Unlike New York City, Los Angeles can be a tough place to pin down on the big screen. It has way too many “codes” and unofficial “rules” than any other city I can think of. Obviously NYC-based films have a lot of characters, ethnicities, demographics, various neighborhoods within neighborhoods within boroughs, etc, but there's still a cohesive bond/connection among everything in New York City. The world of Martin Scorsese and/or Abel Ferrara is just around the corner from Woody Allen’s universe which is only a few blocks up the street from the world of Jim Jarmusch who's just a subway commute away from the world of Spike Lee. This six degrees of separation-type connection between these NYC filmmakers has to do a lot with the use of the same actors (Frank Vincent, Victor Argo, Giancarlo Esposito, John Turturro, John Lurie, Steve Buschemi, Harvey Keitel, etc), similar scenarios, and a lot of the same monuments & neighborhoods. Los Angeles-based films & directors are a bit different. Everyone from; David Lynch & PT Anderson to Quentin Tarantino & John Singleton all have a talent for painting their own unique portrait of Los Angeles but those worlds seem SO far apart (which is a pretty accurate representation of L.A. as everything is so spread out over there whereas everything is so condensed, tight in NYC). The worlds of PT Anderson & John Singleton might as well be in different countries even though they're only a few miles apart. F. Gary Gray & Tarantino may have both worked with Samuel L Jackson & Chris Tucker yet you still don’t associate those two filmmakers with one another like you would Scorsese & Ferrara or Jarmusch & Spike Lee. Both Robert Altman & Charles Burnett have also worked with some of the same actors but you’d never associate those two with each other either. Even the term; “New York City Filmmaker” is more common than “LA Filmmaker”. Furthermore, very few modern filmmakers show an abstract/"artistic" view of L.A. PT Anderson has his moments but next to Michael Mann (a director we explore quite a bit on PINNLAND EMPIRE), David Lynch's exploration of Los Angeles fascinates me the most because it’s so unconventional. Lynch's L.A. & Mann's L.A. are somewhat similar (they’ve both even shot the city with a similar digital/HD lens in recent years). Ever since Crash & Lost Highway got released around the same time (two films with an emphasis on highways & roads, darkness & sexuality), Cronenberg & Lynch have become spiritually connected, but in my opinion Mann & Lynch are just as connected in that they both show that (unforced) “cool” darker side of L.A. with an emphasis on the city’s modern architecture. On an architectural level Heat & Collateral DO exist in the same universe as Lost Highway & Mulholland Drive. David Lynch's films during this period feature a lot of void, open & blank spaces, walls, (especially in Lost Highway) and an emphasis on modern architecture that’s slightly dated (both interior & exterior). Both directors explore L.A. with an abstract perspective but Mann is still a bit more straight forward whereas Lynch is a bit more out there. Heat & Lost Highway don’t exactly take place in the same city the same way Bad Lieutenant (Abel Ferrara) & Straight Outta Brooklyn (Matty Rich) take place in the same New York.
 |
| Lost Highway |
 |
| Lost Highway |
 |
| Lost Highway |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
David Lynch is clearly trying to tell us that L.A. is a place that'll drive you mad. In every one of the three key films that we’re gonna get in to in this write-up (Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive & Inland Empire), there's always a crucial scene where the protagonist loses his/her mind due to the environment around them (L.A.)...
 |
| Bill Pullman loses it in Lost Highway |
 |
| Naomi Watts terrorized in Mulholland Drive |
 |
| Laura Dern rushes up to the camera in the creepiest scene from Inland Empire |
I recently finished reading Ashley Perry’s excellent thesis on Michael Mann’s vision of Los Angeles (with an emphasis on Collateral) and I couldn’t help but think that some of the points he makes in his thesis apply to Lynch too. Lynch's vision of Los Angeles, explored in his unofficial trilogy made up of; Lost Highway (1996), Mulholland Drive (2001) & Inland Empire (2006), is quirky & silly yet shady & uncomfortable at the same time. In Lynch's L.A., almost all the women look like old school Betty Paige burlesque dancers (Lost Highway & Inland Empire), there’s tons of male fantasy/"lipstick lesbianism" (Lost Highway & Mulholland Drive), everything is dark & everyone wears black (Lost Highway), there's always some shady movie-related business going on under the table (Mulholland Drive & Inland Empire), goblins & creepy old people come out of nowhere and startle you (Mulholland Drive) and dreams of being a big movie star are destroyed (Mulholland Drive & Inland Empire). In Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive & Inland Empire, David Lynch takes neo-noir, the psychological thriller, dark humor & a pinch of the horror genre, puts 'em all in to one giant pot and, in my opinion, makes it work somehow. The most obvious & written about connection that Lynch's three films share is that they're all psychological thrillers about someone having some kind of a mental breakdown and taking on another personality in order to escape reality. To be honest, I've never understood the whole; "those movies don’t make any sense" thing that’s attached to Lynch’s work. Yeah, they’re weird as shit, but still…the basic plot of each film is pretty straight forward - In Lost Highway we have a man ("Fred Madison") who kills his wife in a jealous rage after discovering she cheated on him, then loses his mind while on death row (I think a LARGE majority of Lost Highway is a dream). In Mulholland Drive we have an actress ("Betty") who essentially goes out to Hollywood with dreams of becoming an actress but after a failed career and a failed relationship with a more successful actress, she kills her herself. Mulholland Drive is essentially a film about how an innocent naive person can be chewed up & spit out by the "big city" (like Lost Highway, I think the large majority of Mulholland Drive is a dream as well). Inland Empire has elements of both; Lost Highway & Mulholland Drive in that it’s a look at the darker side of L.A. & the movie business (Lost Highway) and the mental breakdown of a has-been actress (Mulholland Drive). All of these stories take place in the same dark, noir-ish vision of L.A.
 |
| Lost Highway |
 |
| Lost Highway |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
 |
| Inland Empire |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
David Lynch surely isnt the first filmmaker to show L.A's weird/alternative/"different" side. You could credit Maya Deren, whose work took place in the 40's, as being the "first" or one of the earliest filmmakers to do so. Although her work was more concerned with experimentation of film and not so much Los Angeles, the vibe & ambiance of the city is very present in her short films. Robert Altman also deserves credit for showing LA/socal's alternative side as well - Besides The Player & Shortcuts, which were both released in the early 90's, a good chunk of his work throughout the 70's (which was a little surreal & quirky) was also set in Los Angeles.
Blue Velvet may be the single greatest thing David Lynch has ever done, but his greatest era/period of work was between '96-2006 (he also made The Straight Story during this period). Lost Highway started Lynch's L.A. fascination. It came out during this short period between 1995-1997 when movie-goers were starting to see a darker, noir-ish side of L.A. instead of just the palm trees, neon lights, Hollywood sign, blonde women with fake boobs & cocaine. During this short period we had: Safe (Haynes), Heat (Mann), The Glass Shield (Burnett), Devil In A Blue Dress (Franklin), Boogie Nights (Anderson), Lost Highway (Lynch), LA Confidential (Hanson) & Jackie Brown (Tarantino). You could even reach a little further back and throw Short Cuts & Pulp Fiction in the mix as well. Even comedies like; Swingers & Friday deserve to be included in that group of L.A. films. More filmmakers were starting to show us that issues like; AIDS (Safe) & Police corruption (The Glass Shield) weren’t just New York City problems, the dark streets of Manhattan werent the only place for a good noir (Devil In A Blue Dress & L.A. Confidential) and L.A./southern california had a genuine dark side (Lost Highway). Naturally, Chinatown predates all of these films but I can’t think of such a huge group of influential works to come out at the same time. Unlike Michael Mann's vision of Los Angeles, which is a world I wouldn’t have a problem living in, Lynch's L.A. is a world I wouldn’t mind visiting for a while...but eventually I’d have to leave.
Mulholland Drive, which brought us one of the greatest performances of the last decade (Naomi Watts), was part of a second wave of modern L.A. films to come out during another short period that produced a nice sized body of work that explored a darker/”alternative” side of L.A. These films included: Virgin Suicides (Coppola), Dogtown & Z Boys (Peralta), Mulholland Drive (Lynch), The Man Who Wasn’t There (Coen) & Ellie Parker (which co-starred 3 actors from Mulholland Drive and dealt with a lot of the same issues). As someone who's been to Los Angeles, I can honestly say that Lynch’s three films really do capture the city's vibe, atmosphere & ambience. I'm not a fan of southern California but every time I watch one of his films I'm kinda drawn to the darkness & mystery of the city…
 |
| Lost Highway |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
 |
| Mulholland Drive |
 |
| Inland Empire |
 |
| Inland Empire |
Lynch’s "L.A. trilogy" isnt without typical shots of things like the Hollywood sign or the walk of fame but he's more interested in the darkly lit, underground nightclubs & back alleys that you wouldn’t immediately associate with Los Angeles. In Lost Highway, Fred Madison (Bill Pullman) plays Saxophone at a seedy underground club ("The Luna Lounge"). In Mulholland Drive, Betty (Naomi Watts) & Diane (Laura Hering) go to some creepy back alley theater and in Inland Empire, Nikki (Laura Dern) ducks in to an underground Burlesque show in the middle of the night. When you get through all the quirky "Lynch moments" (which should always be expected in any of his films) there's plenty nods & hints at real life moments like the OJ Simpson murder trial (which I'm convinced was the inspiration for Lost Highway) or other notorious celebrity moments like Jack Nicholson losing it and smashing someone's car windshield with a golf club in the middle of downtown L.A. (Mulholland Drive). Even the scene in Mulholland Drive where Justin Theroux's character is forced to cast an actress he doesnt want too is clearly a nod at all the times I’m sure filmmakers were bullied or strong-armed in to casting someone they didn’t want to. Just naming the film “Mulholland Drive” is an homage to the movie business as Warren Beatty, Jack Nicholson & Marlon Brando all lived on Mulholland Drive at one point. When Inland Empire screened at the 2006 NY Film Fest, Lynch was asked if he ever planned to shoot a film in NYC, but I'd personally like for him to stay put. Given that the plots & themes in his three films were very similar (not a criticism) I think he's still got more to explore.
