Godawful melodramatic abuse of the recurring Van Trier humorless sweet gull/idiot (or Lillian Gish, per Roger Ebert) archetype, AGAIN!
The production numbers are visually interesting, like BREAKING THE WAVES chapter headings, which underscores the absurdity of Van Trier, whose talent is strictly decorative, aiming for plain indecorous truth? At LEAST 60 minutes overlong? Ms. Deneuve is hilariously miscast as a Frenchly American working wench!!! Bjork IS Gishy enough, or TOO Gishy, &/but modern rural/suburban industrial American scene/milieu is so gravely misunderstood (or dishonestly portrayed?) that one must be a stone artsfop to even consider suspension of eyerolling?
Even the sappiest Frank Capra movie (LOST HORIZON?) is less risibly romantic than ANY Van Trier film? DANCER IN THE DARK rings heavily false, saccharine jejune, politically simpleton, often just implausibly maudlin/grim? Which suggests the real trouble with this kind of art or worldview? Minus genuine humor plus sufficient empathy for others to bother to learn/depict their peculiar complexities, what? I dunno. Crippling inexorable inanity? Adolescent tragic drivel? Compassionate conservatism?
Movie fable/allegory is not & need not be dead, but spouting doctrinaire stylistic dogma implies paying more attention to the harsh (& sometimes funny?) facts/details of the world outside?
The production numbers are visually interesting, like BREAKING THE WAVES chapter headings, which underscores the absurdity of Van Trier, whose talent is strictly decorative, aiming for plain indecorous truth? At LEAST 60 minutes overlong? Ms. Deneuve is hilariously miscast as a Frenchly American working wench!!! Bjork IS Gishy enough, or TOO Gishy, &/but modern rural/suburban industrial American scene/milieu is so gravely misunderstood (or dishonestly portrayed?) that one must be a stone artsfop to even consider suspension of eyerolling?
Even the sappiest Frank Capra movie (LOST HORIZON?) is less risibly romantic than ANY Van Trier film? DANCER IN THE DARK rings heavily false, saccharine jejune, politically simpleton, often just implausibly maudlin/grim? Which suggests the real trouble with this kind of art or worldview? Minus genuine humor plus sufficient empathy for others to bother to learn/depict their peculiar complexities, what? I dunno. Crippling inexorable inanity? Adolescent tragic drivel? Compassionate conservatism?
Movie fable/allegory is not & need not be dead, but spouting doctrinaire stylistic dogma implies paying more attention to the harsh (& sometimes funny?) facts/details of the world outside?
Tell Your Friends