Stream it now Blue Velvet Reset Status Want to Watch Already Watched Don't Want to Watch

Great Surreal Film a must see! (8/10)
Watch For: Isabella actually was nude under her velvet robe when she did the "ritualistic sex scene", a fact that her partner Dennis Hopper was not aware of.

David Lynch's Blue Velvet is a paranoid and disturbing view of small-town life. The story begins with a young character, played with perfect subtlety by Kyle MacLachlan, visiting his ill father in the hospital. On his way back to his home through a field, he discovers a severed ear buried into the grass. This shocking discovery catapaults him into the seemy underbelly of his seemingly quiet and harmless suburban town. He becomes entangled with a masochistic nightclub chanteuse with a closet full of secrets (Isabella Rossellini), a psychotic kidnapper who inhales from a canister around his waist before engaging in his brutal acts (Dennis Hopper), and a gang of miscreants and low-lifes (one of which is portrayed by Jack Nance, who previously starred in Eraserhead, one of Lynch's first films).

A film like Blue Velvet is hard to categorize. While parts of the film play like a small-town comedy, others seem ripped out of a noir thriller. There are some tender moments, especially those shared between MacLachlan and Dern, and some truly disturbing ones (including a violent rape sequence in Rossellini's apartment). The emotional dichotomy of this film can be a hard one to swallow. There are several powerful and emotionally-charged scenes in this film which seem to be surrounded by corny puns (the call letters of the Lumberton radio station: WOOD) or borderline-sappy teenage love affairs, but unlike Roger Ebert who, although he reconizes the "raw power" of these scenes, believes "Lynch surrounds them with what is essentially a satire on small-town comedies," I believe that these elements are not intended as a direct satire. Lynch delves into the themes of the evils that lurk beneath the harmless facades of everyday life, and he futher emphasizes this disparity by making the good stuff really good and the evil stuff really evil. This underlying theme is even expressed in one of the first shots of the film in which the camera moves from a gorgeous and well-kept lawn and house down through the grass and focuses in on a group of bugs. The scene is grotesque and filled with disgusting bug noises, certainly not the kind of thing one generally thinks of when they look out on their perfectly manicured suburban lawn. Lynch is not the first to do this, of course. Look at many of Hitchcock's films and watch how he deftly conceals his most dispicable and heinous crimes behind facades of friendlyness (check out Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train, Psycho, Shadow of a Doubt, or Frenzy for examples of this). In many ways, this film embodies the noir tradition as well as the basic philosophies (and unparalleled ability to craft suspense) of Hitchcock to create what could best be described as a "neo-noir thriller."

As expected in a David Lynch film, the cinematography is quirky and exciting and almost always beautiful. Even the opening credits sequence has an understated beauty in its gentle waves of blue velvet. The film features some highly technical camera work as well and one cannot help but notice where Lynch may have influenced such directors as David Fincher, who employs many similar techniques in his own highly-stylized films. On the subject of technical detail, the sound design in this film is also quite excellent. Although there are some bits of spotty sound editing, the design overall is superb. There are some generally creepy bits of noise popping up throughout the film and Lynch always knows when to break the tension with a sudden explosion of sound. The music is also used very effectively here, and I know Roy Orbison's "In Dreams," played prominently in two rather disturbing sequences, will never sound the same again to these ears.

I intended to write more about this film, but I don't feel as if I could do so without giving away too much specific plot information, so I feel as if I should let the movie speak for itself in this regard. I cannot guarantee that everyone will like this film, in fact I'm sure that there are many people (Roger Ebert included) that will absolutely hate it. And perhaps rightly so. Lynch's intentions are not always clear and what may play as dark humor and social commentary to one could be seen just as validly as inappropriate and juvenile. The film may not work for everyone, but it worked for me, and I found myself captivated and mesmerized. For the first time in recent memory, this film literally had me on the edge of my seat during its suspenseful climax. But this film is more than a suspense thriller, and callng it thus seems to deprive it of the intelligence that Lynch imbues into this film. If you are in the mood for something a little different and more than a little creepy, then Blue Velvet is a masterpiece that cannot be missed.

:up:

Blue Velvet B+
- Dennis Hopper gives a performance that rivals Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs. Blue Velvet was filmed in my hometown of wilmington. It even has a couple of clips at my old High School. Overall this is my 3rd favorite David Lynch film.

Films watched between January 17, 2004 - January 19, 2004.

Blue Velvet. What can I say about this movie that hasn't been said before? This has to be one of the weirdest movies I have ever seen, competing with Mulholland Dr, which happens to be written and directed by the same guy David Lynch. Since I was expecting to see a Lynch movie, I knew I was going in for a surprise. This Neo Noir thriller about a small town crime murder leads into a seedy underground underneath the clean cut world of anytown, USA. In one of his most memorable roles, Dennis Hopper plays a psychotic sex addicted gangster who runs the underground world of Lumberton. Kyle MacLachlan plays Jefferey, who discovers the evilness of a town when he stumbles upon a severed ear and decides to go to his friend's dad who happens to be a detective. After learning some information, he decides to visit an apartment of a possible suspect. That's when he is sucked into the underworld. This movie has an intriguing weirdness to it. It lures you in the way Jeffery is after finding that ear. The acting is hilarious, seeming to come out of an episode of Days of our lives. Of course that soap drama feel is something that intrigues the viewer, which was one reason I kept watching. But I don't know Lynch's weirdness GENUIS. It is definatly unique and disturbing but it is on the border between genuis and weird for the sake of weird. Some of the weird aspect got pulled off to make it come of as disturbing (most of Dennis Hopper's helium induced violence) while other stuff jsut makes you go MAN WTF OMG. Even though I don't think it is one of the best movies ever made, it is definatly a classic and I can't deny Lynch's ability as a director. It is just not my cup of tea.

David Lynch's erotic masterpiece is a true landmark, work of a genius. The film starts out at an even pace, where not much is going on. Jeffery Beaumount is coming home from college too visit his dieing father in the hosipital. The film is very calm, and embrassing, and then we have the introduction of a severed ear, which Jeffery finds while walking one day. He takes the ear too the local detective in hopes of finding out what is going on. He meets the detectives daughter, Sandy, and starts a friendship with her. They soon connect the ear with a Jazz singer named Dorothy Vallens. Jeffery is extremly curious too find out what is going on, and ask Sandy too help him get too the bottom of it. Little does he know that he is about to stumble into a world horror. The film starts getting weirder with the introduction of classic movie villain Frank Booth, played by Dennis Hopper, who is a insane sociopath who gets off on sucking Amyl Nitrite, playing Roy Orbison, and hurting others. Jeffery learns that Frank is using Dorothy as a sexual slave, and gets stuck in a horrifiying situation were he is forced too take "a ride" with Frank and his gang of freaks, with helpless Dorothy coming along. We meet the character of Ben, perfectly played played by Dean Stockwell, who is possibly the most suave, yet strange person ever put on film, and it seems like the only person Frank respects, and even looks up too in some ways. I don't want too ruin the rest, so I'll leave it at that. Ever since I first saw the film, I was blown away by it, and it remains one of my favorite films till this day. Everyone should see this movie.

Intresting movie. I now like David Lynch. Munholland Drive was good too.

Blue Velvet is one hell of a movie. The film combines sexuality, thrills, beautiful yet haunting music, amazing performances, deft direction, and one amazing screenplay; however, the film is quite odd, which is clearly another plus, with several downsides. The story runs smoothly at a tender pace since the narrative works great. Thanks to Lynch though, some sequences never seem to tie together. He leads you to believe one thing, but it turns out that its not what you thought. I felt Hopper's performance was absolutely brilliant (I am the type who prefers over-the-top rather than subtlety, in some cases that is). I am growing more fond of Lynch, ever since my hatred struck after viewing Mulholland Dr. once. I'll be watching Eraserhead next.

Full Review Later

I'm tired of typing reviews. I shouldn't do 5 of them at the same time, really. My girlfriend is now listening to the olympic game's show. Torch bearer. Yeeesh. Have strippers and dwarves carry it instead.

Anyway, this is what I like to call a prison flick. Guy goes to jail, endures hell while there, gets thrown into the hole, the box, whatever, his spirits gets broken. Sort of.

Paul Newman turns in a solid performance and the directing is also solid.

This reminded me of that Jack Nicholson movie where he plays a rapist stuck in a nuthouse. Everything is fun until a certain something happens and then things start to suck. Yeah, I know, exact same stuff. It's a solid movie. What's interesting is seeing how the other convicts leech on him. Beside that, I fail to see how this movie could be #121 in the IMDB top-250. But then, The Elephant Man is #131 and the movie I'll rate in the next entry is #21, so what the fuck do I know, obviously.

I swear, sometimes I get the idea that people call a movie classic simply because it's old.

**.5/****

Pro: The cut scenes. The lighting. The apartment scenes.

Con: A simple story. Much of the acting. The ending.