Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Sprængfarlig bombe (2006)
One of the most awful movies ever made.
I don't recall watching any movie as offensive as this one, ever before. Not because of sex or violence since 'Sprængfarlig Bombe' really doesn't contain any of that, but because it's an 1½ hour long monologue against everything I love about movies.
The bad guy of the movie is fictional director Claus Volker (with the "V" pronounced like in "von Trier") who looks like a clone of Christoffer Boe. Sprængfarlig starts off with an intentionally terrible pseudo-artistic movie by Volker about a guy working at an oil rig like in 'Breaking the Waves', and rest of the movie is filled with similar spoofs.
Throughout the entire movie Claus Volker and the directors he is supposed to resemble are made fun of in almost every way possible. Only 7 people come to see his new movie; he is very egoistic and every time he gets frustrated, he runs to the corner of the room and screams like a wild monkey for half a minute. All "artistic" movies are ridiculed because, according to 'Sprængfarlig', no one wants to see them anyway. There is a "funny" joke about the Verfremdungseffekt and even 'Un Chien Andalou' is mentioned.
Most people though will not notice that but instead just talk about how funny the movie is. The humor in 'Sprængfarlig' is similar to the other Danish action comedies, just with a slightly higher amount of slapstick, so even though it's a meta movie, it doesn't fall prey to it's own charges since it completely avoids being "artistic." Since I like the movies that director Thomas Villum Jensen ridicules in 'Sprængfarlig,' I was somehow offended by the movie. But on the other side I couldn't help being amazed by the stupidity of this movie and its morale about movies not appealing to the common Dane not deserving any economic support. I was overwhelmed.
If you love "artistic" movies and have enough irony or if you just like light weight action comedies like "I Kina spiser de grønne slagtere i nye biler med blinkende lygter," you will probably enjoy 'Sprængfarlig.' I certainly did even though it was a very ambivalent experience.
Kissmeyer Basic (2001)
Keep Your Eyes in Seat Belts!
Kissmeyer Basic is only 1½ hour in total but is still greater than life itself. It is one part sci-fi Blade Runner/Matrix, one part surreal L'Âge d'Or/Naked Lunch and one part Casper & Mandrilaftalen/?.
The plots of the different episodes are often very far-out science fiction stories: In one episode the protagonist, Wulff, is forced into a job as a terminator to shut down the robot Pjotr Sjparov, who believes that he is human, with cinnamon bread rolls, and in another episode Wulff is introduced to "The Kissmeyer System" which controls the entire world. But the plots are very incomprehensible and the "basic premises", introduced in the beginning of each episode, change every time.
Frank Hvam has a new role in every episode and delivers his best performance ever as the architect Abel W. Dip who is trapped in a super market and harassed by Jørn Utzon's bird sounds and whose drawings mainly consist of buildings more than 30 km tall.
Kissmeyer Basic is very much like Casper & Mandrilaftalen spiced up with crazy and scratchy editing (Almost the entire series is filmed with "fisheye" and very high contrast and many of the shots are filmed directly into the sun), wild sci-fi stories and action-packed animations by Morgenthaler.
Kissmeyer has to be seen to be believed. It is one of the most intense movie experiences I've ever had, even surpassing Buñuel, Kubrick, Polanski and Fellini, though not everyone might like it that much. The only drawback is Mette Horns performance.
Kissmeyer Basic is available as a bonus-DVD for Allegro and is worth buying even though Allegro isn't worth watching.
Mulholland Dr. (2001)
No Blue Velvet but still a Lynch movie
Mulholland Drive has a very surreal structure which is the central part of the movie. If you like the surreal narration of David Lynch and aren't too afraid of mediocre acting, you might like this movie, because that's what Mulholland Drive's mystery is all about: Who's who and how are the different situations related.
There is something in Mulholland Drive that gives all the madness some kind of logical meaning; but first of all it makes you more distanced from the actions in the movie contrary to Blue Velvet which was surreal, too, but still very serious, near and frightening, since in Mulholland Drive it's all some kind of hazy dream; and second I'm personally not too fond of movies that MUST have some kind of meaning to it. If you hated Videodrome because it was too confusing and it didn't make sense, you might like Mulholland Drive where the craziness make sense and don't pull you too much into the story.
Mulholland Drive is definitely a Hollywood movie with Hollywood actors but it tries to move away from the Hollywoodness by having a critical view on Hollywood movie making, but in my opinion Mulholland Drive doesn't succeed in this the way for example Adaptation does; mainly because of Naomi Watts and Laura Harring. The selection of actors has a Lynchian kind of irony to it but in Mulholland Drive it is far too obvious.
If you are mostly in to very mainstream movies, Mulholland Drive might be a nice change which still isn't too hard to digest, but if you are mostly in to movies that are a bit more crazy, this might be too mainstream.
Mulholland Drive isn't too bad if you take it for what it is: A light version of a David Lynch movie, but personally this movie just makes me like Blue Velvet much more, since it reveals all the mistakes Lynch avoided making in that movie.