mystery mix and churns out films that we are suppose to "think" about. Well, it is very easy to create dreams and confusing plots and then tell the viewer, "figure it out." I don't want to figure it out, not when you don't give me the clues I need or a sensible script to work with.

Mullholland Drive is a disaster, a terrible movie that seems to be filmed in real time. It takes forever for a character to walk down the stairs, answer a question or do anything. It felt like it took weeks to view this movie. I was actually relieved when it was over and happy to delete it from my DVR. We are left with trying to make sense of this nonsense and some of us actually spend time doing so.

A good movie gives a message and it gives you something to think about and maybe, just maybe, changes you. I resented the manipulation of this film. Lynch, find a truly artistic way to tell a story. All gimmicks aside.

Okay maybe its supposed to be stylised and arty but all I can see is bad acting, disjointed plot and cack. Its really horribly bad believe me dont watch this movie it sucks. If you are a normal person believe me it sucks.

I've only seen two movies by David Lynch. This is one of them, the other one is "Blue Velvet". After seeing those two, I've no problem in telling you all that I'm as far from being a fan of him as it's possible to be. He gives the expression "Weird movies" a new dimension. I really don't know how it's possible to enjoy his movies. "Mulholland Drive" is no exception. OK, It's better than "Blue Velvet", but the main difference is that I didn't fell asleep during this one. In fact, I got excited about it for the first hour or so. Although there were lots of scenes I never understood at all, the main plot seemed interesting enough. The atmosphere in the movie was also interesting. But that was before I had seen the whole film. At the end, I didn't have a clue about anything. A hint for you, Lynch: Movies are meant to entertain, not to irritate the viewer with tons of really hard riddles. I have read some persons ways of 'solving' this movie, and I have to say that it was VERY complicated, and I could never done that myself. 'Solving' movies like this are not for normal people, no doubt about that.

The worst film of the year is also the most pretentious pile of nonsensical crap I have seen in a very long time. People who adore this film only do so in a vain attempt to be cool and because they like to believe they are "above" other film-goers who believe in such mundane film concepts such as character/plot development. Don't be fooled, Lynch has no idea what he's doing and resorts to inserting cheap emotions (such as the admittedly hot lesbian sex scene) in place of real feelings. If you want to taste a sample of real cinema from last year, try "Ghost World" or "Waking Life" instead.

A bum with a magic box... Lynch deserves to get sued by Clive Barker for copyright infringement. Oh wait, I guess you filmic types have never seen _Hellraiser_. What a shame! I'm sure a deluded film student at a high-priced university somewhere has written an inscrutable term paper on Lynch's compression of the viewer's experiential topology vis-a-vis the liminal passages of subcontexual plot as the temporal flow of the film wends its circuitous way into and out of a mystical cube guarded by a filthy vagrant with a predilection for burning piles of refuse --- completely unaware, of course, that the whole conceit was shamelessly lifted from another, better, movie. Watching this film wasted two-and-a-half hours of my existence; if you haven't seen _Mulholland Dr._ yet and are considering doing so, I suggest you not even bother. This is the second or third Lynch film I've suffered through, and it's beyond me how he's managed to dupe so many people into thinking he's some sort of cinematic genius.