I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Absolutely the worst movie.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Nothing much really happens in this fifteen-minute short by David Lynch. Yet I couldn't take my eyes off the nothing much.Another reviewer claims this is a dull movie but a fine commercial. If I hadn't been told it was a commercial for Lady Dior or Luis Vuitton or Sigfried Sassoon or Max Factor, I wouldn't have known.Yes, the bespoke handbag features prominently in the film, but not TOO prominently, and it functions in the film as a link between a phantasmagorical past love and the present circumstances of the curiously boffo Marion Cotillard. She enters her hotel room, a tango from the 1920s playing on the radio, and finds this glittering handbag on the floor of her room Shanghai and two Chinese house detectives appear and ask her about it. Then they stand motionless, speechless, while she spins out this tale of experiencing deja vu at lunch. The story involves her and a lover escaping a room in 1920s Shanghai and landing on a rooftop, at which point the lover says he can't be with her and fades away while handing her a blue flower.Back to the present. Under the eyes of the two statuesque investigators, she finally opens the bag. Guess what's in it.

This 16-minute internet-aired motion picture was created by Dior. It was available until October 2010 on Dior's website and the name Dior appears on-screen outside the picture viewing area. Except for this the viewer would have no idea that the picture was advertising for Dior.The picture opens with Cotillard, whose character is not given a name in the motion picture, hearing a 1920s tango ("Fate-Tango Valentino" written by Nathaniel Shilkret to commemorate Rudolph Valentino) in the hall as she walks to her hotel suite. She opens the door to see a circa 1940 RCA Victor phonograph playing Shilkret's original 78 rpm recording of the song. An expensive Dior handbag then appears amidst elaborate visual effects involving smoke. The remainder of the film is devoted to her reaction and the events leading to these mysterious happenings.The film is extremely well done, using sound and visual effects characteristic of David Lynch audio-video productions and with Cotillard giving an excellent performance.Thanks, Dior, for creating an entertaining film and for not ruining it with intrusive advertising.

Maybe I should be upset this is a commercial. I've never bought any Dior anything and this won't make me run out and buy an expensive handbag...but it is a great film short. Even with the Dior bag in place, the bag is so much like other Lynch objects...the blue box from Mulholland Dr., the envelope with the videotape in it in Lost Highway...it appears with flashes of electricity and smoke making me think the lead character must have ended up at the Shanghai branch of the Black Lodge. The story and there is one, is that the lead character in true Lynchian style recounts she has been there before but hasn't...that she is afraid of what is in the bag. It's interesting that Lynch choices his lead not to go to the object of the commercial. It's a nice addition to the short that seems to speak secrets.The short goes on in the lead's flashbacks to another Shanghai where she has a lover and they are trying to run away from something...almost a flashing war like atmosphere, maybe the Battle of Shanghai...and he says he loves her, but he has to leave. He disappears with a Fire Walk With Me blue rose. She is left in the room, in the present, with the bag, which has a blue rose on top of it. It has a lot of Lynch's mystery, what others call his "Women in Trouble" decade. But really Laura Palmer and Dorothy Vallens were also women in trouble from prior decades. The Blue Lady is just the newest of these creations, stuck in her 15 minutes of fame...was that a set choice, because it seems like one. It's a beautiful shot piece, I love the framing of the scenes and the story, though short and made to sell a product, is again, delightfully anti-commercial and interesting enough to watch a few times and even analyze. It's not perfect because it is a commercial first and art second, which gets a nine from me because of that. I guess Lynch has to make money somehow, since arty directors only get a tiny fraction of what mainstream directors get. But hats off to him, for taking what could be a boring commercial and making it a mysterious romp which has reflections of his past projects. I am not sure why Dior commissioned him for this, but I am glad they did. I only hope other companies hire him to do short films for their websites. It's a pleasure to view them.

Apparently, and maybe I'm thick-in-the-head, this David Lynch short film is a commercial for Lady Dior, which is basically a really fancy handbag. This isn't a surprise that Lynch would make a commercial - he has made several over the years, maybe as a means to get some of his ideas out there into the cinematic medium, and maybe, perhaps, to get some quick money. But this is a little different: this is a 16 minute film where it's really about a woman who goes to a hotel, a record is playing mysteriously in her room, and a handbag shines very brightly. She calls the hotel-help asking what is going on, and then tells a story of meeting a man before... or thinking she's met a man before, in Shanghai. The power of this short film is that a) I didn't have any real clue that it was a long-form commercial while watching it, and b) it carries the kind of unique mystery that Lynch unlocks with his approach to cinema - the cinematography (in this case digital video, with a more sophisticated eye than the experimentation of Inland Empire), the editing that emphasizes the human face and the enigmatic movement of characters in the frame, sound editing that is not-of-this world. I still am not quite sure what it's all about, or if it's really what it is in that handbag (I'm more-so reminded of the elusive nature of the blue box from Mulholland Drive), and I almost don't want to know, at least not until two or three more viewings. It also is a big asset that Cotillard, stunning in appearance and her quiet intensity, works so well here for him as his female-muse. Does it mean as much as his other short films? I'm still not sure about that either. Compared to some of the works on his Short Films of David Lynch or Best of DavidLynch.com DVDs, its not any kind of absurd thing he's dealing with here. It's like a splintered-in-his-mind romantic drama where love and loss and memory and not knowing converge into something one can look at and maybe recognize, or just feel. It's sublime work by a master of his self-made craft.