Land of Dreams

The production could be much better with even a lower budget. I can just feel that there are some sloppiness here and there. Also, the solo part of the leading actress is too straightforward.

This is a great example of how you can engage an audience without giving the whole plot away in the first 10 minutes. The Directors feed you just enough info to keep you glued to the characters as they develop and expose their motivations, their strengths, and their flaws.

The film is fueled with great performances by Sheila Vand, Matt Dillon and William Moseley as 3 very different people looking for very different answers only to stumble into a world where the answers you were searching for may not exist.

It's a complex satire that demands you pay close attention to the characters. The reward is a rich complex film that will stay with you a long time.

Shirin Neshat's Land of Dreams is a beautiful, witty, and fun journey of an Iranian immigrant in America, in a land where dreams and reality blend magically. The outstanding performance of Sheila Vand, Isabella Rossellini, and Matt Dillon, makes a perfect combination with Neshat's distinct and artistic way of storytelling.

It is a beautifully crafted film with stunning visuals. I strongly recommend it!

The movie "Land of Dreams" should be called "Land of Nightmares". Absolutely nothing does work in this movie, the plot is vague, superficial, and without much to tell. The dialogues don't help either with absurd conversations and the actors seem to lack charisma, too dry, without feeling and soul. They literally look like aliens. But the worst in this movie are the set design, continuity and editing. There are too many to mention, but the dinner during a census interview was the worst.

The movie has a political theme but is totally lost with so much satire and symbolism. The direction, and soundtrack are a complete mess as well.

I am of the idea that a movie should tell you a story, within its own terms and following its own rules, HOWEVER, keep it coherent or adhesive and it'll all go well... also, just like Wes Anderson can only do Wes Anderson movies, or Guy Ritchie can only do Guy Ritchie movies, the Cohen brothers, Christopher Nolan, etc. Etc. *only* David Lynch can do David Lynch.

I get it, maybe the intention of the movie is it to feel like a dream, with no coherence, vague, surrealist and confusing, but you have yo bind it all together with some intent... which is, what? Otherwise, is there a porpoise, *at all*, with this movie, other than confusing its audience?