For those that did not understand some or most parts.

It’s not meant to be remotely plausible so “farfetched” is an irrelevant criticism. It’s meant to be totally random and absurd and it is. Sometimes that worked (Dolph, Master Chang, “top level” detective Ronnie and the surly cop who changed his mind about getting on the bus) and sometimes it didn’t (the gardener and the pizza girl, although they both had their moments, and Dolph’s job and co-workers). If you have no tolerance for absurdity—and a lot of intelligent and discerning people do not so I'm in no way making a value judgement about that—this guy’s films are never going to entertain you. There’s ample ground for criticism but the fact that a plausible suspension of disbelief is tortured to death in the opening moments is not a valid one in the case of a film like this.

Exactly. When I watched "Rubber" I didn't like it but acknowledged the idea of making a movie about random stuff without any sense.

But now the director basically did the same thing again. While there were a few scenes/dialogues that made me smile, I did not care much for the movie at all.

I think it's pretty lazy filmmaking always hiding behind the premise and idea of "nothing in the movie makes sense. It's supposed to be that way" so nobody can criticize the script. I mean you can make tons of movies like that, but what for?

I'm gonna stay clear of future movies by this director.