*Some statements may be viewed as containing spoilers.*<br /><br />I saw "Inland Empire" at the AFI Festival and feel it is simply phenomenal. I have no idea what it is about and at the moment it doesn't matter. I actually made an effort not to analyze it and just watch it and enjoy the ride. And a great ride it was.<br /><br />I was afraid what was to happen with the new medium but David Lynch really succeeded in pulling off some beautiful DV. I was impressed. The description of DV he gave at the 20th anniversary screening of Blue Velvet was, as it turns out, accurate: "It looks terrible... but it looks beautifully terrible." It was just so interesting looking and so perfect for the movie that it wasn't distracting in anyway. I left the experience of watching it feeling it couldn't have been done any other way. And although I will admit that I will still miss the look of a David Lynch movie on film, I didn't find anything to be lacking at all.<br /><br />The acting! Wow! I'm almost speechless about Laura Dern's performance especially, but we need to give credit to several people here. One must keep in mind that none of the performers had any clue as to the purpose and meaning of Mulholland Dr. And yet Laura Dern, Grace Zabriskie, Justin Theroux, Harry Dean Stanton, Julia Ormond and a few from Poland I'm not familiar with succeeded in giving such interesting, dynamic and subtle performances. Dern especially was chameleon-like. So often did she go from one emotion to another while maintaining control of all of the nuances one would expect from reality. Mr. Lynch's ability to extract the perfect performance, never ceases to amaze me. That ability shows through scenes from his work that run so well with actors that are not know to be nor do they prove to be exceptional. There was some of that here but the spotlight was really on actors that know their trade very well.<br /><br />Inland Empire was unmistakeably Lynch but it was far more expressionistic than anything we've seen. "Lost Highway" was a situation comedy compared to this. At least with that and "Mulholland Dr." you somewhat know where to begin. "Inland Empire" doesn't give you that. It is longer and has more angles and doesn't allow you to say "Ok let's start here and work our way out." As a matter of fact, I'm not convinced there is anything to get. Well, that's not true. There is something there for sure but I think it may be something that will eventually break down. Like the farther you walk down a street to see the stores, the thicker the fog gets around you. The reason I say that is not purely because of the experience of watching the movie's chaos but also because of the process he went through. I have no doubt that everything you see has its place on the same quilt but why was "Rabbits" there? This is something that was it's own project. A stand-alone endeavor. And yet the same performances were used in "Inland Empire". But then again, we saw new camera angles we hadn't see before. Were they filmed simultaneously with the footage originally presented in "Rabbits" because he saw it moving out of that world all along or were they filmed recently to bind it to "Inland Empire"? "Axxon N." allusions were also a surprise. That is also a stand-alone (though unproduced) series that has been completely written for quite some time. Why allude to it in here, especially when people can't refer to the series? Who knows? We can also question the connections since David Lynch said he got a lot of the ideas separately and serendipitously and only after it had begun did he understand why his brain was giving him these ideas. That's not to say there is no common thread. He is not a common filmmaker and I certainly do not believe he would just do things meaninglessly for the sake of being weird though many are quick to believe such a thing -- after all, attention spans and mental growth potential have been left in the womb by many a film-goer. But because of the change in medium I will grant myself the freedom to toy with the idea that it may not be just a puzzle to piece together. That plots were built around subconscious connections. Like a Miro painting maybe. The common themes and common moods and common chaos of the different threads presented may be as much part of the movie's purpose as the actual plot elements.<br /><br />Anyhow, it's going to be excellent seeing it it several times over in theaters. All three hours of it. Because it will take many viewings and coffee shop discussions to get even a greasy grip on the essence of this piece. And then maybe we can see if it reveals itself to be even more than the exceptional movie it seems to be.