Symbiopsychotaxiplasm

When this movie first started with several couples having the same argument, I was a little confused at what was going on, but I was completely enthralled with the absolute ridiculousness of the conversations, and the horrible acting by some of the couples. I kept asking myself "did people really used to say things like that to each other? do they still?" I was viewing the arguments as period pieces in and of themselves. As relieved as I was to get out of the montage of those couple arguments, when the film cut film cut to Michael Greaves and the camera crews I felt immediate disappointed, thinking I was in for a boring and sloppy "behind the scenes" of some film that I don't know or care about - and in effect, I was. However, the slight twist of "the behind the scenes of some film you don't know or care about IS the film" was enough to completey capture my attention again. The questions of how much did the director know or not know what he was doing or what would happen or what parts were real reactions and what were staged reactions are certainly interesting, but when I was watching it they didn't have too much bearing, for me, on the film. I was still fascinated with the completely outrageous "script" of the two characters and how their chemistry and behavior complete degenerated into what I would image is pretty unprofessional, but common. The guy living in the park was thoroughly entertaining and smart, he stands out in my mind as a really great "accident" in the film.
Oddly enough, in another class the very next morning a fellow student brought this film in to show in an exp. video class, and we watched about 20 minutes of it. He's doing a research thesis on this film, and accorting to him - Michael Greaves pretty much had the whole thing masterminded. He wanted to make a film of a film where the director drives both the crew and the actors to mutiny, and film it as the actual film - and it seems he succeeded. Apparently, the scenes we debated where the crew filmed themselves having a "behind the behind the scenes" discussion were also not scripted or directed. The crew was fed up and after a discussion in a bar one night, they decided to steal some film and start filming themselves talking about how screwed up the whole thing is, and after the "film" was through being shot, they gave the footage to Greaves as sort of a gift to say "you are a lousy director, here's our conversations about how lousy you are and how much this project sucks in the hopes that with some feedback you will not be such a lousy director in the future. Essentially they made a film within a film and played into Greaves more perfectly than he could have hoped for. All in all, I think this film is pretty much by filmakers for filmakers a degree to which I have never seen and probably never will see again - it's not surprising it was a flop and the time and is seeing a new life - particulary in a film department.