IF

HEINEKEN?!

Mommy issues.

>>71753332
PABST
BLUE
RIBBON

>"Daddy wants to fuck!"
What did he mean by this?

Why is this film considered by many as one of the greatest of all time?

FUCK THAT SHIT

>>71753408
pretty sure he says baby

>>71753287

I watched this in a theater last Saturday night. The theater has a small proscenium stage directly in front of its screen, and I had an empty can of PBR which I left right in the center, by its lonesome.

Frank has to be domly dom, and is clearly the AMOG (Alpha Male Of his Group). So his usual violent criminal antisocial behavior and problems frustrate his wish to somehow indulge his "mommy/son" fetish, as some sort of a bottom. Frank can't "let go", which frankly makes sense since if your life is spent doing violent criminal shit as Frank's is, you can't ever appear weak or be known to get out of character.

Frank is just a straight-up 1950s badass type that Lynch must have created from watching earlier kino, and Lynch also needed the character to be an almost cartoonish version of the Coen's Unstoppable Evil trope, which they developed later of course. Frank is sort of mythically bad. In a way, the character is /simple/. This guy is just fuckin' evil and that's all it is. The simplicity of the villain (apart from the above mentioned angle) let Mclaughlan's youthful Hero play a sort of mythic White-Knight Hero against this Evil Dragon that is Frank. Jeffery has two women who want the cock, and his dad's business is happy too see him. Even the cop father isn't too upset with Jeffrey's vigilanteeism and detective work toward the end. Jeffery himself is a sort of simple Mary Sue. The simplicity of the protagonist and the antagonist let us focus on other elements of the story, especially the "amateur detective" plot theme, and classic Lynch weirdness.

>>71753433

I think it's a "neat" movie, like 7-8/10, but it doesn't even belong on a top 100 all-time list IMHO. And I do like David Lynch. Blue Velvet can be fun to watch, but not everything that it does quite exactly "works", in my view.

I think it gets included in whatever discussions you're referencing simply because it's a nice "weird/unique/quirky xD" entry in the history of film, which represents the 1980s well. That way whoever is compiling the list can say that they got a "serious" 1980s film into the list, as a representative example. the 70s and 80s contained a lot of 1950s nostalgia (since the people who grew up in the 50s were of age to tell stories a generation later - Lucas, Carpenter, Lynch, the happy days people etc), and Blue Velvet therefore is a good representative example of this trend, just we now experience nostalgia for the 80s and 90s in the post-modern vehicle of "Vaporwave" music and visual art. Same idea. People who grew up with a certain aesthetic like to revisit and restyle it in new art, a generation later when they're at the height of their artistic creative powers (generally from ages 20-45, somewhere in the middle of that range).

For example, my copy of "The Movie Book" by Phaidon, a series of 500 entries doing a survey of film, its entry on Lynch is a different still of Frank with his damn breathing mask. It was quite a meme for a while, seems to have stuck somewhat.

>>71753433
because it sucks

What a great fucking movie