Director Lars von Trier has no sense of humor. What a mess!

[best12bars]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 10:50am

"Lars von Trier brought the end of the world to the Cannes Film Festival — then the Danish director really shook things up, saying he sympathizes with Adolf Hitler, thinks Israel is a pain and plans to make a porn flick with Kirsten Dunst."
Link

[tazber]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 12:01pm

He is an enigma to say the least. Besides being one of the world's biggest misogynists he often adds elements to his films just be provocative (his words, not mine).

And to be honest the whole "Dogme 95" thing was pretentious.

The bottom line for me is that he often has less to say than he thinks. We get it, women are evil and they represent the devil incarnate. It was old after Breaking The Waves, but now it's just tedious and childish.

He's not even in the same league as Michael Haneke or Gaspar Noe for example.

But I will still check out Melancholia just because I'm curious.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 12:11pm

I gave Von Trier a fair shot, but I haven't seen a film of his that I like. Some nice cinematography and pretty imagery, but that's it.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 12:15pm

B12B,

That post sound like an article from The Onion!

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 4:28pm

I thought Breaking the Waves was more about psychic phenomena and human spirituality with the wife becoming kind of saint at the end with the ocean burial (wouldn't bury her in Churchyard?) and then something strange happened--what was it--tolling church bells out in nowhere? Can't quite remember the mystical happening at the end. I did appreciate the story line if not the method of what the wife was doing to keep the psychic bond with him to keep him alive. She seemed to know to do it by instinct. She was having sex with other men but his spirit was possessing them while his body was in the hospital, something like that. It was more like a bizarre self-sacrifice to help him recover, done from love and on a primitive spiritual level/plane than misogynist to me, though I saw it long ago. As I recall, the wife was given a respectful burial at sea by the husband, who recovered, and his friends, though the church would have none of her, something like that.

I didn't care for his photography much, also didn't like the pacing, but I did like the mysticism of the storyline. Once you step over into the mystical, it is hard to judge it, though there were sick and gruesome elements to it. I really don't like misogyny, but I didn't feel that that was the story he was telling in Breaking the Waves.

I think that's the only movie of his I've seen.

What films has he made that appear misogynist beyond how some view Breaking the Waves? Updated On: 5/18/11 at 04:28 PM

[Gothampc]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 4:57pm

Word on the street has it that he'll be directing an episode of Glee next season. His plans are that Kurt will sing "Pirate Jenny" from 3Penny.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 5:52pm

I read the article and think his comment about the porn flick was probably an attempt at a joke since the movie was already made and obviously isn't a porn flick. As to thinking Israel's a "pain," well our U.S. envoy who just quit there seemed to feel the same way about both Israel and the Palestinians, and he tried to make it work for two years, so big deal.

As to his comment about Hitler, I don't hear it as pro-Hitler, though time will tell. What I hear is him saying that no person is 100% evil or good and the artist will take a look at his or her subject and find the humanity there, even in a monster. Something like what the Dalai Lama said about Bin Laden, that he did terrible things but that since he is a human being, all of which have capacity for good or for evil, that he should be treated with compassion. I think that's the kind of sympathy he's talking about here. He may not be a good speaker, and he spoke in English, which is a second language for him.

I find his comment interesting that Germans feel they can't talk openly about their history or their past. The young Germans weren't alive during Hitler's time yet they pay a price for it on a social, societal or national level. No doubt they resent that disgrace on their national history which they can't undo, and also feel a loyalty to their land and people.

I think a writer or artist paws through all kinds of thoughts and ideas to explore life and to discover how they feel without deciding or taking a stand, at least not early on, as that will end the search and discovery process. If you create characters, not all of them are good, then you need to find out what they are along the way through their behavior. The artist has to get close to these characters to get inside their head to figure out how they will behave. It is important to examine how a Hitler or a Bin Laden were able to get followers to their murderous acts so people can have a chance to recognize those coercive and maniacal behaviors and not follow them or mistake them for leadership. Updated On: 5/18/11 at 05:52 PM

[AC126748]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 6:38pm

When are people going to realize that he's a talentless hack who constantly plays up his status as a provocateur to distract from the fact that his films are garbage? I liked Breaking the Waves (mostly for Emily Watson's stunning performance), but the rest of his body of work represents the worst elements of European art cinema.

[best12bars]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 6:43pm

Oh, I think he was definitely trying to be funny. He just wasn't. He has no sense of humor at all, if this is what passes for "funny" in his eyes.

He also has no filters. He definitely "likes to run his mouth," as Kirstin Dunst said in that article.

If this is what lies underneath that filterless mouth of his, I don't like it. He just exposed himself for being a fascist-loving, anti-Semitic, misogynist freak.

Oh, and he's a lousy director, too.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 7:17pm

I could see Jon Stewart saying all that stuff as parody or satire with a great delivery and people taking it as humor and funny, a la Springtime for Hitler.

And Jon Stewart does some stuff that could be taken as really nasty, like his royal wedding "video" with Queen Elizabeth machine-gunning a bunch of people at the wedding.

I kind of took it as Trier parodying himself or playing devil's advocate when he was kidding he was a Nazi and took it back, because it is so antithetical to the liberality of what someone considered an avant garde director generally represents. I can't really tell from a second-hand article. Hitler would have hated Trier and would have sent him to the camps.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 5/18/11 at 7:22pm

I think the accusations of misogyny stem from just how all of his films involve painful suffering by female characters both physical and mental. The experience was supposedly all too grueling for Nicole Kidman and Bjork. At the same time they are compelling roles and some of the actresses under von Trier have never given better performances since working with him.

That said, I hate the whole style of Dogme 95 (The Celebration was better than any of his films, imo) and think von Trier's insights are too simplistic and take a backseat to the 'shock' value. Noe, who I do not even like, at least tries to add some visual texture.

von Trier has gotten predictable.

[tazber]

Posted: 5/19/11 at 6:52am

That is exactly why many people think he is a misogynist, strummer. This is a discussion that always ignites a heated debate amongst my film fanatic friends.

I never thought of him as being down on women. He definitely subjects his female leads to humiliation and viscous brutality (emotional and physical). But at the same time these characters are not bad people. They are just helpless to the whims of men and society.

So, what is he saying? That women deserve what they get? That being a woman is to live a life of degradation?
Or, is he subversively suggesting that women are stronger and can therefore take what life throws at them? (The men is his films are generally cruel, morally corrupt individuals which adds to the sense that he's not a misogynist at all).

So goes the debate.

But after seeing Antichrist, I had to re-evaluate his oeuvre from a new perspective. Antichrist is not a good movie. It's also not as impenetrable as people think. In fact I think it's pretty clear in its message. The infamous genital mutilation scene was horrendous not for it's graphic content, but because it is at that point when Von Trier's abstract finally becomes clear. Women are evil, spawns of Satan (not being hyperbolic - the film is rife with religious metaphors of which this is one), and yes, they are the antichrist incarnate.


I totally agree with strummer. He has gotten predictable. You will get ersatz shock value, a female character who is battered beyond human endurance, and some nifty, if not all that original, camera techniques.

At least the other les enfants terribles of European cinema change it up with each picture.




For the record: I don't recommend Antichrist unless you're just curious. I mean, where else can you see a talking fox growl "chaos reigns"?

Updated On: 5/19/11 at 06:52 AM

[tazber]

Posted: 5/19/11 at 7:31am

And now he's been banned at Cannes for his comments.

I think that is almost as stupid as the comments themselves.
Link

[nygrl232]

Posted: 5/19/11 at 7:43am

>>>Or, is he subversively suggesting that women are stronger and can therefore take what life throws at them?

Putting women on a pedestal is a misogynist viewpoint, too.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/19/11 at 10:52am

Depends on the situation. I get what you mean re Von Trier, but at the same time, it ventures into damned if you do/damned if you don't territory.

I saw Antichrist and as much as I Hate the idea of it, I have to agree it's difficult to see the movie as anything but misogynistic. But at the same time, if the gender roles were reversed, it would still probably be viewed as misogynistic for the torture the woman would be put through at the hands of a man. I don't know, the story seemed far more personally focused than general misogyny, but the title suggests otherwise. Honestly, I don't really care all that much. I'd rather sort out almost any other David Lynch film (except Inland Empire).

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 5/20/11 at 9:19pm

Another article on the matter.

The festival organizers felt a stand had to be taken given the Nazi/Israeli/Jewish controversy. The festival's attempt to censor him by banning him seems to be against their freedom of speech for the artist stance. His comments also seemed so inappropriate to be made in France as he mentioned his German ancestry as France suffered so under the German invasion and Occupation. Ugh, talk about insulting your host country.

According to this, Von Trier's wife is Jewish, he grew up thinking his own father was Jewish and his three kids are said to have Jewish names. I doubt he is Anti-Semitic. A sometime idiot is more like it.

As for misogyny, the cringe-worthy title of his next film is "The Nymphomaniac." I would have to see it to see if I thought it and he were misogynist, but it's not a subject matter that is going to draw me to a theatre or a movie rental. If I walked into a room and someone had it on TV I might look at it for curiosity to see if it's anything like Breaking the Waves in style or what film style he's up to now, but that's about it and I wouldn't keep watching if it were sick or gross.
BBC article Updated On: 5/21/11 at 09:19 PM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/21/11 at 7:40pm

Maybe Von Trier is just trying to counterbalance all those Lifetime movies.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 5/22/11 at 12:27pm

Meanwhile, MELANCHOLIA has amazing buzz. Wouldn't it be hilarious if it wound up winning the Palme D'Or?

[AC126748]

Posted: 5/22/11 at 5:23pm

Kirsten Dunst won Best Actress for her performance. The Palme d'Or went to THE TREE OF LIFE.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 5/22/11 at 11:34pm

Good for Kirsten. I always had a soft spot for her and she's in need of a comeback.

[Paulyd]

Posted: 5/23/11 at 1:50am

Kirsten's performance in amazing. I think it could be here 'Black Swan' moment at next years Oscars. The film for me though this year was The Artist. The UK rights are being fought over as I type
The Artist

[best12bars]

Posted: 5/23/11 at 7:39am

"The Artist" looks like it has a terrific concept: a B&W silent film, made in 2011.

It also looks like the exact same plot for "A Star Is Born." Not that that 's bad, but I've seen this story before. Three times (four if you count "What Price, Hollywood?"). The leading couple even remind me of Fredric March and (sort of a hybrid between) a young Janet Gaynor or Joan Crawford.

Still, if you see a film made this well today, who cares? It gets high marks for style, vision, and flying in the face of conventional wisdom in today's moviemaking.

But not so high marks for original story.

Personally, I can't wait to see it.

Updated On: 5/23/11 at 07:39 AM

[tazber]

Posted: 5/23/11 at 7:53am

I'm incredibly interested in The Artist. So glad that Weinstein is going to give it an Oscar push.

Good for Dunst. I must say I am surprised that Tilda Swinton didn't win (We Need To Talk About Kevin). Of the two I think Swinton will be the one to nab award nominations. I haven't seen either performance, but don't the the Academy has any love left for Von Trier.

I'm also looking forward to the Dardenne brother's new one.

[Paulyd]

Posted: 5/23/11 at 9:10am

Tilda Swinton is amazing in Kevin, but when does she ever give a bad performance?
I've never been a fan of Kirsten Dunst, but i think her performance in Melancholia well deserved the win.

[Paulyd]

Posted: 5/23/11 at 9:10am

Tilda Swinton is amazing in Kevin, but when does she ever give a bad performance?
I've never been a fan of Kirsten Dunst, but i think her performance in Melancholia well deserved the win.