This film has often been called the worst movie of all time. What is it about its badness that is noteworthy? Why is it so often (unintentionally) funny? After all, most bad works of art are simply boring and stupid. What about this film has allowed it to become a cult classic, instead of merely being forgotten?
Try to pay attention to how the film is put together. What techniques does Wood use (or abuse? or misuse?) to create his vision? What is wrong with the film, from a point of view of effective communication and good craftsmanship? What "mistakes" does Wood make? Is it the script? The acting? The scenery? Does it have to do, not just with particular parts of the film that are badly or wrongly done, but also with how those parts are articulated into a whole?
If this film seems unnatural, obviously phony, etc., to us as viewers, then what are the things that make other, more competent films seem in contrast to be coherent, believable, and convincing?