I appreciate how much Kiarostami expects from the viewer. Yet, it wasn't until reading: http://sensesofcinema.com/2001/abbas-kiarostami-17/cherry/ that I fully appreciated this film. Maybe I would've unearthed its hidden gems on my own if I hadn't read this right after watching it, but the film is so subtle, if not secretive, about its true genius and anyway great regardless, so I don't think I would've bothered.
"I've decided to free myself from this life... What for? It wouldn't help you to know and I can't talk about it. If I told you, you wouldn't understand. It's not because you don't understand but you can't feel what I feel. You can sympathize, understand, show compassion. But feel my pain? No. You suffer and so do I. I understand you, you comprehend my pain but you can't feel it."
What are the motives of Mr. Badii? What would my motives be? After all it is a movie, look, he's passing a cigarette to the director. And what about life, it is greater than movies after all - and is it worth it? so it got me thinking, amongst other things space won't allow for
I expected to love this film but I actually came close to hating it. Perhaps I knew too much about it in advance, so the slow reveal about what he was actually doing weren't revelations at all. I was also surprised by how boring some of the conversations were. The only scene that sparked my interest was the monologue of the taxidermist. And then it ended with the most self-indulgent cop-out I've ever seen.