बेनामी वीडियो टेप एक संगीतकार की हत्या की सजा का अनुमान लगाते हैं, और एक गैंगस्टर की प्रेमिका एक मैकेनिक को भटका देती है।बेनामी वीडियो टेप एक संगीतकार की हत्या की सजा का अनुमान लगाते हैं, और एक गैंगस्टर की प्रेमिका एक मैकेनिक को भटका देती है।बेनामी वीडियो टेप एक संगीतकार की हत्या की सजा का अनुमान लगाते हैं, और एक गैंगस्टर की प्रेमिका एक मैकेनिक को भटका देती है।
- पुरस्कार
- 4 जीत और कुल 6 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
All hail David Lynch. All hail the other David Lynch.
Lynch is not a complex man, I think; it is easy to read him. But he is cinematically articulate and its a pleasure of a special sort when you meet an articulate artist. His interest is simply described: duals.
All his films work with some exploration of this idea. What makes him interesting is that he doesn't work the usual way, with a reality and then a surreal overlay. Both elements in his experiments are what we coarsely call "surreal." The game in traveling with him is an investment in the idea that there is no anchor to reality, that all references are among imaginations, sometimes twisted. "Mulholland" was a little too conventional for me because you could actually explain things and one of the realities was sorta real if you ignored a few things.
My favorite Lynch is "Velvet," which imposes the two warring realities on film genres. The most fun is the seemingly straight "Straight" story, which is perhaps the most bizarre encounters of dual strangeness because it seems so ordinary. Dualing roots that keep getting mowed.
But if you are into Lynch, this is an extraordinary pleasure, this one. Its the most obvious in plan, the least hidden in the swirl of two worlds. Neither world is anchored in reality and each hallucinates the other. Probably the only anchor with reality is the most disturbing character in appearance, The Robert Blake guy.
But even these two surrealities are nested in cinematic realities. One is the gangster movie, elevated to cosmic status by the French new wave. The other is visual jazz and the accompanying dream linkages that have been similarly blazed, starting with Dennis Hopper so far as American films.
What you are open to determines what you can get, I suppose. What Lynch provides is a sort of post-post modern notion of film as sometimes centered in itself, with its own cosmologies and lives that always refer to other film notions and never to real ones. There is no fold of us as viewer, no acknowledgment of our world at all (except for the mysterious videos). Celestial madness.
I prepared for this by watching four bad Holmes movies in a row. How we detect and discover is what this is about and is so superior to what we normally encounter, you should watch it.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
Lynch is not a complex man, I think; it is easy to read him. But he is cinematically articulate and its a pleasure of a special sort when you meet an articulate artist. His interest is simply described: duals.
All his films work with some exploration of this idea. What makes him interesting is that he doesn't work the usual way, with a reality and then a surreal overlay. Both elements in his experiments are what we coarsely call "surreal." The game in traveling with him is an investment in the idea that there is no anchor to reality, that all references are among imaginations, sometimes twisted. "Mulholland" was a little too conventional for me because you could actually explain things and one of the realities was sorta real if you ignored a few things.
My favorite Lynch is "Velvet," which imposes the two warring realities on film genres. The most fun is the seemingly straight "Straight" story, which is perhaps the most bizarre encounters of dual strangeness because it seems so ordinary. Dualing roots that keep getting mowed.
But if you are into Lynch, this is an extraordinary pleasure, this one. Its the most obvious in plan, the least hidden in the swirl of two worlds. Neither world is anchored in reality and each hallucinates the other. Probably the only anchor with reality is the most disturbing character in appearance, The Robert Blake guy.
But even these two surrealities are nested in cinematic realities. One is the gangster movie, elevated to cosmic status by the French new wave. The other is visual jazz and the accompanying dream linkages that have been similarly blazed, starting with Dennis Hopper so far as American films.
What you are open to determines what you can get, I suppose. What Lynch provides is a sort of post-post modern notion of film as sometimes centered in itself, with its own cosmologies and lives that always refer to other film notions and never to real ones. There is no fold of us as viewer, no acknowledgment of our world at all (except for the mysterious videos). Celestial madness.
I prepared for this by watching four bad Holmes movies in a row. How we detect and discover is what this is about and is so superior to what we normally encounter, you should watch it.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
The first time I watched this movie I enjoyed it but was left confused as to what was really going on. As a huge fan of Lynch I was expecting as much. So a few days later I watched it again and everything clicked and made perfect sense and seemed so obvious this time.
If you hated it the first time and found nothing interesting then you probably shouldn't watch it again and put yourself though the torture a second time. But if you feel how I did, watch it again and you'll enjoy it much more.
This movie does require a second viewing for a complete understanding of what's happening. In Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire you get what's going on the first time. Multiple viewings make the details much clearer but you don't leave confused like with Lost Highway.
Great story, the first part is truly one of the scariest things I've ever seen. I think one thing about this movie that is interesting is that almost all of the actors are playing roles that you've never seen them do before. And they do it very well. I was a little apprehensive about Pullman being the lead, as I know him from Spaceballs and Independence Day, but he is very good in this. You rarely get a bad performance in a Lynch movie.
My only criticism is that the movie is a little slow and long. Not in a bad way but I do find myself waiting for the end as opposed to some movies where I don't want them to end.
If you hated it the first time and found nothing interesting then you probably shouldn't watch it again and put yourself though the torture a second time. But if you feel how I did, watch it again and you'll enjoy it much more.
This movie does require a second viewing for a complete understanding of what's happening. In Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire you get what's going on the first time. Multiple viewings make the details much clearer but you don't leave confused like with Lost Highway.
Great story, the first part is truly one of the scariest things I've ever seen. I think one thing about this movie that is interesting is that almost all of the actors are playing roles that you've never seen them do before. And they do it very well. I was a little apprehensive about Pullman being the lead, as I know him from Spaceballs and Independence Day, but he is very good in this. You rarely get a bad performance in a Lynch movie.
My only criticism is that the movie is a little slow and long. Not in a bad way but I do find myself waiting for the end as opposed to some movies where I don't want them to end.
I'm not going into the plotline here because I'm limited to 1000 words. I don't think I can wrap up the plot that space.
I'm a recent inductee into the strange and twisted world of David Lynch. It all started when I caught a rerun of "Twin Peaks" on a low-budget digital satellite channel. Since then I've been hooked, and have had fun with cult films and filmmakers since.
Lost Highway is, as descried by Lynch, a new twist on film-noir. And only Lynch could put a twist like this on a classic genre. People keep wanting to draw comparisons to other films, saying: "Well, it's not Blue Velvet" or "It's not Mulholland Dr,"...they're right. It's Lost Highway, a unique and twisted foray down a dark highway that may or may not be entirely metaphorical...or metaphysical.
One of the things that I've noticed about David Lynch--and what probably inspires much of the hatred non-Lynch fans have towards his work--is that he doesn't explain everything. He lays it out, says "Here's my story. What do YOU make of it?" It's an incredible artistic attitude, much like viewing a Dali painting as opposed to a Da Vinci, and not for everyone's tastes.
Lost Highway is open to many interpretations, as are most of Lynch's works. Are we in our world, and being invaded by some outside force? Are we in a world we don't know we're in? Are we in Hell? What would you do if this happened to you? Maybe we are all someone else, really.
This film is at the same time allegorical, philosophical, incomprehensible, and satirical. It warps understood movie conventions, and is always pulling the unexpected.
All that praise aside, it is NOT the best of Lynch's work. One would have to be a fan to enjoy this, and should establish that fanhood with his better works, like Mulholland Drive, Blue Velvet, or "Twin Peaks."
If one has a set standard of how movies should be, an A-B-C pattern, stay away. But if it's originality, unanswered questions, and a break from standard Hollywood convention, go full ahead.
In my humble opinion, it's better than Wild at Heart and Dune, but not most of Lynch's rest. It is definitely an experience, but not one everybody will enjoy.
I'm a recent inductee into the strange and twisted world of David Lynch. It all started when I caught a rerun of "Twin Peaks" on a low-budget digital satellite channel. Since then I've been hooked, and have had fun with cult films and filmmakers since.
Lost Highway is, as descried by Lynch, a new twist on film-noir. And only Lynch could put a twist like this on a classic genre. People keep wanting to draw comparisons to other films, saying: "Well, it's not Blue Velvet" or "It's not Mulholland Dr,"...they're right. It's Lost Highway, a unique and twisted foray down a dark highway that may or may not be entirely metaphorical...or metaphysical.
One of the things that I've noticed about David Lynch--and what probably inspires much of the hatred non-Lynch fans have towards his work--is that he doesn't explain everything. He lays it out, says "Here's my story. What do YOU make of it?" It's an incredible artistic attitude, much like viewing a Dali painting as opposed to a Da Vinci, and not for everyone's tastes.
Lost Highway is open to many interpretations, as are most of Lynch's works. Are we in our world, and being invaded by some outside force? Are we in a world we don't know we're in? Are we in Hell? What would you do if this happened to you? Maybe we are all someone else, really.
This film is at the same time allegorical, philosophical, incomprehensible, and satirical. It warps understood movie conventions, and is always pulling the unexpected.
All that praise aside, it is NOT the best of Lynch's work. One would have to be a fan to enjoy this, and should establish that fanhood with his better works, like Mulholland Drive, Blue Velvet, or "Twin Peaks."
If one has a set standard of how movies should be, an A-B-C pattern, stay away. But if it's originality, unanswered questions, and a break from standard Hollywood convention, go full ahead.
In my humble opinion, it's better than Wild at Heart and Dune, but not most of Lynch's rest. It is definitely an experience, but not one everybody will enjoy.
"Lost Highway" is a great many things, but often seems to be reduced to a love-it or hurts-my-head-from-the-confusion, so-I'll-just-dismiss-it kind of movie. Some critics have written it off as self-indulgent swill, saying that only people who could hope to appreciate it would be Lynch himself and his plethora of wide-eyed adoring fans, etc, etc. I myself have never actually been a huge fan of Lynch, perhaps because I thought his stories didn't take themselves seriously enough, were just too darn quirky, who knows. Still, I've always admired his talent for creating beautiful, disturbing imagery, and "Lost Highway" has to be my favorite film of his, and possibly one of the most beautiful and mesmerizing I've ever seen! Certainly not for everyone, as those who want a definitive "answer," who think that seeing it again and again is really going to explain everything, or those who are simply into the ol' explosion-packed action blockbusters are going to be left shaking their heads. It's definitely open to interpretation. Myself, I'm not one to offer any new insight, I view it as--SPOILER AHEAD??--a purely subjective movie, with nearly all the events seen and largely imagined by its protagonist, Fred Madison, and once you can simply accept him as insane (or at least very imaginative!) you can simply quit puzzling over it and allow yourself to enjoy the ride.
While incarcerated for killing his wive in an act of jealousy, he embarks on a "psychogenic fugue" as an act of last-minute escapism from the looming dread of his upcoming execution--sort of like Ambrose Bierce's "Occurence At Owl Creek Bridge"--imagining himself as a younger, more likable/worthwhile guy (valued auto mechanic, "Mr. Eddy's" favorite), with people who care about him (his parents and girlfriend, as opposed to his real-life murdered wife who didn't even bother to go to his musical performances), and definitely more virile, as he is able to both attract and fulfill his "wife" (seen here as the slutty, icy femme fatale-type he always suspected her to be). However, try as he may, he ultimately can't avoid his past (notice how the fantasy him is put off when he hears Fred's jazz song on the radio in the garage), and thus after the fantasy Alice/Renee rejects him in the desert, he immediately turns back into his typical view of himself--hurt, older, sensitive, vulnerable (represented by his nakedness)--proving that even his fantasies fail him, and thus he's left to die an unpleasant death in the electric chair after all (notice the way he violently contorts in the closing moments, almost as if he's being electrocuted). Call him a modern-day murderous Walter Mitty I guess. The Fred Madison/O.J. Simpson comparisons made by some are interesting--if just a BIT cynical!--though I have to halfway wonder if that real-life spousal jealousy murder case provided any grain of inspiration for this fictional one. The cast is impressive and do a great job; Bill Pullman definitely has the haunted, deer-in-the-headlights look that his confused, out-of-it character requires, though at the same time I don't know if he quite portrays the extreme jealousy and animal savageness deep down inside that caused him to murder his wife as gruesomely as he did (if of course you even want to accept what was on that final videotape as something that actually happened in the first place!). Needless to say, the whole moebius-strip "twist" of having the film end at its beginning greatly complicates any interpretation; even without it, the film could STILL be difficult to decipher by some (heck, I'm still not even really sure what the significance of the Mystery Man was!)
Perhaps the film could have benefited from a few extra scenes or lines of dialogue to make it a little less cryptic for the more literal-minded members of the audience, but still, even by suggesting that you'd be implying that there was one concrete explanation for the film, which there most certainly is not.
Regardless, all plot and interpretations aside, you can almost certainly enjoy for its images, its music (an EXCELLENT soundtrack), for its mood and atmosphere, and simply for it as a whole: dare I say, it's almost more of an experience than anything (though for what it's worth, at the same time I can't think of the last time I saw a film--or work of art period, for that matter--that provoked such a wide variety of interpretations and opinions, as should hopefully be the case with ANY great work of art).
Fascinating.
While incarcerated for killing his wive in an act of jealousy, he embarks on a "psychogenic fugue" as an act of last-minute escapism from the looming dread of his upcoming execution--sort of like Ambrose Bierce's "Occurence At Owl Creek Bridge"--imagining himself as a younger, more likable/worthwhile guy (valued auto mechanic, "Mr. Eddy's" favorite), with people who care about him (his parents and girlfriend, as opposed to his real-life murdered wife who didn't even bother to go to his musical performances), and definitely more virile, as he is able to both attract and fulfill his "wife" (seen here as the slutty, icy femme fatale-type he always suspected her to be). However, try as he may, he ultimately can't avoid his past (notice how the fantasy him is put off when he hears Fred's jazz song on the radio in the garage), and thus after the fantasy Alice/Renee rejects him in the desert, he immediately turns back into his typical view of himself--hurt, older, sensitive, vulnerable (represented by his nakedness)--proving that even his fantasies fail him, and thus he's left to die an unpleasant death in the electric chair after all (notice the way he violently contorts in the closing moments, almost as if he's being electrocuted). Call him a modern-day murderous Walter Mitty I guess. The Fred Madison/O.J. Simpson comparisons made by some are interesting--if just a BIT cynical!--though I have to halfway wonder if that real-life spousal jealousy murder case provided any grain of inspiration for this fictional one. The cast is impressive and do a great job; Bill Pullman definitely has the haunted, deer-in-the-headlights look that his confused, out-of-it character requires, though at the same time I don't know if he quite portrays the extreme jealousy and animal savageness deep down inside that caused him to murder his wife as gruesomely as he did (if of course you even want to accept what was on that final videotape as something that actually happened in the first place!). Needless to say, the whole moebius-strip "twist" of having the film end at its beginning greatly complicates any interpretation; even without it, the film could STILL be difficult to decipher by some (heck, I'm still not even really sure what the significance of the Mystery Man was!)
Perhaps the film could have benefited from a few extra scenes or lines of dialogue to make it a little less cryptic for the more literal-minded members of the audience, but still, even by suggesting that you'd be implying that there was one concrete explanation for the film, which there most certainly is not.
Regardless, all plot and interpretations aside, you can almost certainly enjoy for its images, its music (an EXCELLENT soundtrack), for its mood and atmosphere, and simply for it as a whole: dare I say, it's almost more of an experience than anything (though for what it's worth, at the same time I can't think of the last time I saw a film--or work of art period, for that matter--that provoked such a wide variety of interpretations and opinions, as should hopefully be the case with ANY great work of art).
Fascinating.
This is the first film directed by David Lynch I've seen, not counting The Elephant Man, which is another great film, but is an outsider in his career, since it is not surreal. This film is, however, making it the first typical Lynch film I've seen. And I'm honestly not sure what to make of it. I had heard a lot about Lynch's films before watching, but I guess I hadn't heard enough. I went into this film hoping for a good mystery, an interesting puzzle to solve. As the end credits rolled I didn't know what to make of what I had just seen. I didn't get an answer to the question I kept asking while I was watching; "What exactly is this film about?". As soon as the credits were over, I read a comment or two by Lynch fans... and the truth dawned on me. It's not supposed to be solved. It's not a movie where you, when you see the very end, exclaim "Ah! Now I get it!". This film won't provide you with some twist ending or have a character come up to the lead and explain it all. It's not supposed to make perfect sense or be easily explainable. It's not real. It's fantasy. Fiction. The whole film is like a dream, or, more appropriately, a nightmare. The film is great; it's just not for me. I won't let that affect my rating, however. This was an excellent example of masterful film-making. Lynch's direction is eminent, evidenced by the fact that I kept watching, despite not understanding half of what was going on or being able to sympathize with any character(something we are much too used to from mainstream movies). The lighting is great. Lynch really plays around with it, and it's always interesting to look at. It also really adds to the mood, nicely set by careful editing and music usage. The acting is flawless, and that is not a term I use lightly. All in all, a wonderfully well-done film, but definitely not for everyone. Wasn't in my tastes, but I enjoyed how well-made it was regardless. I recommend this to fans of art films, rather than conventional ones. Fans of Lynch should enjoy this. Very surreal and loose. 10/10
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाAccording to co-writer and director David Lynch, the first scene in the film is based on an incident that occurred in his own life. He claims his intercom buzzed early one morning and when he answered it, a voice on the other end that he didn't recognize said, "Dick Laurant is dead." However, by the time he got to the front of the house to look out the window, there was no one outside.
- गूफ़When Pete and Sheila are having sex in the car, external shots show the car parked alongside a wall in a dark, tree-covered section of street. Yet in interior shots, the wall is many metres away in the far background and is brightly illuminated.
- भाव
Ed: Do you own a video camera?
Renee Madison: No. Fred hates them.
Fred Madison: I like to remember things my own way.
Ed: What do you mean by that?
Fred Madison: How I remembered them. Not necessarily the way they happened.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटA Real Trooper-Guadalupe Hurst
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनAn unconfirmed report claims that a Director's Cut of the film exists which has a number of scenes deleted from the original 134 minute print. Some of the missing scenes include:
- A breakfast scene with Fred and Renee where Fred asks her where she was when he phoned her from the jazz club the night before, and when she says that she never left the house all evening, his suspicions of her cheating on him intensifies.
- Another scene of a third videotape arriving at Fred and Renee's house where they watch it and catch a glimpse of a cold-faced Fred on one frame. They phone the detectives Al and Lou again who pay them another visit.
- A scene set in the morgue where the attendant, George, prepares an autopsy on Renee's mutilated body where he is joined by a tuxedo-clad medical examiner and the examiner's girlfriend, Joyce, which is immediately followed by a courtroom scene where Fred literally faints after hearing the jury forewoman read the guilty verdict and the judge's sentence of death, which is only heard in the original version.
- A scene in a lingerie shop where two young women, Marian and Raquel, glimpsed only in the porno film at the end, talk about the Renee Madison murder and about the method of execution the state would use when they are interrupted by Andy who gestures for them to hurry up with their selections.
- Another scene follows where Andy, Marian and Raquel are involved in a drugged-out threesome orgy at his house.
- A prison scene where one inmate is shown being led out of his cell to the gas chamber with other prisoners taunting him and the guards preparing for the execution as if it was a formal gathering, plus another scene of Fred talking to the prison guards in the courtyard the next day.
- A full scene of dialogue between the prison warden and Pete Dayton's parents, Candace and Bill, where they are told of their son's whereabouts and his physical condition where he has a hematoma on his forehead and blepharitis, redness around the eyes. Bill and Candace are elusive to the warden's questions about Pete's whereabouts for the last few days. Pete is then brought into the office where he doesn't respond to questions asked, and Bill and Candace are told that they can take him home. After they leave, the warden then makes a statement to reporters outside his office about the disappearance of Fred Madison from the prison.
- Extended scenes of dialogue between Pete and his friends Steve V, Teddy, Carl and Lanie on their arrival at his house where Lanie shows them a scar on her abdomen from an operation she just had. Plus more dialogue as the four of them ride in Steve V's car, where they first arrive at a drive-in restaurant called Johnny's where they pick up Sheila and her two girlfriends and then drive to the bowling alley.
- An extra scene of Pete riding up Van Nuys Boulevard at night on his motorcycle after Alice had phoned him to cancel their evening get-together. Pete arrives at Johnny's Drive-In where he meets with Steve V, Carl and Sheila where Pete responds awkward towards them as he is having a mysterious headache. Pete then savagely beats up two guys who try to pick up Sheila, much to her shock.
- The telephone scene between Pete, Mr. Eddy and the Mystery Man is slightly extended with more dialogue with the Mystery Man telling Pete about him just killing some people and telling him more details about executions in the 'Far East' set to imply China during the Cultural Revolution.
- A brief scene of Fred Madison checking into the Lost Highway Motel and walking towards Room 25 which he knows is right next to Room 26 where Renee and Mr. Eddy are.
- कनेक्शनEdited into Rammstein: Lichtspielhaus (2003)
- साउंडट्रैकI'm Deranged
Written by David Bowie and Brian Eno
Courtesy of Tintoretto Music (BMI) and Upala Music (BMI)
Performed by David Bowie
Courtesy of Jones Music and Virgin Records America, Inc.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
David Lynch's Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
David Lynch's Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
See how IMDb users rank the films of legendary director David Lynch.
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- लॉस्ट हाइवे
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- 7035 Senalda Road, लॉस एंजेल्स, कैलिफोर्निया, संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका(Fred Madison's house)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $1,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $37,26,792
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $2,12,710
- 23 फ़र॰ 1997
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $38,46,852
- चलने की अवधि
- 2 घं 14 मि(134 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें