Bottom of the World

Mystified? Here's my interpretation -- A hypnotic meditation on the mysterious nature of the subconscious and its power. It is abstract and psychological at its core. The logic is skewed to be dreamlike and surreal, making more sense on a second viewing where I picked up on more visual clues and devices. I'd be curious how others interpreted it? Some posts I've seen think Alex exists, some don't. Any psychologists out there? Oh, and Jena Malone is really good as she delivers a sweet and devastating performance all at once. Where has she been?

If you like tidy resolutions and optimistic fade-outs this film is probably not for you!

This movie is artistic, confusing, and trippy. If you like strange/complex it is a most creative film. It might be confusing at some parts but that just made it better. Movies today don't put responsibility on the viewer to figure out what is going on and this film does that. Not only that but the Scarlett character is amazing and devastating all at once. Acting is done very well, Jena Malone was great in her role of Scarlet and Ted Levine did a decent job with his character too. Direction is top notch and I will definitely check other movies done by this director. Overall this movie was a joy ride for me and I give it a well deserved 8 star rating.

Strange, lost, different, stopped, paranoid, but I liked it, slightly, I could have more movement, maybe an explanation, the analogy of peas, which turn into a glass of water, the little boy tortured in childhood, his bloody mouth reminiscent of Joker... A parallel reality, dream, verse, obverse or multiverse, confused, and confusion permeates us at the end of the film, little explained, everything subjective ... Interesting...

I kind of liked 'Bottom of the World'. I make no bones about the fact I'm a fan of the 'mystery' genre, and this film certainly had an element of mystery to it. It's a film where the audience knows as little about what's going on as the characters (if not even less at times), yet there are constant hints as to the direction our thinking should be going in. Then a nice little ending was the icing on the cake.

The whole "nothing makes sense, what is going on?" thing has been done in movies thousands of times over the years, but it always seems to work. I think in a way, much like a magic show, the audience wants to be fooled, or at least in a state of curiosity. It can also be quite easy for film makers to pull off, because the usual linear film making techniques obviously go out the window, and thus it can be harder for an audience to judge what is actually good and what is not.

Some people on the other hand will always hate this type of film and that's fine. I see 'Bottom of the World' being a very polarising film. Some will have a great time with it, while others will utterly despise it. I was in the former camp.

This is a movie that offers an assortment of David Lynch trademarks, in service of a story that's all surface and has none of the pervasive worldview - the perspective - of a David Lynch film. It reads as homage, I guess, but aside from the flattery of imitation it has nothing to offer.

Elements of Lost Highway, Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart are pretty obvious. There's even a lamp with a red shade.

I guess if, like the filmmakers, you enjoy Lynch and have no idea why, you might like this. But if you like substance with your knockoff style, move along.