David Lynch has said that critics of
his movies should not view them as stories. Instead, he says they
should be interpreted as works of art. I've currently seen three of
Lynch's films: Dune, Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me, and now
Blue Velvet. Of those three, the “work of art” label
clearly applies to both Twin Peaks, and Blue Velvet.
(Dune was so awful, I suspect it to have been simply an
attempt to sabotage his own career so that he wouldn't have to direct
any more blockbusters).
I was actually a bit surprised however
that Blue Velvet did have a story I could follow. Jeffrey
Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan), while visiting his hospitalized father,
finds an ear in a vacant lot, and takes it to the police. He
encounters an old flame (Laura Dern), the daughter of a detective
(George Dickerson), who tells him that a local singer, Dorothy
(Isabella Rosellini) may be somehow involved in the case. It's
eventually revealed that her son and husband (from whom the ear was
taken) are being held hostage by a man named Frank Booth (Dennis
Hopper), who uses them to extort sexual favors from Dorothy.
Frank is an utter sociopath. Sexually,
I'm not sure what to call him. He's clearly a sadist, but he also
engages in age-play as a child at times. Dorothy is suicidal, but
can't kill herself because Frank would retaliate by killing her
husband and son. Meanwhile, Jeffrey clearly has kinky urges towards
Dorothy, but doesn't understand how to separate them from the kind of
sociopathy Frank displays, and Dorothy's self-destructive nature
makes her of no help in this endeavor. He wants to bring Dorothy
under control, and destroy Frank.
I think an argument can be made that
Dennis Hopper's performance as Frank is genuinely more terrifying
than Heath Ledger as the Joker. For all of his talk of chaos,
Ledger's Joker always clearly had some intent behind his actions.
Frank, on the other hand, genuinely seems to be making it up
moment-to-moment. While listening to the song “In Dreams” he
speaks the lyrics. I'm sure Lynch had some deeper meaning intended
for that particular song, but to me it simply emphasized how Frank
was practically in another world, even while he was doing truly
horrifying things.
Isabella Rosellini's role has been
controversial, due to the graphic nature of the violence portrayed
against her. Certainly, we could break out the old “this is not an
accurate portrayal of BDSM!” argument against this film. But
unlike 50 Shades of Grey, this movie has no delusions of what
it's showing us. It isn't trying to portray BDSM, it's trying to
portray a monster preying on an emotionally unstable woman. Above
all, Rosellini succeeds in convincing us that she's the kind of
person who would have resulted from the manipulations of a predator
like Frank.
I have surprisingly little to say about
Jeffrey, but I think that's intentional. He's our white bread,
All-American hero, come to save the girl. I'd argue that he's a
repressed Dominant, seeking to “fix” Dorothy. He wants power
over her so that he can do good with it. But, he's repressed enough
in this manner that he still serves as an audience surrogate.
I'd discourage anyone who has a problem
with sexual violence from seeing this film. That said, it is indeed
good at what it is. So if you want to see something horrifying, yet
sexy, then see this.
No comments:
Post a Comment