I think the director was so obsessed with the underlying theme, he forgot about the story needs to be on the screen. I gave it 5 out of 10, because I don't know what happens in the second half. But from what I've seen in the first half, I know not much is on the way.
I think this is one of those movies in which the theme is so complex (philosophical) that even the actors can't get it. A good movie needs to have a good story that can be followed by an average audience ,and needs to have mind challenging subtext for more complex viewers. In case sub text precludes the story, I'd say it might be a better idea to write a philosophical book ,since such a load of ideas can not be gotten across audience via a movie through two hours. Second, movies must have story , when the subtext comes in the first place in terms of importance, this also obliterates the reason for making a movie.
I think this is one of those movies in which the theme is so complex (philosophical) that even the actors can't get it. A good movie needs to have a good story that can be followed by an average audience ,and needs to have mind challenging subtext for more complex viewers. In case sub text precludes the story, I'd say it might be a better idea to write a philosophical book ,since such a load of ideas can not be gotten across audience via a movie through two hours. Second, movies must have story , when the subtext comes in the first place in terms of importance, this also obliterates the reason for making a movie.