Bad movies, typically speaking, are either dismissed as simply bad, or are so bad that they in effect become pretty hilarious. But there’s another way to regard these films as well; what if, by a spark of inspiration, you come up with a theory that, if we take it as true, improves a bad film? Welcome to the Internet, the breeding ground for just such barmy theories, and over the years they’ve come up with some real kickers, the funniest and most interesting of which are typically those which actually improve our esteem of a bad film. Granted, a sucky film is a sucky film, but if we can brainwash ourselves into thinking that this is the filmmaker intention, then it somehow makes everything seem alright…
10. Inland Empire Was Re-Edited So It Didn’t Make Sense
David Lynch is a master filmmaker of weird films that aim to creep and confuse the Hell out of us. He’s had his fair share of successes in this regard, what with Blue Velvet, Mulholland Drive, Eraserhead, and his TV series Twin Peaks, but his last film, Inland Empire, was a regrettable, unfortunate misfire. Not only incoherent and incomprehensible, but surprisingly dull, it’s a rare Lynch film without much merit beyond its solid performances, but there’s an interesting theory that’s been floating about film school lecture halls for the last few years that actually makes a lot more sense.
What if David Lynch actually filmed Inland Empire as a coherent, straight-forward tale, and then intentionally edited it out of sequence to keep his “arty oddball” persona well in tact? Looking at the film, it’s such a narrative non-sequitur that we could believe it, especially given how ingrained his image and style is at this point.
This article was first posted on November 14, 2012