The first thing I notice is how James Carrington speaks about the idea of a man who is "uneducated" in one of the film's meta segments. If anything it reminds me of the way some of the boys speak in a program my college calls Sustained Dialogue. It's a weekly discussion group where you learn to have calm discussions about prejudice and identity, and how it affects us. Some members are more prepared than others. One question stands out to…

I am noticing this film stops working once you can no longer trust Carruth, as character, or as a guiding hand. It's a gentle balance, for a film hanging on it being narratively impenetrable, a so called puzzle movie where the puzzle pieces don't actually explain the scenes we see, it needs to work emotionally for us to understand the connection.

If we can't trust Carruth, and his intentions, the film becomes undefinable b-roll, or worse, a straightforward narrative of…