This padded-out feature would have made a very good short. There are good scenes, and ideas worth considering, but absolutely not enough of them for a feature. The stop-motion and design are great, but it has problems on the story/art/intellect side because of stretching the run time past what the story/themes can bear.
Too many of the scenes (whether attempts at exploring the humdrum, or attempts at absurdist conflict) subtract more than they add to the whole. The main metaphor of a Fregoli delusion well-represents a kind of mid-life crisis, but it also loses quite a bit in flattening out the mid-life crisis into a general alienation (granted, with a mix of older existentialism issues, and newer ones such as 'personhood as illusory'). In a short film, this bare-bones metaphor would have enough of a poetic quality to work. But here, when the story is stretched out, we are constantly reminded of the lack of particulars. And at some point, not telling us more about the main character and his problems is just coy or frigid on Kaufman's part.
I should note that I have no problem with the main character being unsympathetic, nor the attempt at exploring the humdrum side of life in many scenes, nor the film's plot/conclusions being flat/troubling/puzzling, nor scenes that aren't always "entertaining". But those scenes have to do something besides show you that dull dialogue imitates dull talk in life. And if Kaufman was interested in tone/lyricism, theme, and irony OVER human particulars (and therefore other things that art can do), he was obliged to take careful, un-self-indulgent account of what the story could sustain. For the second film in a row, he hasn't.
I see why, on the the business side, this CAN'T be a $3M short when you can make a $10M feature instead. But this has no bearing on whether the feature has problems. And I understand why a lack of human particulars is fitting for puppets (and how from an ironic, existentialist and behaviorist point-of-view, we might be more puppets than we care to admit), but a few modern ideas don't automatically make 90 minutes worth of story.
Too many of the scenes (whether attempts at exploring the humdrum, or attempts at absurdist conflict) subtract more than they add to the whole. The main metaphor of a Fregoli delusion well-represents a kind of mid-life crisis, but it also loses quite a bit in flattening out the mid-life crisis into a general alienation (granted, with a mix of older existentialism issues, and newer ones such as 'personhood as illusory'). In a short film, this bare-bones metaphor would have enough of a poetic quality to work. But here, when the story is stretched out, we are constantly reminded of the lack of particulars. And at some point, not telling us more about the main character and his problems is just coy or frigid on Kaufman's part.
I should note that I have no problem with the main character being unsympathetic, nor the attempt at exploring the humdrum side of life in many scenes, nor the film's plot/conclusions being flat/troubling/puzzling, nor scenes that aren't always "entertaining". But those scenes have to do something besides show you that dull dialogue imitates dull talk in life. And if Kaufman was interested in tone/lyricism, theme, and irony OVER human particulars (and therefore other things that art can do), he was obliged to take careful, un-self-indulgent account of what the story could sustain. For the second film in a row, he hasn't.
I see why, on the the business side, this CAN'T be a $3M short when you can make a $10M feature instead. But this has no bearing on whether the feature has problems. And I understand why a lack of human particulars is fitting for puppets (and how from an ironic, existentialist and behaviorist point-of-view, we might be more puppets than we care to admit), but a few modern ideas don't automatically make 90 minutes worth of story.