How you described the "enlightenment" that comes out of movies like Lars makes couldn't have explained any better my enjoyment of his movies. It lets us go through these harsh and disturbing scenarios and understand them better, maybe even help us reflect on our own similar situations. It's almost therapeutic.
Just got to say this, this might be one of the best reviews you have done. I have heard people talk about this film but none for me has opened up a way to think about it and make sense of it for myself the way this review does with all the points you bring up. Good job!!!
I found little symbolism other than Her describing her dreams, that their names are so impersonal hints at how this movie is a situation any two people can end up in. The moral of the story is that He shares just as much responsibility for the catastrophic finale. My background: I spent years taking psychology courses and was engaged to a woman with dangerously severe Borderline Personality Disorder. In short: 1) We were taught to NEVER treat your own family, and He does that, 2) The way She acts is only slightly exaggerated (I am not kidding). I once askes my fiancee, "Am I going to wake up to you clawing my eyes out?" Rather than screaming or hitting me as she usually would, she got quiet. As for the witchcraft angle, people with BPD latch on to a narrative for why they deserve to be in pain and to hurt the people who love them most: she dabbled in witchcraft and told me that she is, "a piece of shit, I'm useless," and that she deserved to be exploited by the creepers and pornographers of the city. It only seems like a shock movie because nobody who hasn't studied it or lived it could ever believe that these things happen. It's not an ugly movie to me, it is mostly a gorgeous fugue with moments of the ghastly that were seared into my mind.
You can break down the film to humanity's struggle between rationality and primal animal desires (in other words NATURE, also represented by the woods and the animals). The psychiatrist husband character is the representation of rationality and the crazy woman represents nature.
yeah, to me the 2 characters didn't even represent humans but more of an inner dialog between the natural primal instinct vs. the human rationality. (almost exactly how Defoe's character sets up the game where he says he plays nature and she has to be rational.(but reversed)) And how loss, and depression more generally, is the struggle where you cant kill of your natural instinct to feel fear and despair. And when she burns in the end its almost like comming out of a depression, he also somewhat comes to terms with the different feelings in form of the 3 animals in the epilog. Obviously theres alot of ways you can interpret this movie, but to me its more of an inner struggle or turmoil.
I didn’t realize the Fox eating itself represents self destruction. It’s literally ripping itself to shreds kinda like some one who is having mental issues might feel.
This movie reminds me of Possession (Andrzej Zulawski) another break up, transformation, depression type of movie. I really enjoyed the movie it was a blind but for me.
just rewatched this film for the first time in around 10 years. when i first saw it i was in my mid 20s and attracted to edginess for its own sake, and latched on because it was provocative and extreme. i laughed at the pretentious music and slow-mo, and thought of von trier as an admirable prankster and troll. but this time it was different - i went in looking for that same experience, and was caught completely off-guard by how deeply it affected me emotionally. i went through a lot of awful things and a years long battle with depression since my last viewing, and now suddenly all the things i laughed with/at as pretentious or trollish rang true. just my view of course, but at its core this feels like a movie made by somebody very sick and tired of being told "the way out is through", that confronting terrible things will magically make them go away. in the film the natural world seems to represent these naturally occurring feelings, with dafoe's character pushing his wife to confront them, to become one with them, to live inside of them. but the film seems to argue that just because something is "natural" doesn't make it holy - nature has no right and wrong, only chaos reigns. same as our own instincts & natural functions, the human nature we put on a pedestal, but which leads to the historical horrors the film also depicts. it feels like a warning against rationalizing and narrativizing suffering, a condemnation of our reverence for the natural, and most of all a command to just take the damn medication sorry for the essay comment 4 years later lol
I find it very humorous that in trying to research movies that I want to watch, it inadvertently leads to your channel. And I always enjoy your take, whether I choose to watch the movie after or not. Cool stuff 👍
I believe the film is also about self-fulfilling prophecies when it pertains to misogyny. Patriarchal societies frame women as evil, and it's this negative framing that becomes reinforced by the woman. Dafoe's character exists as a counter to this, but his dismissal of her thesis research is simultaneously contributing to devaluing her efforts as a woman. It is all paradoxical and I think you articulated some of my thoughts quite well.
I like to interpret the movie as abstractly as possible. The conflict in the movie shows this almost inherent underlying pattern that shows itself in our perceptible reality on so many levels. On my first watch I immediately interpreted it as the fundamental conflict of self suffering. However, there are so many fitting interpretations of the movie like your own, that I feel the movie is capturing a deeper pattern underlying the human experience. There are ideas about humanities complex relationship with nature and the self, and how neither are multually exclusive. There is something fundamental about conflicts of masculine and feminine, and chaos and order within human nature. When I watch this movie I understand it on such an instinctual level that I can't help but feel it is capturing the experience of life itself.
This was so cathartic for me. As someone who wants to make film, but being 20 from a poorer background, right now the dream as I work a job is just to make reviews and to explore and give myself up to what I can watch as much as possible. Thank you, as someone who looks up to this channel a lot, it was very affirming to hear you had a near identical takeaway from this film as I. Not only did it strengthen my strong feelings and the poignancy of this film to me to know it can be universally read the same, but that someone who’s bread and butter is analysis of film could see what I did and voice it nearly the same. I’m rambling, I just wanted to say thanks for always being an inspiration for how to analyze film and truly subject yourself to the art.
deepfocuslens also would love to finally hear your thoughts on Us. I’ve seen it maybe 6 or 7 times now and it’s still so incredible just the craft alone and I actually think I prefer it to Get Out at this point just because of the sheer ambition.
Also I know there’s probably a long list of films you’d like to review in the near future but I would LOVE to hear your thought on My Own Private Idaho it’s one of my absolute favorite films ever made and I know you love movies that operate their narratives through dream logic and it’s always reminded me so much of Mulholland Drive.
Excellent review. Lars von Trier is a master showing the human nature that most humans fake not to be aware of. It takes a lot of courage to be Lars von Trier. All those metaphorical scenes are also a promise of awareness and emotional maturity.
Well this is Timely. A friend just said that the breakup with her long time boyfriend was like this film. To which I said whoa. I knew enough to know how crazy this film is. So I just ordered it to understand what my friend was saying. It should be arriving anyway. Then I'll come back. And finish watching this. Thanks!
Well I finally saw it. And though I wasn't expecting to be I was quite impressed. Thanks for prodding us with your thoughts on it. What does Antichrist mean? I think the final dedication to Tarkovsky, who certainly was a Christian, gives us a clue. And it is no simple name tacked on. Many images in the film call to mind Tarkovsky. Particularly films like Stalker and especially The Mirror. While Tarkovsky lens moves through the landscape seeking out the meaning of images set before us. Von Trier does just the opposite. He surveys the landscape, and the human relationship, as meaningless, even dark, matter. Yet he gets to the heart of one of the paradoxes of humanity, the love/hate of men and women. Truly worthwhile subject. And interestingly enough, by focusing on that darkness, by implication, he can't help but wrestle with the actual meaning of this life. Which Tarkovsky certainly believed was there. I like your interpretation. And because it really is a work of art, flawed yes, but real, it is indeed open to various interpretations.
I saw it as the failure to help women/ people with mental issues (if you want to be neutral) and how the woman was suffering pain and she killed her kid because she wasn’t being cared for and probably had a kid she didn’t want or eventually her depression got so bad she did what is the opposite of what women are supposed to be. They are supposed to be nurturing, loving, comforting but her mental state ruined it or maybe she wasn’t meant to be a mother and was pressured by society’s standards to depict a typical woman. She tends to be overly emotional, something else is brewing and is the source of her mental issues but it’s never figured out in the movie because she isn’t being treated.
Finally watched this movie for the first time, quite the experience. Loved the review and agree about the open-endedness of the movie - I could see this impacting 100 different people 100 different ways.
I just saw Melancholia for the first time about a month ago and was completely taken in by it - totally mesmerized by its dichotomy. Nihilism meets hope. :)
Your observation that she researches gynocide BECAUSE she hates herself and not the other way around is an observation that went right over the head of every male reviewer of this movie. I am glad I tuned into a woman's perspective on this movie
For me the most monumental scene is when she finally acknowledges that she saw her son while he was on the edge but was too deep in the throes of sexual ecstasy to do anything. The violence spirals from there. I agree with what you said about how her conclusions from her research are a form of internalized misogyny. And I felt that her not reacting in time to save her son was a manifestation (or what she sees as the manifestation) of what she has come to believe about the inherent evilness of women. This is what she struggles with and is unable to deal w it. Which is why she turns violent towards herself and her husband, quite literally destroying their sexuality.
Interesting. First, yes, the first scene of this one is maximum Von Trier. It’s the Avon Trieriest. Personally, Melancholia is the one of this trilogy that stays with me to this day. It’s like a nightmare that I swear I have had, so I internalized it thoroughly. Anti Christ, if I had to choose one theme, why i’t’s “about”, is grief, but the larger sense of grief, the grief that is embedded in existence.
I think it’s odd that, although this movie is inextricably connected to Von Trier’s “nature is Satan’s church,” nihilism and pessimism are almost never mentioned in regards to this movie. I think of that part of Burden of Dreams when Werner Herzog describes nature - “Nature here is vile,” he said. “I see fornication and asphyxiation and choking and fighting for survival and growing and just rotting away . . . the trees here are in misery, the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing, they just screech in pain.” The whole man v. Nature dichotomy subtext seems sort of false but I haven’t really done an analysis of this movie nor seen in it a while, so I could be misremembering things.
Just saw if for the first time so im looking for everyones input.. deffinately a lot to discuss in this one. To me the movie is about control and [repression/expressions] of the same emotions at different ends of a gender binary. SPOILERS The man wants the woman to overcome her trauma by facing the fear and anxiety, a manifestation of the grief, pain, and despair. But he hasn't overcome it himself. He has repressed it into the clinical/logical space of "if I cure my wife's 'hysteria' I'll be healed as well" I think that him killing her at the end can be read as the enviable consequence of men repressing their feminine emotions.
Good video! I think the opening sequence is one of the strongest of the decade (interestingly it's rivaled by two other films of 2009, being Enter the Void and Watchmen). I think there comes a point where something is so articulately crafted and over-the-top, that it triggers different emotional responses for different people: laughter or terror. I think Zulawski's films like Possession do something similar. Night of the Hunter is a very interesting comparison, but there's a lot of merit to it, both visually and thematically. The contortion of Christianity is definitely present in both.
Viewed this movie for the first time last night. Struggling to make any sense of it. So many symbols and so much allegory with very few answers. Certainly a depressive view of nature. We often view cabins in the woods as serene and affirming locations. However, a depressed person is consumed with the tragedy and cruelty in nature. Would love to hear from the Director about the final scene, because I am at a complete loss.
The House That Jack Built is my first experience with Von Trier. I experienced many of the emotions you expressed in this review while watching that film. Antichrist is my next watch, for sure. Peace.
Just watched this movie today for the first time. To me by the end of it the arc I got most was a mothers guilt that she put her own pleasure over the duty to protect and care for her child as you see in the end that she saw her child approaching the window and did nothing to intervene. She wants her husband to share in the guilt and feel as punished and trapped by it as she does, but in the end she succombs to the guilt and punishes herself through self mutilation of the source of pleasure that led to her child’s death. There is a lot more in there too but that was the through line i picked up on.
Between "that" scene in antichrist and "THAT" scene in nymphomaniac part 2, I swear Von Trier is doing his best to make certain people pass out in the middle of his movies...
I watched this movie prob when it came out, by watch I mean I watched the first 10 mins with a group of friends before I had really got into art house or more non traditional films. Some of us died laughing, some of us were completely put off and weirded out, but it always stuck in my mind all these years later and I've wanted to revisit it now that I'm an adult.
It's so embarrassing to go to a real movie with a group of nitwits. "Yeah, art is sooo dumb, where's the fart jokes or jump scares? I didn't get it! It was sooo weird!!!"
@@Turtleproof It's fine not to understand a movie but a certain level of self awareness is also needed, even if you don't completely understand a movie you must understand chunks of it. That is why I hate when people pass movies like Antichrist as bad when they don't even try to understand it.
This might not make much sense, but *based on the sounds and general "feel"* of this movie, I'm *reminded of 3 other, totally different movies* : Jean-Jacques Annaud's *"The Name of the Rose"* (1986), Wolfgang Petersen's *"The NeverEnding Story" (1984), and Akira Kurosawa's *"Ran"* (1985)!
Do you plan on doing a review about any David Cronenberg movie soon? i'd be very interested to hear your opinion about eXistenZ, Videodrome, Naked Lunch, Crash.
It's slmostly quite literal, the final scene could be ... how to put it non-spoiler... the character(s?) could be experiencing symptoms from the real things that happened or maybe something symbolic or paranormal is happening.
Thanks for your insightful thoughts on this movie! I don't have a conclusive answer to your questions, but I feel that your questions are exploring into the right direction when it comes to understanding this film. I really like your interpretation, it is very close to my own thoughts after watching "Antichrist". I also feel a certain kinship between "Antichrist", "mother!", "The VVitch" and "The Lighthouse", as all these films explore historical myths in terms of the psychological thriller, psychoanalytical drama, and horror genres.
I am very happy to discover your channel. I don't know how you choose which films to watch but I would like to hear your take on The Neon Demon by Nicolas Winding Refn. :D
🤔After watching this movie a few days ago I see why it’s called “Antichrist” I think a lot people missed it but I see the story that Lars Von Trier was telling and it is very abstract. Anyway it’s called Antichrist because the movie is describing how Satans “nature” infected the entire world through his relationship with Eve. Also the three beggars: Grief, Pain and Despair are the tools she uses to get her way whenever she’s into her emotions. Her husband aka her “therapist” is really Satan himself documenting and telling her what those feelings of emotions are how she will act or express her emotions out there in the wilderness(world).
What is this movie _really_ about? Here's my attempt: we must remember that von Trier used his own script for 'Antichrist', like in any of his movies. He made a movie about his own mental illness (depression). Everything, every person is a metaphor, facet or stand-in for himself. IMHO 'Antichrist' is the depiction of an unsuccessful attempt at self-healing. Von Trier splits himself up into a supposedly sane and rational "He" and an irrational, neurotic "She". But "He" is not really a doctor and choses the wrong approach for curing "She". And who is the titular "Antichrist"? *Everything* in this movie is "anti": anti-sex leads to anti-life (death). Nature isn't nice but an antagonist. "Antichrist" is both a skewered worldview (depression) and a false approach of salvation (by turning to the wrong person - yourself - and medical treatment - self-healing).
when movie was near to end I literally thought is it possible she saw her child climbing on window and let him die still she was watching, and then in the end I saw flashback. -_0
I knew for certain Von Trier was a massive troll right at the opening scene's ...uuhhh...close up. "Chaos reigns" reminds you of it and the ending scene confirms it.
I know the movies 10 years old so I don’t really know the protocol for spoilers but.. I wish I didn’t known what happened with the son. That took away the shock of The event. 🙉 still excellent review. The intelligence which you broke down and explain the over arching themes really helped me enjoy the movie on a deeper level. Thank you👏🏻👏🏻
Just found your channel, very insightful comments. Alot of the reviews on your channel are some of my all time favorites, I do have a feeling without scrolling all the way through that I will not find a review of the cinematic masterpiece "Big Mommas House"
It's completely misguided to say that she's not evil...The whole turning point of the film is when we find out she was abusing her son by forcing him to wear his shoes on the wrong feet... also how about mentioning the flashback which reveals how she watched him jump out of the window and did nothing about it... Could possibly be worth a mention somewhere in this 20 minute analysis.
Since you asked (in your video), I see this film as a cult film; even though the cult is just two people (for most of the film, anyway). There's a lot else going on, but that's what I took -- I need to see the film again, to be sure. It's similar to the play/film BUG in that one man (the leader) uses whatever he can to control the woman (his "follower") with whom he is connected.
Antichrist is a book written by Nietzsche, and, as I understand, Lars von Trier read it while he was going through a deep state of depression. It's been son many years since I read that book and watched his movie (I disliked them both despite some brilliant passages), but it was clear to me at the time that Lars titled his movie Antichrist as a homage to Nietzsche and his ouvre, for there is no clear parallelism between both pieces of work. So there's no Antichrist in the movie; it's not a physical entity nor an idea, just von Trier trying to get his shit together in a full length film.
Silly question, but I've always been kind of curious - why do you do your videos sitting on the floor? It doesn't bother me, mind you - I'm just kind of curious why you choose that location?
@@deepfocuslens Fair enough. btw I love that you often bust out reviews of non-current films, like this - mixing it up with current releases. I also like your commentary topic videos, like favorite scores, can "bad" people make good art, etc. You provide interesting content :)
Firstly I would like to say that I really enjoy your content (Hey everybody), but maybe I read this film completely wrong but I thought it was about witches and witchcraft.
I think what separates Von Trier from other filmmakers who delve into very macabre and bleak subject matter is he is a truly miserable and pessimistic human being, and thus he is unencumbered by any sort of obligation to soften the blow for the audience.
Maybe I’m crazy, okay probably, but describing something as supersaturated, washed-out, AND sterile is saying it has three different competing aesthetics. Is that what you’re trying to say?
it's been years since i've watched this, but i remember being disgusted and bored at the same time. i've watched several of von trier's films, trying to connect with what he's saying, but i just can't, though i do find particular sequences beautiful/moving/hypnotizing. i just feel like he hates the audience.
I really enjoyed his film The House That Jack Built so I rented this film Antichrist and it was HORRIBLE. I don't recommend anyone see it. The film is garbage.
How you described the "enlightenment" that comes out of movies like Lars makes couldn't have explained any better my enjoyment of his movies. It lets us go through these harsh and disturbing scenarios and understand them better, maybe even help us reflect on our own similar situations. It's almost therapeutic.
This movie makes a strong case for Charlotte Gainsbourg being the most fearless actress who ever lived.
I hear you but I always looked at her like, you need an actress to do something really fucked up call Charlotte
Just got to say this, this might be one of the best reviews you have done. I have heard people talk about this film but none for me has opened up a way to think about it and make sense of it for myself the way this review does with all the points you bring up. Good job!!!
I found little symbolism other than Her describing her dreams, that their names are so impersonal hints at how this movie is a situation any two people can end up in. The moral of the story is that He shares just as much responsibility for the catastrophic finale.
My background: I spent years taking psychology courses and was engaged to a woman with dangerously severe Borderline Personality Disorder. In short: 1) We were taught to NEVER treat your own family, and He does that, 2) The way She acts is only slightly exaggerated (I am not kidding). I once askes my fiancee, "Am I going to wake up to you clawing my eyes out?" Rather than screaming or hitting me as she usually would, she got quiet. As for the witchcraft angle, people with BPD latch on to a narrative for why they deserve to be in pain and to hurt the people who love them most: she dabbled in witchcraft and told me that she is, "a piece of shit, I'm useless," and that she deserved to be exploited by the creepers and pornographers of the city.
It only seems like a shock movie because nobody who hasn't studied it or lived it could ever believe that these things happen. It's not an ugly movie to me, it is mostly a gorgeous fugue with moments of the ghastly that were seared into my mind.
You can break down the film to humanity's struggle between rationality and primal animal desires (in other words NATURE, also represented by the woods and the animals). The psychiatrist husband character is the representation of rationality and the crazy woman represents nature.
yeah, to me the 2 characters didn't even represent humans but more of an inner dialog between the natural primal instinct vs. the human rationality. (almost exactly how Defoe's character sets up the game where he says he plays nature and she has to be rational.(but reversed)) And how loss, and depression more generally, is the struggle where you cant kill of your natural instinct to feel fear and despair. And when she burns in the end its almost like comming out of a depression, he also somewhat comes to terms with the different feelings in form of the 3 animals in the epilog. Obviously theres alot of ways you can interpret this movie, but to me its more of an inner struggle or turmoil.
Apollo vs Dionysius or Wojack vs Pepe
@@giniwelle lol
I didn’t realize the Fox eating itself represents self destruction. It’s literally ripping itself to shreds kinda like some one who is having mental issues might feel.
This movie reminds me of Possession (Andrzej Zulawski) another break up, transformation, depression type of movie. I really enjoyed the movie it was a blind but for me.
just rewatched this film for the first time in around 10 years. when i first saw it i was in my mid 20s and attracted to edginess for its own sake, and latched on because it was provocative and extreme. i laughed at the pretentious music and slow-mo, and thought of von trier as an admirable prankster and troll.
but this time it was different - i went in looking for that same experience, and was caught completely off-guard by how deeply it affected me emotionally. i went through a lot of awful things and a years long battle with depression since my last viewing, and now suddenly all the things i laughed with/at as pretentious or trollish rang true.
just my view of course, but at its core this feels like a movie made by somebody very sick and tired of being told "the way out is through", that confronting terrible things will magically make them go away. in the film the natural world seems to represent these naturally occurring feelings, with dafoe's character pushing his wife to confront them, to become one with them, to live inside of them. but the film seems to argue that just because something is "natural" doesn't make it holy - nature has no right and wrong, only chaos reigns. same as our own instincts & natural functions, the human nature we put on a pedestal, but which leads to the historical horrors the film also depicts. it feels like a warning against rationalizing and narrativizing suffering, a condemnation of our reverence for the natural, and most of all a command to just take the damn medication
sorry for the essay comment 4 years later lol
I find it very humorous that in trying to research movies that I want to watch, it inadvertently leads to your channel. And I always enjoy your take, whether I choose to watch the movie after or not. Cool stuff 👍
I believe the film is also about self-fulfilling prophecies when it pertains to misogyny. Patriarchal societies frame women as evil, and it's this negative framing that becomes reinforced by the woman. Dafoe's character exists as a counter to this, but his dismissal of her thesis research is simultaneously contributing to devaluing her efforts as a woman. It is all paradoxical and I think you articulated some of my thoughts quite well.
Thank you very much. You articulate your points extremely well also. :)
I was prepared for Tumblr nonsense and found a thoughtful observation that properly uses the terms and historical context, hot damn!
@@Turtleproof that's my whole channel lol
I disagree. Antichrist imo primarily is Von Trier trolling his radical feminist critics.
One fantastic UA-camr commenting on another. You guys should each check out the others’ stuff on Possession(1981).
I like to interpret the movie as abstractly as possible. The conflict in the movie shows this almost inherent underlying pattern that shows itself in our perceptible reality on so many levels. On my first watch I immediately interpreted it as the fundamental conflict of self suffering. However, there are so many fitting interpretations of the movie like your own, that I feel the movie is capturing a deeper pattern underlying the human experience. There are ideas about humanities complex relationship with nature and the self, and how neither are multually exclusive. There is something fundamental about conflicts of masculine and feminine, and chaos and order within human nature. When I watch this movie I understand it on such an instinctual level that I can't help but feel it is capturing the experience of life itself.
This was so cathartic for me. As someone who wants to make film, but being 20 from a poorer background, right now the dream as I work a job is just to make reviews and to explore and give myself up to what I can watch as much as possible. Thank you, as someone who looks up to this channel a lot, it was very affirming to hear you had a near identical takeaway from this film as I. Not only did it strengthen my strong feelings and the poignancy of this film to me to know it can be universally read the same, but that someone who’s bread and butter is analysis of film could see what I did and voice it nearly the same. I’m rambling, I just wanted to say thanks for always being an inspiration for how to analyze film and truly subject yourself to the art.
stop trying so hard. ppl sense that.
Watching this movie while high on acid was absolutely insane and I highly recommend it
I'll have to do it with shrooms 😂
Alex Garland’s “Men” is a perfect companion piece to this one. Both excellent films by consistently solid directors.
Would love for you to review Night of the Hunter truly one of my absolute favorite films ever made.
I certainly will at soon point. :)
deepfocuslens also would love to finally hear your thoughts on Us. I’ve seen it maybe 6 or 7 times now and it’s still so incredible just the craft alone and I actually think I prefer it to Get Out at this point just because of the sheer ambition.
Also I know there’s probably a long list of films you’d like to review in the near future but I would LOVE to hear your thought on My Own Private Idaho it’s one of my absolute favorite films ever made and I know you love movies that operate their narratives through dream logic and it’s always reminded me so much of Mulholland Drive.
KILLER FILM!!!!!!!!!!
Robert Mitchum was a GREAT villain.
Excellent review. Lars von Trier is a master showing the human nature that most humans fake not to be aware of. It takes a lot of courage to be Lars von Trier. All those metaphorical scenes are also a promise of awareness and emotional maturity.
Well this is Timely. A friend just said that the breakup with her long time boyfriend was like this film. To which I said whoa. I knew enough to know how crazy this film is. So I just ordered it to understand what my friend was saying. It should be arriving anyway. Then I'll come back. And finish watching this. Thanks!
Crazy...anyone would think your phone was listening.
Well I finally saw it. And though I wasn't expecting to be I was quite impressed. Thanks for prodding us with your thoughts on it. What does Antichrist mean? I think the final dedication to Tarkovsky, who certainly was a Christian, gives us a clue. And it is no simple name tacked on. Many images in the film call to mind Tarkovsky. Particularly films like Stalker and especially The Mirror. While Tarkovsky lens moves through the landscape seeking out the meaning of images set before us. Von Trier does just the opposite. He surveys the landscape, and the human relationship, as meaningless, even dark, matter. Yet he gets to the heart of one of the paradoxes of humanity, the love/hate of men and women. Truly worthwhile subject. And interestingly enough, by focusing on that darkness, by implication, he can't help but wrestle with the actual meaning of this life. Which Tarkovsky certainly believed was there. I like your interpretation. And because it really is a work of art, flawed yes, but real, it is indeed open to various interpretations.
I saw it as the failure to help women/ people with mental issues (if you want to be neutral) and how the woman was suffering pain and she killed her kid because she wasn’t being cared for and probably had a kid she didn’t want or eventually her depression got so bad she did what is the opposite of what women are supposed to be.
They are supposed to be nurturing, loving, comforting but her mental state ruined it or maybe she wasn’t meant to be a mother and was pressured by society’s standards to depict a typical woman.
She tends to be overly emotional, something else is brewing and is the source of her mental issues but it’s never figured out in the movie because she isn’t being treated.
Regret because of neglect caused by selfishness.
I feel that my opinion was warped because I watched Tarkovsky’s major works prior to.
No that's the best way to watch Antichrist, as it's an intertextual piece that (explicitly) relates itself to Tarkovsky's work.
Finally watched this movie for the first time, quite the experience. Loved the review and agree about the open-endedness of the movie - I could see this impacting 100 different people 100 different ways.
I just saw Melancholia for the first time about a month ago and was completely taken in by it - totally mesmerized by its dichotomy. Nihilism meets hope. :)
I thought it was nihilism consumes all
Your observation that she researches gynocide BECAUSE she hates herself and not the other way around is an observation that went right over the head of every male reviewer of this movie. I am glad I tuned into a woman's perspective on this movie
I think it is about the manifestation of guilt which is too much to be worked on or even acknowledged.
For me the most monumental scene is when she finally acknowledges that she saw her son while he was on the edge but was too deep in the throes of sexual ecstasy to do anything. The violence spirals from there. I agree with what you said about how her conclusions from her research are a form of internalized misogyny. And I felt that her not reacting in time to save her son was a manifestation (or what she sees as the manifestation) of what she has come to believe about the inherent evilness of women. This is what she struggles with and is unable to deal w it. Which is why she turns violent towards herself and her husband, quite literally destroying their sexuality.
Interesting. First, yes, the first scene of this one is maximum Von Trier. It’s the Avon Trieriest. Personally, Melancholia is the one of this trilogy that stays with me to this day. It’s like a nightmare that I swear I have had, so I internalized it thoroughly. Anti Christ, if I had to choose one theme, why i’t’s “about”, is grief, but the larger sense of grief, the grief that is embedded in existence.
I think it’s odd that, although this movie is inextricably connected to Von Trier’s “nature is Satan’s church,” nihilism and pessimism are almost never mentioned in regards to this movie. I think of that part of Burden of Dreams when Werner Herzog describes nature - “Nature here is vile,” he said. “I see fornication and asphyxiation and choking and fighting for survival and growing and just rotting away . . . the trees here are in misery, the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing, they just screech in pain.” The whole man v. Nature dichotomy subtext seems sort of false but I haven’t really done an analysis of this movie nor seen in it a while, so I could be misremembering things.
Just saw if for the first time so im looking for everyones input.. deffinately a lot to discuss in this one. To me the movie is about control and [repression/expressions] of the same emotions at different ends of a gender binary. SPOILERS
The man wants the woman to overcome her trauma by facing the fear and anxiety, a manifestation of the grief, pain, and despair. But he hasn't overcome it himself. He has repressed it into the clinical/logical space of "if I cure my wife's 'hysteria' I'll be healed as well"
I think that him killing her at the end can be read as the enviable consequence of men repressing their feminine emotions.
I love this take
best film i've seen made in the past 20 years. Feels like a retelling of Bergman's "Through a Glass Darkly" (probably my fav film of all time)
Good video! I think the opening sequence is one of the strongest of the decade (interestingly it's rivaled by two other films of 2009, being Enter the Void and Watchmen). I think there comes a point where something is so articulately crafted and over-the-top, that it triggers different emotional responses for different people: laughter or terror. I think Zulawski's films like Possession do something similar.
Night of the Hunter is a very interesting comparison, but there's a lot of merit to it, both visually and thematically. The contortion of Christianity is definitely present in both.
Please review Dancer in the Dark next!!!
That movie destroyed me.
Viewed this movie for the first time last night. Struggling to make any sense of it. So many symbols and so much allegory with very few answers. Certainly a depressive view of nature. We often view cabins in the woods as serene and affirming locations. However, a depressed person is consumed with the tragedy and cruelty in nature. Would love to hear from the Director about the final scene, because I am at a complete loss.
The House That Jack Built is my first experience with Von Trier. I experienced many of the emotions you expressed in this review while watching that film. Antichrist is my next watch, for sure. Peace.
Just watched this movie today for the first time. To me by the end of it the arc I got most was a mothers guilt that she put her own pleasure over the duty to protect and care for her child as you see in the end that she saw her child approaching the window and did nothing to intervene. She wants her husband to share in the guilt and feel as punished and trapped by it as she does, but in the end she succombs to the guilt and punishes herself through self mutilation of the source of pleasure that led to her child’s death. There is a lot more in there too but that was the through line i picked up on.
This is maybe the only film that’s made me physically nauseous.
Between "that" scene in antichrist and "THAT" scene in nymphomaniac part 2, I swear Von Trier is doing his best to make certain people pass out in the middle of his movies...
I watched this movie prob when it came out, by watch I mean I watched the first 10 mins with a group of friends before I had really got into art house or more non traditional films. Some of us died laughing, some of us were completely put off and weirded out, but it always stuck in my mind all these years later and I've wanted to revisit it now that I'm an adult.
It's so embarrassing to go to a real movie with a group of nitwits. "Yeah, art is sooo dumb, where's the fart jokes or jump scares? I didn't get it! It was sooo weird!!!"
@@Turtleproof It's fine not to understand a movie but a certain level of self awareness is also needed, even if you don't completely understand a movie you must understand chunks of it. That is why I hate when people pass movies like Antichrist as bad when they don't even try to understand it.
@@crappymcdick Right. There are certain movies that aren't for me but I can still tell that they're quality or at least digestible for certain people.
This might not make much sense, but *based on the sounds and general "feel"* of this movie, I'm *reminded of 3 other, totally different movies* : Jean-Jacques Annaud's *"The Name of the Rose"* (1986), Wolfgang Petersen's *"The NeverEnding Story" (1984), and Akira Kurosawa's *"Ran"* (1985)!
Do you plan on doing a review about any David Cronenberg movie soon? i'd be very interested to hear your opinion about eXistenZ, Videodrome, Naked Lunch, Crash.
Can you please review Marriage Story please? Its on Netflix
Hoping to get to that soon.
Sounds like one of those movies that leaves things up for interpretation.
It's slmostly quite literal, the final scene could be ... how to put it non-spoiler... the character(s?) could be experiencing symptoms from the real things that happened or maybe something symbolic or paranormal is happening.
You do, i don't feel discomfort. You need to step back and recognize.....KAREN
Thanks for your insightful thoughts on this movie! I don't have a conclusive answer to your questions, but I feel that your questions are exploring into the right direction when it comes to understanding this film. I really like your interpretation, it is very close to my own thoughts after watching "Antichrist". I also feel a certain kinship between "Antichrist", "mother!", "The VVitch" and "The Lighthouse", as all these films explore historical myths in terms of the psychological thriller, psychoanalytical drama, and horror genres.
I am very happy to discover your channel. I don't know how you choose which films to watch but I would like to hear your take on The Neon Demon by Nicolas Winding Refn. :D
I love your videos. Thank you for the time you put into them.
A woman’s opinion was much needed on this one, my guy.
Don't forget the movie was dedicated to Andrey Tarkovsky. Which means you are free to interpret the film as you please.
Great review. Amazing t-shirt.
We miss you and I like all your reviews especialy this one .. but would you ever consider doing a trainspoting review please ?
🤔After watching this movie a few days ago I see why it’s called “Antichrist”
I think a lot people missed it but I see the story that Lars Von Trier was telling and it is very abstract.
Anyway it’s called Antichrist because the movie is describing how Satans “nature” infected the entire world through his relationship with Eve. Also the three beggars: Grief, Pain and Despair are the tools she uses to get her way whenever she’s into her emotions. Her husband aka her “therapist” is really Satan himself documenting and telling her what those feelings of emotions are how she will act or express her emotions out there in the wilderness(world).
Great review. What is the exact title you mention in 8:56? I'd like to watch it, but I don't understand you.
Night of the Hunter
What is this movie _really_ about? Here's my attempt: we must remember that von Trier used his own script for 'Antichrist', like in any of his movies. He made a movie about his own mental illness (depression). Everything, every person is a metaphor, facet or stand-in for himself. IMHO 'Antichrist' is the depiction of an unsuccessful attempt at self-healing. Von Trier splits himself up into a supposedly sane and rational "He" and an irrational, neurotic "She". But "He" is not really a doctor and choses the wrong approach for curing "She".
And who is the titular "Antichrist"? *Everything* in this movie is "anti": anti-sex leads to anti-life (death). Nature isn't nice but an antagonist. "Antichrist" is both a skewered worldview (depression) and a false approach of salvation (by turning to the wrong person - yourself - and medical treatment - self-healing).
when movie was near to end I literally thought is it possible she saw her child climbing on window and let him die still she was watching, and then in the end I saw flashback. -_0
I knew for certain Von Trier was a massive troll right at the opening scene's ...uuhhh...close up. "Chaos reigns" reminds you of it and the ending scene confirms it.
I know the movies 10 years old so I don’t really know the protocol for spoilers but.. I wish I didn’t known what happened with the son. That took away the shock of The event. 🙉 still excellent review. The intelligence which you broke down and explain the over arching themes really helped me enjoy the movie on a deeper level. Thank you👏🏻👏🏻
It's billed as a movie about grief, wtf did you think was going to happen to the son?
Just stumbled upon your channel. It’s really good. You’re really good at this. Subbed and belled.
von Trier walked so Aster could run...IYKYK
Just found your channel, very insightful comments. Alot of the reviews on your channel are some of my all time favorites, I do have a feeling without scrolling all the way through that I will not find a review of the cinematic masterpiece "Big Mommas House"
I’d love to see you review Kids (1995)
This is the first review of this movie that I actually felt was accurate to what I saw
It's completely misguided to say that she's not evil...The whole turning point of the film is when we find out she was abusing her son by forcing him to wear his shoes on the wrong feet... also how about mentioning the flashback which reveals how she watched him jump out of the window and did nothing about it... Could possibly be worth a mention somewhere in this 20 minute analysis.
Since you asked (in your video), I see this film as a cult film; even though the cult is just two people (for most of the film, anyway). There's a lot else going on, but that's what I took -- I need to see the film again, to be sure. It's similar to the play/film BUG in that one man (the leader) uses whatever he can to control the woman (his "follower") with whom he is connected.
I just saw this movie called American Pop (1981) and it is AMAZING. I wonder if you have already seen it
Antichrist is a book written by Nietzsche, and, as I understand, Lars von Trier read it while he was going through a deep state of depression. It's been son many years since I read that book and watched his movie (I disliked them both despite some brilliant passages), but it was clear to me at the time that Lars titled his movie Antichrist as a homage to Nietzsche and his ouvre, for there is no clear parallelism between both pieces of work.
So there's no Antichrist in the movie; it's not a physical entity nor an idea, just von Trier trying to get his shit together in a full length film.
Have you ever considered reviewing Salo? It's a disgusting film, but it is also profound statement about evil, and it's visually beautiful too
I’m dying on knowing your books title collection ❤️
Silly question, but I've always been kind of curious - why do you do your videos sitting on the floor? It doesn't bother me, mind you - I'm just kind of curious why you choose that location?
I dunno. I just like sitting on the ground more.
@@deepfocuslens Fair enough. btw I love that you often bust out reviews of non-current films, like this - mixing it up with current releases. I also like your commentary topic videos, like favorite scores, can "bad" people make good art, etc. You provide interesting content :)
you should review Dogville, seen it last night
Firstly I would like to say that I really enjoy your content (Hey everybody), but maybe I read this film completely wrong but I thought it was about witches and witchcraft.
I think what separates Von Trier from other filmmakers who delve into very macabre and bleak subject matter is he is a truly miserable and pessimistic human being, and thus he is unencumbered by any sort of obligation to soften the blow for the audience.
Maybe I’m crazy, okay probably, but describing something as supersaturated, washed-out, AND sterile is saying it has three different competing aesthetics. Is that what you’re trying to say?
Is it possible to watch this movie somewhere for free? Want to watch this so bad!
it's been years since i've watched this, but i remember being disgusted and bored at the same time. i've watched several of von trier's films, trying to connect with what he's saying, but i just can't, though i do find particular sequences beautiful/moving/hypnotizing. i just feel like he hates the audience.
Can you review Dogville?
great insight! thanks for uploading
I love your interpretation!
Could you do Donnie darko at some point?
You gave me Radiohead. Thank you.
This is a great review!
Thank you, very good review.
God/Jesus/Christianty is all about charity - the Devil/Satan/Antichrist is about selfishness (see below)
hey maggie. fancy a threeway?
Will you review Martyrs 2008?
don't laugh at the beginning it's the only good part of the movie
I really enjoyed his film The House That Jack Built so I rented this film Antichrist and it was HORRIBLE. I don't recommend anyone see it. The film is garbage.
the like count is 666...
This film is horrible.
Amazing
Never watch this movie 🙏🙏🙏
One of the worst movies I ever saw. A complete waste of my time.
Did you steal this review from a college University e-Book textbook?
You’re a beautiful young lady! Subbed!😀
♡♡♡♡♡
i love you