A Proper "Alien" Resurrection

This is a wonderful analysis of the production design involved in Ridley Scott's original Alien, the best of the series.  http://www.theauteurs.com/notebook/posts/831

Werner Herzog is a Badass Part 2

Only Herzog could diss Abel Ferrara by remaking Bad Lieutenant without seeing the original and get away with it.

Photo from theauteurs.com

The Complete Guide to the Future

The Complete Guide to the Future from Everything Is Terrible on Vimeo.
www.everythingisterrible.com

Lars Von Trier's "Antichrist"

I just saw Antichrist the other day after reading about it for several months.  These are my early reactions:

John Waters once called Gaspar Noe's Irreversible "The worst date movie in the history of cinema, if this is the first date, you will never get laid."  Due to its brutally violent and sexually explicit content,  Antichrist should merit similar consideration, and I think most people who have seen it will agree.  While we can agree what Antichrist isn't, it will be tough to find common ground on what it is.  Here are my thoughts:

Synopsis:

The plot of Antichrist revolves around a psychologist/therapist and his wife ("He" and "She") played by Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg, respectively.  Following the accidental death of their toddler son, who falls out of a window while the two are making love, She descends into a brutal spiral of guilt and depression.  Feeling that her current therapy is doing little to no good, He decides to treat his wife on his own and toss out her medication.  He decides that She needs to confront her fears directly through "exposure" therapy and after She reveals the source of her fears to be "Eden," their cabin in the woods, they embark on their journey.  Needless to say, things do not work out well for the two of them.  This is, after all, a Lars Von Trier film and he is not the type of director to dole out happy endings in his work.  After a series of bizarre natural incidents and moments of shocking discovery, the film reaches a brutally violent conclusion and Von Trier's camera captures every act in graphic detail.  If you have read anything about this film, you probably know what I am referring to, so there's no need for me to recount them here.  And, I would hate so spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the film yet.

Cinematography:

Antichrist was filmed digitally with RED One cameras and makes use of several computer effects to create an extraordinary tone for the film, reminiscent of Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker or The Mirror and some scenes have the exact color palette as those two works.

One of the more effective uses of digital manipulation was the way in which the edges of the frame seemed to warp and distort, as if it were caused by the wind.  It also gave the illusion that the woods were somehow breathing, which is very disconcerting.  The black and white sequences, "Prologue" and "Epilogue," are simply beautiful; making use of slow motion and a haunting score by Handel to set the tone.  These sequences are masterfully executed.

But What Does it Mean?

Much of Antichrist's coverage in the press has focused on the theme of misogyny, accusing Lars Von Trier of having a neanderthal view toward women.  Others believe that the director is simply having fun with the audience by subjecting them to extreme imagery without offering a redeeming message.  A superficial viewing of his latest film would seem to bear this out, but that is neither a perceptive nor even a very interesting take on the film.  I believe what we see on the screen is a different message altogether.  Von Trier himself was battling a severe bout of depression while making this film and I believe we see much of his own struggle translated to the screen.  Willem Dafoe's character represents scientific rationality, or the triumph of man over nature.  He is calm and detached where his wife is hysterical and increasingly irrational.  He, this psychologist and man of science, is so enamored of his own gifts, that he commits the ultimate act of hubris and takes on his own wife as a patient, with disastrous consequences.  Here Von Trier successfully inverts the horror movie genre and by the final act we see the cool, calm, and collected male victimized and imprisoned by the hysterical, irrational woman as well as by nature itself.  Gainsbourg's character, by contrast, is in touch with her emotions and rightly terrified by the power of the natural world, recognizing that His conceptions and beliefs are inadequate for dealing with her own personal demons.  For His arrogance in believing he can control Her inner feelings, he will pay an enormous physical and psychological price.

Returning to the charges of misogyny, I believe Von Trier made the conscious choice to provoke exactly this reaction.  By this I mean that he is attacking the contemporary assumption held by many that women are the victims of history, which is undoubtedly true in the majority of cases.  But is it true of all women?  Gainsbourg's character wrote her graduate thesis on "gynocide," or the burning of "witches" in the seventeenth century.  It is implied that through her research she discovers that some of these women were quite possibly "evil" or deserving of their punishment and worse, that she may be one of them herself, which is borne out by subsequent revelations and events in the film.  The idea that some women are capable of evil deeds should be nothing new but unfortunately this is grounds for charges of misogyny by some critics.  Relegating women to the status of universal victimhood is, I think, a very sexist attitude that deserves a counterargument.  I'm inclined to agree with those critics who view this film as a slyly feminist work, but even more so as a reaction against the arrogance of modern medicine and technology and the received wisdom of "universal" liberal values.  As the fox says: "chaos reigns."

Should it be Seen?

Yes, but only if you have an open mind and are not easily disturbed by violent imagery.  Even fans of traditional horror movies or of the "torture porn" genre might be disappointed, despite the extreme nature of the film, because it is deeper than that.  Antichrist is a film that needs to find its own audience, and I have a feeling Lars Von Trier would want nothing less.  Also, the brave performances by Dafoe and Gainsbourg are nothing short of astounding and deserve the highest praise.  Gainsbourg's Best Actress award at Cannes was well-deserved.  Yes, the film should be seen, but it demands more than a passive viewer seeking "thrills and chills" or "entertainment."  You must be prepared to think about Antichrist, because it will stay with you long after you leave the theater.


ANTICHRIST - OFFICIAL US TRAILER from IFC Films on Vimeo.


Screenshots are from (of all places) http://www.celebritywonder.com They have been saved and uploaded separately, rather than be directly linked, due to the nature of that site (meaning I don't want them to be replaced by ads).

Alien 3: Unrequited Vision

Here is a link to a site describing Vincent Ward's concept for Alien3.  Ward had the revolutionary notion of setting the second Alien sequel on a medieval-style monastery satellite made of wood with windmills, wheat fields, and a glassworks, which would have made for some amazing production design.  The plot revolves around the alien creature wreaking havoc among the community of monks who live there who believe it to be a demon of some kind.  The script can be found here.

Wim Wenders: An Attempted Description of an Indescribable Film

Wenders' treatment for Wings of Desire, courtesy of Criterion.

Final Scene from Tarkovsky's "Stalker."