If you head here and scroll down to a comment posted by “Anonymous” at 10:54pm (bottom of the page as I type this), you'll find an interesting and somewhat worrying take on the Synecdoche screenplay. Interesting because we get more plot info and an honest opinion; worrying because the opinion is negative and the plot seems similar to much of Charlie's other work (but is that in itself a bad thing?). Excerpt:

I don't know, man, I mean, it's not like I'm going to skip the movie. Of course I'll go see it. I can appreciate films I don't completely understand, but this, this is just so beyond. But not in a good way. It's 152 pages long, and it's a real struggle just to make sense of it–not thematically or metaphysically or morally–I mean you can't follow it. Like he doesn't bother to indicate what's going on, he just sorta pukes it out and you have to mop it up yourself if you want to take anything away from it. Which makes for great cinema if it's handled correctly (ADAPTATION).

[…]I'm glad I didn't have to cover it. I'm sure I would have had to read it twice. I think in my comments I would have said the writer mistakes confusion for depth.

Thanks to Tim for pointing this out.

It seems to be a polarising screenplay. I'm more interested than ever in getting my hands on a copy (any help?). Still, it's very early days; who knows how Synecdoche will look by the time it's in the can.