groovy-vic ..Meaning that I can't conceptualize how one person on this entire earth can tolerate it, much less the fact that most people love it. I've never felt compelled to write a review until today because my opinion on a film has never been so polar opposite to the consensus; even when I hate a movie, I can usually see how it might appeal to others. I'm not going to tell you not to watch this movie, but I will break the style down a bit and you can decide from there. If you like films like Possession (1981) or Suspiria that are 'artsy' and where nothing that seems to contribute to any sort of coherent plot occurs until 15 minutes from the end, then you'll probably like this (Suspiria wasn't actually too bad compared to this movie though). The only difference with Eraserhead is that there is no plot at all and nothing significant happens at any point (except the mutant baby existing). I have an image in my mind of how the idea of this movie came about... *Watching Texas Chainsaw Massacre* "Why did Tobe Hooper go through all the effort of making Leatherface kill people? He's ugly enough that it would still be a horror film if he just sat around crying all the time.. but I guess a couple freaky dream scenes should be added to trick people into thinking something is actually happening in the movie..." *lightbulb* I HAVE AN IDEA".... .....I feel like this movie being called a horror film is insulting to real-life dysfigured people if you think about it, because there is no real danger in the movie, only an ugly baby. It's crazy this guy went on to direct The Elephant Man (which I haven't watched, but is supposedly sensitive with regards to the issue).I was reading an interview with the director David Lynch before I watched the film, and learned that when he first told the company he wanted to make Eraserhead, the script was only 21 minutes long.. Thus, he had to stretch it out. How did he do this? With long, drawn-out scenes where nothing of significance and no dialogue occurs, such as Henry looking at stuff or walking around. For example, the first 6-ish minutes consist of a slow zoom-in on a moon-looking planet. About 12 minutes in my dad asked if this movie has any dialogue at all, so I looked to see if there was any IMDB quotes. After watching the film, I'm convinced every line that occurred in Eraserhead has been documented by IMDB. Not much is said in the movie, and even less actually happens.I gave this a 2 instead of a 1 because I appreciate the visual style, such as the only view outside the windows being brick, which sets an ominous mood. Why can't movies have a stylish artsy flair but also have a coherent plot and move at a pace faster than a dead snail? It seems you can't have both.2/10 would not recommend (and 0/10 from my dad)

merelyaninnuendo EraserheadIt defines the genre for not only its physicality screams horrific poems but so does its deeply layered thought-provoking concept and an heart-screeching exaggeration of the consequences of the actions of the humankind. The metaphorical term can be inedible and uneven for everyone to grasp it, even after the curtain drops for the feature remains subtle throughout the course of it and doesn't lose its tone at any point. It is rich on technical aspects like cinematography, sound effects, and editing. David Lynch; the writer-director, has done a brilliant work on writing the gripping script and has shown guts to pull off such a convoluted plot and get the anticipated vision on screen creating the perfect impact on the audience who is in awe of it. The performance is hold on tightly by Jack Nance on his portrayal of protagonist that is eerily sociopath and hard to be judged at. The only conundrum in here would be the imaginative bubble depicted in here which is dark and brutal and cringe worthy too, where the makers could have step lightly. Eraserhead is an art that neither can be erased nor ignored, it is bold, unafraid to tell its own story on its own terms.

braxium The thing that captivated me most about this movie is that when you dissect it into its distinct elements, you get to see many different well made sides to it. The most important element - to me - is the soundtrack. The experience of the movie is aligned in such a way that it feels like you are listening to an album by David Lynch, and the picture is an accompanying video for it. I could even name it as a dark ambient masterpiece. Of course, there are all kinds of musicians of that movement who could comparatively be much better than Lynch, but nevertheless a soundtrack so much tailored for a movie being dark ambient in origin makes it really worthwhile. The imagery is quite cerebral, I even found some parts that belong to my dreams. And it isn't meant to be horrific, but something more rather innately disturbing, something that lurks beneath that is mutual for many people but unexplored. And of course, the soundtrack draws these out of the picture and makes it all work.My only issue is that the plot wasn't on par with the other elements, it feels like the movie isn't meant to be viewed as a film, but rather a audiovisual collage that aims to express something subliminal. That doesn't of course mean bad news, but there were shifts from the visual aspects of the movie to narrative sections that didn't really express as much and didn't really convey any useful information about the events. I didn't really expect the movie to tell me a story in the first place, I just wanted to see how dark ambient would look like, to be honest.Summary: The movie didn't need a story, it didn't even need to label itself as a movie. Really good soundtrack, accompanying and being accompanied by really nice subliminal imagery.

Martin Bradley The first time I saw "Eraserhead" was in the Ritzy Cinema in Brixton. My friend Gerry had already seen it in San Francisco and was still in paroxysms of praise for the picture so I went in with high expectations; even so, I still wasn't prepared for what I saw that night. I was meeting Gerry in the bar next door afterwards but when I left the cinema I was still in something of a daze, or perhaps a trance, and started walking in the wrong direction. I knew I had seen some kind of masterpiece but I also knew here was a film I wouldn't want to sit through again, at least not for a very long time. Well, here we are 40 years later and I've just seen "Eraserhead" again.For anyone still ignorant of the fact, "Eraserhead" was the film that introduced David Lynch to the world and a few minutes into the film was enough to tell us that here was a singular new talent worthy to sit on a pedestal next to the young Welles, not that Welles would ever make a film like "Eraserhead"; indeed who, other than Lynch, would.There is a plot of sorts but essentially Lynch's film, luminously shot in black and white by Frederick Elmes and Herbert Cardwell, unfolds like a living nightmare, but whose? Lynch's? Henry's, (the central character that established Jack Nance as a cult actor for a new generation), or our own? Certainly there are images here enough to give the strongest of us nightmares, images and sounds, (this film has some of the finest sound designs ever recorded).It has been described as experimental, as avant-garde and by some just as a plain old horror film. You could say it's also a kind of love story, though a very warped and forbidding one. Lynch, of course, would go on to the likes of "Blue Velvet" and "Twin Peaks" and would never fully abandon the sensibilities first seen in this extraordinary film. I was more prepared for it this time but it still blew me away.