David Lynch's latest opus, 'Mulholland Dr.' has received much critical notice, 
mostly for being notably surreal and obtuse.  (Additionally, it was the only 
film this year nominated for an Academy Award for Best Director but not Best 
Picture.)

Many reviews I have read pose the question, "Do you have to understand a movie 
to enjoy it?"   Well no, but it helps.  

'Mulholland Dr.' is a very enjoyable and accessible movie while being (at first 
viewing) beyond comprehension.  Lynch's characters are reminiscent of those from 
'Twin Peaks' in their sinister caricatures.  These signature Lynch-ian weirdoes 
are acted extremely well. (Particularly watch for Naomi Watts.) He employs some 
obvious visual symbols whose meaning is notably elusive: The blue box in 
particular.  Any comments I make here concerning the more tangible, standard 
aspects of filmmaking while relevant, should be put on a back burner to the 
plot, and film as a whole.  Lynch is technically excellent in this film, but his 
genius is nowhere as evident than in his capacity to engage a viewer into a 
world that he or she does not understand.

I haven't heard of anyone who has been comfortable with his or her 
interpretation of 'Mulholland Dr.' after only one viewing.  "Do you have to 
understand a movie to enjoy it?" This is perhaps better stated as "Should modern 
film making be so transparent to make all analysis tautology?"   This year in 
modern Hollywood film the only other picture which even comes close to touching 
the richness and depth of 'Mulholland Dr.' is 'Memento'.  Only two of hundreds 
of Hollywood produced pictures have fully executed an artistic composition in 
the media of film.  Embarrassing.   'Mulholland Dr.' (while not an 'art flick') 
is a piece of art, and available to all the intellectual analysis that 
literature, and the fine arts are granted.

Watch 'Mulholland Dr.' with a group of people whose opinions you respect, then 
talk about it (or exchange emails).