The more I'm thinking about it the less I'm able to comment on anything regarding it, for I'm becoming as inarticulate and baffled as our young narrator and protagonist. Becoming him, is what all young men should avoid, yet can't escape in this asylum of a society they've found themselves in. The character David Holzman speaks, unfortunately, to almost everybody I personally know, and gives a sense that nothing has essentially changed in more than half of a century in the western world, except from a technological aspect; for instance, one could say that what Jim McBride then called a "diary" and thought of, probably, as a cinematic innovation, today is called a "vlog" and people completely unaware of the cinematic art are capable of capturing ten and a hundred times the material he was able to capture in 1967, and without the requirement of even the petty amount of 2,500 bucks! I don't know much of the course the life and career of McBride took after "David Holzman"; I know, from this "diary" that he's a fan of JLG (long live!) and that he went on remaking his icon's first feature, "Breathless" in the early 80s, with Richard Gere. I wouldn't call this piece a master's one, I definitely wouldn't call its maker an equal to James Joyce and Picasso, or even Art Spiegelman, as I'd call Godard. If I had to guess, I'd guess that cranky, political Godard would disapprove of such self-indulgent, experimental projects at the time of its release, but that's irrelevant to people who're striving to find ways to leave a mark with their own breakthrough. From the many movies I saw the past few weeks, "David Holzman" stayed with me the most, even though I wanted to turn my head away every time I saw him, choked-up, trying to spell out his feelings. There are, as in any experiment, certain ingenious and revelatory aspects, like the friend/jiminy-cricket, with his strict logic (the perfect opposite to Holzman) offering us some quotable lines and some of the best piece of advice I've ever heard a friend offering to a friend (especially a filmmaker friend), or the TV-montage, as nauseating and mesmerizing as, I figure, McBride intended it to be, but it's not for its gems, but instead, mostly for its flaws that it has resonated with me. It's obvious that a young man who didn't have much, gathered whatever he had, and did whatever he could, and after all... it is a breakthrough of a kind, and nowadays, at 27, I'm in the state of life where I should envy it.