Nymphomaniac: Vol. I

this film has only one flaw - its not long enough... its funny and brilliant, its dark and thrilling and its poetic at the same time. Whoever have watched any film by Trier won't be disappointed. Of course don't read previous reviews - this film is not about sex. Its about loneliness between sensations, about being alone among people who suffer from lack of attachment. Its about life that struggles with death by facing death , to the ultimate boundary of pleasure. Just watch it, listen to BACH music and observe the feast for eye and ear and a challenge for heart... Maybe my words seem exaggerated but i have finished watching this film just an hour ago and my impressions are strong. But i believe it will endure and i will take my feelings from this movie with me and carry them through my daydreams...

I was amazed to see that there was not a clear 10 rating for this movie . This will be the first . From my point of view, after watching many movies directed by Lars Von Trier, this might be the best one . It is several levels above other movies which will take dozens of prizes and acclamation . The first layer which attracts people is sex , but this is only the fly (see first chapter in the movie) which will try to catch u to see the rest. Sex is only a means to open the box full with human feelings like solitude, emptiness, self hatred, egoism all seasoned with a lot of irony and links to music , poets and manners like eating pastry with a fork . I like to believe all this details are close to Lars Von Trier and like Tarkovky's library they represent a part of his life and feelings

In the end, I consider a piece of work (book , music , movie) a masterpiece when the author puts his feeling inside , when he "writes it with blood". I think here LVT gives us his soul and that makes the difference between a good movie and a 1 in a thousand movies .

Nymphomaniac (2013) [Director's Cut]

"Nymphomaniac" is the final part of Lars von Trier's "Trilogy of Depression", after the "Antichrist" (2009), which was to me inexplicably dull and unjustified morbid, and "Melancholy" (2011), which I have not yet come to see. Originally, "Nymphomaniac" was conceived as a single film but, due to its inhumane length, in the theatrical release, it was divided into two two-hour films. I am watching the director's cut, which lasts five and a half hours.

The first film begins with a scene in which an older man encounters a beaten woman lying on the street. After she refuses an ambulance and the police, he takes her to his apartment and places her in bed. Then he sits down next to her and she tells him her whole life, the life of a nymphomaniac. Occasionally he interrupts her with interesting comments on various topics, such as philosophy, nature, music, literature, mathematics and even fishing, but all these digressions are directly or metaphorically related to the main subject of the film and represent life philosophies that will lead you to thinking and self-analysis, especially if in some of them you recognize yourself.

The film is full of explicit pornography, but this time it is not there just to shock and cause controversy, but it greatly enhances the artistic power of film and contributes to the credibility and the dramatic nature of the story. The sex scenes are not simulated, they are genuine pornography, but they were shot by porn actors and subsequently edited together with the bodies of the main actors. The film is fantastically shot and directed, and drama and pornographic scenes alternate in perfect harmony. The atmosphere is hypnotically dark and depressing, additionally empowered with an interesting selection of music, which ranges from industrial metal band Rammstein, through rock classics, to Bach's organ compositions. Although the movie is very slow and long, my attention has not been weakened for a moment.

In all three films of the "Trilogy of Depression", Charlotte Gainsbourg plays the main role, but as the first part of the "Nymphomaniac" takes us through her childhood and girlhood, in the main role we see Stacy Martin, who, although not particularly beautiful, is extremely cute and sexual, and in every way a sight for sore eyes in comparison with Charlotte. Charlotte's rescuer is played by Stellan Skarsgård, who appears in a total of seven von Trier's films. There is also Christian Slater in the role of Nymphomaniac's father, as well as Uma Thurman, who gave perhaps the best performance in her career. Stacy, Charlotte, and Stellan topped their roles, but in her relatively short scene, Uma Thurman completely overshadowed them. Her scene is totally over the top, but still somehow realistic and believable. This somewhat relates to the film in its entirety, but Uma's scene is one of the most powerful I've ever seen. Ruthlessly awkward, strongly emotional and definitely unforgettable. Uma deserved an Oscar big as the Statue of Liberty.

There's still three hours of the second movie left for me to make a final judgment, but for now, this is a pure ten.

Seligman: "Well, I divide humanity into two groups: the people who cut the nails on the left hand first, and the people who cut the nails of the right hand first. My theory is that the people who cut the nails of the left hand first they're more light-hearted. They have a tendency to enjoy life more, because they go straight for the easiest task, and save the difficulties for later. So, what do you do?" Joe: "Always the left hand first. I don't think there's a choice. Go for the pleasure first, always. And then when you've done the left hand, only the right hand remains. That's the easiest one left." Seligman: "I never thought of it like that. Well, you're never too old. Never too old to learn."

10/10

Lets be clear, I am not especially a fan of Von Trier's work, either I am an artistic cinephile. But lately I am looking a bit further then the mainstream movies, which can be as well very good. That's why I was interested in seeing Nymphomaniac, in the same way that I saw Shame with Fassbender. These movies are not comparable due to the different objective, but treat the same problem experienced by a man or a woman. It is difficult to review the first part of a movie, which exists of 2 parts making 4 hours together. Even then, it is the censored version, NOT due to the sex scenes, but rather for the length of 5:30 hours, which is not THAT standard in theaters. I am sure I will go for the second part and I am as well sure that it will of the same level or better. Therefor the rate of 8/10. It is for sure not porno, even not erotic. Not be mistaken in that. There is no excitement possible. All sex scenes are more or less mechanical, short duration and treated as if it was a documentary. In fact, the movie is like a documentary, where a father type figure Seligman ( Skarsgard ) is the interviewer of the nymphomaniac Joe ( Gainsbourg ) in a way that she can tell her history from when she was 8 years old and onwards. The discussions between Joe and Seligman are metaphors between her sexual behavior and for example fly-fishing, music, etc … and they are sometimes quiet comic. So a laugh is possible. But don't be mistaken, this is a drama. We see how Joe's sexual life conditions her from child onwards, as well as all involved "partners". She is someone who does not feel anything and will do everything to satisfy herself independent of the pain that she will cause around her. A good example is the Miss H chapter, where an astonishing Thurman enters the screen. The situation caused could be like a Veaudeville one, but here it develops as a dramatic absurd situation. Different moods are created, sometimes you feel pity for Joe, then unbelief like with the train adventure, very dramatical situations like Miss H or the with her father causes sadness and anger, even a tip of the love issue … a different movie to see. If I have to mention a negative topic, then it is the cold atmosphere in the movie with only the Seligman metaphors and the sex life of Joe, not more. But don't misunderstand this, it is quiet a lot to handle. And even more, if you have 15 partners a day I suppose there is not that much time for other things to do then having a walk in the park like she does. Stacy Martin is the star of this part, as well as the discussions by Starsgard. Finally, I am certainly going for the second part of this movie. It is a very tricky subject to bring it on the big screen and Von Trier has had the guts to do it. The result is fine, a drama, a documentary about an illness ( as far it is an illness and when it is considered as one ), not a porno or sex movie like we understand it, showing us how it conditions a complete life and sometimes with a comic hint. Of course there is nudity and sex scenes in the movie, a warning for those who have problems with that ...

This is the best movie I've seen from Lars Von Trier. Brilliantly constructed, well directed, with lot of imagination and using many techniques (although I'm not a specialist). I include in my review the volume II as well. After watching the first one, yesterday, didn't have patience for see the second part. The idea of a Sheherezada tail, nowadays, makes the background. I loved the way the chapters telling Joe's life are separated by the intermezzos: her dialogs with Seligman, his erudition, her intelligence shadowed only by the all pervasive guilt feeling... I found the explicit key of the movie in the second part... in one of their dialogs. I try to remember it, it might not be 100% accurate: "Do you know what is characterizing our age? - Hypocrisy! People who tell beautiful lies are acclaimed and accepted, they form the majority; the few ones who tell the truth, often uncomfortable, are rejected!" Von Trier plays with two opposite characters: a nymphomaniac (probably more a being desperate to understand life meaning and get out of the beaten track than anything else), who never finds happiness in her search, so she goes further and further, and a 60 years old virgin who lives alone and finds his happiness in books. He plays as well with religion, with the concepts of purity and sin, with plenty of symbols amassed cleverly together. He shows us, in fact, our obsession with sex, with human bodies, with chair, making fun of the ones who will refuse his movie, scandalized. In our world which sells mainly with the help of sex, rejecting this movie is a huge hypocrisy. The only disappointment for me was the end of the second part... I don't see why he chose it, but probably will find later on the answer.