Spoilers herein.
Most folks don't like this, I suppose because the goofy ending allows them to believe they understood it and that perceived understanding is stoopid. But forget the ending for a moment: something tacked on by the same types of studio executives that defaced Welles' profundities.
See Ruis' Proust film, then see this without that shot mirror. The idea is pretty clever: the first rule of creating a film world is to give the viewer a secure platform. They need to know where they are: how close to reality; what the levels of removal are. This so that when films and imaginings within the `main' story occur, the viewer knows where to place them. For nearly a hundred and fifty years, we have been following the `Alice in Wonderland' model as our default: so while there is lots of TALK about whether we are dreamed or dreamer, the story itself gives us the required anchor.
Recently, dePalma and Lynch have ventured into the territory of the unanchored platform, scaring us with our lack of imbalance. Here, without that stoopid ending, is a riskier adventure. Worth applauding.
In doing this, he has given us several places where everything else in the story is a vision from what happens there. The most obvious is the VooDoo tea given in the `Christmas Palace;' one can see precisely the same trick in `Phoenix and Rainbow.' There's some `Last Year in Marienbad' meets `Lady of Shanghai' here, and a similarity to `Sex and Lucia,' even a reference to `Cabinet of Dr Caligari.' Nikita meets Dialbolique or perhaps the other way around
There's a really nice scene with crabs along the way.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.
Most folks don't like this, I suppose because the goofy ending allows them to believe they understood it and that perceived understanding is stoopid. But forget the ending for a moment: something tacked on by the same types of studio executives that defaced Welles' profundities.
See Ruis' Proust film, then see this without that shot mirror. The idea is pretty clever: the first rule of creating a film world is to give the viewer a secure platform. They need to know where they are: how close to reality; what the levels of removal are. This so that when films and imaginings within the `main' story occur, the viewer knows where to place them. For nearly a hundred and fifty years, we have been following the `Alice in Wonderland' model as our default: so while there is lots of TALK about whether we are dreamed or dreamer, the story itself gives us the required anchor.
Recently, dePalma and Lynch have ventured into the territory of the unanchored platform, scaring us with our lack of imbalance. Here, without that stoopid ending, is a riskier adventure. Worth applauding.
In doing this, he has given us several places where everything else in the story is a vision from what happens there. The most obvious is the VooDoo tea given in the `Christmas Palace;' one can see precisely the same trick in `Phoenix and Rainbow.' There's some `Last Year in Marienbad' meets `Lady of Shanghai' here, and a similarity to `Sex and Lucia,' even a reference to `Cabinet of Dr Caligari.' Nikita meets Dialbolique or perhaps the other way around
There's a really nice scene with crabs along the way.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.