33. Blue Velvet (1986)




Roger's Rating :


Should be :


I can understand someone not liking this movie. It is crazy and bizarre but it is still a movie that demands to be seen. Roger, in his 1 star review, said "And yet those very scenes of stark sexual despair are the tipoff to what's wrong with the movie. They're so strong that they deserve to be in a movie that is sincere, honest and true. But Blue Velvet surrounds them with a story that's marred by sophomoric satire and cheap shots. The director is either denying the strength of his material or trying to defuse it by pretending it's all part of a campy in-joke."
I think he is saying that some of the scenes are so powerful that they deserve to be surrounded by a more serious overall plot, instead of what he feels is camp.
I understand where he is coming from but this is a movie that should be seen. It is not for all tastes but is a fascinating movie nonetheless.
On IMDB it has a 7.9 rating and on Rotten Tomatoes it has a 90% rating.

1 comment:

Wooland Horn said...

Roger always disliked David Lynch. Ebert considered his films to be ripoffs of Russ Meyer's work. I disagree and I believe Ebert's personal relationship with Russ played into his poor review of Blue Velvet.


Roger's Facebook Post

Roger's Twitter

Total Pageviews