Southland Tales (2006)

Director: Richard Kelly

Cast: Carlos Amezcua as Himself, Curtis Armstrong as Dr. Soberin Exx, Robert Benz as Tab Taverner, Todd Berger as Bing Zinneman, Dave Carlin as News Reporter, Joe Campana as Brandt Huntington, Chris Andrew Ciulla as UPU 4 Officer 3 (as Chris Ciulla), Rebekah Del Rio as Vanessa Vera Cruz, Aaron Dillar as Jimmy Hermosa, Nora Dunn as Cyndi Pinziki, Shari Dunn as USI Dent Reporter, Michele Durrett as Starla Von Luft, Jon Falcone as Soldier Falcon, Leila Feinstein as Herself, Jaret Gardiner as Shane Laverne

This movie, maybe more than any other I've seen, is a commitment. If
you think that 144 minutes is a lot to commit to a movie, the running
time is only the tip of the iceberg.

In the DVD cut of the movie, a lot of things are obscured: what the big
picture is, why characters are motivated to do certain things, why
multiple identities are a recurring theme, why certain
characters/actions are necessary.

What is in the DVD cut is an extensively detailed alternate world.
Unfortunately, to make the actions in that alternate world make sense,
you basically have to either watch the movie multiple times, or at
least know what you're dealing with.

There are at least 4 layers to everything that's going on: 1)
political/social commentary on contemporary American society and the
apocalyptic undercurrent therein; 2) sarcastic/caustic pop culture
references (Philip K. Dick is a big one, but also subtle things... for
instance, the Rock was Sean William Scott's protector in "The Rundown"
and plays a similar role here); 3) a self-consciousness or
self-referentialism: actors cast against type, some similar themes to
Donnie Darko, actions that play out in the film are largely based off
of the AWFUL screenplay written by one of the characters (as seen in
the graphic novel prequels); 4) the actual plot of the movie, which has
deep ties to the Book of Revelation, and makes much more sense if the
graphic novels are read first.

These layers are pretty consummately intertwined. This is part of what
makes this movie to be compelling enough to make me want to put in the
necessary effort. Its imagery was provocative, and because Richard
Kelly has created such a densely layered world for himself, putting in
the time actually is incredibly rewarding.

It should also be said that this film, like Blade Runner or There Will
Be Blood, does not let its plot set specifications on its scope, or
what it's about. If you hone in on what the director thinks its
scope/purpose is, it's much easier to appreciate.

I'm not sure exactly how to rate this movie, since as a stand alone
movie it is a failure, but if you take the time to get inside Kelly's
mind, it's worthwhile. So. My advice? View it as an investment or don't
view it at all. Don't throw it on for an evening's entertainment. If
you do, you might be entertained, but you'll probably be confused and
angry.