Here’s the last of our reviews from the 38th Festival du Nouveau Cinema. We’ve saved the best for last, profiling Lars Von Trier’s [insert excessive adjective here] “Antichrist” and Bong Jo-Hoon’s genre exercise, “Mother.”
“Antichrist” — This is our third stab at trying to write a proper review of “Antichrist” (read review one and two from Cannes) and we honestly just don’t know where to start. And that’s exactly both the problem and excitement of Lars von Trier’s underrated psycho-horror picture, a film far more complex than it’s been given credit for to date, but also so absurdly muddled with ideas that it nearly collapses in on itself. By now, even though the film hasn’t yet opened in North America, everyone is familiar with the genital mutilation, talking fox and general outrageousness of the film due to the unprecedented press the film was given after it premiered in Cannes. The film was so contentious that the Ecumenical Jury famously gave the film an “anti-award” branding it as “misogynistic” (more on that in a moment). At the FNC, the buzz on “Antichrist” towered over all the other films, dominating nearly every conversation we heard before and after screenings. Lineups for stand-by tickets to the sold out screenings were as long as the regular ticket holder line. It’s clear that the film, which has already spawned a t-shirt, has now jumped from being seriously considered, to being something of a novelty, a kind of hipster challenge as a film that you have to “dare to see.” And it’s a shame, because “Antichrist” deserves to be discussed thoughtfully and is the kind of challenging, bravura filmmaking that is all too rare in cinemas these days. The film, essentially one of the most grueling therapy sessions ever put to celluloid, allows the filmmaker, who was battling crippling depression while shooting, to plumb the depths of his longtime obsessions – gender, religion and sexuality – with the abandon of someone who has nothing to lose. Indeed, there was a time prior to “Antichrist” when Von Trier was uncertain he would ever make another film and, subconciously or not, he comes out swinging here as if his life depended on it.
“Antichrist” places an unnamed husband and wife in the woods as He (a therapist) tries to help She conquer her grief over the loss of their son. As the film progresses, themes about gynocide (usually it refers to the holocaust of women killed during the witch hunts, and in some feminist circles is claimed as act done to wrest control of science and medicine from women); the nature of humanity and sexual power all come to fore. It’s a great thing that Von Trier’s script is bursting with these kinds of ideas, but he has no idea what to do with them. The result is a film that continually circles around itself, and because of its often shocking nature, the visuals overwhelm the script’s intellect. Frankly, we’re not surprised that some have branded the film as deeply misogynistic, while others proclaim it to be deeply sympathetic to women. The script goes so brazenly off the charts, so often, with characters spouting either brilliant or convoluted (or both) speeches about human nature, healing, pain, fear, sex or whatever else that it’s no surprise that audiences are going to tune it out and just focus on what they see on screen (genital mutilation! Lars hates women! In truth, the events – and revelation – that leads up to it demand a more critical reading). But honestly, none of the readings are right, because we don’t think Von Trier himself even knows.
“Antichrist” – more than any other film before it – is the ultimate art as therapy. This is truly Von Trier at his most personal, working out demons that we believe even he himself probably doesn’t yet know he put on screen. But this a film that demands to be seen by serious cinephiles, not because of its stomach churning violence or stunt penises, but because it’s more often than not strikingly beautiful, deeply moving and rich with challenging ideas we rarely see onscreen. [A-]
“Mother” — Bong Jo-Hoon gained North American audience attention with his monster film “The Host,” which we personally found to be terribly overrated. It was far too campy for our liking, while the political elements were just too simplistic to be taken seriously. Thus, we weren’t holding the highest of expectations walking into “Mother,” and when the film started with the titular character dancing in a field during the opening credits we girded ourselves for disappointment. But once Jo-Hoon gets that brief moment of levity out of the way and gets cracking, “Mother” reveals itself to be a nifty little thriller that would’ve made Hitchcock proud. When her retarded (or just plain stupid it’s never quite made clear) son is arrested for murder, Jo-Hoon’s mother goes to great lengths to prove his innocence. What starts as seemingly a basic procedural becomes something far more sinister, as, just like the greatest of the cinematic psycho-Moms, the mother’s devotion becomes something not to be toyed with. This time around Jo-Hoon keeps the camp mostly at bay, and thankfully doesn’t have any political statements to make, allowing him to weave a very taught and suspenseful mystery, that, as the twists begin to emerge in the second half, becomes extraordinarily involving. If we had any minor complaints, it’s that the film does run a little long, and secondary characters fly in and out of the story as convenience requires but overall, “Mother” is an original, inventive whodunit, with a potent, palpable and unrelenting dash of dread. [B]
“Antichrist” opens up this weekend in limited release in New York and L.A. and will presumably expand from there. “Mother” won’t hit U.S. theaters until March 2010.
