While this terrible mess deserves all the bad things said about it, I have a strong suspicion that the film was not intended to be what finally appeared on the screen. The storyline is simply too screwed-up to have been intentional.
My theory is that the film as published is actually an attempt to resurrect a project that was abandoned without being completed. Perhaps it ran overbudget. Perhaps the principals realised that it would be a dog whatever happened. Perhaps somebody died.
The result was a pile of footage with many scenes unfilmed, and many issues unresolved. Some brave person took this pile of dross and tried to make a coherent movie out of it. Their success was limited, but at least it had a sort-of beginning, a confused middle, and a silly, half-of-an ending. Not having the resources to trim it to normal film length, they made it into a two-parter. Still a disaster, but a little money coming in to cover the completion guarantee.
Well, that's my hope, anyway. Anything to prevent me having to accept that someone actually went out and created this crock on purpose. That would be too much to bear.
CD
My theory is that the film as published is actually an attempt to resurrect a project that was abandoned without being completed. Perhaps it ran overbudget. Perhaps the principals realised that it would be a dog whatever happened. Perhaps somebody died.
The result was a pile of footage with many scenes unfilmed, and many issues unresolved. Some brave person took this pile of dross and tried to make a coherent movie out of it. Their success was limited, but at least it had a sort-of beginning, a confused middle, and a silly, half-of-an ending. Not having the resources to trim it to normal film length, they made it into a two-parter. Still a disaster, but a little money coming in to cover the completion guarantee.
Well, that's my hope, anyway. Anything to prevent me having to accept that someone actually went out and created this crock on purpose. That would be too much to bear.
CD