Wed, 20 May 2015
In 1986, just off his most disasterious flop yet, David Lynch decided to make a film that would become a trademark of the filmmaker's unique style, Blue Velvet. The film about a young man (Kyle McLaughlin) who stumbles upon a twisted underworld in his hometown would become one of the most divisive films among audiences and critics alike, not to mention being a mind-twister to boot. But does the film deserve such recognition? MovieDude Eric, Kent & Lobster find out.
If you like this episode, you can find more of Arthouse Legends on GonnaGeek.com along with other similar geek podcasts. You can also leave comments at firstname.lastname@example.org or on our Twitter feed @arthouselegends.
Please make sure to leave feedback about the show on your podcast directory, especially on iTunes in order to help us gain more listeners. Thank you.
Couldn't disagree more with Eric on his take on this film. I think you want too much hand holding that you will never get from Lynch. I find the plot and narrative relatively easy to follow and the gaps were straightforward to fill in compared to Lynch's other work. I guess I am the Gene Siskel camp on this one. Nice discussion overall though!