Okay, I'll bite.
"not for everyone":
But "discerning audiences will likely appreciate Blue Eyelids as a thoughtful, fairly unpredictable, breath-of-fresh-air," so what difference does its being "not for everyone" make? For that matter is anything "for everyone"? I realize this is just a quick grab-line, and not part of your thoughtful and appreciative review. Your description shows this film appeals to you or, as you say, to a "discerning audience." But I was left uncertain about where the film goes after its flashbacks about the relationship.

What did you think of Casa de Alice? I found it very disappointing despite the alleged "realism" and the famous actress. Not that it's Mexican. But I thought of it in the context of this film you're describing because somebody said it was like a telenovela would be if it were realistic. Variety's Lisa Neelsson:
If telenovelas were convincingly real, they would no doubt look like the tumultuous world of domestic strife and libido deftly limned in "Alice's House."
It sounds like on the contrary Blue Eyelids is more an anti-telenovela. Are you aware in your first paragraph you give the titles as "Desperate Eyelids"?

P.s. Silent Light is "low keyed" also; very low keyed indeed. And yet it is fully of drama and powerful. What's the difference? What primarily makes Blue Eyelids worthwhile--is it the naturalistic details with which the characters are presented? Why would people want comedy here? What about the characters would lend itself to ridicule, as you imply?