How do I make this thing?

This is not all theory. I am truly struggling to conceive of a way to approach the shooting of this film.
Think of Wong Kar-Wai's In the Mood for Love. The couple are seen between lampshades, around doorways, below the jackets hanging in the closed. Snapped. Glimpsed. They are repeatedly reframed. Seen from this the same position, but with a different frame, different focal length.
What is this about? (I am under no illusion that there is great idea trying to break forth).
This is about memory. It is unreliable. Partial. Fragmented.
Also look at Michael Haneke's Code Unknown. Yes, long-takes, but more than that: each shot is a scene. Usually it the world of one character (though the street scene includes all the characters of the film, in some manner).
For example: a father at the farmhouse table eating a simple dinner. The young son has disappeared. Not a word. Ungrateful. There is a noise off. The son has returned. He passes the father and sits at other end. Says nothing. The camera does not follow him, does not establish him in the scene. It stays with the father. The father looks at him. He goes to the counter, gathers some dinner for the son, returns to the table, then follows the father into the toilet. He needs to hide his disappointment.
What about Tidal Barrier?
Imagine a framed shot. Sophie, one of the main characters. From this close-up a jump-cut to an empty frame. Slight pan to the right and the frame is found.
What is this about?
Another Sophie at another time.
The colour of her face could be different between the shots. Her features are different.
Or. The second shot, the same position, but a different focal length. She is further away - we are no nearer to understanding her - her face has changed (the colour, her face is in shadow), before we can know her she has changed again.
Or return to Tarkovsky. If the fundamental of cinema is capturing time, and the long-take is the evident way of doing so then is the long-take the central tenet of the shooting style of this film?