Radical?

So my plans for my new edit have so far not come off. Basically just a matter of people being too busy to take a look. It will happen...I just heard from David who had a look yesterday, but in the meantime I have some more time to think and wonder, have I gone far enough?
This is not an entirely new thought. I have been thinking of this for a time, and this came as a suggestion from my friend Sarah on a number of occasions.
First I wondered if the straight, linear structure was ideal. Second, I imagined an editor swooping in, and then announcing a radical plan: move that here, that there, ignore the linear structure.
So I sat in the garden this evening thinking through this as a principle. Of course you can't just decide to be radical.
No, I had to wonder instead if what I wanted to do was attenuate Claire's journey, and to do so was to rearrange, and as a consequence break time. In essence this is creating a film that followed the dictates of an internal journey, expressed externally as sense, emotion, sound, rhythm, feeling, regardless of linear time.
So now my next step. At least I have to give it a try.

Crisis overcome?

It is one of those situations, where you wonder if the solution is a solution, or just desperation, a confirmation of the true extent of the problem.
What I mean is that these past two weeks I have been very busy editing new material, and making some mid-weight changes to the edit, particularly the first segment of the film. I had planned to show the new edit last weekend, but I had to postpone, as I had not finished all of them yet.
It comes down to fundamental problem with the film, which I have been struggling to solve: the story is still too abstract, the audience becomes bored about half-way through. I had struggled to increase the pace, but I think it really comes down to confusion, they don't know what is going on. My friend Sarah, after seeing an edit in April, said she did not know what Claire was thinking, specifically in the first segment. Almost everyone agreed that the first segment of the film was the weakest, that when Claire leaves Paul the story picks up. Essentially Claire is a passive character in the first segment, which is problematic.
So how to show what Claire was thinking? I dare not write and shoot more material. I believe that at a point you need to make your film with what you have.
So I looked within the film and realised that there was elements present, some developed, some undeveloped, which are abstractions of the story which is in a way all about what Claire is thinking. First there is the title sequence, which uses Claire's trip into Norway as background. In the story the viewer will wondered what this referred to and this was answered when Claire goes to Norway, 2/3 through the film .
Then there are what I refer to as the Rothko sequences, several scenes which are centred around Claire asleep, but referrenced unconscious elements, particularly sounds. In viewings these went unnoticed, and I knew in the back of my mind that I had either to remove them or develop them.
So I have decided to develop these and see where it takes the story. First, I decided that I could think outside of referring to these as Claire's dreams, which freed me to think about how they could take place in the story on a purely emotional level rather as some part of pyschological-realism, a Freudian dream of Claire's. Not for me, this.
So a battle to define these points, first, which means that I may have to radically reshape parts of the edit, shape it to an emotional journey, rather than plot. Of course the story has never been about plot, so this is a good thing.
Then to find and develop the material that would make up these sequences. In this I was thrilled to look about and find all the mistakes I had made could come to value, specifically sequences which I reshot because they lacked detail and did not form a coherent whole. Now these negatives were positives. For example, I reshot the forest sequence, at the end of the second segment, where Claire finally meets her fears. Now the old footage could be a part of an an unconcious idea that Claire has earlier in the story, which she later completes in full. The incoherence and lack of detail in these old version now becomes a plus, an expression of a half-complete idea.
Finally there is the form that these take. I set out some rough rules, first that the static shots were shorter, that shots with motion were slowed down - yes, I am afraid that this could be a gimmick. Sound is especially important, and I played with slowing down and/or reversing sounds that occurred naturally within these sequences.
An unintended consequence was that this meant that some of the other abstract sequences no longer had to carry as much meaning and could be shorter.
Where I am now struggling is seeing the whole picture whent these new sequences are included. For this I need an audience once again.