David Lynch is clearly taking the **** at this point. He is laughing while plebs pretend to think this low-budget joke of a movie is brilliant, and he is grinning down at the bank while the confused controversy around this film brings him dollars. He is not a genius, he is a troll.

Maybe the cinema, in some sense, has not evolved since "Un chien andalou". It is probable that the experimentation in this art has not overcome Maya Deren or Alejandro Jodorowsky. Lynch's risky films confirms this suspicion but... Is everything allowed in this game? Even if it does not work? Inland Empire is a too pretentious, too rigid and poorly-explained thriller. Tedious, at last: Silences in the indecipherable dialogues fill the footage for 3 hours. The surreal imaginary is too static, the swinging between the different planes of the plot is too confusing and the climax is nonexistent. If David Lynch deserves your time you can try to value his attempts: the combination of nightmares and his own Symbology, the rabbits and the rest of the cast, and the disturbing atmospheres! Those attempts are not enough to overcome the void that exists in this film. An exercise in experimentation that is unsuccessful, too cryptic, failed and without guarantees that David Lynch's audience will like it.

After four viewings I am certain: Inland Empire is a 10-star movie. I think that every time I watch it, I love it more. This isn't just a movie, it's an experience that puts you in a dream world, and it's oh so good. If I have to compare it to other movies, I'd say it's a raw version of Mulholland Dr., Eraserheadstyle. And these were also great and dreamy and kinda scary.Honestly, after my first Inland Empire, I was mostly stunned, thinking: 'what did I just watch?' and still I... wanted more. That's the strength of David Lynch's work, it draws you in and if you put yourself to it for several viewings, it's so rewarding. Everything he makes is so layered and you discover new things every time! I think Inland Empire is the most layered film I've ever seen. It's not about the plot at all, it's about the experience. I've read comments from people who are frustrated because they can't explain the movie, but this is irrelevant. It's surrealism. It's about the feeling, beauty, disturbing thoughts. It gets you in a buzz, 'on high'.Cinematographically, it looks a bit less perfect than most of Lynch's movies, due to the way it was filmed, but this really adds to the dream feel and increases the raw emotion a lot. The soundtrack is, of course, amazing. Every sound is perfectly matched to the pictures and emotions. When she walks outside in the cold: 'Ghost of Love'. The 'Locomotion' hookers. 'Black Tambourine' on Hollywood Blvd. The ending credits!Laura Dern deserves loads of credit as well, her acting is so raw and disturbing, there's no words to describe it. She quickly became one of my favourite artists after seeing her as Nikki Grace (and co).If you're either a fan of Lynch or surrealism or you like to be overwhelmed by atmosphere and you don't mind putting some effort in a movie evening, do yourself a favor and go for the experience, preferably more than once. Go to this place both wonderful and strange, it's really worth it!

I should start off by saying I am a huge David Lynch fan. The intricate complexities of Mulholland Drive and the near perfection of Blue Velvet list among some of the masterpieces of modern cinema. And I don't use the term lightly. In fact 'masterpiece' is a grossly overused word when it comes to cinema. There's practically a new 'masterpiece' released every week, judging by critic's responses. Inland Empire is not a masterpiece. It's good, but it's not a masterpiece. In terms of the plot (and I use the term 'plot' very, very loosely) it follows the rise of a once great actor (played by Laura Dern) to fame through her being cast in a new melodrama. That's about as comprehensible as it gets. For the remaining 2 hours and 25 minutes we are presented with an unintelligible mess of Lynchian madness as we see Dern's character slowly lose grip of her sanity and slip into darkness as she questions what is real and what is a product of her madness. And, ultimately, we will do the same. Dern seems to spend the whole 3 hours looking completely terrified and bewildered, but nevertheless she carries the role with a truly operatic brilliance. It's true that the film is overly long. After the first 90 minutes I began to grow tired of the brain-teasing and longed for something with clear narrative rigour. Mulholland drive is an example of clear cut linear storytelling in comparison to Inland Empire. However none of this matters because if you stick with it you will be rewarded with some real cinematic gems. It's always a treat to revisit the world of David Lynch and it really doesn't matter that nothing makes sense. If you accept that this is a film of moods and don't spend the whole 3 hours asking 'what are the people in rabbit suits? , why are they all dancing? , what the hell's the bit with the monkey and the one legged woman?' (I'm not making this up) and completely immerse yourself in the world that Lynch creates, you will enjoy, or at least appreciate, the film. To summarise, Inland Empire is a tour inside the head of David Lynch which places the greatest emphasis on the oppressive atmosphere and building sense of indefinable dread. Yes, it's overly long and would've worked better as a 90 minute snapshot of a descent into madness, but Lynch has certainly cornered the market in terms of mind-boggling surrealism. I will say this though: if you haven't seen any of Lynch's work, I advise you to watch Inland Empire last. It's so surreal and nightmarish that you will either dismiss it as obscurity for the sake of obscurity and outright refuse to watch any Lynch stuff again, or accept the dream-like logic for what it is. The film's a mess…but I think it's meant to be.