I've read some things about David Lynch being the actual director or co-director of this movie. He certainly is the executive producer. I've got this info of eBay, so fcourse it can be false. Does anybody know anything about this?
share[deleted]
When Bill Bailey introduced this he actually said that it was produced by David Lynch, rather than directed.
There is some evidence here of Lynch's influence. The B&W harks back to eraserhead, and there are some shots of flame (wild at heart / twin peaks etc.).
I'm not convinced that Michael Almereyda carries of the directing as Lynch might.
I have fallen asleep three times trying to get to the end of this, so it obviously hasn't got me glued, but I do keep going back and intend to finish watching it, so their must be something there somewhere!
The style reminds me more of Guy Maddin than David Lynch, in the way that it is (deliberately?) artificial.
shareHaving watched both this film and Hamlet, I know they both have a very similar feel. So I think it likely that Lynch was in fact only the producer. (I know Nadja is a weird film, but it's not weird in the David Lynch way.)
shareDid the Director try and pass it off as a Lynch film, it was on Telvision on the ABC (In this Czse Australian Broadcast Commission , not American) and I'm sure it started with the words Directed by David Lynch
share[deleted]
spectacles(in this case the united states of america vision-enhancing device)
shareNO,no,no. You people have it all wrong.
The poster / credits list Lynch as Executive Producer and "Presenter" Almereyda is friends with Lynch and the people at Kino/October films thought putting Lynch's name around the credits would make it more money. Lynch had very little to do with this film other than a cameo.