[Mrluvaluva]

Antichrist





Brace yourselves for a firestorm, people, the globe’s leading provocateur is back on form and slapping his latest film with a title sure to rile elements of the religious right is merely the first and least of Lars Von Trier’s provocations in Antichrist. Sure to shock, offend and astound in equal portions while proving hugely divisive over the nature of its content Antichrist is arguably the most visually striking of his career, certainly the most transgressive, and ample proof that cinema is still more than capable of shocking. Why the boos and walk outs at some screenings here in Cannes? Here are two clues lifted from the film credits: Charlotte Gainsbourgh is at one point replaced by a body double named Mandy Starship while the film’s production team also employed - and I quote - a “misogyny researcher”.

Youtube video

Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourgh star as the unnamed married couple at the heart of the story of Antichrist, a couple destroyed by the death of their young son. Mother collapses into a pit of despair and anti-depressive drugs adminstered in hospital while Father simply retreats into what he knows best: clinical detachment and problem solving as he employs his skills as a therapist to help Mom work out her issues and, presumably, exorcise his own in the process. And at the core of his treatment is the belief that the drugs need to be kicked and Mom needs to directly address her fears and anxieties, a task best undertaken at their remote cabin in a place known as Eden.





But while it may be called Eden, friendly it aint. The landscape is ominous, the building noisy, even the wildlife seems to be against them. “Nature is Satan’s church”, Gainsbourgh states boldly at one point and there seems little reason to disbelieve her on that point. The treatments seem to work, though, at least at first with improvements being made steadily. But you know what they say about the calm before the storm ...





Gorgeously shot on a pair of different digital camera rigs - primarily the Red with a second system designed for ultra-slomo work also employed - Antichrist represents Von Trier’s first step back into the world of traditional style cinematography and film making since The Kingdom; after which he began dabbling with minimalism with Breaking The Waves and the Dogme95 movement. That isn’t to say that many of those quirks aren’t still present - hand written title cards are employed to separate the film into chapters while Von Trier continues to maintain a shooting style that maintains an uncomfortable intimacy - but here shots are properly lit, framed and composed; technical augmentation is employed and an aggressive, very Lynchian score is applied. Von Trier has been associated with the Dogme movement for so long now that it’s easy to forget what a brilliant technical film maker he is and it is very good indeed to have that part of his game back in play.





As for the rest? Well, good may be a difficult word choice for many in a film that includes pornographically explicit sexuality, extreme torture and genital mutilation both male and female. It’s safe to say that those who believe Von Trier hates women - I’m not one of them - will find plenty more ammunition here. The disturbing images aren’t just limited to instances of extreme violence, however, the film including a number of animal shots that I’m hard pressed to say how they were accomplished - moments that are deeply bizarre and unsettling.





It’s really quite laughable to think that when Von Trier first began talking about a return to horror a few years back he was openly citing the need to make some money as a primary reason for doing so. The idea that Antichrist could be considered a commercial film in any sense is absolutely absurd. It is and will be the most transgressive film of this year and very likely of a great many to come. It goes well beyond the bounds of good taste in its effort not just to shock - this is no Hostel - but to provoke, an exercise that will leave many angry and hostile while others will declare the film a masterpiece. Having mulled it over for a good many hours I fall cleanly into the second category.


Out now in selected cinemas


Source

[DrunkerThanMoses]

Suppose to be terrible, well according to critics... wwhat they consider bad, i think is freaking funny!

[Ross]

I'm looking forward to this.

[Mrluvaluva]

A storm has erupted over the UK release of the sex torture flick Antichrist.

Watchdogs say the gut-churning gore-fest should be banned.

And they have even called for the film classification board to be axed after it allowed the sickening movie to open uncensored on Friday in British cinemas with an 18 certificate.

Mediawatch UK’s John Beyer said: “This decision will have a wide influence on society and affect *people and standards elsewhere.

“It has set a dangerous precedent for film-makers to portray acts of brutality and mutilation as entertainment.”

The film features Willem Dafoe as a sadistic *therapist trying to help his wife, played by Charlotte *Gainsbourg, recover from the death of their son by taking her to a remote log cabin.

In one scene Gainsbourg’s character slams a concrete block into Dafoe’s genitals before performing a sex act on his battered manhood.

Another graphic scene shows Gainsbourg’s character performing a vile act of genital self-mutilation with a pair of scissors.

The film caused four people to faint and critics to stage a mass walk-out when it premiered at this year’s Cannes International Film Festival.

Mr Beyer added: “The time has now come to replace the British Board of Film Classification with an accountable and publicly- funded body.

“There has to be a way for the Government to assert control over *material like this being released into society.”

Spider-Man star Dafoe, 54, has admitted: “The graphicness is gonna put some people off.”

And London-born Gainsbourg, 38, confessed to a “masochistic thrill” during one brutal scene in which Dafoe was encouraged to strangle her.

She said: “I would ask him to be tough and I didn’t breathe myself. I thought my vessels were going to pop and it scared me. But in a good way.

“I felt very masochistic at that time *because doing painful stuff was exciting and I loved it. All the suffering, the crying, the screaming was exhilarating.”


Source

[Mrluvaluva]

Has anybody watched this yet? I saw it last night on Sky Movies Premiere and was quite shocked by parts of it, and I am not easily shocked.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

sounds kinky might check it out

will I need Kleenex?

[Zambezi-Riverdance]

Originally Posted by oddballmisfitsFTW

sounds kinky might check it out

will I need Kleenex?

Yeah, me to lol

[BB_Eye]

I've really been meaning to see it, even though it's been out ages. Willem Dafoe is too cool for school.

[Jase.]

I watched it online. It's ****ing awful.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

I watched earlier and it was very very dull

I was gonna switch it off but I was waiting for the "controversial" parts of the film

there was ONE in the entire film C L I T ouch

what a letdown

[setanta]

I think it's a masterpiece to be honest with you. A gruesome, depressing and extremely difficult watch, but I've always admired the directors willingness to carry out his convinctions, without any compromises to his ultimate vision.

It's a hauntingly beautiful film too. Stark and brutal cinema but brilliantly pieced together. He fecking hates women though!

[BB_Eye]

I remember listening to Mark Kermode's radio interview with Willem Dafoe where he tried to derived feminist themes from Antichrist. Dafoe was having none of it.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

I remember listening to Mark Kermode's radio interview with Willem Dafoe where he tried to derived feminist themes from Antichrist. Dafoe was having none of it.

Yeah, I watched it too. I do think the director has huge issues with women though, or maybe he's just very passionate and frustrated by the conflict between the sexes. Either way, the film itself is very interesting on so many levels.