Babylon might not be a movie where all of its disparate themes, ideas, and plots come together, but I had a hell of a time just going along for the ride. Such a manic, thoughtful blunderbuss of a film about a single topic… Hollywood in general, these characters in particular… threatened to fly apart at any minute… but, for me, didn’t.

The film starts in 1926… we’re still in the silent era and were heading to hedonistic parties that look like the “before” scenes of an old school Hollywood bible epic. The film largely (but sometimes inconsistently) follows four Hollywood types – three actors and an aspiring studio exec – as they try to make a living in the biz. Everyone has their own reasons for floundering, everyone has their own reasons for partying like it’s the end of days.

And the movie depicts wild Hollywood excess in such an exuberant, manic, and energetic ways. There’s moments where they are just showing off… and it’s worth the show. Great, over-the-top moments of silent film shooting in the desert where we’re not doing anything but watching the madness unravel. It’s often thrilling and it’s a nice reprieve when the whole movie isn’t operating at that level.

To put this movie into both an accurate and inaccurate perspective, the first five minutes of the film has three of the more R rated things that can be spewed from a mammal’s body. But the hedonism, the sheer abandonment of taste, should not define this rather scattershot film. There are definite gross-out moments that might make you wonder what you just walked into… but there are also solemn, thoughtful scenes where the characters simply have conversations.

Whether any of these conversations or wild dips into the pool of Old Hollywood excess work for you might depend on how much you love the movies. I don’t think someone who has a passing indifference for Hollywood history and trends will find anything of particular value in this film. But I did.

In fact, the final moments of this movie were so good, that convinced me to raise my overall rating of the film. The entire movie – excess and introspection and all – culminate in a scene where Hollywood talks about itself and then becomes unstuck in time. Themes of film being meaningful and stardom eternal splash across the screen in such a Damien Chazelle burst of joy and color. Maybe this is Hollywood navel gazing, but it talked to me (and moved me) as a film fan.

Much of this film indulges in that moment where silent film gave way to talkies. This is a familiar topic and, for quite some time, this film has nothing new to say about it. It definitely presents it in some interesting ways, but the topic is well-worn. But that familiarity – the one where you might say, “Hey, they did this in Singing in the Rain” – is so intentional and to the core of the film. It’s a snake admiring its own tail, a meta commentary on itself. It’s rather brilliant writing as its the answer to previous conversations in the film… and to your own familiarity with film history.

Now, it would be true to say that there’s so much random Hollywood excess and themes in the film that it might be hard to connect all the dots. Is there a singular theme within these sometimes sober, often wild and crazy ideas? Probably not. Not unless the overall themselves is “check out how weird Hollywood was”… which, hey, fair enough.

I was highly engrossed, sometimes grossed, and often amused by this film. I’m often wary of Hollywood navel gazing but I think this one worked because it took me for a ride and showed me the good and the bad and the transcendent. Whether that transcendence is transcendent to non-fans is doubtful… but I loved it.

Score: 95