^What, does Willem Dafoe actually shag in this film???!
Christ, it was bad enough with Gruey from 80s kids telly doing it in 9 Songs...
Christ, it was bad enough with Gruey from 80s kids telly doing it in 9 Songs...
-
-
Nah, a stunt cock was used. Von Trier hired a couple of prOn actors, which seems like a lot of trouble to go to for a single shot that's on screen for a few seconds. It's not the first time von Trier has included hardcore sex in one of his films either. He did the same thing in The Idiots, and it felt just as unnecessary in that too. Maybe I'm just going to have to face up to the fact that I'm a prude. I'm fairly unshockable when it comes to violence on film, but real sex in non-pornographic films is a step too far for me.Originally posted by JazzFunk View PostLast edited by PrayforMojo; 30-07-2009, 18:26.Comment
-
Watched this just now. Personally, i thought it was a pompous pile of bloody wank. An absolute detestable boring piece of drivel.Comment
-
My old scriptwriting tutor told me I should watch this today. Love some of Von Trier's stuff (5 Obstructions, Kingdom) but, well,
isn't something I want to see - at what point should I nip out for a cigarette if I go and see it?Comment
-
Originally posted by Fireproofradiator View Post
Wouldn't want to watch it again, i thought it was terrible or recommend it to anyone personally.Comment
-
Lordy. I don't think I am gonna watch this. Zero9X, you've talked me out of it. Think I'll watch Michael Clayton again instead!Comment
-
Haven't seen Antichrist yet but was really impressed with Dogville and as it's done by the same director it's on my list of films to see. Anyone else who've seen Dogville seen this? If so, opinions please.Comment
-
Antichrist is a difficult film to recommend. I found it fascinating but can understand why others would hate it. I mean, my better half still hasn't forgiven me for making her watch it with me. It's worth bearing in mind that Von Trier has described the film as "kind of therapy" for a bout of depression he was suffering from. The first half of the film plays like a serious study on grief but then it descends into all-out weirdness, and it's left to the viewer to interpret what it all means, if it means anything at all.
I don't subscribe to the theory that Antichrist is some kind of joke that von Trier is playing on the audience, or that von Trier is misogynistic, which is an often repeated criticism of von Trier that I've grown increasingly tired of. I just think it's a deeply personal film, probably his most personal film yet. Most of us keep our dark thoughts suppressed, don't even acknowledge that we have them to ourselves, but von Trier strips himself bare. All the disturbing things that haunt his mind are up there on screen.
Anyway, I've rambled on long enough. I'll end things by saying this has to be one of the best and most balanced review's I've read on the film -
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...e-1763851.html
Spoiler free too.Comment
-
To be honest, I'm the sort of person who doesn't like to be "challenged" by this kind of film. I couldn't give a toss about the filmaker's loss/grief/depression, the baring of his soul or ascribed misogynistic tendencies. I find these kind of art/vanity projects, a load of old ****e.
However, I'm tempted to see this film, to see if it's a troubling/wince inducing as people say. Ultimately I won't see it as my conscious mind tells me that I'll regret it, because (a) it probably is a difficult thing to watch and (b) The internetz has taught me that you can't unsee things.
Comment
-
Comment