Post: #1

Has anybody here watched Lars von Trier's Depression Trilogy? If so I'd love to start a discussion. The anticipation of Nymphomaniac was discussed in /thread-30338.html but no actualy conversation of the film took place.

I thought about starting by writing a review but I think it's very difficult to do so without offering massive spoilers for his three films, Antichrist, Melancholia, and Nymphomaniac. All are available on Netflix at the moment and I highly recommend that you devote a few hours to watching them.

Although nominally about depression one some of the other major themes of his latest three works are women and the relationship between men and women - particularly with regards to sexuality. These are by far some of the most honest and bareboned examinations of how men and women really interact that I've ever seen.

Antichrist in particular was labeled as one of the most mysognistic films of all time - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/rev...hrink.html - which only makes sense if you view it with the same literalism that a fundamentalist interprets the bible. Instead it's a rich film filled with metaphor which although it has allowed feminists to embrace it, http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/200...inist.html, ultimately offers one of the most real depictions I've ever seen of a man grappling with female sexualtiy.

I hope that's enough to entice those of you who haven't seen the trilogy to watch it and for those who have seen them movies to discuss them. From here on out I think spoilers are unavoidable so you've been warned.

Post: #2

I have seen both Antichrist and Nymphomaniac. Lars van Trier is one in a long line of European "art" directors who creates movies depicting life even worse and more negative than it is already.

Whenever you feel like watching a love story where the protagonist dies in the end a useless death while slipping on ice and cracking her head open (real example of a European "love" movie I saw years ago), then go ahead.

The sex scenes from the movies are either performed via rubber penis or by hired porn starlets. Meanwhile the actors have fucked each other and everyone possible during production anyway (I know an assistant in production of von Trier).

Life isn't as drab and depressing as his movies. If it were then way more people should be committing suicide.

Post: #3

Von Trier is living proof of many of the red pill principles we discuss here:

Quote:In 1989, Von Trier's mother revealed on her deathbed that the man who he thought was his father was not, and that she had had a tryst with her former employer, Fritz Michael Hartmann (1909–2000),[67] who descended from a long line of Roman Catholic classical musicians (his grandfather was Emil Hartmann, his great grandfather J.P.E. Hartmann, his uncles included Niels Gade and Johan Ernst Hartmann and thus Niels Viggo Bentzon was his cousin). She stated that she did this to give her son "artistic genes".[68]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_von_Tr...sonal_life

His movies are in some sense him expressing his personal story and how he's come to terms with feminine nature. They're not documentaries and certainly not meant to be taken literally or even enjoyed (on a plot level - visually I think they're stunning). I think they offer a counterpoint to the typical rom-com which is just as unrealistic in the opposite direction. Antichrist goes out of it's way to let you know that the scenes in Eden are a warped reality. On the very shallowest level the stuff that happens to the male protagonist is a graphical depiction of the typical metaphors men use to describe their relationship with women. It's a modern myth. Nobody actually thinks Sisyphus is actually stuck in eternity pushed a rock up a hill but yet the imagery is powerful and resonates with our emotional experience of certain aspects of life.

And who cares how they made the sex scenes or what the actors were doing on or off camera? It's a movie.

Post: #4

I tried watched Antichrist after seeing it on a list of Top Most Disturbing Movies of All Time.

Couldn't really get into it and it definitely wasn't an enjoyable watch for me. I see the artistic merit and the actual direction was good if I remember.

I would definitely like to understand this and other of his movies more.

Post: #5

Nymphomaniac shows the true power of female sexuality better than any other film in history, bar none.

Post: #6

I also think Nymphomaniac does a great job of exploring how women relate to different kinds of men - including white knights. He presents a pretty solid takedown of societies obsession with political correctness as well.

Quote:They elevate those who say right but mean wrong and mock those who say wrong but mean right.

I took the message at the end of the movie to be men who apologize for women's sexuality are hypocrites just trying to get laid and women despise them for it.

Post: #7

I tried to watch Dogville some time back. Turns out the movie takes place on a stage the entire running time. Fuck that pretentious shit. If I wanna see theater, then that's where I'll go.

But I'll give these a shot. Thanks, OP.

Post: #8

I tried to watch Antichrist today and saw 25 minutes before turning it off. It was decent and I don't mind very different kinds of films such as this, but to me it just wasn't done that well. It was boring. A film can be artistic and weird but like any film, it should hold your attention too.

For me anyway, Antichrist didn't.

Post: #9

I think Lars Trier has lost the plot long ago. He is a nihilist, hedonist and probably a sort of luceferianian satanist. His newer films are purely focused on suffering, debasement and dark thoughts. They are not constructive in any way. Stay clear!

The only great work he did was The Kingdom which is truly brilliant, scary and funny. I think he lost the plot soon after that.

Post: #10

I was very impressed by von Trier and Danish film in general back in the Dogme 95 days.

As I've gotten older, I find myself less able to enjoy the works of von Trier and likeminded filmmakers. Berserk says the man's a nihilist, and maybe that's it. I think most of the European arthouse crowd are nihilists. Their work is often clever but hollow - focusing on people trapped by circumstances yet rarely doing much about it.

Take Melancholia for example: it has moments of beauty and a great classical score, but the world is about to end and everybody is just passively waiting for death. The only thing that rouses them to action is the petty cause of being shitty to each other or crying.

Well, fuck that! If a rogue planet was about to collide with the Earth, I'd rather see people doing something - desperately trying to build a shelter, even partying like it's the end of the world. Anything but await death like a stunned lamb in an abattoir.

The sort of stuff I used to find clever or insightful mostly pisses me off now. I'd rather see a celebration of the human spirit - even if it is a simplistic good guys v baddies tale like The Avengers - than a clever filmmaker showing us how awful we can be and how hopeless the human condition is.

Life is a precious, fleeting thing. If you don't do something with it - fight, fuck, laugh, create - you're wasting it. Most European avant-garde and independent cinema strikes me as culturally rotted, like a fine wine turned to vinegar.

That's not surprising, the wider art establishment is of like mind, full of oh-so-clever people who fetishise ugliness and despair. It's sterile and masturbatory. It's a stagnant pool with decomposing shit floating to the top.

I do like this von Trier quote though:

Quote:my DP on [Melancholia], Manuel Claro, at one point voiced a surprising prejudice. He urged me not to fall into the trap that so many aging directors fall into – that the women get younger and younger and nuder and nuder. That's all I needed to hear. I most definitely intend for the women in my films to get younger and younger and nuder and nuder.

Post: #11

Hey guys. I have always been curious about art house films but as stated, the depressing themes and piles of dog crap that you have to step through to find gold has often turned me off from truly exploring the genre. Should I check out all of Lars work or only a few of his movies or where do I start!?

Post: #12

Bump to hope fully get a reply to earlier post

Post: #13

I watched the trilogy over the last week.

I'm really glad I stumbled upon von Trier, by far the most artistic and visually stunning set of films I have ever seen.

I'm naturally attracted to the stranger sides of art, so this was right up my alley.