WHAT DID YOU THINK OF... BLUE VELVET
RT – 95%, IMDb – 7.7
Roger Ebert said:
Zombie Dog, from Mutant Reviewers, said:
@Jack1 said:
RT – 95%, IMDb – 7.7
Roger Ebert said:
"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. The director is either denying the strength of his material or trying to defuse it by pretending it's all part of a campy in-joke." (read full review here)
"Blue Velvet feels like a movie done with a huge amount of passion — and probably some hatred for the studio system — so much so that I would say it is one of the best examples of neo-noir. There isn’t a single scene in the movie that doesn’t advance the story. Every line, every action takes us deeper into Lynch’s world." (read full review here)
"Blue Velvet is a great film, I think. It's stylish, terrifically well-made and well-acted, and has all the hallmarks of the very best Lynch material. Not only do I think there's plenty of scope for repeat watches, but I think it'd even improve the rating for me further. Even so, it's certainly the best Lynch film I've seen so far. Strange but satisfying." (read full review here)
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!