"Antichrist" (2009)

[El Dingo]

IMDB Limk

This is the Netflix summary of the film:

///////////////////////////
After their child dies, a therapist (Willem Dafoe) and his wife (Charlotte Gainsbourg) flee to their cabin in the woods, where they hope to mend their emotional wounds. But the grief-stricken couple watches their troubles multiply when very strange things begin to happen.
////////////////////////////////

Sounds spooky, right? Kind of 'Don't Look Now'-ish?

I like Willem Defoe. I like Lars van Trier (at least 'Dogville' and 'Dancer in the Dark'). The description seemed innocuous enough. A nice little thriller to enjoy after a busy day at work.

Instead I had my psyche scarred and caught a severe case of 'I can never unsee that'.

Don't get me wrong. It's a stylish movie with solid acting and great cinematography. It has that slow pacing I've come to expect from von Trier, focusing more on character than action. This time however, the slow pace is the build up to batshit insane suspense and violence.

I guess the extremely explicit sex scene at the beginning of the film should have clued me in that this was not going to be Bjork singing in the train yard.

I won't spoil anything, but you all know I've seen a lot of violent films but this one has a scene that left me stunned.

After watching the movie I could not help but wonder who would produce a movie for millions of dollars, with a semi-big star and semi-famous director, guaranteed to offend everyone and have no chance at the box office?

It's a very well made film. I can't say I enjoyed it, but it will haunt me for a while.

[Greg_phpbb3_import1]

Yay, El Dingo is back. When I get the images from Necromantic out of my head, I'll watch this one.

[cranefly]

Hmmm. Was El Dingo putting us on with his review in 2010? I mean, considering his taste for bat-shit gore and perversity, it's hard to believe I'd have a stronger stomach. But here's the review I wrote 20 minutes ago before seeing El Dingo's.

Antichrist (2009) by Lars von Trier

Another long dark journey into von Trier’s muddled psyche. As with his subsequent film Melancholia, this is an exercise in psychoanalysis by someone who doesn’t really believe in psychoanalysis.

The movie seemed rather tame for the first hour, considering it’s on the 366weirdmovies.com list. But then it veered off the tracks, rolled over a dozen times, and burst into flames in a bizarrely satisfying manner. Yes, it’s suitably weird, and not for the faint of heart.

Some critics have accused Lars von Trier of being misogynistic, and yes, there’s ample evidence for that interpretation in this movie. But von Trier is one fucked-up dude. He had just gotten out of a mental hospital when he shot this, and he was semi-functional throughout. Who knows what medications he might have been on. I really don’t think he was capable of a clear message making this film, and a lot of the misogynistic happenings could be interpreted in other ways. Add to that the fact that he was aiming to make a horror film and, well, the horror had to come from somewhere.

Worth seeing, if you have a strong stomach and are willing to cut von Trier some slack.

Antichrist serves as part 1 of what von Trier calls his Depression Trilogy. Melancholy is part 2, which I’ve reviewed elsewhere. Part 3 consists of two films: Nymphomaniac 1 and 2. Stay tuned.

I’m on a free one-month Netflix gorge-fest, by the way. This and upcoming films are not to be found at the library.

P.S. Here’s what John Waters had to say about Antichrist: "If Ingmar Bergman had committed suicide, gone to hell, and come back to earth to direct an exploitation/art film for drive-ins, [Antichrist] is the movie he would have made."