Bottom of the World

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...

Anyway, this film was fairly fun if you like to think, figure things out. Like watching the 'best of' compilation of someone else's fever dreams. Bottom of the World delves under the surface, to the dark foundations that we embrace by night and ignore by day. This conceit is taken to a psychological level and into the disturbing unconscious mind of Scarlett (Jena Malone) and her creation of a new reality. The film leaves us with more questions than answers but hats off to trying to make something different and challenging to the viewer. I don't recall a film that was entirely a creation of the sub-conscious other than - Fight Club?

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!

By chance, I watched this the same day I saw Jim Jarmusch's Paterson. Both are similar, but both fail for completely different reasons.

Bottom of the World does not know what it wants to be. It tells a non- linear story that gives itself away about 40 minutes into the film. After that, it follows a predictable path of key symbols to clue the viewer in to what is actually happening. It should have gone a completely different route and stuck with the bizarre, weird, sleazy feel it had at the beginning. It turns into a very underwhelming second half as it drifts away and fades into the same trap many other similar movies fall into. It tries too hard to pull a complicated story together in a very silly way.

The pace and acting are appropriate and the director does a good job with atmosphere and mood, but it falls flat overall.

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.