Dive Deep into the American Underbelly in David Lynch's Blue Velvet
General Reviews
It’s a strange world, isn’t it? Perhaps strange is more than that in David Lynch’s Blue Velvet (1986). Yet apparently for the characters in this film, strange is all there is to it. Audiences may disagree, however. From finding a severed ear in a field to a boyfriend and girlfriend family lunch, Lynch shies away from nothing in perhaps his most surreal and dark film to its date (1986). While only being his fourth feature-length film, Blue Velvet shows just how good Lynch is at braking the boundaries of standard methods of storytelling. Thus leading him down a path towards pure and original artistry.
Lynch has always been the director who focuses on the American dreamscape, from little towns in the countryside to big cities like Los Angeles. He dives in deep uncovering what not everyone sees or wants to believe is there. Albeit he does put a bit more of a paranormal spin onto most of these endeavours, he still does reveal what would have been hidden otherwise. While studying the contrast between exterior persona of Americana and its corrupt underbelly, Blue Velvet might be considered Lynch’s darkest film.
Introduced to us as the simple American town of Lumberton, North Carolina, it in fact is so much more. After his father has a stroke, young college student Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) finds an ear on the field near the hospital. This ear leads him on a high stakes investigation related to a beautiful and mysterious nightclub singer Dorothy Vallens (Isabella Rossellini). With the help of his neighbour, Sandy (Laura Dern), Jeffrey’s investigation leads him to a group of psychotic criminals. The leader Frank (Dennis Hopper) is a deranged sex fanatic who has Dorothy’s son hostage to keep her at his will.
What is extremely interesting and loveable about Blue Velvet is just how completely insane it is. If we throw David Lynch out of our minds for a moment, we think about how Blue Velvet begins in a normal way by introducing the audience to an American suburbia. In most films, when this occurs you as a viewer know what you are about to watch. Perhaps a family drama or something simple where anything that happens could possibly happen in real life. So, without knowing about Lynch and the beginning of Blue Velvet, you quickly realize you are in for a wild ride.
His introduction into this world is truly where he goes into the underbelly of the Americana. Perhaps it was because he knows and understands there is more to the surface or maybe it is because he is completely insane (complementary). From a quick glance at the simple life to a dive down (literally) into the dirt to begin his story, nothing is as it seems. The entire film lies around the plot point that the main character picks up an ear off the ground! I mean, when would that actually happen. Like at least use something to touch it, for goodness sake, do not use your hands. Gross.
What is breathtaking about a Lynch film is that he always knows who to cast. From the beginning to end of his career, it becomes clear that he had his people. Even if they were new, he knew just where everyone would work. Rossellini and MacLachlan are two perfect actors to play these perfectly creepy, eerie, and mentally insane individuals. These are not negative comments especially when you have Hopper playing a truly mentally deranged, sexually obscene individual. Innocence is captured purely in Dern’s portrayal of Sandy. Yes, without each of his actors, Lynch’s film would have been nothing. However, they only added to what was already there.
You never need to understand what is going on in a Lynch film to be pleased by the end. Pleased, also, might not be the right word when you definitely are not once the film has finished. But regular words do not apply when Lynch is involved. Blue Velvet is not one of Lynch’s most confusing films (at least to me) in the sense that you do not know what is going on, for the most part you do. You are, on the other hand, left completely flabbergasted at what you just witnessed and that is where the confusion and uncertainty comes from. I believe that every character is completely insane, well, at least Jeffrey, and Dorothy and Hank. What makes it all the better is the random and completely awkward dialogue all the characters share at certain moments. From sentences that would not be heard in your day to day conversations, to arguments over beer (do you prefer Heineken, Bud, or Pabst Blue Ribbon?).
Beautiful colouring and genius scene setting help place and set the mood of the film. Lynch is so known for his use of curtains that when blue velvet ones open the film, no one is surprised in the slightest. In fact, you find yourself gleeful in someway. You can tell that every choice made was deliberate and has some purpose, even if it remains unbeknownst to you. We may never know why Lynch chose to make his film(s) the way he did, but we will also never all interpret them the same either. From so many questions you wish you could ask this filmmaker, to wanting to know how everyone interprets the film(s), the wishes are never-ending in Lynch’s cinematic universe.
Blue Velvet feels like a fever dream in every sense. It comes across as a film that now, after 40 years after its release, unless you are a fan of Lynch, might leave a foul taste in your mouth. Yet as someone who is used to his fanatics, you are constantly shocked in the most pleasing way no matter how many times you watch one of Lynch’s films. It is a dreamlike experience you find yourself in when you are watching one of his films, and Blue Velvet might be one that elevates this feeling even more.
Another Lynch film watched as part of the British Film Institute’s David Lynch season and this screening was a treat. From the BFI IMAX in Waterloo, the United Kingdom’s biggest screen, I got to witness this film. Now IMAX is typically best for films shot or sound designed specifically for the big screen. Never would I have thought that Blue Velvet would be necessary in this big a screen, and perhaps not necessary, it still remains wonderful. Flawed, and left absolutely shocked on my third watch of a brilliant piece of cinema.
Comments 3