I have been sitting here for over an hour trying to think of a way to accurately describe my feelings towards Lars von Trier's controversial film known only as Antichrist. Even as I write this, I still am not sure what to say.
Debuting at the Canines Film Festival, Antichrist was met with a wave of controversy"¦ with good reason. Telling the story of a grieving couple who recently became burdened with the passing of their only son, the film mixes sexual desires with violence and pain. Nothing is left to the imagination, nothing is censored, and as a result, nothing has ever left me feeling so violated, tempered and uncomfortable.
But to an extent, that is what made the film so appetizing. The shock value wears off after the opening scene -a quick immersion into a sexual paradise between a happily married woman and man. The slow motion take on their passionate love affair makes it quite clear just what kind of film you are going to bear witness to (but don't relax-the extent of the graphic brutality will come as a shock during the story's closing moments).
Split into four chapters, Antichrist comes off as a stylistic picture book, one that contains inner emotional struggles and deepening pain and regret. The mother, played by Charlotte Gainsbourg, is longing for a sense of understanding. Her husband, Willem Dafoe, doubles as her psychiatrist, working hard to get to the bottom of her prolonged grieving state.
In an effort to escape the horrid past, he decides to venture to Eden, a place where his wife and son spent ample time together. The decision backfires as her guilt turns to hatred and eventual violence, leading the film down the dark and dreary path of no return.
The final fifteen minutes are what make this film hard to fully recommend. Not only does it provide no answers, but the on-screen violence and sexual abuse make it a sore sight for the eyes and the conscience. It did, however, force me to sit up and pay attention - a pleasant surprise after an emotionally deadening middle section, but to go there in such a way was a creative risk that probably didn't pave way as originally expected.
The fact that the film carries the story of only two characters is remarkable. For some ninety-nine percent of the film, no other actors accompany the screen. The energy required, along with the emotional demands of both characters makes it the most challenging role of each of their careers. Regardless of your thoughts on the film or its unique style, you can't question the creative juices that surface from both the actors and the director.
To this moment, I neither fully understand the title, nor the film's final sequence. Since seeing it, a thousand new questions have entered my mind. In a way, I bask in director Trier's ability to develop his artistic creativity. I applaud both Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg for bearing it all and taking a career risk with such a low budget, confrontational project. It isn't perfect, but for its artistic integrity, I can't help but give it a strong B- grade.
I was told prior to watching the film that a man threw up during its original viewing at Canines - I didn't by it. Now that I have seen it, I would not doubt if that were true. The film has shock value -a lot of nudity, some graphic sex scenes and a large amount of integrated violence. If your mind is okay with that and you are up for seeing a creative story about life, love and loss, don't miss your chance to catch Antichrist. I am not fully recommending the feature, just making you aware of its existence and content so that you can make an educated decision whether or not to see it.
In Austin, Antichrist is currently playing at the Landmark Dobie Theater. Check show times here.
