Anti-Christ: Film Review

Finally, a horror movie for the pretentious art-house crowd. I mean normal horror is distasteful and juvenile and it can’t appeal to the high society because it isn’t true art. Well guess what you Andy Warhol loving assholes, now you too can say you enjoy horror because your favorite director of  metaphysical bullshit is back to give you the true horror cinema that you would be too embarassed to share with your ‘Piss Christ’ loving friends before. You say normal horror is for the un-intelligent, well look no further because now you can see a woman cut off her own clit, and you can pretend with your friends that it’s purely symbolic for her cutting pleasure from her life due to grief! Wow isn’t this so DEEP and insightful? How ’bout a girl jacking off a guy until he cums blood? This film really ‘gets’ it right? I mean the slasher in the woods, preying on innocent virgins is vile, but the deer with the dead fawn fetus hanging out of it trancends normal conventions and becomes high-art, correct?

Well fuck that and fuck this movie. Antichrist is another cheery Lars Von Trier film. Apparently, Lars was almost too depressed to make this film, sending away auditioners because he was ‘crying’. Oh poor poor Lars the film director. Too sad to make a movie where a lady drills a hole into a man’s leg to attach a millstone to, after she rams him in the dick with a block of wood. Boo hoo, life is hard. I mean normal people can’t understand the depths of sadness that Lars must have gone through to almost prevent him from making  a movie about nothing and trying to make controversy stand in as art.If only the rest of us could take a lesson from Cashier du Trier we might truly understand what the fuck he’s trying to accomplish with this piece of shit.

I’ll admit that I was quite intrigued when I saw the trailer for this movie. Even the opening of this film is beautiful in it’s stunning black and white. If this film has anything going for it it is the cinematography, which is actually quite stunning. However, the story and the bullshit get in the way. The story is about a man and woman, who, during sex, neglect to see that their child has climbed the windowsill and then falls out. Then Willem Dafoe as ‘He’ (just brilliant Lars) tries to cure She(Charlotte Gainsburg) of her depression by making her go to ‘Eden’ a camp in the woods they used to visit. When they get there, She starts to freak out and say how the ground is burning and blah fucking blah, psychobabble, talking foxes, and ticks.Word was that Lars was going for an idea that ‘what if God didn’t exist, and the devil rained over everything’. Well this hypothesis is total fucking bullshit. What this movie is about and only about is how grief can control your life if you let it. Possibly this stems from Trier’s grief at making really stupid movies. I’m not about to claim that I can’t appreciate shocking scenes or controversy. I’m opposed to censorship in art. However when you use these tactics only in the way to get people to look at your work than it is cheap and shallow. Ask yourself if you really need to put female castration as a metaphore for guilt. Do we need to see it in close-up and with blood spurting out? I don’t think it’s reasonable, when all it stands to accomplish is have idiots argue over ‘What did the clit mean? Is Lars trying to tell us that we are the clit and have to cut ourselves from the shackles of modern society? Does cumming blood mean that the corporations take pleasure from our pain at the risk of eating cheap tainted meat?” and so forth. It’s not like Lars did this for the sake of art. He knew full well by putting this into his movie that people would talk about it and try to read into what isn’t there. Where the Wild Things Are didn’t need bloody semen to teach us a lesson and neither does this movie.

What really cuts my dick off is the fact that the so called ‘art snubs’ give repugnant shit like this the time of day and yet scoff at normal horror. Even though I hate the Saw and Hostel movies, I’m sure these people would rail against them in an attempt to sound culutured whereas they praise a movie like Antichrist for being brave. If any movie i have seen has been torture porn, it is this movie. The characters are constantly fucking each other during the most inappropriate time. She cuts herself right after she masturbates so I can’t think of something that describes that label better than this movie.

If anything good comes from this movie, is that it will be forgotten about quickly and people will stop giving von Trier a pass for this kind of thing. There was no reason for this movie to be made and we don’t like anything about these characters so it’s nothing more than boredom punctuated by genital violence. I’m finished with this review as to talk about it more just pisses me off that I wasted 2 hours more of my life on something as worthless as this. It’s not film, it’s not art, it’s a little crying boy trying to make people cover their eyes in the dark because he thinks he has some kind of finger on the pulse of depression and ‘true horror’. von Trier is the Demon Dave Defalco of pretentious bullshit.

One thing I will leave you with, this movie has dead animals that come to life and do dumb shit like say ‘chaos reigns’. But at the end of the movie it shows He on a hill where people are climbing up and down it. Then for no reason at all we see the deer, fox, and crow with the exact same look as the dead people from Star Wars during the Ewok orgy in the jungle. This was probably the best part of the movie because it made me laugh for a minute, although unintentionaly. Ugh fuck.

I feel pretty, oh so pretty, I feel pretty, and witty, and SAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDD


7 thoughts on “Anti-Christ: Film Review

  1. Stumbled on your blog from another blog…Nice review!

    I didn’t find out the point of the film (what if god didn’t exist, etc.) until much later and I thought that makes for a really neat idea for a film…But then how was this executed so confusingly? Being shocking for the sake of it is one thing but Anti-Christ is another thing completely.
    In short: I think there’s a good movie hidden behind Von Trier’s pretentiousness.

    • Thanks! I agree that it is an interesting concept for a film, but this is not the good vision of that idea. I think it’s just Von Trier trying to be so provoking and it actually feels like he wants you to hate it so he can tell you how wrong you are.

  2. I watched it!

    Over at Moonwolves I said I wasn’t going to bother. Then a lad at work challenged me to watch it; he had, didn’t have a clue what was going on and thought I stood a better chance of giving him some insight. Me? Insight?

    Anyway, I watched it and it’s horrible and unecessary. I think it was about the perplexity of muffins. Or giraffes disguised as Groucho Marx. Definitely 100% one of those two.

    • one of the worst things is that it can, at times, be beautiful to look at, but the content is terrible

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s