Antichrist

Antichrist is a difficult film, but it is also interesting, bold, provocative and incredibly visually compelling. However, connecting to it emotionally is more of an art than the film itself. Instead of the never-ending analyzing of the female protagonist’s mind, it would have been better to focus solely on the relationship of the couple in the given stage of their lives or take a look into their respective pasts. That is, if the film was made for some kind of audience. (12/06/2009)

Thought-provoking, cinematically daring, and very depressing, but at its core it’s as cold as a penguin’s butt and its highly irritating execution is not easy to digest. Lars von Tier goes really far, so far that he often breaks reasonable boundaries and his creative excesses are bound to divide the audience into two groups. I tried to come to terms with his style, but despite some truly impressive scenes and an uncomfortable atmosphere, I couldn't overcome the detachment and long-windedness of his narration and I couldn’t even partially enjoy the film. Definitely a disappointment that even the otherwise excellent Willem Dafoe could not reverse. 50% (12/05/2012)

This film is about as much of a horror as Bergman's Hour of the Wolf. The stunning metaphor of the decay of man and woman uses satanic properties only to underline the traditional concept of evil, the source of which Lars von Trier provocatively places in the soul of woman. In a time of correctness, his almost inquisitorial rhetoric is a revelation from hell, but it is supported by an absolutely perfect film form. After dry theatrical productions, we have the Trier-aesthete once again, which indulges in the raw images of "Paradise", in the raw studies of perfectly authentic actors. I don't know what made Trier confuse a selfless woman for a satanic woman, but I clearly rank the resulting film as one of the most captivating intimate dramas. To be offended means not to understand. Antichrist is not shallow - the audience that laughs at him and condemns him is shallow. (11/23/2009)

After all the controversy around Antichrist, the film itself is quite surprising, or rather, its contents are. In terms of filmmaking, I’m truly fascinated, I’ve watched the prologue five times already and I don’t think I will see anything better this year, but the contents of the film bothered me a little. I didn’t like the transition to the last act, some scenes are too gratuitous and there were moments that I thought could have gone deeper. Basically, the effect wasn’t as intense as I wanted or expected. Even ordinary exploitation horror can sometimes make me feel worse psychically. (10/16/2009)

By using elements of symbolism, romanticism, realism, and above all naturalism, Lars von Trier has achieved an almost magical atmosphere, which together with the acting of the two protagonists, gave me a truly extraordinary, breathtaking and often pulse-quickening experience, the likes of which I have never seen in a cinema before. During the climactic scenes, when my companions and the other occupants of the cozy cinema room averted their eyes or whispered various words quietly to each other, I was "only" aware of my accelerated pulse and drops of sweat on my forehead, but I watched every second very closely, because I was completely captivated by von Trier's crazy openness... The prologue, with its beautiful musical accompaniment, is interspersed with a character study that explores the psyche of the Woman in considerable detail and chronicles the Man's efforts to identify the demons that torment the Woman's soul and prevent her from moving past that fateful event for both of them. At the moment when the demons and evil in the form of the raging nature completely engulf the Woman, she becomes a deranged and cold-blooded sadist, driven only by her own suffering and the terrible pain inside her heart. Antichrist cannot be described as a shocking and controversial film, for it is an utterly unique lyrical-epic work of art, a ballad with elements of romance, an atypical poem revealing the darkest and most terrifying aspects of human nature, or a desperately accurate and relentless account of the consequences of a human tragedy, in this case the loss of a child. While von Trier's latest effort will have a hard time finding a wider fan base (as all of his films probably do), it will remain a gem for me for a long time, and one that I will treasure immensely even many years later. And as to whether it's self-indulgent, perverse, immoral, or revolting? From an austere and uncomprehending point of view, yes. The likes of Emil Zola or Karel Josef Šlejhar would be delighted. --- NATURE IS SATAN'S CHURCH --- (01/15/2010)