Originally Posted by Skaligojurah

I strongly disagree. Essentially, it's not even a film. It's a pilot to a TV show that never occurred that has some random 10 minute narrative skewing at the end to attempt to make sense of the rest of the film. Then a million lesbian sex scenes thrown in to attempt to garner an extra bit of media attention.

A lot of Lynch films obviously are known for their rather bizarre incohesive narrative(Eraserhead, Lost Highway) however, for some reason Mulholland Drive doesn't seem to do this intentionally, or for a purpose. There was five or six subplots in the first half hour of the film that entirely disappear in the rest of the film, and go nowhere.

After I was done watching it I felt kind of like... "Why are there 17 characters, and situations introduced in the first half of the film that just go nowhere" then reading it was a rejected Television pilot, it begins to make sense.

Blue Velvet remains champion because albeit it was weird, and the narrative was unique, and unpredictable. Yet, it felt that every piece served a general purpose, and everything was tied up nicely.

Even Lost Highway which was equally confusing(and for some reason universally hated by critics for such) at least kept strict to it's themes of the relations of sexual confusion, and violence. Mulholland drive was just all over the place, and lacked too much closure in too many spots. Maybe it's doing the same thing, but it feels far less intentional.