Review of Blue Velvet (1986) by Bryce I — 20 Jan 2012

There is no doubt that Blue Velvet is unique. Nowadays you see movies just like it everywhere you look. But at the time that it was released, there was nothing quite like it. And even today, nothing has reached the limits or pulled the strings as much as David Lynch. But the film is... very much so...more than strange. It might be the weirdest movie I have ever had the pleasure of watching. That's saying something. Since beauty usually does not go well with the weird and bizarre, you'd be amazed at what it accomplishes. And while it's no easy ride, it is sure entertaining.

Excluding a few casting choices and some questionable material, Blue Velvet could easily be called one of the greatest movies of all time. But no matter how you look at it, it is a masterpiece. Just like your 9th grade drama teacher always told you... good writers take risks. And there is nothing riskier than putting a character like Frank Booth into a story about urban suburbia. Out of all the performances through-out, I think most of us can agree when we say that Dennis Hopper was born to play that role. Frank Booth is still one of the most memorable psychos ever portrayed on the screen, and Dennis Hopper's performance is one that stays with you.

Blue Velvet is a masterpiece. I cannot even begin to say that enough. But as I have pointed out, it's too strange for me to take seriously. In a world were I am able to call "A Clockwork Orange", "American Beauty", "The Shining", and "Taxi Driver" Masterpieces, and still have the courage to say that this is as strange as it gets... there's no doubt that it's not for my taste. No matter how well directed or acted it is, I will always have a bad taste in my mouth when it's mentioned. It was worth a shot, and was more than worthy of a look. And though I can recommend it for it's originality and classic eerie setting, there are far more better things to watch. Even if they're not by David Lynch.