I got the impression that the Hollywood scene is a confusing mix of stereotypes. The film makers are saying the girl who flew in from Canada could just as easily have been the dead girl in the bed or just as easily the girl who commited suicide. The girl in the car accident could just as easily have been the starlet. The landlady could just as easily have been the director's mother. In fact, the movie shows them portrayed by the same actors.
As in real life Hollywood, there are powerful figures with hidden agendas. Some are powerful in the conventional way, such as the old tycoon behind the glass wall, some are powerful beyond the director's understanding, like the cowboy, and some are powerful beyond OUR understanding, like the dirty man behind the diner. They all impact the rank and file. Indeed, the dirty man impacts US by twisting the story thread. The closest we get to seeing the artifice of the twist is when the blue box is opened and expands to black out the scene. This is clearly some kind of transition point. Perhaps this transition could have been managed without such an apparent disconnect.
I suppose I have the impression that if I go to Hollywood and live there for a few years in a defocused way, I would remember years later a mish mash of faces and people, confusing and not well delineated. Horrible things, strange things.
I agree that the film-making was artful. The scenes are beautiful capsules, often self contained almost classic set pieces. The music was well selected and usually properly set off the visuals and dialogue, almost never intrusive.
All that said, I must admit I didn't like the movie. I find that I like logical plots with linear development. I can follow these well and get more involved with the story. With a movie like this, my first reaction is dismay that the film makers are playing a trick on me. I wasn't able to integrate it (grok? -- dating myself here) into an understanding until long after it was returned to the rental store.
As in real life Hollywood, there are powerful figures with hidden agendas. Some are powerful in the conventional way, such as the old tycoon behind the glass wall, some are powerful beyond the director's understanding, like the cowboy, and some are powerful beyond OUR understanding, like the dirty man behind the diner. They all impact the rank and file. Indeed, the dirty man impacts US by twisting the story thread. The closest we get to seeing the artifice of the twist is when the blue box is opened and expands to black out the scene. This is clearly some kind of transition point. Perhaps this transition could have been managed without such an apparent disconnect.
I suppose I have the impression that if I go to Hollywood and live there for a few years in a defocused way, I would remember years later a mish mash of faces and people, confusing and not well delineated. Horrible things, strange things.
I agree that the film-making was artful. The scenes are beautiful capsules, often self contained almost classic set pieces. The music was well selected and usually properly set off the visuals and dialogue, almost never intrusive.
All that said, I must admit I didn't like the movie. I find that I like logical plots with linear development. I can follow these well and get more involved with the story. With a movie like this, my first reaction is dismay that the film makers are playing a trick on me. I wasn't able to integrate it (grok? -- dating myself here) into an understanding until long after it was returned to the rental store.