Review: "The Nymphomaniac - Part 2"

Director: Lars von Trier
Runtime: 118 minutes

By the time Part 2 of The Nymphomaniac comes to its bleakly humorous conclusion, one thing has become clear: despite the split release of Parts 1 and 2, this is truly one film. Von Trier doesn't bother with set up or introduction at the start of Part 2, which only further cements the idea that it should have, somehow, been released as a single 4 hour film. Taken as separate entities, however, it's clear that Part 2 is where The Nymphomaniac really comes together. With Charlotte Gainsbourg finally doing more than narrating, The Nymphomaniac gets a whole new life, and comes closest to achieving the sort of epic sexual saga that von Trier was striving towards.

This is, in large part, due to Part 2's descent into much darker territory. This was first hinted at in the final shot of Part 1, when young Joe (Stacy Martin) loses all sexual sensation. From this point on, we see Joe transform not only into her older self, but also into a woman caught up in the destructive side of her sexuality. In the confines of young adulthood, Joe was able to experiment without significant consequence. Now a grown woman, she's finally starting to feel the weight of expectations and social mores closing in on her. 

Joe initially wilts, but soon pulls herself together and starts using her sexuality to lash out against what she views as prudish bourgeois morality trying to shame her. Even so, her newfound sexual outlets aren't without their costs. At the start, Joe had a whole world open to exploration. Now she's finally run out of territory, and there's really something at stake for her. It's this significant shift that von Trier handles best in Part 2, and it's the reason why, even in isolation, Part 2 has the heft that Part 1 lacked.

In fairness, part of the credit is simply due to Gainsbourg appearing on screen in the flashbacks. Ms. Martin was quite effective in Part 1, but the disparity between narrator and protagonist proved something of an odd barrier to surmount. With past and present now inhabited by the same woman, The Nymphomaniac becomes a much richer work. Gainsbourg, relegated to passive narration in Part 1, finally has room to actually give life to Joe's journey beyond reciting it. Once again, Gainsbourg's gifts are an ideal match for von Trier's material, even if she never reaches the heights of her performance in Melancholia. 

The supporting cast, meanwhile, remains rather one dimensional, despite the increased number of recognizable faces. Joe leads a lonely life, and the film reflects this by not really delving into the backgrounds of other characters. The lone exception is P (Mia Goth), who Joe unwillingly takes on as a protege after getting involved with a seedy businessman (Willem Dafoe). Though P comes into play in, as Joe describes it, a remarkable coincidence, it nonetheless helps The Nymphomaniac come full circle in a deeply unsettling way. Even when doing her best to care for another life, Joe is still pitted against P in surprising ways. Their relationship is a microcosm of how parts of society treat women, never allowing them to be more than just friends. There must always be competition either in service of men or for the pleasure of men. 

With its noticeable stakes and sense of danger, Part 2 serves as a fitting conclusion to von Trier's would-be opus. Though at times unwieldy in its dialogue, (though less so than in Part 1), Part 2 is where Joe becomes more than someone to follow; she becomes someone to be invested in. After so much build up, Part 2 is where The Nymphomaniac feels more in tune with its characters than with its concepts and ideas. Taken as a whole, The Nymphomaniac is certainly a compelling portrait of a woman's sexual journey, but only it Part 2 does that journey fully come to life. 

Grade: B+

Review: "The Nymphomaniac - Part 1"

Director: Lars von Trier
Runtime: 118 minutes

Before the release of Blue Valentine in 2010, the film was caught up in a ratings controversy after being slapped with the dreaded NC-17 marker. The given reason? Footage of Michelle Williams' character receiving and, *gasp* enjoying oral sex (never mind that it's possible to earn a PG-13 with male character receiving fellatio, albeit not too graphically). The film was, thanks to pushing from Harvey Weinstein (see, he is capable of good deeds!), downgraded to an R, thus removing the snickering connotation that the film was somehow pornographic. Sadly, issues of female sexual pleasure remain a thorny issue, often prompting overly sensitive, and sometimes backwards responses despite the leeway granted for men on film.

Now, barely four years later, Danish director Lars Von Trier is back with a four hour, two part film that might as well be a massive middle finger to the sorts unable to believe in a woman's capability for independent sexual pleasure. Premiering in a staggered format (a VOD release, followed within weeks by a limited theatrical run), only the first half of The Nymphomaniac is currently available in the United States. Though I suspect it might be difficult to fully assess the film without seeing both halves, this review will try its best to tackle Part 1 as its own entity (much in the vein of the separately released volumes of Tarantino's Kill Bill). 

Rarely one to coddle audiences with style or content, Von Trier's latest begins with a near silent montage of falling rain and snow, before a blaring grunge rock track tears through the soundscape. Von Trier is known for using cinematic techniques to put the viewer ever so slightly on edge (ie: the constant jump cuts in Dogville), and Nymphomaniac wastes no time in announcing that it will be no different. Whether the techniques work in service of the story is another matter, one that is harder to assess without the full film available. 

What is available is the progressively intriguing, albeit slightly stodgy, tale of Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg, in her third von Trier film), as related to Seligman (Stellan Skarsgard), the man who finds her beaten and unconscious in the street. Where Joe's life is built around only one pursuit, Seligman's is filled with many (fly fishing, poetry, history, etc...). As such, he takes interest in hearing Joe's story, and spends much of Part 1 commenting on the literal and metaphorical parallels between Joe's life and his own interests. 

It's a clever idea, even when von Trier's screenplay stumbles. Seligman's comparisons, more analytical and flowery than Joe's recounting, contain interesting references, yet some of von Trier's dialogue is a bit too stiff, and too academic. This is only reinforced by the grungy look of the whole production, keeping in line with the director's tendency towards minimalism in terms of design and visual variety. Thankfully Mr. Skarsgard, another frequent von Trier collaborator, is talented enough to soften the blow of some of the more stilted passages. 

Gainsbourg, on the other hand, is set aside, despite being the primary storyteller. Part 1 is concerned with Joe as a young adult (played by Stacy Martin), which means that Gainsbourg spends a lot of time merely narrating. As Melancholia and Antichrist showcased, the actress is more than up to the task. That's why it's frustrating to see the actress sidelined in a film that is all about her character. Martin is effective enough, but knowing that we'll eventually get to see Gainsbourg on screen in the flashbacks makes her part of the story feel more like a necessary hurdle to overcome. 

The supporting ensemble, meanwhile, are mostly adequate, with a few exceptions. Christian Slater gets the job done as Joe's caring father, while Connie Nielsen silently glowers as his distant wife. Joe's never-ending parade of lovers (clients?), are played mostly by unknowns, which is for the best. It's her story, after all, and focusing too heavily on the men would distract from the central, female journey. Unfortunately, the one lover (so far) played by a name is Jerome, who has the misfortune of being inhabited by Shia LaBeouf. While not a disastrous performance, LaBeouf's work lacks the spark or magnetism required, seeing as Jerome is something of an object of fascination for Joe. 

On the other hand, Uma Thurman nearly steals the whole movie as the abandoned wife of one of Joe's clients. Thurman's screen time likely amounts to less than 10 minutes, but she adds a much needed jolt to the proceedings, which at the point have started to drag a little. With Gainsbourg and Skarsgard increasingly removed as Part 1 progresses, it's not too surprising that Thurman is able to swoop in and run away with the show. The worst part of the performance is that it's so brief, and that the actress is unlikely to reappear in Part 2 (which arrives April). 

The Thurman sequence aside, Part 1's strongest moments tend to come from the scenes detailing Joe's methods and ideas about sex and love. Despite her love of an act of pleasure, her interests stem from a more detached view. Sometimes she uses it to hurt men, other times to trick or manipulate them. It's underscored with von Trier's offbeat, dark humor, which keeps the whole enterprise from drowning in pretension (in some cases just barely). The Nymphomaniac's script does need a bit of smoothing out, but the parts that work instill hope that Part 2 will be richer and more emotionally involving. Von Trier also deserves credit for turning down the shock value elements. 

Rather than sensationalize female pleasure, he captures it as something totally natural, which is probably Part 1's biggest triumph. All that remains to be seen is if he can better synthesize his academic and thematic ideas with his storytelling. That's what will ultimately make or break this sex-driven tale as it continues to be both mundane and bold with startling ease. At last, Denmark's enfant terrible is finally starting to grow up.

Grade: B

Review: "Melancholia"

Lars von Trier, ever a controversy magnet, attracted quite a bit of attention for his remarks about understanding Hitler at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival. This controversy, which ended with the Danish director being ejected from the festival, almost overshadowed his latest film, which managed to pick up a Best Actress prize for star Kirsten Dunst. Yet for all of the attention given to Mr. Von Trier's uncomfortable press conference, and to his previous film Antichrist, the craziness, surprisingly, ends there. Von Trier's latest effort, Melancholia, is actually devoid of the usual emotional (or physical) torture the director is known for inflicting upon audiences.

After a gorgeous prologue filled with slow-motion images, culminating in the earth colliding with a larger planet, the film settles into the story proper. Split into two chapters, the first focuses on Justine (Dunst), on the day of her wedding. As the the wedding reception drags on into the night, Justine begins to act increasingly inconsistent, much to the frustration of those around her, namely her sister Claire (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and brother-in-law John (Kiefer Sutherland). But enough about that, let's talk about the end of the world. Sorry, was that an awkward transition? Well, prepare yourself, because the film's movement between chapters isn't much better. At the end of the day, Melancholia is something of an art house disaster movie, only with little emphasis on the disaster. As is turns out, a planet (bluntly named Melancholia), is due to pass by earth. Claire is worried that the planet with collide, even though John tells her not to worry.

And if it sounds like the two halves of the movie don't seem to match up on paper, they don't fare any better on screen. Chapter One honestly feels like it needs to go off and become its own complete, separate story, and it drags when compared to the more anxiety-ridden Chapter Two. Although maybe it's for the best that Chapter One is only half of a film, because I don't think I'd want to sit through an entire feature's worth of it. Littered with interesting angles to explore, the film instead chooses to introduce boring subplots and inane scenes that go nowhere (if you can find something of worth in the scene where Justine urinates on a golf course, please let me know...). Instead of exploring the relationship between Justine and her bile-spewing, marriage-hating mother (Charlotte Rampling), or really examining why Justine starts to become so bizarre, we have to endure a subplot involving Jack (Stellan Skarsgaard), Justine's new boss. To be brief, it's stupid. And as beautiful as the film often is, technical aspects sometimes falter. The constant use of handheld camera work fails to add to the overall effect. And if you're a stickler when it comes to the 180 degree rule, you'll have a heart attack when you see how von Trier shoots and edits the conversations together.

Thankfully, Melancholia ends with its stronger half. As the film's perspective orients itself around Claire, and the story actually focuses on the titular planet, the film becomes less frustrating, and more engaging. In large part, this is due to von Trier's significantly better writing for the role of Claire. Justine is meant to be all-over-the-place, but unfortunately the script's treatment of her is equally scatter-shot. It's not just that Claire is a showier part that requires more obvious emoting. Quite simply, Gainsbourg blows her co-star clear out of the water. Claire's conflict may be a simple one, but in the hands of Ms. Gainsbourg, it comes to life with consistency and conviction. Faring much better in her second go-round with von Trier, it's Gainsbourg, not Dunst, whose performance deserves to be talked about (and possibly awarded).

And by finally focusing on the end of the world scenario von Trier is obviously eager to get to, Melancholia finally develops a sense of purpose. Whereas Chapter One has Justine urinating on a golf course and some shots of space that look like rejects from The Tree of Life, Chapter Two shows us how the small group of characters react to the oncoming planet. There's fear, doubt, confusion, and anger, all amid a simple-yet-intriguing sci-fi premise. And, barring some awfully strange and strangely awful dialogue (the child actor has terrible lines), it all fits together rather well. Melancholia may be as ignorant of science and physics as a Michael Bay blockbuster, but at least here, there's something of substance to distract you and aid in the suspension of disbelief. A scene where Jack tries to calm down Claire as she has trouble breathing winds up being full of understated suspense and intensity, even though it only lasts a short while. And even when we know how the story is going to end, how it has to end, the fact that von Trier has given us a limited range of characters to spend time with, rather than covering a huge ensemble, makes the sense of impending doom that much more earned. In, say, 2012, when we see Los Angeles fall to ruin, countless lives are lost amid overblown spectacle. Melancholia contains no explosions (barring the impact of the planetary collision), yet works on a much higher level as an end of the world story.

To a point, that is. Whatever the strengths of Chapter Two, there are still residual flaws that creep in from Chapter One. Justine may become a supporting character, but the messiness of the writing hangs over the role (and Dunst's performance) for the film's entire run. What von Trier has in mind for her never feels as focused and concrete as it should. Is her mental state somehow tied to the planet? Where does her hatred of life on earth come from? Were her role designed with greater purpose, these questions would intrigue, but as it stands, they perplex and annoy, to the point that you'll likely give up on figuring them out because you won't care, no matter how many times the lovely prelude from Wagner's Tristan & Isolde is used as soundtrack. For as many strengths as Melancholia has, it is also weighed down by errors in writing, whether in stiff dialogue or clumsy handling of themes and symbolism. So while Melancholia may stand above other end of the world flicks for its dedication to its characters, too often that dedication is inconsistent or shallow, rendering von Trier's latest equal parts compelling and tedious.

Grade: B-/C+

Cannes Review Round-up: "Melancholia"

I wish could do more of these review round-ups, but with so many films debuting (and well, since I'm not there) keeping tabs on the reception of every film in (and out of) competition throws me all over the place. Still, there are those that I'm determined to keep up with, one of which debuted this morning. Melancholia comes from love-him-or-want-to-kill-him director Lars von Trier, and mixes basic sci-fi elements (a planet colliding with earth) with dysfunctional family drama. While guaranteed to be less out there than Antichrist, part of me still expected nothing short of outrage over something in von Trier's latest. Apparently that's not the case, for while some label Melancholia emotionally draining, nothing so far indicates anything hugely sensationalist about it, which only intrigues me more:
The Hollywood Reporter - Todd McCarthy: (N/A) "...this contemplation of the planet's demise predictably provides not an ounce of comfort or redemption, nor does it offer characters or ideas with which to meaningfully engage..."

indieWire - Eric Kohn: (A) "Melanholia is supremely operatic, enlivened by its cosmic sensibility, and yet amazingly rendered on an intimate scale."

The Telegraph - Sukhdev Sandhu: (5/5 stars) "It takes a baffling, almost bone-headed premise...and from it creates a mesmerizing, visually gorgeous and often-moving alloy of family drama, philosophical meditation, and anti-golfing tract."

Movie Line - Stephanie Zacharek: (N/A) "The actresses' performances intertwine beautifully, like twin climbing vines vying for the attention of the sun."

Rope of Silicon - Brad Brevet: (C+) "It's a melancholy, sad sack kind of feature and what I perceived to be von Trier's boredom with it hit me quite hard."

The Film Stage - Raffi Asdourian: (A) "...the end result of Melancholia [is] a powerful statement on the futility of our lives as we try to escape our own inevitable fate."

Digital Spy - Mayer Nissim: (5/5 stars) "It's visually stunning from beginning to end, with the opening and closing moments in particular being (quite literally) breathtaking."

FirstShowing.net - Alex Billington: (7/10) "[Von Trier] starts with a big idea, then just lets it slowly trickle out for 130 minutes, ending at the moment everyone is expecting, but without having said much throughout."

Time Out London - Dave Calhoun: (2/5 stars) "Melancholia isn't a provocative or confrontational film, but it's too often a dull one."

Additional Comments: The film's opening and closing sequences are given unanimous praise for their spacey beauty and stylized destruction. The performances, however, are usually treated with mild compliments, some of which border on indifference. Consensus seems to be that none of von Trier's cast will be anywhere in the running for acting prizes at Cannes. Finally, the cinematography earns across-the-board raves.

Cannes Verdict: Though strikingly beautiful, von Trier's take on the end of the world sometimes fails to make much of an impact, despite many moments of visual and emotional power.

Trailer for "Melancholia" (Lars von Trier's end of the world drama)

After promising no more happy endings in his films (because Breaking the Waves, Dancer in the Dark, and Antichrist were all so uplifting), Lars von Trier's latest film takes us to the end of time...literally. Melancholia, which originally was set to star Penelope Cruz, if you can't quite tell from the trailer, begins with a planet colliding with Earth, before it jumps back and looks at the relationship of two sisters (Charlotte Gainsbourg and Kristen Dunst). Sci-fi elements aside, this looks surprisingly normal for von Trier, especially when compared to the psycho-freak outs of Antichrist or the stripped-down-to-nothing approach of Dogville. The performances of the lead actresses certainly look impressive, though, and maybe by returning to more of his dogme 95 roots, von Trier will be able to give art house audiences something less, well, insane. That would be a nice change of pace.

Penelope Cruz seeking to join Von Trier's "Melancholia"???

This week is just full of interesting cast new; and it's only Tuesday! Von Trier is one interesting (read: disturbing) director and I'd love to see Cruz branch out by working with him (not that I don't love it when she works with Almodovar, but that relationship can't last forever, right?). Von Trier has a way with his actors, and if his writing is more on the level of than Dancer in the Dark than Antichrist, Cruz could finally have a great all-English performance (I still haven't seen Elegy, so I can't comment on that one).

Source: FirstShowing.net

It looks like the lovely Penélope Cruz wants a bit of time in the controversial von Trier spotlight after seeing Charlotte Gainsbourg steal her thunder in Cannes last year (Gainsbourg won the Best Actress award, Cruz did not). I just received a news tip from a Swiss reader who runs the site Cineman.ch. He was informing me that, somewhere in Germany, it was just announced that German director Lars von Trier cast Penélope Cruz is his next upcoming film called Melancholia. On their website, though, I can't find any sourcing details at all. While I do trust them, I need confirmation before I can call this anything other than a rumor.

Melancholia was first announced last year. It's described as a "psychological drama-cum-disaster movie" about an enormous planet that looms threateningly close to Earth - but it's not an alien invasion movie. A translation of the article on Cineman.ch reveals that, remarkably, von Trier made this announcement right now because he wants to be able to have this film ready by Cannes. I'm not sure if he means this year or next, but damn, he better get to work. Then again, if it's another one or two-man show (like Antichrist), it would only take a few weeks to shoot. But we don't know anything about Melancholia, so it's hard to tell.

If this does turn out to be true, it will be quite interesting (to say the least) to see von Trier work with Cruz. So does this mean he'll make Cruz play a sex-addicted woman who ends up mutilating herself? Because if so, I might like to see that. I'm half-kidding, but the article does say that Cruz' role in this should be "edgy" (or "tranchant" in French). We will definitely let you know if this casting news is accurate or not - stay tuned!

Read more: http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/02/09/rumor-lars-von-trier-casts-penelope-cruz-in-melancholia/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+firstshowing+%28FirstShowing.net%29#ixzz0f3bsa1dW

Lars von Trier gives hints about his next pyschological torture device...

Source: Slashfilm.com

Lars Von Trier has been doing press over the past week for the US release of Antichrist. (Remotely, as he doesn’t fly, and has never been to the States.) But it wasn’t until today that he revealed the name and nature of his next project. Planet Melancholia is said to be a ‘psychological disaster film’, which he will write and direct. Hm. Psychological disaster? Sounds like Antichrist, no? But this one has a sci-fi bent, and a couple other interesting things about it.

There’s the possibility that the film is actually just called Melancholia, which is how Variety is currently listing it. The trade says the title is illustrated in their press release by ‘an enourmous planet…that looms threateningly close to Earth.” THR says that Von Trier is “moving into Roland Emmerich territory” with Planet Melancholia, but also calls Antichrist an “art house mash up of the slasher horror genre,” so I’m not sure I trust the Emmerich description.

More intriguing is the note from producer Peter Aalbaek Jensen, who said the film will shoot next summer in Germany and Sweden, and feature “a mix of spectacular, cinematic imagery with Dogme-style handheld camerawork.” Jensen also said the film, which has reportedly come together very quickly, would be “romantic, in a Lord Byron sort of way.” The sci-fi intimations are slight, so I’m curious to hear more about that angle, if indeed it is significant. Jensen says the film does not involve an alien invasion, so there’s that. Wonder if this one will get a video game, too?

Unfortunately, we don’t know any more than this. We might get a few more details as the director does more Antichrist promotion, but I expect we’ll have to wait a few more months for anything significant.

As for Lars Von Trier, there was only one comment: “No more happy endings!” Be afraid