| Page 1 of 48: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Index | 471 reviews in total |
I've never seen anything so painfully familiar. Every move of Justine, her every word echoes with the heartache of a melancholiac. And the inability of the others to understand this pain, their inability to feel it and understand - it only makes it more familiar to the ones drowning in this mute slow-motion everyday despair. After watching this movie I went home without saying a word, I sat down on my chair and sat there silently for about an hour. I like Lars von Trier, I liked his movies before, but this one was a headshot. In this one film Lars von Trier succeeded to show all the ultimate emptiness of the everyday rituals, the endless longing of a melancholiac and the unbearable helplessness of this condition - like a bulletproof glass cocoon around you, muting the sounds and making the colors dim. I vote "excellent", 'cause this film is closer to my heart than any other I've seen before.
Yesterday I had the chance to see Melancholia. I was a bit anxious
given the mixed reception here (either euphoric or very negative).
It seems the media are talking more about the
disaster-press-conference-from-hell Lars gave in Cannes. Which is a
shame.
Like always, Lars von Trier does not want to appeal to the general
public, but in stead wants to present the viewer something unique and
honest.
It was influenced by his own "melancholia", of which he suffered when
working on this project.
I, for one saw solid acting and great directing from a person who
carefully observes and understands human interaction. For me it works.
This movie is by no means perfect but it was thought provoking, and
heart touching and that's exactly what a decent movie should try to
achieve.
Thank you for reading my opinion.
Melancholia is LVT's Wagnerian opera. Justine is a mythological
creation. She is the white goddess, Diana bathing, la Belle Dame Sans
Merci, Cassandra tormented by futurity. It ends in Gottedammerung, the
destruction of the world.
The Cannes jury was right to honour it. In 2, 10 or 100 years this will
be manifestly THE film of 2011, capturing as it does this precise
historical moment, on the cusp of epochs. More than just an economic
crisis, or even the end of Western capitalism, or the American Century,
or of Europe - though it is all that - it is the consummation in fire
of all we have ever known. Leaders and experts sit mesmerised and
powerless, making reassuring noises, or setting aside puny provisions;
taking shelter in denial or custom. While Melancholia and Earth act out
their dance of death; gravity, the most ineluctable force in the
universe, does its work.
Justine, being incapable of happiness, is therefore incapable of
illusion. She has always known. Herself untouched by affect, by human
assimilation or persuasion, she writes the killer tag lines which
manipulate others. Having a damaged soul, she suffers from a disorder
of perception - she sees things as they actually are. She knows
precisely how many beans are in the jar -like those who called the top
of the Dow Jones index, at 12807 exactly. On one level, she represents
the spirit of financialisation, the final, hottest white dwarf phase of
capitalism, quantifying, inhumane, ultra-competitive (seen also in
Skaarsgard's brutal ad boss, and in the brother-in-law who paid for the
wedding - "an arm and a leg, for most people" -he means it literally I
think - chilling!) And, like the Sybil, Justine wants to die. She wills
the destruction of herself and everything else. 'The Earth is evil.'
LVT is the holy idiot of European cinema. Much as Justine destroys her
stellar career, then hours later, in the garden, consciously and
irrevocably obliterates her marriage and future happiness, so LVT - in
the most perfect example of parallel process - in his acceptance speech
at Cannes compulsively befouls himself, his credibility, future
opportunities, his film and all associated with it. (Poor Dunst, beside
him. Did she always know? I wonder.)
Which brings me to Kirsten Dunst.Once the all-American teenage sweetie
in some of my favourite films.(The US invented the teenager, much as
the English Victorians invented childhood, and its richest and most
creative seam of film and TV deal with this stage of life. In a way,
America is the world's teenager; and all teenagers are Americans by
proxy.) In fact, Dunst is German-American, with all the ancestral
baggage that implies. (Read Sylvia Plath's 'Daddy' if you don't know
what I mean). Beneath the apple-pie sunny exterior of her teen roles,
there was always something remote and uncanny about her beauty. And
now, with teen / young adult roles behind her, this strangeness, this
well, German-ness, is exposed. In the riveting opening shots of
'Melancholia' she looks like Marlene Dietrich - unheimlich,
fascinating. Like la Belle Dame Sans Merci, she takes possession of a
man through his unconscious: like the groom in the film, he will follow
her, exchanging all that is dear - home, family and hope of happiness -
for bitterness and despair.
In the scene in the limo, the earliest, lightest part of the story, she
seems American, in accent, face, body, She becomes less American , more
northern European, and ultimately less like a human being at all, as
her story unwinds. Those who criticise the inconsistency in her accent
are missing the point. The change is about the character, not her
nationality, which is purposely vague. (In fact, in what country does
the film take place? Would you ask that question of 'the Ring'?)
I get the impression that just as Lars is working through some issues
around his German-ness hence the Wagnerianism -, so is Dunst, which
must have made his Cannes performance doubly excruciating. (I hear she
wants to be called 'Keersten' now, pronounced the German way.) For the
girl who has been being other people superbly well from her childhood,
it seems to me that Dunst the adult truly exposes something painfully
real of herself in this film. ('Exposing' is the right word in every
way.)
And she pulls it off. The film is stunning. She is stunning, and
thoroughly deserves Best Actress. Bravo, Lars von Trier!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This review MAY contains spoilers, yes. The movie itself DOES contain
spoilers.
The first four minutes or so are awesome. You can do yourself a favor
and leave the theater after that for dinner and coffee. You can come
back for the last two minutes save the titles. They bookend the
beginning. The rest is torture. If you are a depressive masochist, you
might find the middle part enjoyable though. I gave it 2 stars for
those few minutes.
"It looks like sh.t. I'm shaken." These are not my words. It's from
Lars Von Triers director's statement about this film.
When Lars Von Trier appeared with Kirsten Dunst at Cannes promoting his
latest effort in tormenting audiences he claimed to understand Hitler.
Maybe because this rather endless, self indulging narcissistic
art-house piece about the annihilation of rural upper class Denmark had
brainwashed him to the point of calling himself a Nazi and Isreal a
"pain in the ass". Who knows. Maybe he meant to promote the film. It
did not reach me.
His promotional efforts got Trier banned from Cannes. He is banned from
my play list too after I have been bored to tears one more time with
outdated art-house tricks that have ceased to impress me in the last
millennium.
Kiefer Sutherland, Kirsten Dunst, Charlotte Gainsbourg (they don't look
like sisters) and others are working loyally with their tormentor. It's
sad watching them waisting their talent though on this pointless
journey. Udo Kier has a short cameo and is funny, as always, even in
pointless surroundings.
The editing is bad enough to use it as an example for film students on
how to make wrong choices.
Yes, jerking a camera endlessly and pointlessly can be done, even 15
years after "Breaking the Waves". Back then shaking cameras without
meaning was some kind of art-house fashion statement. Now it looks like
someone wearing the wrong trousers to the wrong party.
The implausible arrival of another planet, being observed through an
obscure piece of wire until it finally smashes an idyllic pasture was
great for two things: it ends both the endless camera jerking and the
movie.
Even if this review will be stowed away deep in the bulk of this
distributor's guest reviews, I'd like to warn you. The film leaves you
in pointless depression. If you think that's a good way to invest your
time end money, I can highly recommend it.
There's a serious polarity in the reviews for this film,and I'm not
surprised. If you've ever suffered depression this bleak movie will hit
hard, and you'll pick up on all of the subtle messages it sends out.
It's done so well it can't be anything other than achingly familiar.
The despondency, and the frustration the sufferer feels at their own
despondency, in particular, is well conveyed.
Unfortunately I think a large chunk of the people who've seen this film
(and there aren't many who have, sadly) went to it expecting a slightly
arty apocalypse movie. It's not a smarter Deep Impact. The (blue)
planet Melancholia is just a metaphor for depression. Unrelenting and
irresistible, Melancholia has the main character in its thrall.
For those who don't "get" this movie, no it's not a pretentious, pseudo
intellectual flick. Rather it's a well crafted take on the fine detail
of a subject matter that you have been fortunate enough to not have had
to understand. Long may that be the case.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Melancholia was a movie I went to see expecting it to blow me away. I
thought: now here's a movie that doesn't have the mass-friendliness of
the average Hollywood movie, but at the same time actually has a nice
budget, and some good actors. Now don't get me wrong, I often find low-
budget films with fresh talent amazing, but with Melancholia I was
hoping for something that successfully molds together the Hollywood and
indie movie scenes. Here's what I thought of the movie:
As it opens there's a quite long, slow moving apocalyptic scene that I
won't even try to explain. But, to be honest, I found it to be quite
nicely done. With the occasional space imagery to me it looked like if
Ingmar Bergman had made a 2001: A Space Odyssey -based short film.
Wagner's music really made it an extraordinary experience.
Part I: The Wedding (no I'm not calling it Justine, live with it): At
first it seemed like a pretty nice, slow starting, atmosphere building
part of the movie (note that at this point I still really wanted to
enjoy this movie), but as time went on I found myself hating most of
the badly written, annoying, and shallow cast, and I was hoping for bad
things to happen to them all, especially Justine, Kirsten Dunst's
character. By the way, why does everyone consider her performance so
great? Sure, she was good at playing an angsty character whose motives
remain a mystery to everyone, but honestly, being either expressionless
or having an intentionally painful fake smile on shouldn't be that
hard. When the wedding scene was over, I thought, finally, now can we
get to the part where this gets good?
Part II: The Generic Ranch: So, after being bored with the first half
of the movie I was hoping for something a bit better. Well, I never got
what I was hoping for. Justine just got a lot more annoying, we found
out she has paranormal abilities, and people were taking a planet
sucking out some of earth's atmosphere, probably taking it off it's
course and killing everyone on it regardless of weather it collided or
not really goddamn well. Not even Kiefer Sutherland's great performance
could make me have any motivation for watching on. For the first time
in my life I was actually contemplating walking out of the theater I
was so bored and annoyed. Long story short, Justine was a total douche,
her sister paniced and the world came to an end, and the movie ended.
Oh yeah and there was that kid who did an even worse performance than
Jake Lloyd on Star Wars ep. 1. Yes it was really that bad.
Okay, the very end was pretty epic, with Wagner's music almost blowing
my eardrums out and a huge blue planet smashing into the earth. I have
to admit though, when the movie ended, I accidentally let out a giggle,
much to the dismay of most people sitting near me. Seriously, as well
made as it was, it was a pretty silly way to end the movie in my
opinion.
Alright, pros and cons:
Pros: We saw Kirsted Dunst naked a couple of times, and although I
really disliked the jumpy, amateuristic camera-work, the movie was at
times visually amazing, and not really ever over the top. Also, the
idea for the movie was pretty cool, and I really enjoyed Kiefer
Sutherland's acting. The very beginning and very end should have been
made into separate short films because they were really worth watching.
Cons: Exceptionally shallow characters whose ridiculously small
backstories were just thrown on to the viewers, mostly just average,
sometimes painfully weak acting, and plentiful filler scenes that had
no purpose whatsoever and that could have been cut down without the
movie losing anything, while some scenes were just cut off completely
(for example the impromptu sex scene with Justine and her husband,
which, if correctly made, could have told us most everything about
their relationship, and many more scenes that were just cut way too
short).
Conclusion: I'd like to give the movie more points just for it's
beginning and end, and the story that had great potential for a sci-fi
- sporting drama, but I just can't. For the first time in a while I
seriously had trouble getting through this movie without walking out in
the middle. Sorry to all the people who think it's a great movie, but
personally I think I'd seriously rather do the dishes and mow the lawn
than watch this movie again.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The movie shines visually at certain points. To be specific it shines
first five minutes and then the last say 20 seconds.
The rest of the movie is just cruel, sadistic and never ending torture
by boredom. First and foremost, the lead character is not
"melancholic". She is seriously depressed, I mean chemotherapy to
electro-convulsive therapy class depressed. It is seriously not fun to
watch her being depressed. It made me feel very depressed as well and
this was just the beginning.
The family seems to be broken, but in a very boring way. Nothing much
happens here except for people running away (I wish I did the same
thing after opening scene, but I was hoping for at least some pretty
pictures later on). Then nothing happens, then nothing happens, then
nothing happens, then the sister suddenly understands the World is
going to end, so she freaks a little, runs around a little, then all
three remaining heroes decide to sit at their asses and to wait for
collision.
Yes, there are some pretty pictures of the castle where the boring
people live, but seriously I would rather watch another Miss Marple
murder case. These movies are silly but at least something happens!
Seriously I never expected to see another Armageddon or something like
that but this bottle is completely empty. There are not even questions,
it just frustrating wait for the end of the World so the movie may end
as well.
I'm so so disappointed. If you were attracted by the trailer, you may
go home now. There is nothing more interesting to see here. The trailer
is misleading, it is pretty poster consisting of all the action in the
movie. The rest is just cold, empty, freezing hell of boredom disguised
as a art. Even the worst Lynch movies are at least an order of
magnitude better than this!
Trier takes us for a ride. It's a slow ride, taking in the beauty of
the cinematography. It is at once a beautiful movie, while at the same
time focusing on the absence of real love between the characters - and
in the world. The movie hints at a correlation between the lack of
love, and the threat of impending doom that's present throughout.
I speculate that every viewer will take something slightly different
away from the picture, because the movie is designed to make you think
about us humans and our behaviors toward each other, as well as enjoy
the work of wonder that the movie is. What you end up with is dependent
of what you take to the movie in the first place. Trier's movies are
usually adept at making you feel. In this movie you are left to your
own devices. There is no inherently good person to root or feel for.
There is only the state of the world. And the future of the human kind.
Can you be bothered to feel for us?
Truly Trier-esque (10/10).
''Melancholia'' - Lars von Trier's best work to date. The movie is about the nature of depression and how 2 sisters go through it. Kirsten Dunst (Justine) accepts her melancholia by the time a planet that was hiding behind the sun threatens to collide the Earth, while other sister (Charlotte Gainsbourg - Clair) is afraid to face the reality and her own personal emotions. If you have any little doubt whether you want to watch this movie or not, you better don't, because this is not for everyone, and if you still want to see this then prepare yourself for what you're going to face. The movie is all about how Lars Von Trier sees the world, the people and the dearness between them. It's beautiful, it's real, it's disgusting, it's terrifying - it all depends on how you want to perceive this film. The opening and the ending scenes are mesmerizing! The music used in the film is taken from Wagner's ''Tristan and Isolde'' opera which fits the movie perfectly. Cinematography - amazes. Special effects, not for 3D, but are very realistic and breathtaking. Kirsten Dunst gives us her best performance to date, forget the girl in Spider-man, this is a new level for her. She finally proves us how good she can be with the right movie choice. An Oscar nomination is on its way... I'm not a fan of Lars and his movies, but this one had me at the edge of my seat to the last minute. 10/10
First off, let there be no doubt Melancholia is an amazing movie, a one of a kind experience. But it's also a strange movie. Strange because some parts are just so much better than others. From divine touch of genius to actually really rather bad. There are parts that are so strikingly beautiful that you can not help being mesmerized, there's superb directing resulting in amazing, almost screen transcending acting (and this is from the girl from "Bring it on" mind you), and there are parts were sound and imagery merge with such impact that you get blown away. But then there are parts that feels just the opposite, some characters are portrayed surprisingly flat and their dialog and behavior seems contrived at best, almost like they never got beyond a crude first draft in the writing. The mother and the boss especially could have been watered down and integrated with more finesse IMO. It sounds like no biggie but it's such a stark contrast to the brilliance you find in other parts of the movie e.g. the subtle and tender portrayal of the groom and his love and affection for his troubled wife. Regardless and in spite of these rather prominent shortcomings I was sucked in from the mind blowing opening and my emotions were once again stripped bare and exposed at the signature killing blow finale. As before with Trier's films, I stumbled out of the theater, all numb and profoundly touched.
| Page 1 of 48: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Plot summary | Plot synopsis | Ratings |
| Awards | External reviews | Parents Guide |
| Official site | Plot keywords | Main details |
| Your user reviews | Your vote history |