twin-b wrote:iar wrote:Finally, I want to interject on the FX situation. I dunno.. but I just don't understand the complaints. The FX back in 1990 sucked. The FX in all of Lynch's films have sucked. I've always thought it to be completely intentional, an attempt at reaching a certain aesthetic. It's also now 2017 and technologically-speaking, budget allowing, he could do almost anything he wanted to do and have it look fairly real. But why would Lynch ever do that? FX today are overused and as a consequence create predictable scenes. His hokey, hand made, ridiculous effects - when they land - wow... let me just say, that charcoal man in the jail cell. I will see that in my nightmares.
Setting aside Eraserhead and Inland Empire I'm sincerely curious to be reminded of a few examples of bad FX in his films?
Also, I'm curious if people thought the decapitated corpse looked real. I can appreciate the argument around how do you make an electric tree with an amorphous head look real. But if you balance that with really good, believable FX in more realistic situations, I think the more artistic stuff would feel more purposeful.
Quite a few, I think:
- * Superposition of Laura's face on Sarah in TP.
* Superposition of Mystery Man's face on Renee in LH.
* Crazy Laura Dern face in IE.
* And the classic: Mechanical robin in BV
The decapitated head reminds me of the Black Dahlia, FWIW. Didn't Lynch have an option to film that at some point?