Nonetheless, the film is still vintage self-indulgent Von Trier. For example, he continues to favour a technique he utilized in Antichrist of having shots slowed down to an absolute snail’s place, so slow that it takes, for example, a character 30 seconds to take a single step. And while these moments are gorgeous to look at (despite all else this is one of the most visually stunning films of the year) I fail to see what purpose they serve beyond mere aesthetics.
Regardless of the controversy he draws, Von Trier always manages to get a great cast of actors to act out his strange ideas. Here we have Kirsten Dunst, Charlotte Gainsbourg (reteaming with the director after Antichrist), Alexander Skarsgård, Stellan Skarsgård (who are father and son), Kiefer Sutherland, Charlotte Rampling, and John Hurt. All performances are fantastic but it’s Dunst who gets all the heavy-lifting to do, and she was aptly awarded for her brilliant performance with the Best Actress award at Cannes. If you thought being a damsel in distress for Peter Parker was all she could do, think again.
In the end I can’t say I liked Melancholia. It’s more interesting than anything else for me, a piece to be admired from a technical standpoint. And overall I don’t think it adds up to as much as Von Trier maybe thinks it does, a case of being less than the sum of its parts. Von Trier is still as decadent as ever, perhaps even more so because he spends less time trying to annoy his audience and more time wallowing in his various trademarks. But hey, I didn’t come away from this one seething - considering how much I dislike Von Trier, that’s definitely a step in the right direction.
.jpg?t=20130517094513)
Article comments
1 - babamaal
What a pointless review. Don't waste your life. Next time, see a movie that you feel you have something to say about.
2 - Zan
If what the critics are showing in their reviews, it seems like Von Trier has been somewhat distracted in his attempts to force his strange views and ideas down the audiences throats and at least making an attempt at letting the film evolve and grow on its own.Will be seeing this very soon (busy, busy).Once again Ross thanks for taking the time to give us your insight into this controversial directors work.
3 - Dansker
Actually most reviews seem to have been fairly positive, but then on the whole they've attempted to decode and interpret the images and style, rather than just throw their hands in the air and give up. If Mr Miller had tried to do the same, then this piece would have come closer to perhaps being an actual review. Having opinions, even biases, is one thing; filtering everything about new things through your existing hatred of old things is best left to the Daily Mail.
4 - Ross Miller
Guys, I didn't write this review in the same way and with the same aim as I usually do. I thought why be coy about my feelings towards Von Trier? Tried to be up front and honest about my feelings towards him and his movie. It wasn't my aim to decode and interpret the images, just wanted to give my raw honest feelings about it.
5 - Ross Miller
@Mishell,
Thanks for the link, nice review. I agree on the visual beauty of the film and how its meticulously crafted, it didn't resonate with me however. Though it's good we can all look at the same film and see different things, like and dislike the exact same piece - the most beautiful thing about film.
6 - Dansker
Mr Miller, I was going to say that that's fair enough - although if you call a piece a review rather than a essay or a rant then you might also have some obligation towards a reader looking for a bigger picture than just your personal reaction. Being able to combine the objective and the subjective is what separates the men from the boys.
But then I realized that you called me a troll on twitter, which since your piece is almost entirely a bunch of ad hominem insults and characterizations of Lars von Trier based on no supporting evidence, suggests that you don't understand what trolling means either. So I'll just wish you good luck with the new Roman Polanski.
7 - Ross Miller
@Dansker,
I don't usually let bias towards a filmmaker creep into my reviews but as I said, I wanted to give my raw and honest reaction to it and what I think of Von Trier in general. If that didn't come across I apologise.
Also, I meant no offence to you or anyone else with the Tweet(s).It might have come across wrong in plain text. If you don't like my review fair enough. I appreciate you taking the time out to read it and comment anyway.
Again no offense intended.
8 - Stevan
Dear 13 year old, Von Trier is obviously too hard for your aesthetic sense and thinking. Change ocupation, travel to planet Melancholia and...
9 - Zan
I kinda get from a lot of comments on here about Ross's review that most people really don't have a lot to say about the film themselves (if they did they would have written a review themselves !!)and would rather pick away at an established writer's written word. Maybe it's the Von Trier Fan Club or something.Can please many people but there is always a few who are never pleased.
As for Stevan's post( NOTE :comment policy).