Dogville

May contain hints of spoilers. That people are mostly bastards and have vile and despicable characters, we know, and so does Mr. Lars von Trier, who also has the courage of his convictions to present them in Dogville. What was probably killing me inside the most were the questions I kept repeating to myself: when will they finally let her go? what comes next? what else are these beasts capable of doing?" The almost theatrical treatment with its minimal sets played out in a minimum of space is very imaginative; on the other hand it doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone. The content here clearly outdoes the "small" format, but as has been mentioned many times, the small format gives the whole film a special meaning and in turn further emphasizes what this truly unique film wants to tell us. Fortunately, I was pulled out of my heavy depression and pity for Grace by the ending, which I found very appealing and which I would call a "higher justice", which (unfortunately) we hardly see in the normal world. Let's face it, the vast majority of people will give von Trier the benefit of the doubt (whether they are willing to admit it or not), having experienced something similar themselves (maybe not to the same degree, but it certainly wasn't pleasant). P.S.: I give the maximum rating to either technically perfect films that are nice to watch or "works" that hit me emotionally and make me think. Why I’m giving Dogville 5 stars, therefore, I think everyone knows.)) (12/13/2009)

I love experimenting with film, I love theatre, and I knew that even though I hadn't seen any of Lars von Trier's films, I should expect the unexpected. And yet I can't sort out the confusion in my head that Dogville unleashed, even days after watching it. You certainly can't say it's a weird movie. But oddly enough, it is true. Von Trier wanted to achieve an absolute victory of content over form, but in doing so he created the film's main Achilles heel. Or does anyone want to object to the fact that the audience will fully focus on the story and be completely absorbed, not minding that the actors are in a huge studio with standing sets that would make even a theater envious? That the illusion of day and night, as well as the changing seasons, is the result of the skill of a great team of lighting experts? And that most of the sounds, including opening doors and birdsong, were added in post-production? We can answer yes to that, but only if Dogville has a really strong story, which unfortunately it doesn't. The photographs shown during the closing credits left me pondering whether Von Trier's screenplay was based on a true story or not. Regardless, one cannot deny its certain impact and impressiveness. At the same time, there is a certain coldness and predictability in it, which is the main reason for my "lower" rating. I would really like to raise it higher, mainly because of the actors who give outstanding performances. Nicole Kidman shines brightly, and the contrasting chemistry with Paul Bettany is excellent. Dogville is a film that you don't often see, but when you do, it should at least be worth it. No, I'm not demanding, I just don't like it when something is not working smoothly and this creaks too much. (07/07/2005)

Excellent. I’m not sure if I would have put it on if I’d known beforehand the style it’s made. But I did and I’m thrilled. The simple plot that probes deep into the dark corners of the human soul is tailor made for this minimalist form. Fortunate are those who in the film didn’t find anything similar to their own experience. (04/06/2009)

Dogville is wonderfully cast, with even the smallest roles played by actors who would deserve to play the lead role in any other film, and the whole ensemble is led by Nicole Kidman, who wanted to earn the reputation of a great actress after filling her purse, and certainly didn't argue with Lars von Trier about how much she was getting paid. The film relies on a thought-provoking emotional story with a truly devilishly clever twist that is satisfying not only for the humiliated protagonist but also for the audience. Revenge is ruthless and absolute. But the problem with Dogville is that it's not really a film. It doesn't use specific film language and techniques. Rather, it's an alternative theater performance recorded on film. Experimental theater with minimal sets and props. Some people will be satisfied and content with the emotions shown and the intimate acting, while others may feel cheated. Lars von Trier is a filmmaker who likes to push the boundaries of what is possible and accepted, and I find that appealing. On the other hand, if cinema were to develop in this direction, it would probably be a disaster because not everyone is such a good storyteller and not every actor has such a good range as the participants in this experiment. Overall impression: 90%. (01/03/2008)

A psychological masterpiece, formally quite extraordinary and unique. The trip to a town of horrors presented as a stage set with minimal scenery does seem extremely strange for most of its runtime, but Trier somehow managed to convince me that this is the only way to deliver such a complex and powerful emotional experience. You may enjoy the company around you all you like, but I think that after my experience with Dogville, I can't help but have a spark of doubt about them. Because such a precise and detailed blackening of human characters, crowned with one of the most shocking endings I've ever seen in a film, it’s something that I can’t get out of my mind with just a snap of the fingers. The minutes go by at lightning speed, the actors give riveting performances (I couldn't even breathe during Kidman and Skarsgård's scenes together), and horror fans can write down the name of another unfriendly place with the suffix -ville in their diaries. I don't think you can take it all in well enough the first time, so I'll save the fifth star for the second screening :) 85% (01/01/2014)