There was much I liked about this film but overall I was left disappointed because, I think, it couldn't decide if it was a situation drama that developed a powerful narrative (the story is highly emotional), or a character (perhaps 'personality' is more accurate?) analysis, and if it was the latter then which character/ person is its focus? - or is it an experiment in multi-perspectives? Not that I believe there's anything 'wrong', so to say, about any of these filmic approaches. My point is that here they seemed blended (or ambiguous) to the point where my engagement vacillated and waned.
Both Scarlett and Amy for instance seem to equally share our attention-credits (something that seems to be sealed in the very last scene); but Julie too is emotionally central; and Helen's involvement fundamental to the storyline. And is Simon victim ('I love you Julie, I love you, I love you') or conman ('You disgusting bastard' says Helen), or both, and if both then is this too much of a stretch for the viewer to accept, given the other points I've just made?
Perhaps I'm overcomplicating things. Waking David is not just your classic situation drama. Nor is it drawn altogether from therapy sessions (though interestingly at one point Amy says to psychologist researcher Scarlett 'I am not your project', to which Scarlett to her credit apologises).
Perhaps I'm just too comfortable with my generic stereotypes.
