Antichrist (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message

Empire Admin -> Antichrist (20/7/2009 9:59:31 AM)

Post your comments on this article



SpaceLion -> Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 9:59:31 AM)

exactly what Gainsbourg's character does to Dafoe's assures that I will never go to see this. Stomach-churning stuff. Hence my one-star.

Also, is it just me or is this review a bit too specific about certain aspects of the movie as opposed to telling me why I should go see it? Perhaps it is just me. It is early Monday morning and I have yet to be caffeinated.



tftrman -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 10:42:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpaceLion
exactly what Gainsbourg's character does to Dafoe's assures that I will never go to see this. Stomach-churning stuff. Hence my one-star.


You don't work for the Daily Mail do you? 1 star for a film you haven't seen, dear oh dear.....



Jo Wareham -> (20/7/2009 1:53:09 PM)

The Daily Mail's off again. The "critic" should have his own stand up show.



kenada_woo -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 2:33:13 PM)

BAN THIS SICK FILTH!!!!!!













I'm gonna try and get it watched this week hahaha[:D]



CORLEONE -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 2:37:16 PM)

Can't be rougher than Martyrs...........can it?



SpaceLion -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 2:45:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tftrman

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpaceLion
exactly what Gainsbourg's character does to Dafoe's assures that I will never go to see this. Stomach-churning stuff. Hence my one-star.


You don't work for the Daily Mail do you? 1 star for a film you haven't seen, dear oh dear.....


I didn't want to give it any rating at all, but I wasn't permitted to post without doing so. Perhaps I should have given it a three and let the other ratings balance it out. Apologies for the unfair influence.

And no, I do not work for the Daily Mail. I work for the Daily Star. [;)]



CORLEONE -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 3:04:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpaceLion


quote:

ORIGINAL: tftrman

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpaceLion
exactly what Gainsbourg's character does to Dafoe's assures that I will never go to see this. Stomach-churning stuff. Hence my one-star.


You don't work for the Daily Mail do you? 1 star for a film you haven't seen, dear oh dear.....


I didn't want to give it any rating at all, but I wasn't permitted to post without doing so. Perhaps I should have given it a three and let the other ratings balance it out. Apologies for the unfair influence.

And no, I do not work for the Daily Mail. I work for the Daily Star. [;)]


Get out.



Drone -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (20/7/2009 10:43:44 PM)

I'm completely thrown by this... it came out of the blue for me, but it sounds extraordinary.  I can't decide if I want to see it or not, as the whole "gore-porn" thing (certain aspects of this sound like it would qualify in that category) has no appeal to me at all.  My curiosity is defeinitely getting the better of me.



Deviation -> RE: Having read in other reviews.... (21/7/2009 1:52:15 PM)

When is it coming out in Malta? When?[:(] And I hope they won't cut it here. Been waiting too long now...too damned long. (six months were made to look like a five years).



dayglowjoe -> grrr! (22/7/2009 11:33:38 PM)

Thanks for filling your review with spoilers Empire!

Still, I am very much looking forward to seeing this. I love the way Von Trier rubs people up the wrong way.,.

I have to rate this out of five or I can;t submimt my comment but i haven't seen it yet so ignore the rating...



boove -> RE: grrr! (23/7/2009 2:51:39 PM)

Is there a list of cinemas that are showing this film? Anywhere I can go to find out if it will be shown even remotely near me?





Nari -> Well worth the pain (24/7/2009 9:31:39 AM)

Yes, it's a tough watch, yes, it's gruelling...but it's such a beautiful film. Cinematography is magical, beautiful sequences of shots that cut to the point. Von Trier and the lead actors (Gainsbourg in particular) portray the overwhelming grief & mental pain really well. The escalation of the events is captivating, as the nature takes the lead in the game. It is absolutely fantastic that any man could conceive such a film, especially being bed-bound by a severe bout of clinical depression. And, the talking fox with a little bell on his collar was my favourite!



antmumford -> RE: grrr! (24/7/2009 8:05:57 PM)

Hi there,

This should answer your question. I can't wait to see it too :D



antmumford -> RE: grrr! (24/7/2009 8:06:39 PM)

Sorry, forgot to put in the link!

http://www.artificial-eye.com/film.php?cinema=antichrist&where=antichrist



adambatman82 -> RE: grrr! (24/7/2009 9:59:55 PM)

Saw it and kind of liked it. The prologue and epilogue where particular highlights, at least in terms of cinematically. The main chunk of the film did lag a bit at times though. Im going to work on a proper review tomorrow.



boove -> RE: grrr! (24/7/2009 10:14:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: antmumford

Sorry, forgot to put in the link!

http://www.artificial-eye.com/film.php?cinema=antichrist&where=antichrist



aha! thank you very much. looks like a trip to london or cambridge...booo!

why dont cinema chains play bloody films! heres looking at you, cineworld!



demoncleaner -> RE: grrr! (24/7/2009 10:20:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

Saw it and kind of liked it. The prologue and epilogue where particular highlights, at least in terms of cinematically. The main chunk of the film did lag a bit at times though. Im going to work on a proper review tomorrow.


I'll look forward to the review Adam.  I'm frightened of this one.  After seeing Hedwig and the Angry Inch a couple of years ago I really want to see to John Cameron Mitchell's Short Bus (and that's cuddly by all accounts)...but I don't know...real sex...mixed with "real violence".  Snuff movie grade Bergman? I'm afraid of that. After seeing "real" violence in Haneke's stuff...I'm afraid he'll see this, be impressionable and bring us, the viewer into a real living hell of embittered sex and violence.  (Cronenberg doing Yo Gabba Gabba in comparison).

Maybe I'm ostriching, but bring on Land of the Lost.  Scary biscuits.


EDIT:  Tell me only one thing.  Is it like Lars Von Trier?  'Cause I couldn't fucking handle that!

EDIT: EDIT:  DON'T ANSWER THAT!  I just went downstairs, self-satisfied, cracked open a beer, had a smirk to myself, realised it was BY LVT and ran upstairs for this disclaimer you're reading now.  Never mind me, definitely staying away from this one.



adambatman82 -> RE: grrr! (24/7/2009 11:50:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: demoncleaner

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

Saw it and kind of liked it. The prologue and epilogue where particular highlights, at least in terms of cinematically. The main chunk of the film did lag a bit at times though. Im going to work on a proper review tomorrow.


I'll look forward to the review Adam.  I'm frightened of this one.  After seeing Hedwig and the Angry Inch a couple of years ago I really want to see to John Cameron Mitchell's Short Bus (and that's cuddly by all accounts)...but I don't know...real sex...mixed with "real violence".  Snuff movie grade Bergman? I'm afraid of that. After seeing "real" violence in Haneke's stuff...I'm afraid he'll see this, be impressionable and bring us, the viewer into a real living hell of embittered sex and violence.  (Cronenberg doing Yo Gabba Gabba in comparison).

Maybe I'm ostriching, but bring on Land of the Lost.  Scary biscuits.


EDIT:  Tell me only one thing.  Is it like Lars Von Trier?  'Cause I couldn't fucking handle that!

EDIT: EDIT:  DON'T ANSWER THAT!  I just went downstairs, self-satisfied, cracked open a beer, had a smirk to myself, realised it was BY LVT and ran upstairs for this disclaimer you're reading now.  Never mind me, definitely staying away from this one.



To be perfectly honest the "real sex" is limited to one shot in the opening bars of the film that lasts maybe 5 seconds. Its not a patch on the likes of Baise Moi or as disturbing sexually as Battle in Heaven. The violence, while at times pretty intense is again not as explicit as your average horror flick. There is some pretty messed up visuals in there tho, and the style that Von Trier has given the film makes it a lot more "personal" and as such more involving than a glossy hollywood horror film, but I wasnt as shaken by Antichrist as I was Crash, which i found to be much more genuinely fucked up. Obviously some of the stuff on display is crazy, such as the acts of mutilation and the blood-cum shot, but its actually rather brief in that respect (saying that, the final 15 minutes are pretty damn relentless). There is lots of very graphic masturbation too.

I found two incidents to be genuinely difficult to watch; the first is the opening prologue, in which Nick, the couples child dies. As someone who lost a sibling as a baby I've often found it hard to deal with such fare in films, in fact its pretty much the only area that is guaranteed to get a rise out of me regardless of quality, but yeah, the opening section proved surprisingly hard to stomach, in a good way though, if that makes sense? The second genuinely "horrible" moment is again very early on, in which the character of Her hits her head against a sink. The sound is deafening, and pretty much the single most disturbing thing I've seen in a cinema since the "scream" in Inland Empire. There was also an occasion whereby a very similar thing to that moment in Inland Empire happened later on, in which She repeated lines back that she had already delivered, albeit in a more menacing manner. I found these smaller, more focussed areas to be much more difficult to stomach than the all out "shocking" moments.

Anyway, tis late, I shall do a proper write up tomorrow.



demoncleaner -> RE: grrr! (25/7/2009 3:29:51 AM)

I won't be watching this one.

I thought we were middle-class because we had two cars in the estate and had the first video player. The only tapes you could play on it by rental were Superman II, I Spit on Your Grave, and Cannibal Holocaust.

I'm a sick bastard.  But I've no desire to see this film at all. 



adambatman82 -> RE: grrr! (25/7/2009 9:47:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: demoncleaner

I won't be watching this one.

I thought we were middle-class because we had two cars in the estate and had the first video player. The only tapes you could play on it by rental were Superman II, I Spit on Your Grave, and Cannibal Holocaust.

I'm a sick bastard.  But I've no desire to see this film at all. 



Meh, Im no sicko, in fact I've never seen the likes of I Spit on Your Grave or Cannibal Holocaust the whole way through, but as an intrigued cinemagoer I felt compelled to see Antichrist. Its not about being a sick bastard or anything of the sort, and like I've said I have found many films to be far more disturbing.



losthighway -> RE: grrr! (25/7/2009 5:31:31 PM)

God damn my nasty tonsils and having to have them out last Monday, which has now left me housebound and unable to see one of my fave directors new film on opening day!!! [:(]

As for being a sick bastard... I have an extensive range of cult video nasties in their uncut forms on DVD, e.g. ISOYG, CH, Last House, etc, etc. (Cannibal Holocaust is a masterpiece btw!)

Will I be seeing this sick filth when able... YES!
Will it turn me into a raving lunatic... POSSIBLY!
Will I be seeing talking foxes... ALREADY GOT ONE DOWN THE BACK GARDEN!

[:D][:D][:D]



rupert303 -> RE: grrr! (25/7/2009 6:02:11 PM)

I thought Antichrist was hilarious - best comedy of the year!



fletch666 -> RE: grrr! (26/7/2009 9:23:40 PM)

Planning on seeing this tomorrow, not sure it can out do Matyrs in the 'Holy Fuck this is grim' stakes but its Lars Von Trier, so anything is possible



Neth -> RE: grrr! (27/7/2009 10:32:48 AM)

Saw this last night. Despite being a big Von Trier fan, I tried to approach it as subjectively as possible. And I'm still not quite sure what to make of it all. Suffice, there's a ton of striking imagery - the slowed-down shots of Gainsbourg (and later Dafoe) crossing the forest are eerily beautiful - and the performances are strong. The script's not so hot, with some clunking on-the-nose dialogue and an over-reliance on psycho-babble.

I counted eight walk-outs from a cinema around 1/3 full - and I'm betting those were more down to the laborious pace than anything else. It's sad to see this being marketed to dipshit Saw fans expecting a plethora of over-the-top yucks - that's not really the case. The emotional violence on display far outweighs any of the brief dalliances into "torture porn", and makes the movie far more disturbing as a result. People anticipating another Martyrs should rethink their expectations.





steveg66 -> RE: (27/7/2009 1:46:56 PM)

The Daily Mail's off again.

Yes, their critic gets on my tits. One of the biggest puritanical snob bores I've ever read. Bambi's mum being shot was torture porn for him. Mind you, I believe Mark Kermode didn't like it much (more because it's pretentious crap) and he's my favourite reviewer.
Each to his own!

1 star as I haven't seen it yet.



demoncleaner -> RE: grrr! (27/7/2009 2:00:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: demoncleaner

I won't be watching this one.

I thought we were middle-class because we had two cars in the estate and had the first video player. The only tapes you could play on it by rental were Superman II, I Spit on Your Grave, and Cannibal Holocaust.

I'm a sick bastard.  But I've no desire to see this film at all. 



Meh, Im no sicko, in fact I've never seen the likes of I Spit on Your Grave or Cannibal Holocaust the whole way through, but as an intrigued cinemagoer I felt compelled to see Antichrist. Its not about being a sick bastard or anything of the sort, and like I've said I have found many films to be far more disturbing.

I’m sorry if I sounded judgemental.  I really wasn’t trying to be, the inference that anyone who did go see Antichrist was somehow curdled didn’t occur to me.   It seems a bit obvious now, but there you go.  Sorry.  I’m not that sick either…maybe a little jaundiced.

Total Film’s review is pretty interesting.  They gave it one star but earnestly proposed that Von Trier would be flattered by that (with one or five - anything in between would be an insult).  Erring on the side of caution they went with one star with the caveat that if there was a tiny chance that Von Trier was actually taking the piss, then it would make what’s there masterpiece material of high irony.  The same could be said about any non-conforming work I suppose. In the great majority of cases I think these leftfield auteurs are simply pretentious and too ill-humoured to benefit from that kind of get-out clause.  I’m a fan of irony however.  Does anyone agree with the tentative Total Film proposal that LVT has a glimmer of that humour and the will to bury a pastiche so deep?  More Mighty Boosh than Bosch perhaps?   I’d go see that.



Hadyn89 -> (27/7/2009 3:28:25 PM)

I agree with steveg the daily mail critic can't seem to open his eyes, he is such a snob. I remember him giving Superbad a turkey not even 1 star both films may be to everyones taste but he needs to get that stick from out of his ass. Haven't seen it yet so 1 star.



fletch666 -> RE: grrr! (27/7/2009 5:15:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neth

Saw this last night. Despite being a big Von Trier fan, I tried to approach it as subjectively as possible. And I'm still not quite sure what to make of it all. Suffice, there's a ton of striking imagery - the slowed-down shots of Gainsbourg (and later Dafoe) crossing the forest are eerily beautiful - and the performances are strong. The script's not so hot, with some clunking on-the-nose dialogue and an over-reliance on psycho-babble.

I counted eight walk-outs from a cinema around 1/3 full - and I'm betting those were more down to the laborious pace than anything else. It's sad to see this being marketed to dipshit Saw fans expecting a plethora of over-the-top yucks - that's not really the case. The emotional violence on display far outweighs any of the brief dalliances into "torture porn", and makes the movie far more disturbing as a result. People anticipating another Martyrs should rethink their expectations.





Just got back from seeing this and can agree with your view on this, really unsure of what to make of this.  It is a beautifully shot and well acted film, both leads give it there all.  But if there is a message here I'm really not sure what it is.

My comment comparing it to Matryrs was in the way this film had been marketed as extreme cinema, but should have realised that this being Lars Von Trier, nothing would be straightforward or even close in comparison.

There were also multiple walkouts in the screening I saw, including 3 during the prologue, which is the most straightforward of the chapters presented.



adambatman82 -> RE: RE: (27/7/2009 6:07:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: steveg66

The Daily Mail's off again.

Yes, their critic gets on my tits. One of the biggest puritanical snob bores I've ever read. Bambi's mum being shot was torture porn for him. Mind you, I believe Mark Kermode didn't like it much (more because it's pretentious crap) and he's my favourite reviewer.
Each to his own!

1 star as I haven't seen it yet.



Kermode loved Antichrist, he even gave it film of the week.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125