Congratulations to those who can make sense of Lynch's work without having to resort to some textual film analysis or e-zine spoiler. Personally, I can't relate or fully appreciate his out of kilter storytelling -- call me old fashioned, but by and large, it strikes me as contrived and often just assumed high art. I'm sure Lynch gets a right guffaw picturing his viewers sitting around in awe trying to make sense of the obscure symbolism in his films. I, for one, don't have the patience. It seems like the sometimes marginal acting and lack of cohesion in his work is overlooked simply because it's a picture done by Lynch.
In terms of cinematography, he has his moments -- but for the most part, I just ain't buyin' it. Like the musical offerings of Cecil Taylor (or late era Coltrane), Lynch has flashes of greatness in his work, but it's just not worth sitting through the abrasive weird-for-weird's sake tripe to witness them.
If I had to pick one, I'd say Blue Velvet is his best. Still not a great film, in my opinion, but I like the way he tears down the old white-picket-fences of Americana by exposing a seedy and unsettling underbelly. I also appreciated the film's loyalty to classic film noir.
