Naked Lunch 1991

It's about a junkie writer who reaches new lows mentally and physically yet a high creatively. The whole movie follows an unlikeable man who is a living stereotype of what a creative hipster writer is. Drug issue. Check! Mental issue or delusions. Check! Isolation. Check! Some fashion oddity. Check! Live like a tramp. Check! Sexually repressed . Double check! The only think left out was bipolar disorder and a camera. And it's before veganism got hijacked by the art crowd.
There's lots of weird hallucinations in the movie caused by drugs and possible mental disorder. It's this main thread throughout and questioning reality drives the movie. I didn't mind that guessing game. It gives you something to concentrate on and a slight sense of mystery. Beyond that the story is nothing special. I felt it failed with the dual realities in creating tension, drama or horror. I think they switched so much you just accepted whatever reality you were watching and didn't feel a need for one to win over the other or a struggle for one to dominate. That's not a bad idea itself but it also doesn't go anywhere. Nobody even cares the guy is messed up.
I didn't care about the characters either but I was intrigued by the story enough that I wanted to know where it was taking me. The visual effects were pretty good. They lost shock value after a while. The hallucinations weren't always played for horror but to be cartoon-like encounters. This quality made even darker hallucinations non threatening when they appeared, apart from the scene of two insect males having sex which did stand apart and was creepy.
Peter Weller played the junkie pretty good but he did mumble a bit too much. I know he was playing someone doped up as hell but I'd like to hear him clearer sometimes just to follow the dialogue easier. The dialogue is fine. I expected more babbe. It had the odd monologue, which is expected in a movie about a self absorbed writer showing off his abilities. It's a very self indulgent experience for the main character and perhaps the viewer. I imagine some watch this and have their own narcissistic creative egos massaged due our cultures modern interpretation of creative genius. They watch it and relate because it reflects on them and their own desires. The material is the problem for me. I don't find a rambling addict seeking creative validity through surreal means interesting.