A woman on the run from the mob is reluctantly accepted in a small Colorado town. In exchange, she agrees to work for them. As a search visits town, she finds out that their support has a price. Yet her dangerous secret is never far away...
On the night of her wedding, Justine is struggling to be happy even though it should be the happiest day of her life. It was an extravagant wedding paid for by her sister and brother-in-law who are trying to keep the bride and all the guests in-line. Meanwhile, Melancholia, a blue planet, is hurtling towards the Earth. Claire, Justine's sister, is struggling to maintain composure with fear of the impending disaster. Written by
John is the only character who refers to the planet as "Melancholia." See more »
The planet Melancholia disrupts all electricity in and around the house, including the electrical systems in the cars in the driveway. However, Claire is able to jump in an electric golf cart and drive away with no problem. See more »
Yeah, you're good. You can back up a little more, if you want. I think you need the... I think you need that extra...
I don't think he can hear you.
Sir. Sir, can you hear me up there?
[fiddling with controls]
Do you copy, sailor? He's in a different county, I think that's...
See more »
Outside of the first 10 minutes, which I found painfully slow, although visually interesting, the rest of the film appears to be destroyed by shoddy camera work.
Shakycam, as I call it, or perhaps more accurately, "handheld camera with no stabilization" is distracting, obnoxious, and in this case pointless. Shakycam makes sense during a fight sequence, a car chase, something with a lot of action, and only for short segments.
This film appears to be filled with long drawn out scenes, no surprise considering the movie length, so why shakycam? I can't focus on the story. Every stumble or random zoom the cameraman does makes me imagine that he is suffering a mild stroke and trying to get through the scene. It also makes me want to slap the director for being so thick. Oh, wait, I'm supposed to be watching this movie, not wondering about the production, right?
Shakycam made sense to me in "Dancer in the Dark" staring Björk. Even though that film gave me a headache while watching it, I loved the film itself. I forgave the pain it caused me do to the jerky, wandering camera work. I've called that film my one exception because I believed the director wanted the viewer to see things as the main character did, who suffered eye problems.
What I wasn't aware of at the start of this review is that Lars von Trier, who directed "Melancholia", also directed "Dancer in the Dark". This makes me second guess the pass I gave that "Dancer in the Dark". Maybe Lars just hates tripods and dollies and all his work is visually problematic?
"Dancer in the Dark" trained me to watch out for shakycam, as I don't enjoy the expense of a throbbing headache for the sake of watching a movie. Any production that can't properly use a camera is in my terms, unwatchable.
I love dystopian stories, looked forward to this, but sorry, I can't watch this unless I run it through an image stabilizer.
Lars, please buy a tripod.
4 of 5 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?