True fact: Stanley Kubrick once said that "Eraserhead" was his favorite film.
@crangismcbasketball97103 жыл бұрын
And Lolita was one of David Lynch’s favorite films!
@vincenzoberetta10852 жыл бұрын
Kubrick actually said that Eraserhead had shown him the limits of his creativity: he could never do a movie like that. However, he showed the movie to the crew of "The Shining" and you can actually find some of the inspirations from this movie in Kubrick's horror masterpiece (use of sound, surreal images out of place etc.)
@ajs412 жыл бұрын
@@crangismcbasketball9710 The "normal" scene with Peter Sellers is amazing.
@MAXAMILLIONMAN2 жыл бұрын
And his favorite band was ministry. The early stages of AI are how the band ended up in the final product.
@dustbinfilms2 жыл бұрын
ah them old true facts.
@gp28604 жыл бұрын
Siskel never fails to fail to understand art
@abonny4 жыл бұрын
Well, he understood Blue Velvet. But he couldn't see ANYTHING in Lost Highway or Eraserhead. What's shocking for a "professional" film critic (and Ebert is guilty of this as well) is to call Lost Highway "meaningless" and arguing that young people only want to be creeped out by Eraserhead - suggesting there is nothing there besides that. If they can't see meaning, they dismiss. A real objective critic would admit that they can't see the meaning at this point and therefor can not recommend this film at this point. But they can still talk about what it made them feel - even if it was a bad experience. Just be real with your audience.
@RhinocerosProductions4 жыл бұрын
He didnt even like Taxi Driver
@eargasm10724 жыл бұрын
@@abonny I was one of those kids who saw it on home video probably around the time this aired..and I was a fan after first viewing...it was the most surreal film I had experienced up to that point, and I knew then I was not of the "normal" ones (aka atypical) lol
@reguluspastor4 жыл бұрын
I remember Ebert tearing him a real new one for not getting _Jacob's Ladder_ 😌
@arsaeterna42854 жыл бұрын
THANK YOU haha
@becketclark99423 жыл бұрын
Its not just surrealist nonsense...There was definitely a story and while a lot of it was shown and not told explicitly handed to you what was going on, the emotional beats and conclusion is abatract, but not meaningless fun to get freaked out to. I like to think of it as an allegory for fatherhood and the unwanted child.
@stopthephilosophicalzombie90173 жыл бұрын
Exactly. If you can't see this as a film about the fears of adulthood and fatherhood you are dumb as a brick.
@apseudonym3 жыл бұрын
the fatherhood allegory is pretty well trodden turf in film analysis about this film. we get it.
@rofyle3 жыл бұрын
@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017 Well now that's funny seeing as how Lynch himself has said there's no meaning behind it.
@mattjazzfan22882 жыл бұрын
@@rofyle was about to say the same thing.
@brian.jrmontoya32272 жыл бұрын
@@rofyle wait really? Where?
@footwinner13 жыл бұрын
"In the 60s, I think it was called a bad trip. Sometimes people wanna go on one. It makes them feel kind of creepy, and that's maybe what they're looking for." Lmao what a great response to Siskel being a stiff. I do like him a lot, but he can be so annoying about more abstract/art films.
@otasrob2 жыл бұрын
It’s still a pretty reductive answer from Ebert imho, considering the movie
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
Yeah but it sucked. Plenty of creepy movies that are actually compelling and grab your attention like Hausu
@footwinner13 ай бұрын
@@VashTheDamnFiend lol House has a plot that’s as boiler plate as it gets buttressed by upskirt shots of 17 year old girls. Its special effects are charming, but it’s not a meaningful movie at all. Eraserhead’s horror comes from anxieties about starting a family. It’s got real stuff going on, and the baby is an all-timer in practical effects.
@dalecooles4 жыл бұрын
David Lynche's Erasurehead remains the most original American film made from the 1970s and beyond..Jack Nance is terrific as Henry Spencer and Judith Hall as Beautiful Lady Across the Hall is absolutely alluring.
@stopthephilosophicalzombie90173 жыл бұрын
Judith Roberts, not Hall.
@kayEnt3rtainm3nt Жыл бұрын
@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017 Judith Hall as the lady across the Roberts is absolutely alluring.
@KenoshiAkai Жыл бұрын
As much as I strongly disagree with either of their views at times, I greatly miss this duo. They had a passion for cinema and it showed.
@shioq.2 ай бұрын
they liked what they liked and hated everything else. wouldn't say that's a passion for cinema.
@KenoshiAkai2 ай бұрын
@@shioq. They reviewed thousands of movies in their lifetimes. They lived and breathed cinema. Sure, they had opinions but they were largely informed opinions. I could call that a passion for cinema.
@Emulous793 жыл бұрын
I first saw this in my teens and was spellbound. It also gave me a headache and I couldn't stop thinking about it for days. The same with my first viewing of In the Mouth of Madness. That is some powerful art.
@2wheeledsocialworker372 Жыл бұрын
I’m with you on in the mouth of madness.
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
@@2wheeledsocialworker372yeah same, that movie was a twisted thriller. Eraserhead is just boring and dreadful.
@ivans.1914 жыл бұрын
It's not John Nance but Jack
@BK_gamer_4 жыл бұрын
He was credited as John Nance for this movie.
@kamuelalee3 жыл бұрын
He was in Twin Peaks too.
@1chienandalou3 жыл бұрын
There was a fish in the percolator!
@Doctorjesus19823 жыл бұрын
Same thing. Like calling Gandolfini “Jim”
@jameshaynes70625 ай бұрын
Ebert doesn't know Jack...
@rhwinner3 жыл бұрын
Siskel: faithful defender of the quotidian.
@josephdorenbos26334 жыл бұрын
Roger Ebert was a brilliant writer and wonderful human being.
@res1dentgearsol1d3 жыл бұрын
Yeah, but he said John Nance
@rightchordleadership3 жыл бұрын
Maybe but he blew it on elephant man
@mattlohr3 жыл бұрын
@@res1dentgearsol1d he’s credited on Eraserhead as John Nance
@nathanisaksson3 жыл бұрын
He poorly reviewed so many great films.
@crappingcat3 жыл бұрын
@Dench2020 Give details
@Modbossvideo3 жыл бұрын
Siskel's's favorite movie was Saturday Night Fever. Nuff said.
@kamuelalee3 жыл бұрын
Yeah, Siskel had a weird fascination with that movie...never understood that one.
@jon47153 жыл бұрын
Siskel had very good and interesting, sometimes off-beat taste in film. Lots of good takes and top 10 lists. Definitely a worthwhile critic.
@BrianKishreviews3 жыл бұрын
I like both movies...but yeah, Eraserhead is a force of nature.
@linkbiff10543 жыл бұрын
Actually his favourite is Dr. Strangelove. He has mentioned so more than once.
@kamuelalee3 жыл бұрын
@@linkbiff1054 Siskel had a few favorites, including Dumbo.
@babasovka9 ай бұрын
Dead Kennedy's "You bawl like the baby in Eraserhead!"
@plasticweapon2 ай бұрын
jello biafra bawls like the baby in eraserhead.
@sleuthentertainment587210 ай бұрын
The meaning of Eraserhead rests on nightmares and subconscious, in some place between real and dream world If you reject that idea...you won't be prepared for the movie
@iDreamOfOkra Жыл бұрын
I just watched this movie and have to say that it’s definitely a masterpiece. Just the soundtrack alone is enough to make it a masterpiece, never mind the amazing cinematography, lighting, and directing. This is the stuff of real nightmares.
@tommydarko19842 жыл бұрын
I didn't get through it the first time because I tried to watch it with my mother when I was younger. I cared what she may think of me. Now that I'm older, I've come to accept and embrace my quirks and love for the abstract and obscure.
@brandondrake1415 күн бұрын
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@FearMonarch4 жыл бұрын
"I didnt like the movie" I coughed up a piece of chinese food laughing at that one
@nathanielphillips35923 жыл бұрын
why?
@FearMonarch3 жыл бұрын
@@nathanielphillips3592 its a very dismissive and straight forward response from a usually well spoken critic. Its just so blunt
@nathanielphillips35923 жыл бұрын
@@FearMonarch Oh okay, lol
@wanderlustrer2 жыл бұрын
Unnecessarily disgusting comment.
@FearMonarch2 жыл бұрын
@@wanderlustrer i mean i was eating chinese food and choked on my bite, not sure its that bad Ill keep you in mind the next time im draining pus or fixing a broken bone tho
@cybernautadventurer3 жыл бұрын
In my opinion: Eraserhead is a movie that puts you inside the mind of someone with Schizophrenia. It's definitely interesting movie, but I was so disturbed by it that I can never watch it again.
@MsThebeMoon3 жыл бұрын
Think of it more that he was having a nightmare about being an unprepared father - and try a re-watch unless you really hate that type of film making.
@TheEddieStilson3 жыл бұрын
I think I made it about 30 minutes into the movie. It was like watching someone’s bad dream or a fucked up art school project.
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
@@MsThebeMoonok then what significance does the disfigured man in the beginning have? Or the part where his head is decapitated? Or the woman with the weird cheeks in the radiator? It’s all literal nonsense. Saying “oh it’s like a nightmare” doesn’t actually make it a good film.
@plasticweapon2 ай бұрын
it has nothing to do with schizophrenia, and i can watch it any time i want.
@starshotdirector76053 жыл бұрын
Eraser head is simply the story of a man who fears becoming a father. Any other sort of subtext you take from the actual film is up to interpretation, but that is a concrete fact of the story. Henry is afraid. Whether or not the events of the film even happen is up to debate, since it is implied the pregnancy was way too short to spawn any sort of life. I like to think that Mary was still pregnant, and Henry imagined what his life would become if he was to be a father. That’s why the second half of the film goes off the rails, in the best way.
@sclogse13 жыл бұрын
The film is really about the sensation of dread. Hitchcock spoke to Truffaut about how he was supply connections to some of our senses and biological programing that have become formant in modern society. We don't sleep in the woods any more. Danger had become abstract. How often are we in a panic now? He was aiming at those fears with many of his films. How many films did he depict a man falling from the vantage of looking down on him? And Hitch learned from his own mistakes.
@captainlengthwidth66922 жыл бұрын
Yep. I watched this film in the cinema back in the 1980s. Hated it. Watched it again a couple more times over the years on VHS then DVD and though I didn't hate it I didn't really like it. (I'm more likely to rewatch a film I didn't like to try and work out why I didn't like it - if it's not obvious straight away which is true with most films I dislike - rather than rewatch I film I DID enjoy and get disappointed that it wasn't as good as I initially though.) The first time I watched Eraserhead after having had my first child I fell about laughing. It is a brilliant pure and unadulterated distillation of every fear and dread that I felt as a new father. It's a great film.
@JC-li8kk Жыл бұрын
Wow, it all makes sense now. The biggest fear really is giving up your throne & having your child become the center of you & your wife’s universe.
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
That’s fucking dumb lmao
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
@@JC-li8kkhe didn’t have a throne
@RhinocerosProductions4 жыл бұрын
Honestly was anyone expecting them to love it?
@stopthephilosophicalzombie90173 жыл бұрын
Both Siskel and Ebert were decidedly dull reviewers. There are better reviewers on KZbin today by the dozen.
@themoreyouknowfools49743 жыл бұрын
Yeah, I wasn't. Roger Ebert has hated everything David Lynch has done. He's liked like two movies of his.
@DougHoffman2 ай бұрын
True story: I saw this in college with a few friends. We'd been drinking malt liquor, smoking marijuana, and munching on something that may or may not have been shrooms. After the movie, we were surprised to learn we'd all fallen asleep during the movie and had had this vivid dream . . . and then we started comparing notes and learned we'd all had the SAME dream. Eventually we figured out that it hadn't been a dream. We got back to my best friend's co-op and his roommate said, "So, what'd you think? You dig Eddy?" He'd named the Eraserhead baby "Eddy."
@Rayoscope3 жыл бұрын
Tom Hagen: "Tessio. I always thought it would be Clemenza." Michael: "It's the smart move. Tessio was always smarter." Ebert was always smarter.
@plasticweapon2 ай бұрын
which makes for a REALLY unflattering observation about siskel.
@Diakonov293 жыл бұрын
Move is a nightmare brought to life.
@acrovader3 жыл бұрын
Saw this on videotape back around the time Siskel & Ebert reviewed it on their show. Trust me, you do NOT want to watch this movie when you have the flu.
@generalgk3 жыл бұрын
This movie gave me the flu
@SimMaster3 жыл бұрын
No one should watch this movie. That's how disturbing it is.
@DrawtheCurtains3 жыл бұрын
Watching it and Blue Velvet high as fuck is awesome
@dzenacs20114 ай бұрын
@@DrawtheCurtainsdid some guy barfed for 2 hours while watching it
@AlexHudgins-cn7vk Жыл бұрын
Siskel made some very good points. But I still enjoy Eraserhead. I think Roger said it best when he said "it makes people feel kind of creepy and I guess that is what they're looking for."
@dzenacs20114 ай бұрын
Ebert is stupid like a child
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
You can make people feel creepy and also write a decent plot.
@dizzyhole6663 жыл бұрын
David lynch couldn’t even name a Bunuel film, and yet he’s been said to have copied him many times
@kattcp3 жыл бұрын
You're pretty naive if you think Lynch hasn't seen a bunuel film
@stopthephilosophicalzombie90173 жыл бұрын
Lynch went to a film school that had surrealist directors among its faculty. I'm pretty sure he saw Bunuel's work.
@spacealienjesus7093 жыл бұрын
The soundtrack is just as amazing..
@Hal9000ize4 жыл бұрын
I wouldn't call Henry a hero
@LordMarlle3 жыл бұрын
Hero is a dumbed down word for protagonist. I wonder if Lynch would call Henry a hero
@Hal9000ize3 жыл бұрын
@@LordMarlle I doubt it, Henry seems to do a lot of questionable things throughout the film
@joeycmichael32063 жыл бұрын
@@Hal9000ize He kills his wife and child. Not the most heroic thing.
@Hal9000ize3 жыл бұрын
@@joeycmichael3206 Idk about him killing Mary
@joeycmichael32063 жыл бұрын
@@Hal9000ize Yah that's admitedly up more for interpretation.
@kamuelalee3 жыл бұрын
It did appeal to me as a college kid in the 1980s. Surrealistic and creepy and themes of alienation. Worked for me back then.
@sclogse13 жыл бұрын
The thing about Eraserhead, is you kind think of it as a short film, because it doesn't behave like a full length film. And then you remember the dread you had after you saw the baby, (especially trapped in the theater) and you started wondering how long the rest of the film was going to be. Cause the humor in it was....gone....But both these guys don't mention the humor in this film.
@snuke373 ай бұрын
The elevator bit is still one of the funniest things ever.
@VashTheDamnFiend3 ай бұрын
It’s a twilight zone episode at best
@brandondrake1415 күн бұрын
What do you do for a living? Nothing. I'm on vacation. I mean when you're NOT ON VACATION! 😂😂😂😂
@paullowman9131 Жыл бұрын
You have to realize that these two panned Blade Runner when it first came out. Apparently Siskel watched Roy Batty's speech, and it went over his head.
@dzenacs20114 ай бұрын
These 2 is dumber than dirt
@Imnotplayinganymore Жыл бұрын
I've shown this movie to half a dozen or so friends and have yet to convince anyone it's a great film. I watch it 3-4 times a year. I don't know how to explain my fascination with it and Ebert comes as close as anyone. To me, and I don't hear much about this, the sound is one of the most critical aspects of the film. I always crank it up and, to be sure, the sound is disruptive and agonizing, in a good way.
@mikebest72844 жыл бұрын
Ebert understands art a little bit more than siskel obviously
@LordMarlle3 жыл бұрын
That seems a little harsh. They do know about art, but mostly about what has been, not what might be considered art. But then again, harsh seems fair with the tone Siskel and Ebert has when talking about stuff that didn't appeal to them. They can be quite brutal, but at least they always strived for honesty
@joeyday5763 жыл бұрын
Siskel loved Lynch's Blue Velvet and Ebert absolutely hated it. They were pretty equally inconsistent.
@plasticweapon3 жыл бұрын
really, really not saying much.
@stopthephilosophicalzombie90173 жыл бұрын
They disagreed on Blue Velvet though. Siskel liked it and Ebert panned for being too exploitative/misogynistic. They both were kind of annoying reviewers.
@racookster3 жыл бұрын
@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017- Roger Ebert couldn't stand seeing women humiliated. He hated A Clockwork Orange for the same reason he hated Blue Velvet, never mind that you couldn't humiliate either Isabella Rossellini or Adrienne Corri if you stripped them both naked, painted them yellow, and made them crawl around Branson, Missouri on all fours, braying like donkeys. Those women were fearless.
@cablejimmy3 жыл бұрын
It's so funny how they don't understand any film that's not strictly literal. They just call it weird lol. Tim Heidecker does it in On Cinema, it gets me every time.
@Harpoonthrower3 жыл бұрын
It was a WEIRD movie. I didn't like it. *gregg chimes in* SHUT UP. SHUT UP! I give it 4 bags SHUT UP 4 bags of popcorn and 2 soda drinks.
@tarico44363 жыл бұрын
You mean On Cinema At The Cinema. And yes: brilliant stuff by both he and Turkleton.
@peteparker223 жыл бұрын
You have to be on acid to enjoy this movie
@Harpoonthrower3 жыл бұрын
@@peteparker22 shut up
@SaulBadmon2 жыл бұрын
But when you got films like Tom Cruise in them, you can’t go wrong.
@JozeeWalz2 жыл бұрын
After recently watching this for the first time I thought "ok, David Lynch took the brown acid that was announced at Woodstock to avoid!"
@notsure12773 жыл бұрын
It is a really good film, one worth rewatching periodically.
@JC-li8kk Жыл бұрын
I don’t know about rewatching unless you haven’t put all the pieces together yet. Once I knew it was about the fears of becoming a father i understood everything & no longer found a reason to watch it again.
@byHexted3 жыл бұрын
Dude is the epitome of “I didn’t get it the first time so it means nothing that’s that”
@zecraw Жыл бұрын
That's the case with most critics, unfortunately. That whole industry doesn't leave a lot of room for challenging works.
@imcallingjapan2178 Жыл бұрын
Honestly, you're trying to say you got Eraserhead the first time you watched it? Right...
@AcetylsaliciIique Жыл бұрын
@@imcallingjapan2178 That is very much not what they said. Like I don't understand how that could be how your interpret it.
@EpicBeard8152 жыл бұрын
ts weird how Siskel says he doesnt get the appeal, only to then perfectly describe why people find it appealing
@MCVessels2 жыл бұрын
I think because to him it was Kids These Days who were swamped with anxiety. That wasn't how he worked, and even if it was he'd probably never admit it.
@Seantendo4 жыл бұрын
Dammit, Gene!
@plasticweapon3 жыл бұрын
he had one job...
@karimrashidpour93783 жыл бұрын
The difference between Ebert and Siskel is clear here...Ebert knew what he was talking about while Siskel didn't. Knowing what surrealism was is one of the keys to have a basic analysis of the movie. Lynch is the son or grandson of Bunuel and the fact that Ebert got it, which honestly it is expected, demonstrates that he had the tools to analyse the movie while Siskel did not
@Greg-lo1tl3 жыл бұрын
Some brains are genuinely incapable of absorbing the abstract. It's a foreign language,
@ottomattix862 жыл бұрын
Agreed. Ebert had a more whimsical way about him. He saw the world with more understanding. Made him appreciate and understand movies better than Gene.
@sm55743 ай бұрын
Not quite. Ebert would sometimes differentiate his appreciation for a movie from his enjoyment of it. For Siskel, they were essentially the same thing -- he generally considered a movie to have failed if he didn't enjoy it. That's how he saw his role as a critic: to explain why he thought a movie worked or failed, and to base his recommendation on that. Ebert felt he was supposed to recommend the film based on its own merits. (Ebert was far more likely to violate this premise, but that's a different matter.)
@jeepdog4 жыл бұрын
flash back to the acid days
@chrisitl3 жыл бұрын
And yet David Lynch never did acid
@joelbizzell13863 жыл бұрын
Creepy? Uhhh no...not for me at least. Eraserhead, to me, is the intense dream you wake from only remembering bits from, but are so intrigued by you want to go back again and again to explore that particular reality. And it is a reality where I am strangely comfortable, for lack of a better word. There is something very calming about it. Now I may lack the ability to understand what it is I see there, along with the ability to convey what little I do understand, but I absolutely love it. It is a favorite among favorites.
@kamuelalee3 жыл бұрын
Yes, it does have a dream (even nightmare) quality, like most of David Lynch's films.
@joelbizzell13863 жыл бұрын
@@kamuelalee Oh absolutely. Eraserhead and Inland Empire are perhaps the most dreamlike for me.
@jon47153 жыл бұрын
Not creepy? OK Mr. Cool. But yes you can describe why it makes you feel that way, it doesn't have to be intellectualized, just use your words. Easy.
@joelbizzell13863 жыл бұрын
@@jon4715 It's not creepy for me, as it presents a world and reality which I find comfortable. And it is likely from the juxtapositions. The mechanized industrial hellscape and the cramped but cozy confines of Henry's apartment. The cold dark rain and the warmth of his radiator. The muffled drone of the outside world and the quiet still of his room. These are the reasons I am comforted by the movie, rather than repulsed by it. Have you ever layed in the dark while a hurricane roars outside? It's _that_ kind of feeling. Like I said, it's difficult to put into words. Lynch's movies elicit an emotional response more than an intellectual one. It's why I love them. The eggheads can jaw about it all they want. More power to them. That's just not my scene.
@MCVessels2 жыл бұрын
@@joelbizzell1386 I don't suppose you've read Songs of a Dead Dreamer by Thomas Ligotti, have you? Vastarien, The Greater Festival of Masks, The Troubles of Dr. Thoss: all eerie stories which are a pleasure to walk around in. Eraserhead's still creepy, but.
@ertznay31423 жыл бұрын
Thanks for giving away the ending Roger.
@connormcclenny96813 жыл бұрын
Spoilers were not a meme 35 yrs ago, when the movie was already 10yrs old. But you're right, journalists were just a stupid back in the day and way more disrespectful to their audience and whatever art they 'covered'.
@sselluoss59353 жыл бұрын
People were normal back then and didn't throw a tantrum like a child because they knew an ending to something they haven't yet experienced
@MCVessels2 жыл бұрын
He's really not giving much away - and even if he did, with this movie the plot is nothing compared to the experience of seeing it. Does the film title count as a spoiler?
@sm55743 ай бұрын
@@sselluoss5935, that is not true. People would beg not to hear the score of a game because they were recording it.
@RetakeRemakeAlanSmithee3 жыл бұрын
Pretty sloppy comparison with Bunuel's "Golden Age" They both use surrealism but the main themes of each film couldn't be more different.
@SmelOdies2 жыл бұрын
Ebert sums up my feelings, but his bad trip analogy would neatly work with Evil Dead 2, various Cronenberg films, probably Argento (though I’ve never seen) and Carpenter’s The Thing, you get my drift.
@allghilliedup19923 жыл бұрын
Siskel is a sharp tack but he was typically the villain when it came to movies like this.
@TTM96913 жыл бұрын
To be fair, Ebert panned each and every one of Lynch's films - including "The Elephant Man" - up until (I believe) "The Straight Story" and "Mullholland Drive". I can understand Lynch's other movies not being to everyone's tastes.....but "The Elephant Man"? :P
@thadeenz97 Жыл бұрын
The oldest thing is that after saying he didn't like it, Siskel went on to pretty much nail the point of the film. If he'd maybe realized that, maybe he would've viewed it a different way.
@SoCalFreelance Жыл бұрын
Wow, Ebert breaking out his hard-core film studies knowledge there at the end.
@monkeyboy47462 жыл бұрын
I have heard it said that we do not choose Heaven, Heaven chooses us, I think that is one of the main themes in the film.
@thiscorrosion9002 жыл бұрын
I think everyone over analyzes Eraserhead. It was Lynch doing his first real feature as such, given free reign to work with a hand-picked gang of friends and recommended colleagues (Alan Splet, et al.), and he's said many times that it was mainly an attempt at creating kind of a self-contained pocket universe of sorts, surreal, an allegory, whatever you want to call it. People used to watch it with me and ask me Scott, what the fuck is the point of this nonsense, and my response is, the point is that it creates a strange world that you go into (Lynch often talks about how that excites him as a reason to want to make a film) and come out of. If you're expecting Eraserhead to be like some conventional Hollywood narrative film, well, you can forget it. It's also kind of a backhanded tribute to Philadelphia and the milieu that Lynch lived in for years attending art college and learning to be a painter and multimedia artist first, and then filmmaker second. If it is "arty" well it is the product of an artist! It wasn't supposed to be Star Wars. Elephant Man creates a similar world but it's a more familiar one, based in historical reality, and Lynch didn't write it, it wasn't his "baby" (haha) as it were. Blue Velvet was a breakthrough because after the DUNE disaster, Lynch was given more free reign to make a more personal project, but it's kind of an uncompromising film that takes you into a weird noir world of smalltown corruption that at least meets Hollywood halfway, by then Lynch had some commercial clout (even after Dune), and he managed to produce a very surreal and strange film that still had some commercial trappings or potential. That's a difficult balancing act. But anyway like all of Lynch's early short films, Eraserhead really was experimental filmmaking and I don't think it makes any apologies for being so. Like Jodorowsky, he wasn't making the film for the multitudes, he was making it for himself and his friends, primarily.
@thatgermanicguy3 жыл бұрын
“Oh you are sick”
@clintonsmith5163 Жыл бұрын
Why are so many commenters saying that Ebert liked the movie? In this clip he never says that he likes it. Are people really this incapable of understanding the English language? It's almost as if they think that Ebert HAD to like Eraserhead simply because Siskel DIDN'T like it.
@sm55743 ай бұрын
Agreed. Ebert merely described what the movie was trying to be. He almost directly says at the very end that he is not among the people who feel like they get something from seeing it. Siskel verly clearly states that he doesn't like it, and Ebert doesn't even try to argue with him.
@Gitfiddle3 жыл бұрын
So Roger liked it. He’s not exactly sure why he liked it but I think I reacted that way also the first time I saw almost any David Lynch film. I liked it but I needed to watch it a few more times to find out why?
@ケイリakaケモイ3 жыл бұрын
Much as Siskel didn't like it and couldn't see the point, he got pretty close. I relate a lot to what happens to Henry in this film. Well, not directly luckily.
@dagnabbit61873 жыл бұрын
In her review of Lynch’s Elephant Man , the late great Critic Pauline Karl prefaced it with a comment on Eraserhead . “ I thought David Lynch was a true original “. Ditto that but like Last Tango in Paris it took me several viewings .
@JustSomeCanadianGuy3 жыл бұрын
Everyone giving Siskel guff here.... I'll remind you Ebert HATED Blue Velvet and A Clockwork Orange.
@MCVessels2 жыл бұрын
He loved Synecdoche New York, though, which is at least as weird as Blue Velvet. And the book Blood Meridian, too, though that's far more violent and nihilistic than A Clockwork Orange.
@RyanAnthonyDigitalMedia3 жыл бұрын
I think you have the date wrong. They speak about Blue Velvet, which came out in 86. This had to have been after that, though Eraserhead DID come out in 77.
@chiefscheider3 жыл бұрын
It's in the description: "Taken from a 1987 episode reviewing cult movies"
@tinay94914 ай бұрын
always enjoy siskel + ebert especially interviews with both
@bmiller9493 жыл бұрын
I miss intellectual discussions about film.
@gswithen3 жыл бұрын
This film is up to interpretation like, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey. I guess that one is bad too.
@zecraw Жыл бұрын
The appeal is in the film's use of visual and aural language to communicate an everyman's anxieties about parenthood and sexual intimacy against an intimidating modern, industrial backdrop. It's one of the best films I've ever seen, but one has to know how to read it. Much of what you see an hear is exaggerated and not meant to be literal.
@geofflongford20083 жыл бұрын
Man, I thought it was a comedy?
@beezy56283 жыл бұрын
The first half most certainly is. David Lynch has said that half was a dark comedy, so that the next half would be completely unsettling.
@eliotoole5 ай бұрын
I miss these guys
@SimoSakariAaltonen4 жыл бұрын
”Shot in a crude way”... yeah, sure.
@Lalo-dh8xq3 жыл бұрын
Did you.... watch the movie?
@stopthephilosophicalzombie90173 жыл бұрын
@@Lalo-dh8xq It was shot on a small budget, but in no way was Eraserhead "crude". The baby effect is still a mystery to most people and it was incredibly effective.
@andymassingham3 жыл бұрын
L’age D’or plug for fifty points. Nice play.
@jessepanders14073 жыл бұрын
If they hate it you know it’s good. Just like if rotten tomatoes hates it you know it’s good.
@alexbirch46162 жыл бұрын
Tell that to Cats the movie
@JC-li8kk Жыл бұрын
That’s not always the case. I have to go by multiple sources. A lot of times rotten tomatoes is right, but usually if a movie is less than 6.3 on IMDb then it’s no good. I find that more reliable than rotten tomatoes.
@Dr170 Жыл бұрын
Only a dumbsith deals in absolutes
@tcrossfranco5 ай бұрын
One of the great movies of all time😮
@KingThrillgore3 жыл бұрын
I mean they hate it but Ebert does argue for some of its merits.
@christianhughes15672 жыл бұрын
I totally get what people are saying when they say that Siskel can be annoying sometimes with his unwillingness to better appreciate some of the more abstract/surreal films such as this one. But I still really respect the guy because at least he gives reasons and explanations for why he feels how he does. Regardless of whether those reasons make sense or not. At least he gives a reason. What I can't stand is when people just say "It's just shit and that's all I have to say". Why do you feel that way? "Cuz it just sucks. That's my reason." .... -_- ....
@dynamicvoltage97653 жыл бұрын
It's a masterpiece. It's a horror dream.
@fabiobonetta5454 Жыл бұрын
From a critical standpoint ( and despite their physiques) Siskel was Sancho to Ebert's Don Quixote
@ChelseaColeslaw3 жыл бұрын
A narc and a square acknowledge a movie on a show where their thumbs are a metric of quality
@matthewoshea72247 ай бұрын
The “L’Age D’or” comparison is on point
@ivanbarnes874 жыл бұрын
Fair review!
@curttuckfield55654 жыл бұрын
Man these guys suck way too often. Eraserhead is profoundly symbolic film about a man who wants physical intimacy with females so badly, but at the same time is terrified of commitment, marriage and being a father. He wants it to be like heaven, but it's really like hell to him. That's all it really is about.
@mrrabbittv66464 жыл бұрын
This. I heard that Lynch got the inspiration from it when his wife was pregnant and he was worrying about becoming a father.
@nunyabiz28894 жыл бұрын
You're one of the very few who understands what this is about. Good on ya.
@Lalo-dh8xq3 жыл бұрын
It is profoundly symbolic, but I disagree that that's "what really is about". The fact that is profoundly symbolic means people are gonna interpret it in many different ways. This is one of my favorite films, and yet I don't agree your interpretation at all. That doesn't make it any less valid, if that's your point of view then great, but that's still not "what is really about". No one knows for sure, and that's the beauty of it.
@whatevershebrings3 жыл бұрын
Lynch himself has admitted that his relationship with his then wife and terror at becoming a father was the film's inspiration...add to that living in a Philadelphia tenement, where he realized that all that separated him from the outside was a brick wall.
@BackyardPix3 жыл бұрын
Ok. I prefer Steven Seagal flicks where he goes around killing loads of people and blowing stuff up REAL GOOD.
@LOS_NEGRITOS2 жыл бұрын
"...okay" at the end LOL
@michaelfarar42323 ай бұрын
This is not a popcorn movie. This is not for the average or mundane movie goer. This is surrealist art and very complicated. His greatest masterpiece is Mulholland Drive,
@eliotoole5 ай бұрын
I would like to thank mister ebert for alerting us to john prine all those years ago😊
@jackieboyborden3 ай бұрын
Siskel's final "ok" so sassy
@tabo01 Жыл бұрын
When I saw the chain restaurant Twin peaks, I thought of the chickens scene in Eraserhead.
@BoxingGOATEditsАй бұрын
"i didnt like it" a Siskel refrain when going through all the would-be classics. Ebert was almost always correct!
@sstaners1234 Жыл бұрын
I have yet to see the movie but from what I’ve read, the lady in the radiator represents death. The man who runs the gears represents God. Seems like an interesting premise in a way.
@AAAFilm-yt7gx3 жыл бұрын
When we were 16 we watched this high on cough syrup. It was horrifying and transcendent. We tried to watch it again months later and it was unwatchable. Highly recommended but you have to be in the right mindset.
@雪鷹魚英語培訓的領航2 жыл бұрын
People don't generally seek out the "bad" part of a trip.
@briansimerl40143 жыл бұрын
The whole movie is a dark comedy on new Fatherhood. What's the big mystery?
@channelsurfing21 күн бұрын
0:25 Ebert makes a mistake by calling Jack Nance 'John Nance'
@attackofthecopyrightbots2 жыл бұрын
Two years ago?
@jonathanmelia2 жыл бұрын
Well, what do you expect from a guy whose favourite film is SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER?
@BigDaddyDraculaАй бұрын
Eraserhead isn't even Lynch's most confusing work, I'd say the central plot is pretty obvious
@theflorgeormix10 ай бұрын
Really tough one...appreciate the individuality of it. No desire to get thru it.
@matthewschwartz6607 Жыл бұрын
JOHN Nance or JACK Nance?
@FrankCoffman3 жыл бұрын
Siskel -- OMG, no clue.
@arsaeterna42854 жыл бұрын
Ebert already KNEW that Siskel was going to act like he didn't get it So he prepared a comparison to 50s surrealism and even 70s psychedelia So either Siskel was living under a ROCK or the truth.. he just hates art cinema
@filmbuff27773 жыл бұрын
Um, Siskel praised Elephant Man & Blue Velvet, & he has expressed admiration for directors like Fellini, so just because he didn't like Eraserhead doesn't mean he hated art house cinema.
@matthewschwartz6607 Жыл бұрын
Ebert didn’t really like Lynch movies. He did like The Straight Story, and I THINK Mullholland Drive! But other than that (Did he like Twin Peaks?)?
@synthpunkdaddy619 Жыл бұрын
S&E: Art? How does it work?
@Gyfrctgtdbhf2 жыл бұрын
I remember watching this episode on cable during the era when eyeglasses made everyone look like owls.
@JC-li8kk Жыл бұрын
I’m not sure if this is true or not since I wasn’t around back then, but did the owl eyes make everyone seem vulnerable & innocent? Childlike? More trustworthy? Just the vibe I get when seeing old pictures & videos.
@nicksolan4 жыл бұрын
“ weird” wow... shocking word.
@Felix-ij8eg3 жыл бұрын
whats your favrotie david lynch movie?
@nicksolan3 жыл бұрын
@@Felix-ij8eg lost Highway
@Felix-ij8eg3 жыл бұрын
Nick Solan nice
@beyondvger36822 жыл бұрын
What? You never had a vacation turn into a nightmare?
@superaa67793 ай бұрын
I like the creepy industrial feel and the sounds of machinery ,trains and such, but David Lynch needs to explain some stuff which he refuses to do.Like why is there plants in piles of dirt on the night stand that isn't in a pot?Why does the lady in the radiator have giant cheeks?I like arty films,but I like a coherent story.Lynch is great at setting a mood but some one needs to help him with the script.
@Hellraiser060111 ай бұрын
Ebert was a film connaisseur. Siskel was a comb over enthusiast.
@Paraselene_Tao3 жыл бұрын
I just watched the movie, I feel like Ebert's opinion matches mine. The movie is a negative experience shown in film format. Nothing is real or maybe all is symbolic. It's a very odd and uncomfortable movie. Everything is dark, uneasy feeling and sometimes gross. The credits play circus music in the end. The experience is a fun house nightmare of sorts. It's enjoyable yet very weird. Trying to reason with this movie is futile. I tried to reason it out, but it's very irrational. It very much needs to be felt and not thought out.