Author Topic: Antichrist  (Read 23187 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5797
  • Respect: +180
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #120 on: November 20, 2009, 02:13:32 AM »
0
nothing is really "necessary" though. it's an expression of some guy's vision. that's what film is. and how are you going to allude to blood ejaculation without showing it? and why wouldn't you just show it?

I haven't seen Anti-Christ, but Ingmar Bergman (in Cries and Whispers) alluded to a woman masturbating with a shard of glass and still made it pretty horrific. I don't think the scenario in Anti-Christ is much worse, but I also think Anti-Christ has different objectives. Still, shocking nature of this kind has been presented to Stefen's wishes before.

Stefen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 7778
  • smh
  • Respect: +193
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #121 on: November 20, 2009, 02:32:58 AM »
0
Do you plan on seeing it, GT? I know you're not a LVT fan, but I'm curious to see what you think of it. Or at least certain parts.
Let's go to a motel. We don't have to do anything -- we could just swim.

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5797
  • Respect: +180
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #122 on: November 20, 2009, 04:48:13 AM »
0
Do you plan on seeing it, GT? I know you're not a LVT fan, but I'm curious to see what you think of it. Or at least certain parts.

Definitely am going to see it. I have numerous problems with LVT but the good thing about Anti-Christ is that a lot of earlier problems will most likely not be repeated here. He could begin his difficulties anew with me or make a good film, but I'm excited for a fresh start either way.

Gamblour.

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +12
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #123 on: November 20, 2009, 07:18:30 AM »
0
Stefen, to me, it's not the violence so much that makes it a horror film, but really the fact that I was pretty frightened at certain points, and they're in the woods in a cabin. It just takes on the facade of a horror film, while not necessarily playing into it.
WWPTAD?

Reinhold

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
  • Respect: +3
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #124 on: November 20, 2009, 07:41:43 AM »
0
i posted a reply a week ago and it's not here. damn it. no time to try to say this eloquently before work, but i think the film, again, is about male authorship of the female identity-- something that just can not work well. i can flesh that out later, but the thing is that in a way that justifies all of the violence you see in this film-- it's violence that's already been done. the chaos that reigns is the insanity of doing so much damage to our society and being too self-important, distracted by personal interest, or have even coming to enjoy the symptoms because we (men, but not exclusively) tend to have a "heyyy... it's not THAT bad" attitude" in spite of castration anxiety and ridiculous (and obviously damaging) sexualization of woman pervading practically every cultural text.

My beef isn't with the symbolism. That's all great, and as a whole, the film is in my top 5 of the year, but my beef is the way it's all presented. There really isn't any need for some of the shots. A penis ejaculating blood is a bit unnecessary. You can allude to everything it showed without actually showing it.

i don't want to insult you but i think you're completely wrong. involuntary muscle spasms normally associated with ecstasy at a moment of complete terror, forcing a sexual context onto a horrific set of actions, her getting nailed with the blood shot and wearing it on her clothes... i dunno man. it seemed like he got plenty of mileage out of that unnecessary shot. when your point is something along the lines of JESUS CHRIST WHAT'S IT GONNA TAKE FOR YOU TO SEE THAT WE'VE FUCKED EVERYTHING UP... maybe a blood cum shot is justifiable.
Obviously what you are doing right now is called (in my upcoming book of psychology at least) validation. I think it's a normal thing to do. People will reply, say anything, and then you're gonna do what you were subconsciently thinking of doing all along.

picolas

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Respect: +105
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #125 on: November 20, 2009, 07:22:01 PM »
0
nothing is really "necessary" though. it's an expression of some guy's vision. that's what film is. and how are you going to allude to blood ejaculation without showing it? and why wouldn't you just show it?

I haven't seen Anti-Christ, but Ingmar Bergman (in Cries and Whispers) alluded to a woman masturbating with a shard of glass and still made it pretty horrific. I don't think the scenario in Anti-Christ is much worse, but I also think Anti-Christ has different objectives. Still, shocking nature of this kind has been presented to Stefen's wishes before.
i'm gonna say ejaculating blood is a whole different visual ballpark from cutting oneself. and yes antichrist probably has different objectives, many of them being visual.

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5894
  • :boxing:
  • Respect: +20
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #126 on: November 24, 2009, 12:11:47 PM »
0
Antichrist's imagery didn't seem incredibly shocking to me.  It seemed fairly reminiscent of In The Realm of the Senses.
"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye

RegularKarate

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 6053
  • Respect: +213
    • http://www.livejournal.com/users/regularkarate/
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #127 on: February 25, 2010, 10:32:33 AM »
0
This is streaming on Netflix instant right now... even though it's not out on DVD yet.

Space Luck!

Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1765
  • Respect: +500
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #128 on: November 20, 2010, 12:41:13 AM »
+1
Most reviews I've read for this film have made me mad one way or another. Films like this can't help but show how amazingly lazy film critics can be for the simple task of thinking for themselves. It's like listening to sheep balling endlessly with no meaning behind the sounds.

SPOILERS I GUESS

Is this film ABOUT the physical act of sexual mutilation? Some of these reviews make it sound as if you will see nothing but dicks and clits being destroyed on camera for 2 hours. I mean really, what a way to blown something out of proportion. "Illogical"? "Unreal"? Are these critics serious?

It IS a horror film. This is in fact what horror films should be. Horror as in an emotion, a state of being. Von Trier and team are in such top form. I can't believe some critics called this amateurish, that's insane, this is such a perfectly, expertly, carefully staged and edited thing. Beyond any criticism you may have, the craft in this is like, I don't know, like fucking NASA or something. It's a beautiful film to look at and to listen to. Disturbing of course, pretty intense, scary, offensive in parts. But worth every minute.

Just Withnail

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1658
  • Respect: +494
    • Truls Krane Meby's website
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #129 on: November 20, 2010, 12:09:50 PM »
0
"The craft is like fucking NASA." Marquee?

KJ

  • Inspiring Actress Jacki Lynn
  • ****
  • Posts: 992
  • Respect: +382
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #130 on: June 03, 2013, 06:37:23 PM »
+1
I see a classical horror thriller coming out here

I love this quote.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3742
  • Respect: +1875
Re: Antichrist
« Reply #131 on: February 04, 2016, 06:05:12 PM »
0
wtf is happening

Lars Von Trier’s ‘Antichrist’ Latest Film Banned By French Court Amid Ratings Furor
via Deadline

French conservative values group Promouvoir has won another victory in its crusade against sex and violence on French screens. Lars von Trier’s 2009 drama, Antichrist, which scooped the best actress prize for Charlotte Gainsbourg in Cannes, has seen its operating visa revoked by the Administrative Court of Paris. The court cited “scenes of great violence” and “non-simulated sex” in its Wednesday decision, per multiple reports. The move comes at a time when the industry is seeking reform of the ratings system to keep it out of court and weaken Promouvoir which has spearheaded — and won — campaigns against several major titles in recent months, mostly over sexual content. It’s also particularly disconcerting in a country that so highly values its freedom of expression, and which saw it so devastatingly attacked in 2015.

French film body ARP today came out swinging in response, saying that it was “once again stunned” that judges have challenged a decision made by the culture minister and the Classification Commission, and that a “repressive and extremist association” such as Promouvoir, “should decide what we can and cannot see in France.”

This is the third time that Antichrist — which did its fair share to scandalize the Croisette when it originally debuted — has seen its rating challenged. It was previously banned by the State Council in 2009 and 2012 before being reinstated by the culture ministry with a -16 certificate. Yesterday, judges yanked its certificate again. An appeal is possible, I’m told.

Promouvoir has previously gone after the ratings classifications of Gaspar Noé’s Love, Virginie Despentes’ Baise-Moi, Universal’s Fifty Shades Of Grey and von Trier’s own Nymphomaniac films. In December, it succeeded in stripping 2013 Palme d’Or winner Blue Is The Warmest Color of its visa. That decision was also subject to appeal by the culture minister.

ARP, together with the Directors’ Guild (SRF) today said, “It is astounding that so many films, which have been widely acclaimed in major festivals, and offended the sensibilities of no one — except for the promoters of a new obscurantism — can be barred from the public.”

The groups again implored Culture Minister Fleur Pellerin to take urgent measures to modernize the system and give “meaning and weight” back to the Classification Commission.

I recently asked Noé whether he expected reforms would come, especially after his experience with Love. In August, the film was bumped up from -16 to -18 (NC-17) in what was believed to be the first time such a change occurred mid-run, and again at the behest of Promouvoir. He laughed and said, “On the internet, there is no ratings system so it’s awkward that people still believe there is a sense to put a rating on a film.” He added, “I wish people were shocked each time they see a gun in a movie. I don’t know why a penis is more shocking than a gun.”

Love was released unrated in the U.S. by Alchemy in December. Noé’s other films like Irreversible and Seul Contre Tous were similarly unrated Stateside which he said didn’t bother him at all. He noted that in Denmark, Love had the maximum rating of -15. “But (cinemas) say if you’re with your parents you can get in if you’re 11. So Denmark is the most open-minded of them all.” Von Trier of course is a Danish filmmaker.

In theory, the economic impact to Antichrist is minimal. If the rating changes, then it would have to change on all forms under which the film is exploited. It’s been out of theaters for seven years, so that would mean DVD, VOD, etc. It would also mean that it can’t be shown on television at certain hours.

It is, however, part of this larger issue surrounding the French ratings system which has typically been more lenient when it comes to sex than violence compared to other markets.
The Classification Commission is made up of industry professionals, experts in human sciences and government and youth representatives. Together they make a recommendation to the culture minister who then has the final word.

In its statement today, ARP said the commission “already exercises its vital role in guaranteeing the protection of moviegoers. It is no longer tolerable that [Promouvoir’s attorney] be allowed to make use of defects in our texts in disregard of the legitimacy of this commission.”

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy