***Spoilers***
Let me start my review by saying that this film accomplishes what most filmmakers hope for when they begin the mountainous task of creating one: it provokes and engages the viewer's mind. I will not review the film's plot because prior posts have amply covered the many questions that are presented and only partly answered. This was an unforgettable film for me even though I do not accept its ideological foundations.
One of the subtextual layers of the film involves what I see as a severe criticism of the film industry as a whole. I'm sure that most readers are aware of Lars von Trier's grievances. In many ways, the things he has said about modern cinema ring true. How many times have we viewers left the movie hall, after watching the latest blockbuster, shaking our heads? The special effects may have astounded us, but the characters seemed petty and one-dimensional, or even worse, a GLORIFICATION of all that is bad about our culture. I emphasized the word "glorification" in the previous sentence because I do not believe that a film should ignore the bad - just that it shouldn't make the antagonist the hero.
The moving picture was invented by Thomas Edison. Because of him, we have the gift of film. Dogville begins with a father/son duo named after this famous inventor and it is here that I detect a critique of contemporary films. The younger Tom struggles to come up with a story; he wants to create something of value but he can only manage a meager three words. He walks around Dogville wanting to help its citizens, but he cannot relate to their situations. He, unlike them, does not have any financial worries because he lives with his father, Thomas Edison Sr., who brings in a comfortable pension.
Tom the younger is living off of his father's success. (Edison Sr. represents old Hollywood and is presented in a kinder light than the other town residents - i.e., he does not molest Grace.) Ineffectual in influencing his culture, young Tom is the first to recognize that Grace, played by Kidman, is a gift. He introduces her to the townspeople.
Grace is accepted by the townspeople and for a while all are content to share in her sunshine. But then, the benefactors begin to long for a greater exploitation of Grace. Through Tom the younger's mediation, they seek more "balance" from their relationship with Grace. No longer interested in her goodness and humanity, they want physical gratification at her expense (and ultimately Tom's). Tom eventually goes along with them and is corrupted himself. (Tom, representing modern cinema, panders to them by wooing Grace even as he furthers her captivity. He gives them the equivalent of the gratuitous sex scene, car chase, or mass explosion with resulting body count.)
Grace leaves Dogville and, in the spirit of the Dogme manifesto, decides that the world would be better off if the current societal malaise were eradicated, along with all of the money and capital of the modern film industry. Hence, Grace provides the coup de grace to young Tom.
Let me start my review by saying that this film accomplishes what most filmmakers hope for when they begin the mountainous task of creating one: it provokes and engages the viewer's mind. I will not review the film's plot because prior posts have amply covered the many questions that are presented and only partly answered. This was an unforgettable film for me even though I do not accept its ideological foundations.
One of the subtextual layers of the film involves what I see as a severe criticism of the film industry as a whole. I'm sure that most readers are aware of Lars von Trier's grievances. In many ways, the things he has said about modern cinema ring true. How many times have we viewers left the movie hall, after watching the latest blockbuster, shaking our heads? The special effects may have astounded us, but the characters seemed petty and one-dimensional, or even worse, a GLORIFICATION of all that is bad about our culture. I emphasized the word "glorification" in the previous sentence because I do not believe that a film should ignore the bad - just that it shouldn't make the antagonist the hero.
The moving picture was invented by Thomas Edison. Because of him, we have the gift of film. Dogville begins with a father/son duo named after this famous inventor and it is here that I detect a critique of contemporary films. The younger Tom struggles to come up with a story; he wants to create something of value but he can only manage a meager three words. He walks around Dogville wanting to help its citizens, but he cannot relate to their situations. He, unlike them, does not have any financial worries because he lives with his father, Thomas Edison Sr., who brings in a comfortable pension.
Tom the younger is living off of his father's success. (Edison Sr. represents old Hollywood and is presented in a kinder light than the other town residents - i.e., he does not molest Grace.) Ineffectual in influencing his culture, young Tom is the first to recognize that Grace, played by Kidman, is a gift. He introduces her to the townspeople.
Grace is accepted by the townspeople and for a while all are content to share in her sunshine. But then, the benefactors begin to long for a greater exploitation of Grace. Through Tom the younger's mediation, they seek more "balance" from their relationship with Grace. No longer interested in her goodness and humanity, they want physical gratification at her expense (and ultimately Tom's). Tom eventually goes along with them and is corrupted himself. (Tom, representing modern cinema, panders to them by wooing Grace even as he furthers her captivity. He gives them the equivalent of the gratuitous sex scene, car chase, or mass explosion with resulting body count.)
Grace leaves Dogville and, in the spirit of the Dogme manifesto, decides that the world would be better off if the current societal malaise were eradicated, along with all of the money and capital of the modern film industry. Hence, Grace provides the coup de grace to young Tom.