I haven't read Burrows' original book, but judging from the film, it is estimated that he wrote very stream of consciousness. The film seems to have a coherent and logical sequence, but in my opinion, except for the consistency of the theme and characters, other fragments are scattered and randomly combined, like a series of photos with the same tone, and there is no need to see any deep meaning from them. , Conan Berger dealt with so psychedelic, that only he himself understood——.
But then again, no matter how puzzling this film is, there is nothing wrong with it. It was originally a depiction of the imaginary produced by addicts after taking drugs. Those disgusting hallucinations are not allusions to the stains of human nature. "Liar door, you have a stain that cannot be removed, and that is the stain in your heart." (William S. Burroughs's original words, played on the screen before the opening.) After seeing the film, I gave up on distinguishing reality in it. It can be said that any of the plots in the effort with the fantasy world are the reflection of Burrows' real life, which has been enlarged repeatedly in the hands of Conan Berg, and it has become a flesh-and-blood picture.
View more about Naked Lunch reviews