'Antichrist' - High-Def Digest Review

[paaron46]

Never heard of Enter the Void.

Nah, I have a pretty strong mind. ;-)

It's a Gasper Noe film. Right up your alley I think.

[cheez avenger]

It's a Gasper Noe film. Right up your alley I think.

Ah, now I remember Enter the Void. Irreversible was very hardcore as well.

[AndersT2]

Lars Von Trier is the only film maker I truly hate. He alone completely ruined the Danish film industri with his Dogme rules.

It there one thing you should not have when one is telling a story, is a set of rules to complie to. Any restrictions on how to tell a story is a very bad thing. I know "Antichrist" isn't a Dogme movie. Downloaded it to see what the fuss was about.

Uwe Boll makes entertaining shit, Lars Von Trier makes shit. Even get good actors to act really bad. And critics loves it because it's called art. And critics are supposed to like arty movies. If they don't like the movie, they force out a good review just not to be looked down on by other critics.

[CaptainCanuck]

Lars Von Trier is the only film maker I truly hate. He alone completely ruined the Danish film industri with his Dogme rules.

It there one thing you should not have when one is telling a story, is a set of rules to complie to. Any restrictions on how to tell a story is a very bad thing. I know "Antichrist" isn't a Dogme movie. Downloaded it to see what the fuss was about.

Uwe Boll makes entertaining shit, Lars Von Trier makes shit. Even get good actors to act really bad. And critics loves it because it's called art. And critics are supposed to like arty movies. If they don't like the movie, they force out a good review just not to be looked down on by other critics.

The best thing he ever did was Kingdom Hospital .Great films. Everything else i've seen of his i disliked.
Dogville was especially bad. It was sposed to be innovative and as far as the concept behind it went it was but the story was very poor and unbelievable.

[Jester217300]

It was sposed to be innovative and as far as the concept behind it went it was but the story was very poor and unbelievable.

You're kidding... you bought the way the story was presented but didn't like the story itself? You need much more suspension of disbelief for the presentation of the film. If you can get that far I'd think you'd be able to enjoy it.

[CaptainCanuck]

You're kidding... you bought the way the story was presented but didn't like the story itself? You need much more suspension of disbelief for the presentation of the film. If you can get that far I'd think you'd be able to enjoy it.

The way they did it was totally original . It was like a live play . The story was silly though with her staying in the town and allowing herself to be punished.

[Jester217300]

The way they did it was totally original . It was like a live play . The story was silly though with her staying in the town and allowing herself to be punished.

It's been a long time, forgive me if my memory isn't spot on, but isn't she thankful to the town as a whole for letting her hide out and accepting her? That would be the start of the movie, I guess. Then we see how everyone manipulates and takes advantage of her one by one. It's a slow progression and those moments have to supersede her loyalty to the town as a whole. It isn't until she realizes that the personal injustices outweigh the communal good that she

Spoiler:

kills the fuckers.

For me it's a great character study, but I guess you have to accept her initial bond with the town as a community (not individually) for it to be effective.

[eppis1@sbcglobal.net]

Interesting that Drew considers "Don't Look Now" as an all time favorite. I loved that film too. I wonder if he ever saw "Images" by Robert Altman? Another interesting and dark spirited 70's film. By the way, when writing about the Brit Journalist, did he mean "posterity" and not "prosperity?"

[hojusimpson]

By the way, when writing about the Brit Journalist, did he mean "posterity" and not "prosperity?"

I mentioned that here (Post #7) before the thread moved away from this specific film and into uncharted territory!

Just kidding -- I've discovered some wonderful movies based on the organic nature of these forums and the way discussions have moved.

[TripleHBK]

Sorry to bring up a dead thread of nearly one year, but I had a simple question for the Criterion fans/collectors out there. Why was this release not released with the typical Cardboard slip cover? I'm not the biggest Criterion fan out there, but from all the films I've browsed, (admittedly only within the past 3 years and all on Blu Ray) Anti-Christ is the only one released without the typical outer shell packaging. Anyone know why that is?

[ubsman]

Sorry to bring up a dead thread of nearly one year, but I had a simple question for the Criterion fans/collectors out there. Why was this release not released with the typical Cardboard slip cover? I'm not the biggest Criterion fan out there, but from all the films I've browsed, (admittedly only within the past 3 years and all on Blu Ray) Anti-Christ is the only one released without the typical outer shell packaging. Anyone know why that is?

Most Criterions come in a clear plastic case without slip cover.

[TripleHBK]

Yeah I actually just read that the difference with Criterion's now is that most multi-disk releases, or those with exceptionally in depth companion notes come ij digi-pack packaging (the kind with the outer slip box) where as single disk releases, or those without any companion notes come in the clear cases. Thanks for the info though!