Why is this film so fucking boring?

Why is this film so fucking boring?

David Lynch

stupid attention deficit kid
you will never be able to appreciate the man with no name trilogy

I seriously can't comprehend how anyone could find Eraserhead boring. It's so batshit insane that it can't be boring.

Pleb

It picks up after like 20 minutes in and then you appreciate the slow parts after finishing it.

>All the ickle babbies watching Eraserhead for the first time because Pleb Letter Memeia told them to.
Drink bleach.

You are a sad person

that movie was legit the only one time Lynch was TRULY memeing

the only purpose of that movie was to make the spectator to feel unconfortable.

What were you expecting? I found the effects and chilling cinematography to be great for being in 77.

>why is this film so fucking boring?

This image never fails to bring a smile to my face

2deep4u

at least you haven´t seen Mulholland drive yet
It looks bearly normal (for david lynch standars) but at the latest quarter of the movie get this reaction

Midnight high as fuck, then the movie comes to life

Art film (a much maligned term) relies upon mood, the texture of an environment or image and the infamous layers of meaning. Lynch is one of the more accesible directors simply because his surreal style is rebellious and not as heavily referential as other art directors. With a director such as Lynch you are very free to enjoy it and intepret it as you will. Eraserhead is one of his more clear films and if you found it boring it is either because its many messages and the feelings it intended to convery are not suited to your own mindset, or you are just not a very intelligent person. I am not a massive fan of Eraserhead, many of its surreal moments seem very forced and transparent. His masterpiece is ultimately Blue Velvet where the surrealism is largely submerged into pure tone, those obvious wtf moments are the stronger because of it.

>or you are just not very intelligent

I love how people that think themselves intelligent always toss this around.
Art and appreciation for art has nothing to do with intelligence. Finding something dull and boring has nothing to do with intelligence either.

I disagree. Appreciating the effort and the expression requires a certain level of intelligence. I did not say that one has to be a genius or anything, but it requires an abiliy to think a certain way. I just threw that in there as a possibility though. I prefer to believe the former possibility, which would be confirmed by OP explaining why he found the film boring.

Please keep posting, it is very rare that I see this kind of thought around here.

Art appreciation requires you as an individual being in touch with your emotions. Intelligence has nothing to do with it.
When you look at Warhol's Soup Cans, our intelligent, rational thoughts would decry it as nothing more than 32 different cans of soup.
Instead, when you look at it, you feel some sort of deeper meaning behind what's visible for all to see. This is devoid of intelligence.

remember finding the picture of jack nance looking into the screen from eraserhead years ago

and I found out it was from a movie and I ordered it because it looked so hilarious

and my mind was literally blown. this was the film that started it all for me. never cared about films until I saw this. made me want make films too.

one day, teevee. you will see my perfect little film.

I do not believe that there is one definition to intelligence. One can be emotionally incontinent and enjoy only the most sentimental of works, to me, being in touch with your emotions require a certain intelligence. I do agree that calculating reason has little to do with art appreciations however, unless we talk about the technical aspects (which should remain secondary in my opinion). I will try to not refer to intelligence in future, but I feel that another phrase is needed, emotional cognition perhaps? Language can be a little tricksy unfortunately.