Always Shine (2016) User Reviews

The idea is cool but the attempt falls just short.

[sonnybillhammond · 6/10 · 8 December 2016]

Our two characters, Anna and Beth, are both actresses. Bashful Beth is a rising success, while bold Anna's career is struggling to take off. The two decide to take a weekend away to rekindle a neglected friendship. However the trip seems burden by an overbearing sense of tension, that slowly builds between the two over their stay, leading to an unexpected yet unavoidable confrontation.

The film is intriguing enough to hold interest until the end, mainly because of the two main characters and the actresses portraying them. The film is at it's best when centered on the two and their interactions. When the plot takes over with it's evasiveness and phantasmagoria, it seems to use the excuse of self awareness as an answer to your questions. An interesting watch nonetheless with a commentary that touches on sexism and type casting.

Excellent until the end

[rocabella-60777 · 7/10 · 8 May 2021]

It's a really good slow burn and the director and one of the characters do a damn good job of pushing you into a corner and making you feel uncomfortable the entire movie. Great slow burn but what was up with the ending? Somebody please explain? Even YouTube doesn't know.

It's pretty good, but

[fbabka · 6/10 · 22 July 2018]

It's a pretty good film, Caitlin FitzGerald and Mackenzie Davis did an excellent job and hold interest for most of the film. The whole thing is ruined by a poor ending which appears to be a patch to the whole film that doesn't belong there. It could have been much better. Still enjoyable to watch.

Very well-done

[Red_Identity · 30 December 2016]

I didn't really expect much from this but the poster certainly intrigued me. It reminded me a lot of the classic two-female psychodramas, most recently of Queen of Earth, and yet it also managed to bring something new to the table. It feels like a B-flick at its core but the filmmaking is very impressive and very intentional. The film also has a lot of interesting themes on its mind regarding the role of women in the film business and in society as well, and it will surely hit close to home for many. The two lead actresses are really good in their roles, particularly Mackenzie Davis who has the meatier role and who is able to knock it out of the park. I highly recommend this.

Conflicted

[HypnoticPoison7 · 7/10 · 4 April 2017]

The only reason I give this movie a 7 is because I was enjoying it right up until the last few minutes. I was so disappointed with the ending that I considered rating it a 4 (due to the script not being very philosophical or interesting for an indie flick with a clear agenda), but Mackenzie Davis SAVED this.

If you watch the movie knowing the ending is going to disappoint you, then you may just enjoy it that much more. I wish I had known. I felt that it ended abruptly and had no point. The dialogue wasn't great throughout, and I was disappointed in basically all of the acting, aside from Mackenzie. She was so magnetic in this, she really pulled me in. By the end, I wanted to be her. In that sense, this movie is worth seeing. However, if you like films with a beginning, middle, and a proper end, then just pass this one up and save yourself the time.

Rivalry with a twist

[ReganRebecca · 6/10 · 2 January 2017]

I didn't love Always Shine, but I did admire the film's chutzpah. It takes a lot of clichéd elements like the rivalry between women, especially actresses, but puts a new spin on them.

The film is about two best friends, Beth (Caitlin FitzGerald) and Anna (Mackenzie Davis). Both are actresses but Beth is experiencing a sudden surge in her career as she begins to land dumb parts in big budget successful horror movies. Anna meanwhile is the more talented of the two, but can't get a decent agent or good work. Her strong personality is also perceived as abrasive while Beth's doormat behaviour is perceived as being extremely attractive. The women head up to a cabin for a vacation but tension about their careers is high and neither can find it within themselves to be kind, graceful or supportive of the other. As tensions flare they finally learn what they really think of one another.

The acting on this is great and I did enjoy the twist. It's a bit of a psychological horror film, so while the gore isn't there, it's still pretty dynamic and a little scary.

What??

[Foutainoflife · 4/10 · 16 July 2018]

This movie was going along great until the last little bit. The end leaves you with a few questions. No one wants to constantly walk in the shadow of someone else. I would've had rated this higher if the ending had been more than what it was. Wasn't bad just didn't end right.

I didn't want it to end...

[wildsparrow16 · 7/10 · 2 December 2016]

This movie is about two young, struggling actresses whose friendship is dying and they know it, so they plan a girls retreat in a remote cabin in Big Sur. One is beautiful, in a committed relationship, gets admiration where she goes, and has had some steady gigs. She is kind and gentle - much like the character "Chloe" that she plays on the show Rectify. The other is the better actress yet can't get cast, she is alone, has average looks and is very mentally unstable - we see this in the first few scenes and it builds from there. Gee, what could possibly go wrong on this trip? If Single White Female and In Her Skin had a love-child, it would be this movie - on steroids. But make no mistake - this is no chick flick. There is plenty of psychological suspense to go around. This is all accomplished with no gore, no blood. The ending could be improved upon, but at least it won't leave you in the dust. I strongly recommend this movie if you are into psychological thrillers.

A film unjustifiably earning praise

[sifucrockett · 1/10 · 24 February 2017]

Always Shine is in the ilk of Certain Women. Meaning that because its leads are women, it's about women, and its director is a woman (Sophia Takal)... it must, by default, be spectacular.

Well, sorry to say, it most definitely is not!

Not a single review here to-date touches on the fact that this film borrows — LIFTS — heavily (and poorly) from Ingmar Bergman's 'Persona'.

Nor do any of this film's fawning fans notice how it is over-dabbling with the currently overused device of Multiple Personality Disorder (now known as D.I.D.).

This is an appallingly bad film.

There are enough hints dropped to suggest these girls ARE split personalities of the one character, however... there is also either an abundant LACK of evidence to confirm it, or CONTRADICTORY evidence to refute it.

Make up your friggen mind!

Seriously, nothing makes sufficient sense here. And because this film is going out of its way to raise questions, but does it so illogically, I will not waste my time rifling thru the trash to unveil the hidden truths. This film does not deserve that sort of rigour. That sort of introspection.

Always Shine also bears no capacity for concealing its feminist agenda. Shame on you for being so blatant. There also exists no intelligence in this script to neither do that sublimely nor tell a coherent story.

At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself what the point was? What was really worth telling here? And why tell it in such an intentionally obscure way? Could it be because they thought that being obscure meant being smart? Clever? Original?

Then we have the typical indie ending. A useless long shot of nothing (this time, our lead walking up a hill in a forest); then the moment of long staring; then... the notorious abrupt cut to black.

Praising the acting, which is indeed excellent, makes up for none of the poor choices made repeatedly in both the writing and the directing. To think that investors were talked into throwing money at this concept. What a waste.

See it only if you have an old TV you're looking to toss out, so you can throw things at the screen, then put your foot thru it at the end.

"Always Shine" takes us to Dark Places of A Woman's Soul.

[jtncsmistad · 6/10 · 27 November 2016]

With "Always Shine" Director Sophia Takal has fashioned a subtle/not so much so really treatise on the too frequently vicious dynamic among women consumed by envy-infested competition. While this twisted story of two young actresses plays out in progressively amped-up stages, the soft impact denouement leaves one with the feeling of "So what the hell IS the thrust?" Mackenzie Davis (building on her impressive turn in 2015's quiet gem "A Country Called Home") is Anna and Caitlin Fitzgerald (Showtime's "Masters of Sex"), Beth, whose friendship is frayed as the latter's career has progressed more successfully than has her gal-pal's. Beth is a demure, submissive wall flower. Her non-threatening demeanor stands in stark contrast to that of Anna, who is a full-force in your face boss bitch. In an effort to repair and recoup, the pair head out of L.A. for a weekend together at a spacious family cabin in Big Sur. May the fireworks begin. And, boy, do they ever.

Practically right from the get-go there is a palpable undercurrent of barely repressed tension between the two girls. Takal creates and sustains a venomous vibe here, ratcheting it up by means of rapid fire subliminal suggestion editing from Zach Clark and a consistently discomforting music under bed supplied by Michael Montes, all coming together with wicked ferocity to inject intensely ominous pulsations of alarming foreshadowing.

Lawrence Michael Levine (Takal's husband who also appears in the film) has composed a story heavy in it's apparent message that the fairer of the sex's is painfully complicit in consistently falling victim to the predatory machinations of men, particularly in the conform or be cast out world of Hollywood. And to this end, you will no doubt note that Takal teasingly, and quite purposefully, tantalizes her audience with, yet never completely gives in for even a split second to, gratuitous nudity involving her comely co-stars. (No, sir. Not in THIS chick's flick, buster.) Levine takes the driving theme to expressly existential places, such as in a scene where the anger-afflicted Anna aggressively challenges a guy who is participating in a "Men's Retreat", asking him if a similar event comprised of women would meet with a comparative degree of acceptance and embracement. The writer's point is certainly a potent one, if not overplayed across all manner of societal discourse, both public and private. The premise of the female gender as historically and unconscionably under appreciated, minimized and even nullified stands firmly on it's own, and demands no call for validation from me nor anyone else. However, the "solution" to the issue as proposed in Levine's script is as demoralizing as it is simplistic. Not to the alarming degree of severity we come to realize in "Always Shine", obviously. But in essence, and from a euphemistic perspective, is this, then, the ONLY way matters can ever truly be settled? Don't we, most of us of reasonably pragmatic sensibility leastways, believe that women as a community of spirit and souls are far better, and one whole helluva lot STRONGER, than that? Lord, let's hope so.

I was looking for, and fully expecting, a more jarring conclusion than Takal opts to give us in the final moments of "Always Shine". Still, such as it is, these lyrics from the Talking Heads satirical classic rocker "Once in a Lifetime" initially sprung to mind for me: "My GOD!! What have I DONE??!!" But then, as the screen cut abruptly to black and the credits rolled, a very different, perhaps even more troubling, interpretation occurred to me: Is it all merely, and in faithful accord with the overarching nature of the narrative, "just an act"?

characterisation and blah blah

[trashgang · 5/10 · 27 January 2017]

Maybe I don't get it but this flick didn't offer a thing to me. The story looked promising, two girl- friends going for a weekend together, the one being a popular actress and having a steady relation. The other not finding a job and not having a relationship and is naturally jealous. So it all did remind me of the classic Single White Female (1992) which delivered the stuff you expect. sadly, Always Shine stays away of what could be creepy or even squeamish.

It's clearly that you can see it coming but it never came. It's building up towards the point of no return but from then on nothing really happens, in fact they split up and it's all blah blah again. This flick is going to hit a lot of festivals in the near future, I guess why because it's in no way a horror, some say a psychological thriller, I can agree in some way but still nothing really happens only verbal words....

Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 0/5 Story 2,5/5 Comedy 0/5

A psychological thriller with more going on under the surface than most

[Red-Barracuda · 8/10 · 24 April 2017]

Two actresses take a break from L.A. and travel to a house in the country, the isolation brings to the surface dark emotions such as jealousy and distrust. Before long, events start to deteriorate badly.

This psychological thriller is one of those which plays around with the concept of the unreliable narrator. At times, we are unsure of what is real and what is not. The introductions to both characters taps into this right away where we have a close-up shot of the actress head on, the first woman is auditioning for a part in front of a group of men, while the second woman is engaging in a heated exchange with a man who is trying to rip her off. This latter sequence tricks you into thinking it too could be an actress reading for a role and the reveal shocks us when we discover it is actually real. The idea of these scenes I guess is to show that women exist essentially in a man's world and have to put up with things men generally do not. So, one of the themes of the film is the pressures society puts on women. In this scenario, these tensions result in two friends going to war with each other. We slowly see little niggles gather momentum and insecurities create space that is filled by negative emotions. Both women are actresses, with one being more successful than the other; I guess you could say the less successful one is the better actress but has been less willing to pander to the will of male producers. Professional jealousies intertwine with all other tensions leading to a dark place.

Acting by both leads, Mackenzie Davis and Caitlin Fitzgerald, is very good, especially Davis whose character ultimately runs the gauntlet of emotional states including assertive, insecure, meek and aggressive. The final act compounds this where there is a fusing of identities and events develop a more dream-like ambiance. It's, overall, a pretty compelling concoction of ideas which I found very involving. You have interesting characters with differing motivations and huge amounts going on under the surface. This results in a narrative which from an early point suggests cracks in the surface and hints at sinister events. As a viewer, you are actively encouraged to piece things together without being spoon-fed the answers. It's, on the whole, a very satisfying combination of a lot of disparate ideas that's comes together to create something really interesting.

Dark and uneasy in the best way

[jtindahouse · 7/10 · 14 July 2021]

I love a film where you can feel darkness simmering right beneath the surface. Very similar to 'What Keeps You Alive' (which came along 2 years after this movie) 'Always Shine' has that in spades. From very early on in the film we are left with an uncomfortable feeling which only grows from there.

A lot of factors are used to create this but the most clever one I noticed was the camera framing. There are scenes where two people are talking and yet the camera is focused on the third person who is not a part of the conversation. Seeing the expressions of these two wonderful actresses worked a treat. The old trick, don't tell us - show us.

There is a twist in this movie that I found very confusing. I have spent the 24 hours since finishing the film trying to get my head around it and don't think I've entirely managed it. I believe I know the intention that was had with it, but I haven't been able to put all the pieces of the puzzle in place to make it work.

I enjoyed this movie. It's dark, smart, very well acted and leaves you thinking after the credits roll. I highly recommend this one. 7/10.

Bergman's little brother...

[danthepoetman · 5/10 · 19 December 2018]

This is an extremely simplistic version of Ingmar Bergman's "Persona". Actresses, identity questions and melting-downs, envy, craziness, but oh! so much less interesting and fun! There is an element of suspence from the start and the two protagonists are good. Good rythm, the photography is not bad. But it still falls short in every department. Overall not a loss of time, but you could as well invest it better for sure.

I can only think Experimental Horror

[jrneptune · 7/10 · 29 April 2021]

After watching the movie I would agree with many of the reviews here but...

Besides the weird sounds and flashbacks that built up to the final scenes where I can say things had unexpected changes but I see those sounds and flashbacks were foreboding clues.

You ever watched a movie you did not like but you would watch it again just because of the acting and to see what you missed the first time around? That is what happened to me.

I felt like I was watching a horror movie done in an experimental style. Definitely not for everyone and I am not a horror fan generally.

Outside of the clear theme, not enough insight

[spencergrande6 · 6/10 · 1 December 2017]

Two women who are aspiring actresses and lifelong friends decide to take a retreat to a beautiful house overlooking the woods and the ocean in Northern California to reconnect after time has started to move them in different directions. One is becoming more famous everyday and is close to her big break, while the other is stuck in neutral.

That the woman who is close to making it is also a passive woman, with little of interest to add to any conversation and little in the way of personality, who is prone to saying yes to any man asking her any thing (whether to take her clothes off or to go to dinner with a man her friend clearly likes even though she has a boyfriend she likes) and the other is stubborn, outspoken and "feminist" with a strong personality, is the real crux of the film though. This is a movie about what it takes to make it in Hollywood, but also just as a woman in any walk of life. The prevalent constant sexism under the hood of everyday expectations of being female.

There's a naturalness to both performances that works well, and the tension mounts from meaningful dialogue exchanges and the actor's faces. Then the twist happens and while it's interesting in theory, it also sort of halts the movie's progress and momentum. Outside of the clearly labeled theme there isn't enough exploration or insight.

Lots of talk and not much else

[mancinibrown · 2/10 · 14 September 2017]

Beth and Anna are young actresses whose careers are going in opposite directions. They grew up as friends, but have lost touch as Anna became jealous of Beth's success. To reconnect they go on a retreat to Big Sur.

The movie is supposed to be a thriller, but absolutely nothing thrilling happens. The two talk and talk and talk without anything actually happening. There isn't anything overly threatening occurring. The only thought crossing the viewer's mind is how unlikable Beth is. she's a shell of a person who can't accept her own success. At least Anna feels truer, having some emotion come out of her when needed.

I'm not sure anything could have made this bore of a movie any better. It got 2 out of 10 only because the production values were solid, and the actress who played Anna did a good job with the bad material she had.

Great Use Of The Craft

[nuclear_brownies · 7/10 · 19 November 2020]

I skipped through this one online to see if it was worth a watch. The titlesequence was the first thing that made me want to watch it, the editing of it and the moving of the titles, sharp is the only way I know how to put it. The next scene I saw was a wide shot of the girls' car driving along the ocean. The cinematography was awesome there and again the editing got me, also the voices of the girls talking was slowed down which made it real weird and creepy. Yes it reminded me of Lynch's L. A. movies about 2 women and identity and stuff, but somehow it didn't feel exactly like a soulless copy of that kind of movie. The scene where the girls talk about this guy who liked one of them I thought, ok, it's cliche to talk about that but this movie IS about two girls, there's bound to be girl-talk. I'm a fan of Mackenzie Davis and both the girls acting was good.

I think I saw the opening quote as well which kind of put me off: yet another film where the subject is what it means to be a woman etc. But the snippets I just described made it feel relevant in terms of exciting and inspired use of the craft. I ended up watching the whole thing the night after. The first 5 to 20 minutes made me want to stop, because indeed it was yet another movie about what it's like to be a woman. So I thought, alright, let's at least watch a bad movie then, being an aspiring filmmaker I might learn how NOT to do things. Yes the story was a bit shallow. The dialogue I thought was alright, the acting was good and I believe the directing did a lot to make this movie special. Again cinematography and editing where also real good. If the story had been a little thicker, more satisfying or more clear even, less 1 dimensional and vague, I think it would have been a way bigger success. But I think for the craftsmanship portrayed in this movie for everything except the plot, it doesn't deserve the low rating it has. Same crew and better script is something I'd like to see happen. But this movie is way better than the loads of crappy stuff being poured out constantly by new directors.

On the way to being a real Lynchian thriller, the wheels came off...

[ykgtspd · 3/10 · 12 June 2020]

At first glance, David Lynch's Mulholland Drive (2001) came to mind, as the relationship between two female Hollywood industry friends begins to brew up a storm of jealousy, passive aggressive behavior and mysterious male acquaintances. With plot-appropriate locations and tension building film direction, It had all the right stuff to play out as another one of those rare hit-you-over-the-head and leave you naked with no money thrillers that I love so much.

Regrettably---this never happens. After a climactic estrogen-laced verbal catfight, the female leads seem to switch roles and feed into a sort of emotional ambivalence that takes whatever the story should have been off the tracks and into B-movie ditch.

Strong performances, solid ideas... short nonetheless

[I_Ailurophile · 6/10 · 25 August 2022]

Let me be upfront: the editing is plainly overzealous, and the manipulation of audio, too. Even within the first 15 minutes these elements distract, and detract from the viewing experience - they are intended to heighten it, but instead come off as style over substance. To whatever extent the rapid sequencing in particular (flashing to other scenes) does add to the movie, I nonetheless think 'Always shine' would have notably benefited from a more subdued, straightforward approach. Yet from there it gets more thorny. I greatly enjoyed Lawrence Michael Levine's 2020 film 'Black bear,' with Aubrey Plaza, and I was pleased to see he wrote this; I'm less familiar with filmmaker Sophia Takal, but I trust she's capable. I'm a big fan of Mackenzie Davis; while I don't know Caitlin FitzGerald very well, I've liked what I've seen her in. Unfortunately, this is a bit of a mixed bag, and perhaps not the best representation of anyone's skill set.

Chief characters Anna (Davis) and Beth (FitzGerald) are concretely fleshed out; the differences between them are stark, very plainly setting up a conflict. I think both actors do a fine job of bringing their roles to life, demonstrating admirable range and nuance, with the material they're given. However, as it stands the writing is uneven. It can often be a welcome breath of fresh air when a movie takes its time to let the story develop at its own pace, and I think this is especially true of psychological thrillers. Might 'Always shine' be too deliberate in its pacing for its own good, though? A substantial portion of the length is devoted to establishing the chief characters and setting up the remainder, which is no problem in and of itself - only, here it feels like the picture goes nowhere fast for a little more than half its runtime. Even after the big turn comes, the filmmakers insist on the same embellishments of editing and sound that first earned my ire, which would have actually been appropriate only at the climax, and too much of the dialogue is less than inspiring.

I really get what Takal and Levine were going for here. There are wonderfully strong ideas in the screenplay. Major themes present surrounding the polar personalities of Anna and Beth, the dynamics of friendship, and the struggles of finding success in film and television. Small flourishes further touch upon the overwhelmingly masculine and patriarchal slant of the industry and of society at large; one could also reasonably read a meta commentary on the ways that our culture sets women and even young girl in opposition to each other. The dialogue maybe needed some revision, especially outside those scenes centering the primary characters; the scene writing could have used more polish too - but at its best, mostly in the latter half of the picture, I think it's pretty tight. The overall narrative is solid, with initially underhanded tack as a psychological thriller that becomes increasingly prominent.

To be perfectly clear, I do enjoy this. Davis and FitzGerald are fantastic, and I like what the filmmakers aimed to create. I also think the end result comes up short, however; 'Always shine' just doesn't quite make the grade - forgive me, but it "almost shines." I think what it comes down to is that this just rather lacks the delicate hand, the subtlety and finesse, that would have helped to take it to the next level. The first impression it makes isn't a good one, and while the value reveals itself over time, the last feeling I'm left with as credits roll is of being underwhelmed. I'm a little sad to even say that just because I do like the leads so much, and I believe this had great potential. I'd love to say I like it more than I do, but even as I sit here and reflect on it, the weaknesses spark my memory at least as much as the strengths. Ultimately, in my mind 'Always shine' is entertaining, and partly satisfying, and worth checking out. It's especially recommendable if you're a fan of someone involved, as was true for me. Just keep your expectations in check, however, because I also think 'Always shine' doesn't fully land on all its marks.

Good idea, everything else fails

[jessicartim · 2/10 · 5 March 2020]

Not a good movie at all, the idea is there but its just executed badly. Poo pacing, pretty bad acting that made me giggle in the most inappropriate times, and it just leaves no impression at all. Lots of better movies to spend your time on, just pass this one.

Cat gut

[bob_meg · 10/10 · 6 December 2016]

If you see Always Shine for any reason, see it for its two lead performances. Mackenzie Davis and Caitlin Fitzgerald appear to be on verge of spontaneous combustion --- at each other but mostly at themselves --- for the hour-and-a-half run time of Sophia Takal's sophomore feature (penned by her fiancé Lawrence Michael Levine).

Always Shine is one of the most compellingly shot and edited indie features I've seen recently, using jump-cuts and flash-forwards in consistent intriguing ways. It opens with Beth (Fitzgerald) reciting a "please don't hurt me" slasher-film script into the lens for an audition and immediately follows with Anna (Davis) giving a polar-opposite speech that is more, well... unrehearsed. It's a clever set-up and tells you everything you need to know about these two young women in about eight minutes: Both are actresses. Beth is confident with her looks and charm, but not much else, and Anna is so insecure that every twitch Davis delivers is almost too painful to study for long.

Both are grappling for a tow-hold on the Hollywood feature film success ladder but only Beth has achieved a moderate level of success even though it's obvious Anna is the more talented of the two. It's a shame they can't be one person --- they'd be perfect. And that's where Always Shine gets really interesting as the two head off for a weekend of "healing" at Anna's aunts house in (gorgeous as always) Big Sur.

Watching Davis and Fitzgerald come *just shy* of ripping each other to shreds --- with paper cuts not razor blades is far more interesting than watching most actresses pull hair and scream. A fierce layer of male complicity runs underneath each woman's self-loathing and that's a nice touch, carefully derailing the "crazy chicks" cliché the film could have collapsed into under less skillful hands.

Audiences looking for an easy-out are going to be a bit put off by the last third of the film, which doesn't chart any new territory plot-wise and can be confusing for the more literal-minded, yet it strangely works for the most part. Ultimately, Takal seems to be saying that the image in the mirror is only going to be as ugly as you make it and subsequently even harder to ignore. Always Shine is many things, but slight and superficial it's not.

Talented Mr. Ripley rip-off. Only this time, women

[turan_yagublu · 6/10 · 24 January 2024]

This film had some good potential with an interesting story, but it ended up heading into a place we are all quite familiar with through experiences from other films made in the past, which have left their own indelible marks through their originality and innovativeness. Always Shine simply fell into the trap of imitating those films. The whole horror/thriller elements, including frames edited in between shots intended to create a shocking effect, felt forced. Instead, the film could have been developed into a solid psychological drama. The horror thing just killed the subtlety of the film by making it too predictable and simple.

Good hit; no field

[xoxone · 3/10 · 11 February 2019]

The two leads give fine performances in this hopeless mess of a movie.

Thought-provoking

[fellowshipofthering-976-769687 · 7/10 · 20 January 2017]

When I started watching this film, I'll admit, I expected the Hollywood over-sexualized b-movie about girls in underwear and steamy showers... It was, as they say, "a breath of fresh air" to be able to watch a female-led film without having to cringe and sigh at over-sexualized interactions, and pointless nudity. This is a film with a focus on it's story! I'll be damned! Then, I turned to the internet to find out what the ending was supposed to mean (and you might too), and as it turns out, my (as mentioned) relief WAS the point- in a sense.

I have watched a questionable amount of films in my lifetime (more so than my peers), however, I don't consider myself to be a film enthusiast. I do feel this film might need to be watched at least a couple times before you're able to make sense of some scenes, and thus believe this film will be more appreciated by film enthusiasts, but nonetheless would recommend watching. The themes of the film are refreshing, and I feel lucky to have lived in a time when a filmmaker could tell a story for what it is, and without the distractions (glamour, nudity, gore) needed to keep an audience's attention.