There are two stories being told at the same time. One is the story of a 1950s stage production called "Asteroid City" and the other is an actual presentation of the stage play "Asteroid City".

It flips back and forth between the behind the scenes stage production and the actual play itself.

It's stilted and awkward because that was the style of many plays in that era. If you look at playwrites like Harold Pinter or Samuel Beckett, you'll get the same vibe.

Here are films of two of Beckett's better known productions, this is the sort of vibe Anderson was going for. It was called "theater of the absurd":

https://youtu.be/izX5dIzI2RE

https://youtu.be/L5vhQ4d_KMI

No, it doesn't make much sense. Why is that woman buried in dirt up to her waist in the first act and up to her neck in the second? You aren't supposed to ask those kinds of questions with these productions.

That's going to bother a lot of people.

I’m not sure how much there is too explain beyond what you saw. But maybe that you’ve only seen one other Anderson film makes you think there’s more to it when rather it is what it is.

I personally was disappointed, the Wes Anderson style was driven so hard it took away from the movie and waaaay to many characters. All these amazing actors and they had so little screen time they were barely utilised. Tom hanks and Steve Carrel had barely 10mins of screentime. What a waste!

Less actors would have led to a much more concise and engaging story, like Grand Budapest, Moonrise Kingdom and Darjeeling Ltd IMO. I’d be interested to hear what other people thought of it.

My take after a single watch is

Hope that helps

Haven't seen it yet so this will be less helpful than you'd hoped for, but!

His movies have a lot of imagery just to have the visuals on the screen. Like stuff he thought, "I want to see this on the silver screen" or hear so and so say "this line" even if it doesn't particularly fit the movie.

I haven’t seen the movie yet, but after watching The French Dispatch, it really makes me miss the old Wes Anderson. Movies like Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums, and The Life Aquatic were much simpler and yet still felt very human but worked with Anderson’s unique style. I still appreciate his approach but wish he would just cut back a little more on the meta stuff.

I’ve found his movies to mean different thing to each viewer. Sometimes I find a new meaning in the stories each time I watch. I haven’t seen this one yet but I’ve seen all of the others. Personally I’ve liked fantastic mr fox the best. So many different feels.

I think it defeats the purpose of his storytelling to have someone write it out for you.

Wes Anderson has a really distinct style, I felt like the whole movie was just meta about that. There have been quite a lot parodies made about his style so maybe he wanted to expand that.
I really liked the movie but it was definitely one of my least favorite Wes Anderson movies.

I really liked Richard Brody's take on the film https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/in-wes-andersons-asteroid-city-the-artist-is-present

I think you have see a little bit more of Anderson to grasp some of the common themes with him. Overall, is not that complicated: just a story within a story, going meta on a very Wes Anderson way.