What i dissliked about this film *SPOILERS*

If you're willing to hear me out...

I didn't care much about what was happening overall, the narrative I mean, but I did care about Oscar and the toll these "characters" were taking on him. I was also intrigued by his past love and what they might have shared, and was content with it being left a mystery. So where I cared less about the story I did find some footing in regards to understanding the absurdity of acting as a profession, and the acting we all do in our everyday lives, through the character of Oscar.

Which lead me to what I think a lot of the visuals and ideas were trying to get at; for me, all of these seemingly unconnected stories really explored the relationships that happen between the viewer and the artist in cinema. The audience watching a film at the main titles and oscar's boss telling him those who were watching his "performances" were not believing him anymore, both helped to underline the metaphor between oscar's daily performances and the act of making movies.

I guess what I am suggesting is just because there isn't a strong story or B-Line of occurrences to connect the scenes together, anchored by reality, doesn't mean they aren't connected by more abstract and textual ideas that are, in fact, very real. Holy Motors is a dissection of film as it exists today, and in age where digitization is slowly stripping people of their identities, where HAS film found itself now? How are we digesting film these days, and how is that process effecting those who wish to continue to make and share film? As a society, how romantic and jaded are we really?

I mean, look at the lengths Mr. Oscar and holy motors have to go to just to make their viewers Believe what they're seeing in their world.

So every scene, no matter how small or strange, all share in the same meta conversation about cinema. And I, and I would think the director, might argue that THAT conversation is a strong enough backbone to support these scenes. The meaning of the film is in that conversation between the different scenes, not necessarily in the journey of the characters that inhabit them.

Just my take though...

The limos talking made me think that maybe Oscar was right about the viewer being unseen, maybe the viewers are machines. Which once again brings to light the connection between technology and identity and how that line has been blurred in our generation, and especially, in the world of this film.

Sorry for the length, thanks for the time.

The bottom line is this: not all films need to follow the same formula and assuming so is the viewer mistake.

A film does not have to label itself as being unique, it does not have to warn anyone.

Some artists prefer to present their audiences with something new, something unique, something daring.

The life of an actor can consume them, drain them, as role after role demands incredible strength, and from my point of view, I certainly appreciated the abstract view presented and I'm certainly not disappointed that my 'normal' expectations were not met because the film above and beyond to present something different, something quite enjoyable to watch.

If all you will ever enjoy is something that fits a formula there will never be new to watch.

Yeah I think this is a good summary of my thoughts on it as well.. I liked the idea, visually it was interesting but ultimately it did feel quite an empty experience and left me disappointed.