DVD Finally Finds ‘Lost Highway’
Like Michael Haneke’s Caché, it begins with a mysterious videotape. Like Syndromes and a Century, it reboots unexpectedly part way through. Like Hitchcock, it deals with voyeurism and obsession and paranoia. Like Lynch’s own Mulholland Dr., it suggests there is something rotten in the Hollywood Hills.
Oh, and then there’s Robert Blake.
Borrowing tropes and imagery from Kiss Me Deadly, David Lynch’s Lost Highway is film noir coming down off acid. It’s a fever dream full of dread and foreboding, promising something evil just below the surface.
Perched between the unlikely pop-cultural success of Twin Peaks and the mainstream curveball The Straight Story, it remains an imperfect, but underappreciated entry in the Lynch filmography.
Unfortunately, Lost Highway hasn’t always been easy to see. In the U.S. it’s only been available on pan and scan VHS (or letterboxed Laserdisc if you could find one), but today it finally arrives today on Region 1 DVD and one of the more significant gaps in DVD releases has finally been filled.
It’s about damn time.
UPDATE: Be advised that the nerds at DVD Beaver were less than impressed with the image quality of the new Region 1 DVD. (In Comic Book Guy voice) Clearly, the bit rate on this new DVD is inferior and there has been some obvious red/black boosting resulting in a darker image and less accurate skin tones than the PAL releases. Factoring in the lack of extras, we must rate this the worst. DVD. ever.
Filed under: Miscellaneous
Related Posts: - MZS on PTA
- Museum of the Moving Image Goes Online
- ‘Secret Sunshine’ Wins 3 Asian Film Awards
- Friday Filler: Thanksgiving is Still Freaking Me Out
- Contest: Name that Movie #2 (Part 4)
Oh, and then there’s Robert Blake.
Hah!
I’m looking forward to revisiting this film. I have a great appreciation for Lynch.
This is where I shamefully admit that no, I haven’t seen LH, and yes, I know how seminal it is considered. Sigh. At least I can blame it on not having been available on DVD before? Whatever, nobody’s seen everything, have they? We mention about 20 movies a day here. Many I’ve seen, many I’ve haven’t. I almost wish Hollywood would truly, literally go into an “off-season.” Has this been considered before? No new releases from Oscar night through Memorial Day weekend. Maybe that’s a bit much. Anyway, it would give everyone a chance to catch up (not just on the last year/season, but on classics), build anticipation and buzz for the new season, and hopefully eliminate a period in which studios can release Meet the Spartans.
Mulholland Drive remains the trippiest experience I’ve ever had in a movie theater. I remember Ebert perfectly saying, “the less sense it makes, the more we can’t stop watching it.”
I’m starting to regret my decision to skip Inland Empire last year, too.
Seriously Alison…..creepiest comeback performance ever. Well it would’ve been a comeback if he hadn’t ended up shooting someone…
Daniel. Don’t feel bad about Lost Highway. If anything I think its critical reputation is mixed. The first half is among the best things Lynch has ever done (in my opinion), but the second half is much more uneven. It deserves to be seen. Whether you’ll love it or not, I can’t say.
Inland Empire is 342% trippier than Mulholland Dr. Yes it was my favorite movie of 2006, but I can’t necessarily recommend it in good conscience. It doesn’t really follow any of the rules of filmmaking which, understandably, is a dealbreaker for a lot of people.
Daniel, Inland Empire may only be viewable in a theater, so that is too bad. I’m still not sure I’d ever want to chance seeing it on DVD.
As for an off-season for Hollywood, I’d be happy if they just made about 50% less movies in general.
I have never been much of a Lynch fan, I have to admit. That ‘dealbreaker’ you mentioned, Craig? Yup, big effing dealbreaker for me. I remember leaving Mulholland Dr. quite incensed (although I did appreciate how he tricked me into thinking Naomi Watts was a terrible actress).
On the other hand, I find Werner Herzog to be consistently compelling, and stack some of his masterpieces at the top of my list. Why do I love Herzog but hate Lynch? (granted, they are different, but their films - meditations on insanity - share some of those same ‘dealbreakers’ in common)
Chalk it up to the beautiful subjectivity of the cinema. The Hughes brothers, in their commentary track on “From Hell” said it best: “Lynch is one of those directors who pisses you off, but you have to admit no one else is doing anything quite like him.” Now how’s that for a random snippet of useless film trivia?
Haven’t seen LH either, but that is no shocker at all. I have seen Inland Empire and Mulholland Dr. and I can say Lynch is definitely original. I mean, I enjoyed those two films, but it took time and effort to get to that point. I had to see both twice before I could really formulate any opinion of them, is that strange? I do appreciate those films more now than I did then.
Whatever, I have no excuse but to see LH now, and that is a good thing.
“I had to see both twice before I could really formulate any opinion of them, is that strange?”
I would find it strange if anyone could formulate any opinion immediately after a first viewing, Nick. It took me a few minutes to realize I was sitting in a theater when MD ended.
Yeah, Joel, I realize I might have missed my chance on that one. I’m even more intrigued by Craig’s trippiness math, but what can I do.
No off-season, but instead fewer movies? I guess I would accept that as a first step.
I think Joel is spot on in saying that INLAND EMPIRE may only be watchable in the theatre. I’m a major admirer of Lynch’s work, and I still haven’t revisited IE since driving two hours to see it in a theatre. I respect the film, but portions of it are, for me, redundant and nearly unwatchable. Dern’s amazing performance is a true accomplishment though, and it should be seen.
LOST HIGHWAY, in retrospect, feels like a test run for the deeper and more moving MULHOLLAND DR. (one of my all time favorite movies) and for that alone it has my respect, and I agree with Craig about the first half, its a superb piece of work: really a horror film. I almost bought this this morning but picked up THE MIST and BONNIE AND CLYDE instead, I’m sure I’ll remedy this soon.
Long been a Lynch fan. I even liked his Dune. The only film that didn’t work for me so well was Eraserhead. He is a great and important American surrealist. Blue Velvet is among my absolute favorite films and Twin Peaks occupies the same appreciation territory on the television series front. I rated Lost Highway as one of the best films of 1997.
I’ve yet to see Inland Empire.
Joel, the Inland Empire DVD can be purchased at David Lynch.com ->
http://ecomm.davidlynch.com/catalog/dvd_inlandEmpire.php
I also love seeing Lynch in interviews. I’ve not encountered anyone else who simultaneously appears a genius and a simpleton.
Off topic, but speaking of revisiting films: for those of you who love Singing in the Rain, check out the review of one of the guest bloggers at The Film Experience. He took a “make me watch a musical” vote in which he would watch the 2 top-voted musicals (he is not exactly a musicals fan). The 2 films voted on were West Side Story (which he didn’t love) and Singing in the Rain, review here http://filmexperience.blogspot.com/2008/03/mmwam-singin-in-rain.html#links.
It made me laugh out loud. Definitely worth a read. And he uses some of the best stills from the film. Makes me want to watch it again right now.
Daniel, I can only assume fewer movies would lead to fewer good and bad movies, which at least would make my selection process less daunting week to week. I don’t like the idea of fewer GOOD movies, but Hollywood already seems to have taken that path as a matter of convenience so it seems like I have little choice in that matter.
Chuck, I may have had fewer issues with Inland Empire that you did overall, but I don’t think it’s humanly possible to replicate the near perfect movie-going experience I had the first time I saw it and now that I would know what to expect, I’m not sure I can properly judge the movie again. It is one of those rare films where my admiration for it is in direct proportion to my fear that revisiting it would dilute my memories of it. Some things are better left alone.
I have the exact same feelings about Lost Highway. I really like where the first half goes and feel more or less let down by the second half. It’s an elegant mess that in retrospect feels like a dry run for Mulholland Dr., which in turn feels like the thesis statement that Lynch expands upon in Inland Empire.
But no matter how you slice/parse/interpret it all, Lynch is a very demanding film maker. I can’t explain what is I like about him and I don’t like everything he does, but his work touches my psyche (and my funny bone) on a deeply elemental level.
“Diane, I hold in my hand a small box of chocolate bunnies.”
Lost Highway is somewhere in my Top Five of 1997, easily. I’ve said it before, and now that there’s an actual thread about Lost Highway itself, I’ll say it again–I actually prefer it, just a little, to Mulholland Drive even though I actually love them both. I also love Inland Empire a great deal. To me, though, and I know I’m in the stark minority on this, I’ve never completely responded to Mulholland Drive 100% the way others do whereas I’m always hit harder by Lost Highway, and, even more so, Eraserhead, The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and Wild at Heart, and The Straight Story.
I think someone once wrote that one of the reasons Mulholland Drive became so popular even among non-Lynch fans was because it was a surrealistic film by Lynch that people could sort of “figure out.” Nevertheless, it’s certainly in my Top Ten of 2001. Actually, all Lynch films are in my Top Tens.
I actually love all of Lost Highway, beginning, middle and end. It becomes more twisted as it goes in my opinion, and though it arguably kind of hits you over the head in its final stretch, I find the denouement as rewarding as the “set-up” Lynch created with Hitchcockian precision. I know you’ve written this a number of times, Craig and I couldn’t agree more–Lynch is essentially the closest thing to Hitchcock today–maybe Hitchcock on acid, like this film itself.
Inland Empire admittedly loses something between the theatrical experience and the sitting-at-home experience, but it’s still pretty damned rewarding nonetheless. It’s bold and, to continue the Hitchcock comparison, an intensely, deeply personal exploration of Lynch’s neuroses and beliefs, as at least a couple of critics said (especially in the San Francisco Bay Area), a bit like Vertigo.
Is Lynch up to anything now?
I think you’re right Alexander about the reason for MD’s appeal, and, frankly, that’s probably why I love it. I love most of Lynch’s stranger films, but the (relative) simplicity of MD really bowled me over, I went into the theatre with my academic hat on and left very moved.
Inland Empire, in fits and starts, is equally powerful, but I just found portions of the thing to be maddening, and I had a theory that sort of figures that one out too (sorry, I can’t help being literal).
I haven’t seen Lost Highway in years, so I want to re-watch before I commit to an opinion on that one too strongly.
Alexander, that’s an interesting interpretation of the appeal of Mulholland Dr. I would add that I think because 75% of the film was originally shot for and intended to be broadcast on network television, it’s highly possible that audiences generally responded to the more densely plotted aspects of it.
Regardless, I do like it more than Lost Highway so I suppose I’m in the majority on it. Course, I can’t deny that a large part of my enjoyment of it rests entirely on Naomi Watts’ performance. If another actress had been in that role, it’s possible I may not have liked it as much.
Well, Chuck, I think that’s a perfectly reasonable and cool reason for liking or loving Mulholland Drive. It’s a very powerful film to be sure.
I actually had a theory on Inland Empire, and if I had more time (next class is about to start) I’d probably go into it, but it’s somewhat tenuous… I can most definitely see anybody finding it maddening, but, like joel and Craig and many others, I just allowed it to sort of wash over me… I still remember seeing it on a chilly Saturday afternoon in late February with only three more people in the theatre–three women sitting in the front row, all looking like they were in clothes for exercising. Such an amazingly bizarre, beautifully defiant film, at least for me…
The three hours flew by in the cinema.
At home, you feel the running time a little more.
joel, I do think you’re right about audiences enjoying the densely plotted narrative of Mulholland Drive, and as you say, that was doubtless partly because of so much of it being shot for network television.
Nothing wrong with being in the majority, ahaha…
Damn, I completely forgot to mention this in my weekly DVD Digest. I’ll remedy that tonight, methinks.
Also, I’m looking forward to revisiting this. I’ve only seen it once so far, on its original release back in ‘97, before I was really into Lynch. If nothing else, it should make more sense to me now. Back then, I mostly just grooved on the weirdness, especially the scene with Robert Loggia and the tailgater.
Funny thing about my Inland Empire experience- I saw it in a theatre with really crappy presentation, which made the grimy DV even more distracting to me, and I had a hard time getting past that, especially at three hours in duration. I rarely have trouble with long films at home, so I’ll check it out again one of these days.
I’m glad I had seen MD and LH before Inland Empire. Without those primers to Lynch’s current thematic direction, I might not have made it through IE or liked it much. I suppose he’s broken down my expectations and opened me up to a wider range of expression.
On the other hand, Gus Van Sant has been trying to accomplish the same experiment with audiences and I think he’s mostly failed to achieve that same level of cinematic dialogue.
But I respect what both of them are trying to do. You have to respect anyone who will go out on the limb that many times in a row. And their continued ability to get funding for movies that more than likely will fail to show much profit.
I think MD was the first time I’d seen Watts in a film. I recall the precise scene when I realized she was an acting force to reckon with – the audition with the sleazy actor.
Sorry Daniel, I meant to refer you to the IE DVD link, not Joel. It’s like you walked towards the ominous shadows of a room and completely disappeared, only to re-emerge from them as Joel :-)
I really don’t like David Lynch’s movies, yet for some reason I feel compelled to watch them. Maybe it’s a desire to be in the know and to be able to discuss them. I don’t really know what it is because I definitely don’t enjoy watching them.
Inland Empire was one of the most painful movie experiences I’ve had, and not in a good way. The only redeeming parts of that movie were Dern and the Locomotion dance scene. Likewise with Blue Velvet, Hopper and his singing scene. I think Eraserhead was his most enjoyable movie but even then, that’s just in comparison to the rest of his work.
It seems I’m in the minority. At least in the group of people who know who Lynch is. Many of my friends enjoy him, and it looks like most of you do, too.
I love Lost Highway. Not sure why it’s so underrated. I’d say it’s easily one of his best films (and probably his most twisted and outrageous), and a brilliant companion piece to Mulholland Drive. Very happy this is out on dvd.
I was really hoping this little notice would inspire a decent Lynch thread and I’m glad you all delivered. Makes my day.
Sartre. Watts. Audition. YES! I had the exact same revelation.
Inland Empire blew my tiny little mind and that’s all I can really say about it. I’m also hesitant to revisit it because I’m afraid to find out the emperor has no clothes.
Nick. Until IE, Lynch has always demanded another viewing from me in order for me to process it and appreciate it.
Eraser Head took me the longest to warm up to. When I first saw it in college, it gave me a headache and I actually kind of hated it. I revisited it years later after becoming a Lynch fan and now I love it.
The last time I rented it, the owner of the video store looked at me funny and asked if I’d seen it before. I said yes and she asked why on earth I’d want to see it again. I explained that, to me, Lynch was like watching a waking nightmare. I don’t know about you, but I love having nightmares. There’s that moment when you wake up, right when you realize it was just a dream, but you’re still freaked out and it hasn’t quite sunk in yet. It’s a crazy awesome feeling, and that’s David Lynch.
Clearly not everyone’s cup of tea. Justin is certainly not alone in not really digging the whole thing….especially Inland Empire.
All I can say about IE is what I’ve said about it before: there’s a very liberating feeling for me from having my intellect completely assaulted and ultimately defeated. I spent the first half trying to make rational sense out of it only to have the rug pulled out from underneath me at every turn. Finallly I just gave up and let it push my buttons.
I did have a loose theory about what it all amounted to, though it’s fuzzy to me now and I wouldn’t care to get into it. Perhaps another time when I revisit it.
In some ways I think Lost Highway is less a dry run for Mulholland than it is the real deal that was cleaned up and made presentable for a wider audience with Mulholland. I reserve the right to change my mind when it comes from Netflix tomorrow, however.
lol, sartre, I was wondering if anyone would notice my feat. Glad to know that it’s available on DVD, that’s for sure. I also believe I first saw Watts in MD, and was completely blown away by the same scene as you. Is credit due to Watts or Lynch for that scene, in your opinion? I don’t think she’s ever been better. Not that she’s been bad since, but she’s never been that good. Has she?
“But I respect what both of them are trying to do. You have to respect anyone who will go out on the limb that many times in a row. And their continued ability to get funding for movies that more than likely will fail to show much profit.”
Agreed, Joel, to the extent that their work actually “succeeds” that many times in a row.
Justin, I don’t think you’re standing alone (and even if you are, good for you). I don’t think Lynch fans are any more cinematically competent than anyone else. They just have a taste for the “nontraditional” every now and then.
Yes, Justin, I have some film-loving friends who absolutely detest Lynch. I don’t hold it against them or anything, we just have different tastes that occasionally overlap. I like hearing a different opinion on things, even when I vehemently disagree with it, just to keep my options open.
David Lynch isn’t for the masses and I’m not even quite sure why I grawk him. But when I first saw Blue Velvet on cable as a teenager, it so completely blew my mind that I was left speechless and completely hooked. Between that and Brazil, I couldn’t really ever watch movies the same way again.
Daniel, there are quite a few Watts films that I haven’t felt compelled to see. But she’s never disappointed me in those I‘ve caught. Her low key presence in Eastern Promises probably said more about the role than the performance. I thought she was terrific in King Kong, Huckabees (I heart the film), and even The Ring. But the performance that I felt was most comparable in quality to MD was 21 Grams. I know several here don’t rate the film and/or her performance in it, but I experienced both as courageous and complex.
I liked her in 21 Grams and I thought the movie was competently made, I just didn’t enjoy *watching* the movie. It was just too depressing.
It is curious that Watts hasn’t found many roles that really seem to work for her though. I think she has talent, so I’m not sure what the problem is.
I would add that Lynch has a way with female performances. His actresses on average seem to do more memorable and interesting work for him than they do elsewhere. For me, this is especially true of Twin Peaks were the cast was generally great, but the female actresses shone more brightly in that series than any where else in their respective careers.
I could mostly say the same about Laura Dern or Isabella Rossellini. Patricia Arquette has never interested me much.
Ironically, the only film of his I haven’t seen (The Straight Story) also has the most versatile female lead (Sissy Spacek) of his body of work.
Damn, I feel shallow now. See, I totally fell for the ‘densely plotted TV melodrama’ of Mulholland Drive, was rather exasperated by Inland Empire (though parts of it were amazing), and well, Lost Highway… it’s been a while. And I remember liking it. But loving it? I don’t think I’ll go that far.
My problem with Lynch, I think, is that’s he’s such a vague, trancendental meditation practicing, dream-logic using type. And well, I’m kinda, you know, analytical. So when Lynch throws me a bone, the illusion of a thread connecting everything, I’ll go along with tons of weirdness, and I’ll even like it if the puzzle doesn’t quite fit in any way, like an Escher drawing…but gimme that thread!
I know, I know, this coming from the girl gushing over Southland Tales. I can’t quite explain it, either. And I will revisit Lost Highway…but not with much enthusiasm, I must admit.
Oh, and I would add to Joel’s list: Laura Elena Harring. Smouldering temptress in Mulholland Dr., beautiful but very, very bland everywhere else
Now would be a good time to say to those of you who carry a torch for Ms. Watts: despite all the horrible things I’ve said about it, Funny Games might be worth your while.
Hedwig, you and I are on a similar vague vs. analytical page, but I think that’s why I get so excited when I’m utterly confounded. Does that make any sense? I do need a thread too, but I found enough of one in both IE and LH to keep me satisfied.
Joel, the curious thing about Lynch and female performances is that he demands so much of them, he really puts them through a ringer…they’re usually very vulnerable and some of the stuff is borderline exploitational…yet often they’re thrilled to work with him again.
I seem to recall that Watts had some problems however…
Yeah, I tend to veer off from the more experimental directors, but Lynch and I have this weird understanding: He does his bat-shit crazy stuff and I continue to give him a pass.
I have no explanation.
Craig, yes, he does demand a lot of his actresses and there are times when he requires acting that verges on exploitive, but I wonder if they’re simply responding to being given such interesting roles?
That’s an excellent observation re Lynch’s ability to bring the best out of actresses, Joel. As for Patricia Arquette, I’ll always love her for Alabama Whitman.
Hedwig, I can’t comment on IE but all of Lynch’s other more surreal efforts still seem essentially cogent to me. Off the top of my head, he offers abstracted, expressionistic, fragmented, time-fractured, sometimes meditative, archetypal and primal representions of emotion and epiphenomena. It may not be confidently analyzed, but can nonetheless resonate as truthful and coherent in a way that eludes more literal/concrete explorations of human experience.
I’ve updated the post to reflect the less than stellar review given the disc by DVD Beaver.
I can’t even say “DVD Beaver” without feeling funny on the inside.
PAL kicks NTSC ass. HD crushes both formats with a foot of Monty Python proportions.
Fortunately, I already have Lost Highway on DVD: from IFC, recorded a few years ago.
How long has DVD been around now and they STILL CANNOT GET THIS RIGHT?!?!?!?
Inexplicable.
We’re beset from all directions by a confederacy of dunces and knaves.
I’ll judge for myself tomorrow, but unless the reviewer is watching the DVD along with a freshly struck, properly projected print of the film while sitting next to David Lynch and Peter Deming, I’m taking his opinion of the DVD with a grain of salt.
Otherwise, image quality is highly subjective, in my opinion.
Less-than-stellar DVD still offers better picture quality than VHS.
It’s not my favorite Lynch movie (I agree with whoever called it a warm-up for Mulholland Dr.) but it’s still great and crazy and full of stuff nobody else can manage.
Also, my theory is that it’s not fewer movies that we need, but more; Hollywood has plenty of talented people who would make a good movie if they could but can’t because the powers that be would rather make 2 or 3 Evan Almightys than 10 or 20 Paranoid Parks or Snow Angels.
My initial concern about the number of films was not necessarily based on quality. It was really just quantity. In other words, there are plenty of good ones already, but who has time to see all of the new good ones and all of the older good ones that you missed? I vote for the off-season.
I know what you mean Daniel. I used to pretty exclusively watch older movies and even then I felt like I’d never see everything I should see. Since I’ve been blogging…it’s been almost all new movies all the time.
Well, at least you got some good pre-blogging viewing in. I’ve been primarily focused on the new stuff for the last five years or so. Averaging 2-3 trips to theater per week really takes away from DVD time, and I’m trying to be as selective as I can with the theater movies. Still, the pressure to see and review as much new stuff as possible is always there. And I still get hooked into seeing some garbage, too, especially since I go in as blind as possible, as you do.
Dan, averaging 2-3 trips to the theatre per week and being selective doesn’t compute :-)
I should’ve picked up LOST HIGHWAY over THE MIST yesterday, rewatched THE MIST, which I was already mixed on, and found that it doesn’t make the jump from theatre to home well. Though, I’m still curious about watching that black and white version.
I had my doubts about your choice Chuck, but sometimes people just have to be given the space to learn from their mistakes :-)
Haha. I have doubts about my choice too, though if it makes you feel any better I did pick up the new BONNIE AND CLYDE too.
Wait a second- the DVD Beaver folks said that the image was too dark? No offense to the Beav, but one of the best things about Lynch’s style are the profound and cavernous blacks lurking in the corners of rooms, so anything that can make them even darker is fine with me. Seems Lynch shares a unique goal with the gents from Spinal Tap: “none more black.”
Besides, I’ll take “slightly too dark” LOST HIGHWAY over no LOST HIGHWAY any day of the week. Watching it tonight for the first time since its original release, I was able to set aside the need for coherence more easily. At the time, I was a newcomer to Lynch, and I approached the film too much like a conventional thriller, and although the weirdness worked for me I didn’t think it hung together. But in light of INLAND EMPIRE it seems almost quaint. I still have some problems with the prosaic acting in some of the roles, especially from Getty, but the thing really sings. And is it just me, or does Bill Pullman resemble Kyle Maclachlan from certain angles? To quote the film, “there’s no such thing as a bad coincidence.”
Oh, and let’s not forget that along with Blake (who is so amazing in this) this was also Richard Pryor’s last big-screen performance.
Haha, sartre, bad math, isn’t it? I’ve lived in above-average markets in the last few years, but that’s no excuse for me having seen The Invasion and Love in the Time of Cholera in the theater…
Paul. “one of the best things about Lynch’s style are the profound and cavernous blacks lurking in the corners of roo” exactly! I respect the Beav so I didnt’ want to put too fine a point on it, but the DVD looked fine to me. Maybe a little too fleshy looking, but not too dark. Maybe the brightness on my TV is adjusted too high….
Another thing that’s been left out so far in the coverage of the LOST HIGHWAY DVD is the biggest surprise of all- chapter stops! Which is rare for a Lynch DVD, as I’m sure you know. Now time-strapped fans can watch their favorite stuff without having to FF through everything else. I know I’ll be watching all of the Blake scenes as well as some of Loggia’s hammier moments.
I remember when I saw the movie with friends on its original release, and for months afterward we’d almost constantly quote Loggia’s awesome line, “you like pornos, kid? They give you a boner?” It’s still as funny now as it ever was.
I think we should make a list of all the “lasts” of LOST HIGHWAY. Here’s a start:
1. Last movie appearance to date of Robert Blake.
2. Last movie appearance of Richard Pryor.
3. Last movie appearance of Jack Nance.
4. Last time anybody gave a rat’s ass about Balthazar Getty.
Any others I’m forgetting?
Paul, there’s a great interview with Eli Roth for The Treatment on KCRW from a few years ago where Roth (alledgedly) claims to have schooled Lynch on the value of chapter stops with his copy of the movie Bound. I’ll let you do the math on that one, but the reason should be obvious with even a slight knowledge of Lynch’s filmography.
Regardless, it was pretty damn funny (comes in near the last third of the broadcast).
http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/tt/tt030903eli_roth
Too bad I just checked this thread now, being like everyone else a big Lynch fan. But no matter–I was treated to reading fascinating discourse here! I generally value DVD Beaver, even if (like me) they ALWAYS give Criterion a free pass.
I have owned the widescreen Region 2 of LOST HIGHWAY for a few years now, and it is most fine.
DVD Beaver has a great rep and I’m sure it’s deserved, but I’m much less picky of an A/V guy. I was relatively happy with the transfer.
One thing that just occurred to me- LOST HIGHWAY’s DVD release makes me wonder if Universal/Focus intends to release editions of movies that were originally released by companies they’ve since acquired. Some of them are currently out of print in the US, after all. I hope so, because that bodes well for a new edition of TOPSY-TURVY.