Three Worlds

This is a movie that as trance seeming tries to capture a mood moreso than a story (tying in twilight scenes), then again it tries to tie in ALOT of notions in itself, and on that it throws in home footage and experiences from people who supposedly are close to the lead or the person he represents.

The movie can be read quite easily in 4 ways; * as a movie about film making (as a film to show off what the director has learned to use so far - a CV of sorts) * as waking life (2001) without the insights mixed with Night on Earth (1991) if it was a solo story * as eternal sunshine of the spotless mind (2004) * as Swiss army man (2016) There are notions for all of these directions, if you put the messy footage, lack of message (but pushing its none message) with the home footage and lack of properly tying in the scenes into the storyline it is more remniscent of the kind of modern art where you are supposed to create your own meaning. It does somewhat capture the notion of ambivalence/twilight.

End notes: It has a homage to American History X in it (1998).

Three Worlds offers a new story from indie filmmaker Amir Motlagh, who has made 15 or so films to date - including 3 features. In the movie a man goes through an experimental procedure and we get to see three stories, possibly more, happening in different points in time and perhaps in an alternate dimension. This is unlike most movies out there - a beautifully shot slow cinema art movie w/ sci-fi elements, featuring an Iranian-American lead (actor/director Motlagh) with moments from an Iranian-American experience in the film. And there are some great surprises in the film, can't say much more except that one of those great moments may involve some type of a ghost. An unpredictable film that deserves repeat viewings to fully experience and appreciate the multiple layers of the story. Fans of Malick, Mekas, and movies that blend real life and fiction seamlessly, and fans of earlier movies by Motlagh will enjoy this movie.

Coming into this movie, considering the super low rating I expected some sort of a pretentious artsy mess, and instead I got a very heartwarming and interesting experience. The main critique of the film seems to be that it's confusing and that it makes no sense, and to be fair, this definitely isn't structured as a standard movie, but rather a very non-linear mix of several different stories. It seems to be a very personal look into the director's life as a filmmaker, and some of his inner demons. There are some breathtaking scenes, I enjoyed all of the interviews as they felt so natural, and the sci-fi layer to the whole thing was a nice touch. If you enjoyed Shane Carruth's movies for example, you shouldn't miss this one. If you're looking for a classic drama or sci-fi flick, you might be disappointed.

I'm not even sure what this movie is supposed to be about as I wasn't able to watch more than 1/2 an hour without turning it off. It was like some 15yo av club geek was experimenting with his video camera with no thought whatsoever to an actual storyline. The acting was flat and the cinematography was absolutely horrible. I imagine it was supposed to be some deep film festival submission with some kind of message or something but it just came across as a bunch of jumbled scenes of wasted film footage. Even the audio was poorly recorded and dubbed. It is not worth wasting your time with. Watch an hour and a half of depression medication commercials and you will come away feeling like you watched something of more substance.

5 years from now, people will read this review and be like "emerging???" But very much like Amir Motlagh's other small, experimental film "Man," this one hooks you in with it's skewed narrative and patchwork structure. Don't expect some grand drama with a clear-cut plot. That's not what this is--it's experimental, non-narrative essentially--and it's a bold indie with an equally bold Motlagh hallmark.