Revisiting this years later, it still holds up as one of the better neo-noirs using sci-fi iconography (down to a surprise reworking of the femme fatale!) that takes its sweet time deliberately stretching out the narrative, using cinematic space to elicit looming discomfort in the terror of altered states, ironically exemplified by interesting and exciting stimuli flooding in the spaces where only banality lies comfortably. The film takes a familiar sci-fi idea in meditating on the nature of subjective reality by formulating the ease which one succumbs to destabilization when one small fragment of the wheel of predictability shifts.
The idea of artificiality vs. authenticity isn't new territory, but Fassbinder's exploration of the connotations of each is more novel and rather perverse in its challenge of the default philosophy that sober insight is always ideal. There is a question posed during the first part of the film, on whether consciousness in the computer simulator is a marker of success or failure. If the latter, then is it more ideal to exist in a subconscious state? Is this a meditation on how we need to live with some ignorance of objective reality in order to function outside of constant existential crisis? Even the psychologist’s advice is to detach.
The ending plays out like a literalist's critique of Descartes, where instead of finding solace in existing by thinking, Stiller only achieves a serene state once he reaches (what he believes to be) the objective reality. He says “I am” over and over as his final lines, rolling around with Eva romantically, joyous because he has the ability to turn off the debilitating self-awareness and exist without thinking too hard about his existence, a reinforcement of the lens that ignoring these questions and living in the moment blindly are what impact the quality of life. It’s a seemingly superficial goal to reach, to be validated of objective truth by social context, which is in step with Fassbinder’s interests. Even more cynically, the film seems to be suggesting that insight and problematic paranoia are synonymous and not idealized states, and that we are incapable of reversing this self-destructive path once we start on it (which is why Stiller needs to literally transition into a new reality to find peace). A more empowering, less socially-conscious director, would find an ending in Stiller accepting his circumstances and self-actualizing to live a meaningful life within his limitations in his designated reality (the simulation isn't exactly an oppressive place to be, as Stiller had it pretty good until he started destroying its equilibrium, and there's no indication that this 'new' level/reality will be any different), but instead we get this more realistic and unsettling worldview of what we really need to achieve psychological harmony- and given that we cannot escape our realities into a new one in real life, the implications for the rest of us aren't optimistic. The text reframes God as scientific human forces, yet briefly still allows the enigmatic quality of love to be the higher power saving Stiller in the end from death. However, the film seems to outright reject God on the condition that the force allows itself to be known as a tangible interventionist power! It's simply too much to bear.
Also worth mentioning here is that my blu-ray, which I've only watched once before about five years ago, wouldn't play from 2:08-2:46 (thankfully I had a backup digital copy to supplement the viewing). No marks on the disc, bought brand-new, and not one of the discs listed as problematic in its function or bronzing. I emailed Criterion, but I'm curious if anyone else has experienced or has heard of this issue.
