When lists of the decade’s best films appeared at the end of 2009, I was surprised to see Mulholland Dr. at the top of so many. The David Lynch movie was suspenseful, cinematically beautiful, witty, and often confounding, but I daresay that most of us here at AfterEllen.com remember it for something else entirely.
Whatever you thought of the rest of the movie, you have to agree: the lesbian sex gets five gold stars.
To refresh your memory a bit, here’s a promotional video from the French premier of Mulholland Dr. (in English with French subtitles).
If you’ve never seen the movie and the video makes no sense, don’t worry. The movie doesn’t make sense, either. At least not until you’ve seen it about five times — or have listened to expert interpretations from Retro Reviewers Katie and Danielle.
This week, NBC Miami reported that a Mulholland Dr. sequel might be on the way. Laura Harring, who played Rita/Camilla in the original, said that she met with Lynch last week. “I’m very sure it’s coming, it’s being born,” she said. “I cannot really tell you how I know.”
As much as I liked Mulholland Dr. once I decided I understood it, I can’t imagine a sequel. True, the film left a lot of weird things unexplained, but nothing that kept the story from being well told. But the bigger problem is with the main character, Betty/Diane (Naomi Watts).
For one thing, she’s dead. (As is Harring’s character, for that matter.) Even if Lynch resurrected her, I’m not sure Watts would be interested. Why risk marring a classic with a possibly inferior sequel?
Unless, of course, it contains more hot lesbian sex.
Hey, I may be a film purist, but I’m not stupid.
What do you think? Is a sequel to Mulholland Dr. a good idea?