It turns out Lost Highway is available on Netflix in Poland. I found this out a few days ago when I watched a left-wing YouTuber called Maggie Mae Fish's comparative analysis of Lost Highway with The Shining. As the title of the video, "MYTH OF THE AUTEUR", suggests, Fish uses the two films to attempt to demonstrate the illegitimacy or immorality of auteur theory. Like many people who criticise auteur theory, she either doesn't understand it or pretends not to understand it. Certainly her analysis relies on very selective pieces of evidence. This is a problem I find common to reviewers with political bias, left or right. Ironically, it's not unlike Fred Madison's own selective memory, his preference to remember things his own way to create a palatable narrative.
Oddly, Mae argues that Lost Highway is a superior film to The Shining because Lynch is less true to auteur theory than Kubrick. I suspect this would be quite a surprise to Lynch considering how vocal he's been about the necessity of film directors having final cut. Some of Mae's evidence is directly contradictory, as when she criticises Kubrick for not directing his actors and praises Lynch for allowing actors to make creative contributions. Surely, Kubrick is doing just that by not directing his actors? Also, Lynch is known for not directing his actors, too. Harry Goaz talks about having to do the same take dozens of times in a behind the scenes feature on Twin Peaks season three while Lynch wouldn't directly tell him what it was he was looking for.
Underlying Mae's argument is the implication that to be an auteur you must be responsible for every creative decision in a film. Which is silly because no proponent of auteur theory argues that auteurs never use separate screenwriters. Alfred Hitchcock, one of the very principle directors cited in the days when the concept of the auteur was formulating, was known for not directing some of his actors and for being generally hands off in productions later in his career. He didn't compose the scores and he didn't design the costumes. He had some input on these things but not always. Yet his films do represent his consistent creative signature because he was ultimately in charge of choosing his collaborators.
Mae argues that both Lost Highway and The Shining are about a misogynist and that Lost Highway is the better film because the misogynist is less sympathetic. I would dispute three points there--I don't think Jack Torrance is more sympathetic than Fred Madison, I don't think the presence of a sympathetic misogynist degrades a film, and I don't think there's any evidence that Fred Madison's a misogynist.
We don't even know for sure--he doesn't even know for sure--that he killed Renee. A guy doesn't need to be a misogynist to be a murderer and we never see Fred or Pete make any statements, direct or oblique, applying any general opinion of women. The best I think you could argue is that Pete cheats on Sheila with Alice after Fred was angry at Renee for cheating on him. That's hypocrisy that may imply a double standard. Or maybe it just means Fred/Pete tends not to think things through. We do have evidence of that.
In any case, Mae's obvious love for David Lynch is endearing, anyway. I'm grateful for her VPN ad that tipped me off about the film being on Netflix Poland.
Like most of Lynch's films, I think Lost Highway benefits from not having a single valid interpretation. I watched it on Friday and enjoyed soaking up its atmosphere in a quiet, dark room. I'll give you my interpretation, in case you're wondering.
I think Robert Blake's Mystery Man is an agent from the Black Lodge. Fred Madison is sort of like Cooper's doppelganger--a denizen of the Black Lodge who left and didn't return at his appointed time. The Mystery Man is a demon who feeds on jealousy and violence and he was attracted to Fred because of this. He was surprised to find that Fred was also a denizen of the Black Lodge, a shapeshifter who long ago forgot his original name and shape. I came to this conclusion after the scene where the Mystery Man points a camera at Fred and asks, "What the fuck is your name?!" It suggests the Mystery Man doesn't know and he really wants to find out--he also seems slightly surprised and infuriated that it's an issue. But the two of them are birds of a feather, after all, because they collaborate in killing Mr. Eddie. I think the Mystery Man had an assignment to kill Mr. Eddie in retaliation for the killing of the porn star played by Marilyn Manson. I think Manson's character may either have been from the Black Lodge or someone important to the people of the Lodge. I don't think Fred consciously understands any of this.
Anyway, that's my current interpretation. Mostly I think it's a film that works brilliantly on an emotional level and that its lack of clear logic is evocative of the irrationality of the human mind. You can string together the beads in so many meaningful ways because the underlying currents of emotion are meaningful in ways beyond words.
No comments:
Post a Comment