Artsy/Experimental/Surreal

Does anyone else have an interest in these types of movies?

These are some film makers that I hold in high regard:

Alain Resnais
Jan Svankmajer
Alajandro Jodorowsky
Shinya Tsukamoto
Jean Cocteau
Stan Brakhage
Ingmar Bergman
Luis Bunuel
David Lynch

Here are some examples of such movies that I've seen:

Blood of a Poet – Jean Cocteau – 1930
The Seventh Seal – Ingmar Bergman – 1957
Alice – Jan Svankmajer – 1988
Last Year at Marienbad – Alain Resnais – 1961
Lost Highway – David Lynch – 1997
Mulholland Drive – David Lynch – 2001
Begotten – E. Elias Merhige – 1991
Dog Star Man – Stan Brakhage – 1961-64
Eraserhead – David Lynch – 1977
Love is the Devil – John Maybury – 1998
Tetsuo: The Iron Man – Shinya Tsukamoto – 1988
Un Chien Andalou – Luis Bunuel – 1929
Santa Sangre – Alajandro Jodorowsky – 1989
Possession – Andrzej Zulawski – 1981

Does anyone else know of any movies or any other directors in general that fall into this genre of movie making?

I hope I'm not alone in this interest here...

__________________
We've met before, haven't we?

I always thought I had an open mind when it came to "alternative" movies. I guess I don't. I was reading through your list, and I have to say...I hate David Lynch's movies. Eraserhead was just awful. Absolutely no reason for that movie to have even been made.
Ditto with Lost Highway. The only thing I even remotely enjoyed, was the Twin Peaks series on T.V. I was pretty interested in the premise...Fire Walk With Me, totally sucked, though.
I don't know. I guess I just have a line I don't like to cross. Lynch's movies cross it; everytime.

I'm always one for change, so I will try out a different kinda movie every now and then. Mulholland Drive was one of those, and I enjoyed it, very confusing, but I didn't want to be able to understnad all the twists and jagged edge's

__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg

I haven't seen the movie yet, but see if this makes sense...my mom told me to Does that make sense to any of you?

Yeah...actually it does

Oh goodie. I'll have an edge when I finally see it then.

eek! I think Eraserhead is great...but I have no idea what I like about it...it's just so engrossing to watch, as with all his films, they just seem to have this rich visual flare.

Try checking out the Elephant Man...

__________________
Another high quality post by Fez Wizardo

I have seen the Elephant Man, the one with Anthony Hopkins? (is that the only one? )
Eraserhead was disturbing, disgusting, and I wish I had never seen it. I don't understand why anyone would hold it in such high reguard.

I'd agree with that assessment. To easily dismiss what you don't understand is to be closed-minded.



So says you. I salute Lynch for not succumbing to the "norm", creating his own style, and bringing us his highly artistic, creative, and subjective films. The cinematography is Lynch's films is always top-notch. Lynch is a master of playing with our emotions without us even knowing why or how. Many Lynch movies are too easily dismissed by those who search for objective answers in a subjective question.



Everytime? What about The Elephant Man? Or what about
The Straight Story; it's about as tame and down-to-earth as a movie can possibly be.


P.S. I hope this doesn't cause a distraction from the original point of this thread.

I'm offended. I never said I didn't understand. I saw the damn movie, processed it with my own mind, and dismissed it because it didn't do a thing for me. It was a story, in my opinion (that counts right?), that didn't need to be told.

and P.S. this has everything to do with the point of your thread. How insulting. You asked and I answered. Hmph.

But what did you think of The Elephant Man Sades?

I think that movie shows off how brilliant Lynch can be without any of his surreal themes. He is a wonderful filmmaker - always worth a watch, never boring.

__________________
I couldn't believe that she knew my name. Some of my best friends didn't know my name.

You are welcome to your opinion, but if you can question my opinion, I think I am entitled to question yours.

If we are disturbed by a work of art then we should automatically turn our heads, disregard it, and label it as "bad"?

Seems like an easy way out to me.

She didn't say you should do anything. She said she didn't understand how you could. Big difference. No one's forcing anything on anyone else.

Oh jeeze, I am so sick and tired of ugly=brilliant. I honestly am. I never said I didn't understand the movie, don't insult my intelligence, what's not to understand?
What I don't get, is why something so ugly has to be honored. Am I a big fat idiot because I turn my head away from something that bothers me? No.
And are you a big fat idiot for getting something from it? Nope.
I just wish you had some other reason for liking it, other than,"I was disturbed. Disturbed doesn't=bad"

I liked The Elephant Man. It was based on a true story, what's not to like? If I didn't like it, than I would be ignoring the brutal fact of that man's life. Although I'm sure Lynch took opportunity with some creative license.
But yes, I enjoyed it. The acting was top notch.
I'll agree that Lynch is never boring...I don't know how great that makes him. Watching a car accident isn't boring either.

Yes, EXACTLY. I almost want to laugh when someone refers to some bizarre film as "misunderstood." As if the public at large is at fault for not interpreting it the way they did, or the way the director may have meant for them to.

No one is compelled and moved by a slasher flick...or a porno. But take sex and violence, put them under the guise of war or love or emotion of some sort, and voila, you've got a few people who'll automatically label it as brilliant filmmaking...likely hailing it as something that "doesn't shy away from this" or "tackles the controversial issue of that."

"The difference between pornography and erotica is lighting."
- Gloria Leonard

That's right. That's how I feel.

And by the way, MysteryMan...this discussion is totally on topic, you wondered if people like this genre of movie making, I'm telling you, I don't. Not usually.

I have watched some controversial movies before, and enjoyed them.
For my own benefit, I have to draw the line somewhere. There are just boundries that I don't let any medium make an "artistic representaion" out of. Such as children. I will NOT see any movie about child victimization, and Eraserhead bordered on just that issue. IMO.

It was not my intent to offend. My point was that it is impossible to "understand" Lynch movies of this type. They are surreal and subjective by nature. However, if you believe that you understand them, I would love to hear your assessment.

Actually, my primary objective to starting this thread was to enquire about other movies similiar to those that I listed in the opening post of this thread. I am however glad to see that it has sparked a debate about such movies, but I still don't want to lose sight of the primary objective.

Once again, I'm sorry if you interpreted my comment as an insult toward you. That was not my intent. My point was that there is plenty to not understand about these types of movies, because they are subjective by nature. I didn't mean to say that you, specifically, don't like them because of this, but rather that *many people* don't like them because of this reason. And as far as the "ugly=brilliant" thing goes, *I* never said *that*. The word I used was "disturbing." And I never said that "disturbing=brilliant" either. I just don't believe that it should *always* be dismissed as *only* disturbing.

I also never said that "disturbed doesn't = bad."

On the contrary, I believe that you were the one that proclaimed that as your reasoning for not liking the movie.

I believe that these were your reasons:

-"Eraserhead was disturbing, disgusting, and I wish I had never seen it."

-"Eraserhead was just awful. Absolutely no reason for that movie to have even been made."

-"It was a story, in my opinion (that counts right?), that didn't need to be told."

I did however state reasons that I liked the movie as well as other similiar Lynch movies:

"I salute Lynch for not succumbing to the "norm", creating his own style, and bringing us his highly artistic, creative, and subjective films. The cinematography is Lynch's films is always top-notch. Lynch is a master of playing with our emotions without us even knowing why or how. Many Lynch movies are too easily dismissed by those who search for objective answers in a subjective question."

The reason you liked Elephant Man was because it was a true sory? So there are no true stories that you don't like? Also, I don't believe that if you didn't like the movie that you "would be ignoring the brutal fact of that man's life." If you felt that the story wasn't told effectively, or if it wasn't effective at conveying his torment; and didn't succeed in making us feel such sympathy for him would you still think it was a good movie because if you didn't you would be "ignoring the brutal fact of that man's life"?

This has been one of my underlying points throughout this discussion. Many of these films are *not* meant to be understood; not objectively anyway. They are only "misunderstood" if the viewer/audience doesn't understand that fact. They are subjective. It is up to the viewer to form his or her own conclusions about what it all means.

I don't even know where to start. Almost everything you said, frustrated me in some way.
Agh.