Lemmiwinks Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 So I suppose that with all the Lars Von Trier fans on this site, you have heard that he has made a new movie called Antichrist? Well you know, with Von Trier most movies have a horror aspect in them so you can imagine that when he decides to make a movie that's actually labeled as horror it will be something... I've seen it yesterday and it totally blew me away! Of course, you should throw away everything you know (or would expect) from a conventional horror movie, this one is just plain sick. You know when you're on acid and feel like you've crossed the line between a sweet little demented high and mental-hospital like dementia? Well that's EXACTLY how watching this movie feels like. I can't say that I like all of it, like with everything Von Trier does, there are always some bits that are just too wierd in there but overall this is definately one to watch (if you have the courage of course...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormion Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 So I suppose that with all the Lars Von Trier fans on this site, you have heard that he has made a new movie called Antichrist? Well you know, with Von Trier most movies have a horror aspect in them so you can imagine that when he decides to make a movie that's actually labeled as horror it will be something... I've seen it yesterday and it totally blew me away! Of course, you should throw away everything you know (or would expect) from a conventional horror movie, this one is just plain sick. You know when you're on acid and feel like you've crossed the line between a sweet little demented high and mental-hospital like dementia? Well that's EXACTLY how watching this movie feels like. I can't say that I like all of it, like with everything Von Trier does, there are always some bits that are just too wierd in there but overall this is definately one to watch (if you have the courage of course...) It's not a horror movie. Horror movies by definition are made to make you feel scared and not uncomfortable or demented. Now about the movie itself I found it as pretentious and empty as anything made by Trier. I know that when reraph read this he will kill me , but I never liked a single movie by him and him personally. That's taste of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest antic Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 Well, it was good but nothing really spectacular. The story is OK and pretty much subject to individual interpretation, because at the end I couldn't really tell what it was REALLY about (which is good, I think?). The strong point is how it develops - frankly I thought this will end in a completely different way and the Antichrist will manifest himself in a more traditional form, but - as I mentioned above - I still can't figure out what really happened and why - I have two 'working theories' but won't reveal them not to spoil it for those who haven't seen it. Anyway, it's different to most other horrors released nowadays, which in itself should be enough of a reason to see it. Stylistically, it was rather interesting, but all those nude / graphic sex and violence scenes were not really necessary - due to just that I don't think I'll ever want to see it again, because there's only so much of blood ejaculating cocks one wants to see in his life I'll better shut up now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
needle ninja Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Sounds like a movie that will never be released in america. I hate this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drosophila Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Sounds like a movie that will never be released in america. I hate this country. I is sold for distribution for American cinemas, so keep an eye out. From all the media hype about this movie I thought it would be a lot worse than it actually was, but that said it is rather sick, in a Von Trier way, but still the visual side its kept very tight, it's dirty and clean at the same time! A visually stunning movie! The story is not entirely in my taste, but I think it has a good narrative, and clever build up, but yes definitely not a horror movie in its traditional sense. Did anybody see his tv mini-series The Kingdom ("Riget" in Danish) 1 and 2? I still feel like that is his finest work, well maybe not but the one I have enjoyed the most! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemmiwinks Posted October 11, 2009 Author Share Posted October 11, 2009 It's not a horror movie. Horror movies by definition are made to make you feel scared and not uncomfortable or demented. yes, "modern" Hollywood horror is supposed to make you feel that way, but noone says that horror has to keep by those standards. And even if you go back to the 70s with movies like Canibal Holocaust and such, you'll see that even Holywood went through a much more demented-gory phase than what it is now. Well, it was good but nothing really spectacular. The story is OK and pretty much subject to individual interpretation, because at the end I couldn't really tell what it was REALLY about (which is good, I think?). The strong point is how it develops - frankly I thought this will end in a completely different way and the Antichrist will manifest himself in a more traditional form, but - as I mentioned above - I still can't figure out what really happened and why - I have two 'working theories' but won't reveal them not to spoil it for those who haven't seen it. Anyway, it's different to most other horrors released nowadays, which in itself should be enough of a reason to see it. Stylistically, it was rather interesting, but all those nude / graphic sex and violence scenes were not really necessary - due to just that I don't think I'll ever want to see it again, because there's only so much of blood ejaculating cocks one wants to see in his life I'll better shut up now... ha well that's one of Von Trier's trademarks, isn't it? It leaves the questions put in the movie open and subject to interpretation. But yeah, I think that a title like The Witch would've been MUCH more apropriate, on the other hand, that's also one of the charms of the movie: you don't expect the development in the second half at ALL. For the graphic scenes well... it's Von Tirer man, he always likes to cross that line between what's acceptable in "normal" cinema and what's not (like that scene from Dogville when they first shoot the baby and then the mom, man Hollywood would never touch that with a 10-foot pole) I is sold for distribution for American cinemas, so keep an eye out. From all the media hype about this movie I thought it would be a lot worse than it actually was, but that said it is rather sick, in a Von Trier way, but still the visual side its kept very tight, it's dirty and clean at the same time! A visually stunning movie! The story is not entirely in my taste, but I think it has a good narrative, and clever build up, but yes definitely not a horror movie in its traditional sense. Did anybody see his tv mini-series The Kingdom ("Riget" in Danish) 1 and 2? I still feel like that is his finest work, well maybe not but the one I have enjoyed the most! Well, just like everything Von Trier does, there are some bits that are pure genious, but others where you think "WTF??". Overall I liked it, but I also found it lacked a bit of substance, like the tension mounted near the end but the conclusions were almost always dissapointing. IMO he could've explored the "doors" in the plot he opened a lot more than he did. Like Stig's gf wanted to shoot him at the end of the 1st series but then she becomes normal again in the 2nd? and they dropped off the whole Haiti thing in the 2nd as well, or that secret society thing that never really explained anything... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormion Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 yes, "modern" Hollywood horror is supposed to make you feel that way, but noone says that horror has to keep by those standards. And even if you go back to the 70s with movies like Canibal Holocaust and such, you'll see that even Holywood went through a much more demented-gory phase than what it is now. Hollywood has nothing to do with this. By definition a Horror movie is a movie that is made to make you fell scared. If a movie can make you scared that doesn't make it a horror movie and if a movie can't make you scared it can still be a horror movie. Cannibal Holocaust is a horror movie cause it's made as a horror movie. Just because it makes you feel more uncomfortable than scared has nothing to with its genre. Antichrist it's an avant garde, philosophical, dark twisted tale. Critics named it a horror movie, Trier never said such thing. Anyway off topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemmiwinks Posted October 11, 2009 Author Share Posted October 11, 2009 Antichrist it's an avant garde, philosophical, dark twisted tale. ha ok if you put it that way then I agree Still, you'd have to agree that the horror element is stronger here than in any one of his former movies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormion Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 you'd have to agree that the horror element is stronger here than in any one of his former movies... Yeah of course, I don't disagree about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.