Lars von Trier

[ulicar]

To "glumac" je bilo ironicno, jer ga tako naziva taj tvog renomirani kriticar. Naravno da se odnosi na njegove reziserske uratke.
Ne vidim niti jedan argument. Ne uopcavaj pricu nego mi daj konkretne primjere gdje je to los u pravljenju filmova-
Znas li mi navesti primjer "lupanja gluposti" ili ces samo supljirati?

Meni bi trebalo malo vise vremena nego je na forumu moguce dobiti da tebi licno objasnim zasto su LvT filmovi smece, jer ne kontas osnovne postavke o filmskoj umjetnosti, sto pokazujes sa tvrdnjama da je LvT dobar. Iskreno, malo vise znanja ti ne bi skodilo.

[Faust]

E, vidis, ti da znas ista o filmu, znao bi da su reklame u skupini kratkih i experimentalnih filmova. Historija tih filmova potice jos iz 1920-ih, ali to je tebi jel' malo previse da svaris. U reklamama mozes vidjeti puno vise kvalitetnih filmskih zahvata, nefo sto ces vidjeti i u jednom LvT filmu. Evo, bas smo imali srece gledati Superbowl http://www.superbowl.com/, a jedan od posebnih, sada vec normalnih za ocekivati dogadjaja, je i ocjenjivanje najbolje reklame, koja je mozda jednako vazna kao i sam rezultat utakmice. Ti to naravno sve znas, to je naravno za tebe sve suplja. Ppq, Peter Jackson u svojoj kompaniji pravi reklame, za pivo, eto koliko znas o filmu.

A sto se tice mene i mojih akreditiva glede filma, svi koji me znaju, sada se valjaju od smijeha tvojoj gluposti. Ozbiljno.

Nesto si se uvrijedio? No, da pojasnim: postoje izvrsne reklame, samo ih često ne posmatramo kao film, nego kao propagandu što ona u suštini i jeste - hoće natjerati kupca da kupi proizvod. To znaš, siguran sam.
Dalje, da pojasnim, Peter Jackson nije jedini reditelj koji je pravio reklame i to je općepoznata stvar. No, to što je on, ili neko drugi radio reklamni film, nit govori o reditelju, niti o reklami, a najmanje o Von Trieru.
Zavoravih te pitati prvi put: Je li ti tvoji Danci pitaju: šta je ta Zlatna palma? Gdje se ona dodjeljuje? na Superbowlu?

[ulicar]

Dogville je sjajan film.
Ogoljenost filmske scenografije je skretanje pažnje (naglašavanje) na priču. Emocije izaziva priča, ne vrijeem, radnja, kostimografija,...
Mandrlay, nastavak Dogvillea nisma gledao. Kratko je igrao u Apolu, ali ga još Tropik nije stavio na DVD.

Faust, pa ti si meni sjajan. Hajde sada malo na internet i potrazi sta je to Mis en Scene, u stvari, da ti ja malo pomognem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mise_en_sc%C3%A8ne http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_372a.html http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/h ... -scene.htm, mozda ti bude lakse za skontati zasto je Dogville los film. Boze me sacuvaj glupog li argumenta, to sto je kod njega sve nacrtano kredom je dobro? Da te Bog sacuva. Ovo ja zovem lupanje gluposti, koje samo prepotentni ppq moze lanuti i misliti da je pametan.

[Faust]

Sinak, jesi li ti primijetio da ti je Wikipedia jedini izvor informacija. U koju školu ideš? Koji si razred?

[Hierarchia]

To "glumac" je bilo ironicno, jer ga tako naziva taj tvog renomirani kriticar. Naravno da se odnosi na njegove reziserske uratke.
Ne vidim niti jedan argument. Ne uopcavaj pricu nego mi daj konkretne primjere gdje je to los u pravljenju filmova-
Znas li mi navesti primjer "lupanja gluposti" ili ces samo supljirati?

Meni bi trebalo malo vise vremena nego je na forumu moguce dobiti da tebi licno objasnim zasto su LvT filmovi smece, jer ne kontas osnovne postavke o filmskoj umjetnosti, sto pokazujes sa tvrdnjama da je LvT dobar. Iskreno, malo vise znanja ti ne bi skodilo.

Neko ko s takvom sigurnoscu mjeri znanje ljudi koje uopce ne poznaje nije bas najadekvatniji kandidat za raspravu. Tako da ne zelim ni da slusam tvoje argumente. Mozda je najbolje pojasniti tvojim istomisljenicima jer, kao sto vidim, tesko trpis kritiku i oprecne stavove. Jednoumlje je najveca posast covjeka.
Hvala ipak na savjetu, znanja nikad nije dosta. Samo cu se truditi da ga ne kupim na wikipediji, nije to bas pouzdan izvor informacija. Svako dobro.

[ulicar]

Nesto si se uvrijedio? No, da pojasnim: postoje izvrsne reklame, samo ih često ne posmatramo kao film, nego kao propagandu što ona u suštini i jeste - hoće natjerati kupca da kupi proizvod. To znaš, siguran sam.

Pa Faust, suti Tita ti. Filmovi su pravljeni s politickim, ekonomskim i jos par pozadina, tako da pricanje kako je reklama nesto drugo nego film, jer prodaje sasvim odredjeni proizvod, cisto pokazivanje tvog neznanja.

Sta je "Good night and goog luck" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433383/ ? Nije nista vise nego dvosatna reklama protiv GWB. Jo, stare mi, provala koje ti pises, cudo jedno, poznavalac umjetnosti.

Dalje, da pojasnim, Peter Jackson nije jedini reditelj koji je pravio reklame i to je općepoznata stvar. No, to što je on, ili neko drugi radio reklamni film, nit govori o reditelju, niti o reklami, a najmanje o Von Trieru.

Ti si pomenuo kako su reklame lose i samim tim pokazao svoje nepoznavanje materije, haj sada jos se malo provaljuj.

Zavoravih te pitati prvi put: Je li ti tvoji Danci pitaju: šta je ta Zlatna palma? Gdje se ona dodjeljuje? na Superbowlu?

Hoces to da kazes da je zlatna palma pokazatelj kvalitete? Pa Kusturica je za Zivot je Cudo dobio palmu, a film je vise nego sranje.

[ulicar]

Sinak, jesi li ti primijetio da ti je Wikipedia jedini izvor informacija. U koju školu ideš? Koji si razred?

Jel' to nivo kojim ti raspravljas? Kada ti neko jednostavno izbije sve iz ruku, pokazujuci kako si vrlo jednostavnim rijecnikom prepotentni glupan, onda ces pricati nesto protiv wikipedie? De ti malo otidji, pogledaj te linkove koje sam ti dao i pokusaj skontati zasto je tvoje laprdanje o tome kako mis en scene odvlaci pogled glupost na trecu dimenziju. Ozbiljno, glup si, suti.

[Faust]

Pa Faust, suti Tita ti. Filmovi su pravljeni s politickim, ekonomskim i jos par pozadina, tako da pricanje kako je reklama nesto drugo nego film, jer prodaje sasvim odredjeni proizvod, cisto pokazivanje tvog neznanja.
Sta je "Good night and goog luck" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433383/ ? Nije nista vise nego dvosatna reklama protiv GWB. Jo, stare mi, provala koje ti pises, cudo jedno, poznavalac umjetnosti.

Par pozadina (znači: još dvije pozadine). Onako informativno. Nema koristi ti više odgovarati. Hierarchia je to lijepo objasnila.
No, jedno sam zaključio: Stručnjak si za pronalaženje siteova gdje korisnici sami dopunjuju sadržaj. wikipedia, imdb, ... Sam dovrši niz.

[ulicar]

Neko ko s takvom sigurnoscu mjeri znanje ljudi koje uopce ne poznaje nije bas najadekvatniji kandidat za raspravu. Tako da ne zelim ni da slusam tvoje argumente. Mozda je najbolje pojasniti tvojim istomisljenicima jer, kao sto vidim, tesko trpis kritiku i oprecne stavove. Jednoumlje je najveca posast covjeka.
Hvala ipak na savjetu, znanja nikad nije dosta. Samo cu se truditi da ga ne kupim na wikipediji, nije to bas pouzdan izvor informacija. Svako dobro.

Tvoje znanje je meni vrlo jednostavno za skontati, zato sto pricas svakojake gluposti, a wikipedia je jedna od najboljih pocetnih tacaka koje mozes posjetit, pa da skontas koliko pojma nemas.

[Faust]

Sinak, jesi li ti primijetio da ti je Wikipedia jedini izvor informacija. U koju školu ideš? Koji si razred?

Jel' to nivo kojim ti raspravljas? Kada ti neko jednostavno izbije sve iz ruku, pokazujuci kako si vrlo jednostavnim rijecnikom prepotentni glupan, onda ces pricati nesto protiv wikipedie? De ti malo otidji, pogledaj te linkove koje sam ti dao i pokusaj skontati zasto je tvoje laprdanje o tome kako mis en scene odvlaci pogled glupost na trecu dimenziju. Ozbiljno, glup si, suti.

Ne reče, koji si razred?

[Hierarchia]

Neko ko s takvom sigurnoscu mjeri znanje ljudi koje uopce ne poznaje nije bas najadekvatniji kandidat za raspravu. Tako da ne zelim ni da slusam tvoje argumente. Mozda je najbolje pojasniti tvojim istomisljenicima jer, kao sto vidim, tesko trpis kritiku i oprecne stavove. Jednoumlje je najveca posast covjeka.
Hvala ipak na savjetu, znanja nikad nije dosta. Samo cu se truditi da ga ne kupim na wikipediji, nije to bas pouzdan izvor informacija. Svako dobro.

Tvoje znanje je meni vrlo jednostavno za skontati, zato sto pricas svakojake gluposti, a wikipedia je jedna od najboljih pocetnih tacaka koje mozes posjetit, pa da skontas koliko pojma nemas.

Ok, boss. Ti zato imas zavidan nivo kucnog odgoja. To se tesko moze popraviti.

[ulicar]

Ne reče, koji si razred?

Pa mogu ti biti profesor, vrlo vjerovatno. De ti malo citat' o stvarima o kojima bi da pricas. Bio je ovdje negdje thread sa online kursevima razumijevanja filma, koji sam postavio samo za tebe i tebi slicne "znalce" da malo procitaju o stvarima, prije nego lupe glupost da je mis en scene odvlacenje paznje. Fakat si znalac u 3.14159cku materinu. Glup si, fakat, nemas pojma o stvarima o kojima pricas i sada ces da pricas o necemu drugo? Jel? Interesantno.

[Faust]

Ne reče, koji si razred?

Pa mogu ti biti profesor, vrlo vjerovatno. De ti malo citat' o stvarima o kojima bi da pricas. Bio je ovdje negdje thread sa online kursevima razumijevanja filma, koji sam postavio samo za tebe i tebi slicne "znalce" da malo procitaju o stvarima, prije nego lupe glupost da je mis en scene odvlacenje paznje. Fakat si znalac u 3.14159cku materinu. Glup si, fakat, nemas pojma o stvarima o kojima pricas i sada ces da pricas o necemu drugo? Jel? Interesantno.

Opet, moram pitati, koji si razred?

[en_jackal]

ljudi zar ne vidite da je ovo jedan apsolutni idiot.....

Nego, sjetih se predratnog Sineasta sa Jean - Marc Barr-om iz Evrope na naslovnici i kritikom filma unutra.
Pa me zanima, sjeća li se iko Sineasta?
Zašto ga neko ponovo ne pokrene i ima li danas uopće interesa za takve stvari?
Gdje su R. Šešić, D. Dimitrovski, M. Cvijanović i ostali?
Ko bi to danas mogao pisati o filmu i ko bi to čitao?
Baš me zanima vaše mišljenje.
Ili, da li uopće u BiH danas postoji filmska kritika?

eeeee...da....sineast.......zadnji broj koji ja imam je august 2002.....nisam siguran da je od tada izasao novi broj....
pisao se novi materijal....ali od 2002 nisam procitao nista novo....

rada uskoro dolazi u sa......vodi program indijskog filma u sklopu sarajevske zime. .....nisam siguran da ce ucestvovati u ostalim programima...koliko znam prikazivat ce se malo iranske kinematografije i stari japanci...radujem se ponovnom gledanju mizoguchia, ozua.....

dusko dimitrovski je...koliko znam...u austriji.....

pitanje je da li danas u bih postoji neko ko bi mogao na pravi nacin pisati o filmu....izuzimajuci staru gardu.....ne poznajem dosta mladih ljudi koji su sposobni za takvo nesto...........istina....ne postoji ni publika koja bi ozbiljne tekstove o filmu zeljela....citati......

filmska kritika u bih se svodi na imebcilne pseudokritike mirsada klicica.........citajuci izjave ovog ulicara...izgleda da je i to previse....

[aNTropocentrio]

Ne reče, koji si razred?

Pa mogu ti biti profesor, vrlo vjerovatno. De ti malo citat' o stvarima o kojima bi da pricas. Bio je ovdje negdje thread sa online kursevima razumijevanja filma, koji sam postavio samo za tebe i tebi slicne "znalce" da malo procitaju o stvarima, prije nego lupe glupost da je mis en scene odvlacenje paznje. Fakat si znalac u 3.14159cku materinu. Glup si, fakat, nemas pojma o stvarima o kojima pricas i sada ces da pricas o necemu drugo? Jel? Interesantno.

Pa daj nam onda te tvoje ekspertne argumente koji zagovaraju tvoju tezu! Kani se websajtova, superbowla, Danaca (?!) itd.

PS: Kursevi razumijevanja bilo koje umjetnosti postoje da bi učesnike naučili kako da "šupljiraju" o svom razumijevanju.

[shuriken]

Ulicar:
sta je smece?
ko ne konta?
po cemu su Danci mjerodavniji od drugih da ocjenjuju njegove filmove?
oni se najbolje razumiju u feta sir i Grundfos pumpe!
karikature da ne spominjemo

Odgovori:
1. Filmovi LvT
2. Oni koji kazu da su njegovi filmovi dobri
3. On je danski filmski reziser http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_von_Trier Ako ga oni ne vare, a ne vare, ovo provjereno, mores mislit' onda kako je dobar.

fino si to elaborirao

smece su reklame, pogotovo superbolske, pogotovo ove godine
reklame su samo djelic i to vrlo ogranicen, kratkog i eksperimentalnog filma
i to sto jedna od hiljadu uspije imati i drugu dimenziju, govori o zanru da je u pravilu smece. peter jackson snima reklame? snima i jessica simpson, kakve to sad ima veze sa bilo cime?

da ne raspravljamo o ukusu, to se kroz zivot gradi i mijenja i svaka tebi cast na ukusu tvome, tebi je sigurno dobar. a da ti prihvacas izbor i ukus drugih ljudi ne bi bio tako bezobrazan i imao takav nick.

sta si mislio da ja ne znam da je on Danac? Jesu li jevreji voljeli Isusa? Vole li Madjari Belu Tara? LvT radi svjetske filmove sa univerzalnim temama i svako ima podjednako pravo dati svoj sud o tome. Mislis da nam trebaju Grci objasnit sta je tragedija, da mi to ne znamo?

odrasti, upristoji se, pa ce mozda neko imati i zivaca da te educira i uputi te u paralelne svjetove estetike. do tada sa svojim dancima i svima koji znaju tvoje akreditive uzivaj u reklamama.


offtopic:
ako hocete pogledat reklame sa Superbowla, recimo na yahoo video, onda prije reklama morate pogledati reklamu, a u isto vrijeme se u boxu pored vrti reklama. pravi raj za ljubitelje reklama

[Hierarchia]

ljudi zar ne vidite da je ovo jedan apsolutni idiot.....

Nego, sjetih se predratnog Sineasta sa Jean - Marc Barr-om iz Evrope na naslovnici i kritikom filma unutra.
Pa me zanima, sjeća li se iko Sineasta?
Zašto ga neko ponovo ne pokrene i ima li danas uopće interesa za takve stvari?
Gdje su R. Šešić, D. Dimitrovski, M. Cvijanović i ostali?
Ko bi to danas mogao pisati o filmu i ko bi to čitao?
Baš me zanima vaše mišljenje.
Ili, da li uopće u BiH danas postoji filmska kritika?

eeeee...da....sineast.......zadnji broj koji ja imam je august 2002.....nisam siguran da je od tada izasao novi broj....
pisao se novi materijal....ali od 2002 nisam procitao nista novo....

rada uskoro dolazi u sa......vodi program indijskog filma u sklopu sarajevske zime. .....nisam siguran da ce ucestvovati u ostalim programima...koliko znam prikazivat ce se malo iranske kinematografije i stari japanci...radujem se ponovnom gledanju mizoguchia, ozua.....

dusko dimitrovski je...koliko znam...u austriji.....

pitanje je da li danas u bih postoji neko ko bi mogao na pravi nacin pisati o filmu....izuzimajuci staru gardu.....ne poznajem dosta mladih ljudi koji su sposobni za takvo nesto...........istina....ne postoji ni publika koja bi ozbiljne tekstove o filmu zeljela....citati......

filmska kritika u bih se svodi na imebcilne pseudokritike mirsada klicica.........citajuci izjave ovog ulicara...izgleda da je i to previse....

Kako imati filmsku kritiku ako se svaki pokusaj kritike apriori odbacuje ukoliko nije afirmativan? Ovdje mislim prvenstveno na domace filmove. To je, koliko sam ja upucena, bio problem i Sineasta i Anagnorisisa, pored svih finansijskig i motivacijskih problema koje ASU ima. Taj problem je svugdje prisutan - nedostatak kritike i samokritike.
A kriticara bi bilo i imali bi volje pisati ukoliko bi bilo publike. Tu si definitivno upravu. Ko ce citati o filmu dalje od pukih recenzija u sedmicnicima, da ne govorim o Avazovoj rubrici za kulturu, itd.

[legionarka]

Ulicar...ti ko Bogom dan da kazes da ljudi koji filmove LVT nalaze zanilmjivim nemaju pojma...e pretjera ga maksimalno..
Ja nisam velii ljubitelj njegovih filmova, osim onih starijih...od kojih ti se noge odsjeku...ovo novije..stavr licnog ukusa..ne svidjaju mi se i tacka..ali to mi ne daje za pravo da ljudima govorim da su glupi..tebi jos manje...sleti malo s tog oblaka...

[Hierarchia]

DOGME 95

.. is a collective of film directors founded in Copenhagen in spring 1995.

DOGME 95 has the expressed goal of countering “certain tendencies” in the cinema today.

DOGME 95 is a rescue action!

In 1960 enough was enough! The movie was dead and called for resurrection. The goal was correct but the means were not! The new wave proved to be a ripple that washed ashore and turned to muck.
Slogans of individualism and freedom created works for a while, but no changes. The wave was up for grabs, like the directors themselves. The wave was never stronger than the men behind it. The anti-bourgeois cinema itself became bourgeois, because the foundations upon which its theories were based was the bourgeois perception of art. The auteur concept was bourgeois romanticism from the very start and thereby ... false!
To DOGME 95 cinema is not individual!

Today a technological storm is raging, the result of which will be the ultimate democratisation of the cinema. For the first time, anyone can make movies. But the more accessible the media becomes, the more important the avant-garde, It is no accident that the phrase “avant-garde” has military connotations. Discipline is the answer ... we must put our films into uniform, because the individual film will be decadent by definition!

DOGME 95 counters the individual film by the principle of presenting an indisputable set of rules known as THE VOW OF CHASTITY.
In 1960 enough was enough! The movie had been cosmeticised to death, they said; yet since then the use of cosmetics has exploded.
The “supreme” task of the decadent film-makers is to fool the audience. Is that what we are so proud of? Is that what the “100 years” have brought us? Illusions via which emotions can be communicated? ... By the individual artist’s free choice of trickery?

Predictability (dramaturgy) has become the golden calf around which we dance. Having the characters’ inner lives justify the plot is too complicated, and not “high art”. As never before, the superficial action and the superficial movie are receiving all the praise.
The result is barren. An illusion of pathos and an illusion of love.

To DOGME 95 the movie is not illusion!
Today a technological storm is raging of which the result is the elevation of cosmetics to God. By using new technology anyone at any time can wash the last grains of truth away in the deadly embrace of sensation. The illusions are everything the movie can hide behind.

DOGME 95 counters the film of illusion by the presentation of an indisputable set of rules known as THE VOW OF CHASTITY.

[Hierarchia]

At War with Myself

A Word with Lars von Trier at Cannes 2005

By Karin Badt

Most directors at Cannes you can meet at their hotels lining the boardwalk, for a Perrier and an interview. Not Lars von Trier, the director of such disturbing films as Europa, Dancer in the Dark, and Dogville. Von Trier had sequestered himself in Antibes, far from the maddening crowds, at the exclusive Hotel Cap perched atop a nature reserve. As my taxi rounded the cliffs, the sky turned gray and mist floated on the waves, rather like the empty landscape of von Trier’s own movie, Breaking the Waves. A lone tornado ripped across the water. The taxi dropped me into total silence — except for the twittering of birds — and on the mowed slopes to von Trier’s private cabana, there on a path rounding the sea, I came upon the director himself, walking calmly alone in his white suit and white beard, looking like the gentle proprietor of a great plantation. After all, his newest film Manderlay, a scathing critique of racism in the United States, takes place on one.

Von Trier is a lot more gentle than one might expect from a man with the reputation for terrorizing his actresses. A small man, with a twinkle in his eye, he is quick to tilt his head and mumble a response, no matter what you ask — and what usually comes out of his mouth seems to surprise both him and the journalist. Unlike other film directors, who are prompt with soundbites, repeatable from interview to interview, a conversation with von Trier is an original opus. He speaks in spurts, inventing metaphors and images inspired by whatever word comes before him, rather as if the journalist is a Rorschach test. For example, we began our interview discussing why it was he did not fly — why he took a trailer home from Sweden to Cannes — and he whispered: “I have psychological problems. Many many. It’s hard right now.” And by the time our interview concluded — in midsentence (the publicist checking her watch) — he was on to new revelations about his family life.

Intellectual? Consistent? Ideological? Here too von Trier was a surprise. The von Trier of the Dogme Manifesto, the von Trier who bombasts the world with political statements about the death penalty, about religious and judicial institutions, the von Trier who has been cited to be motivated by a conversion experience to Christianity, came across as a man tortured by his own contradictions. Throughout the interview, he squirmed in his white jacket, as if caught and netted by it, and then apologized sporadically. For what? For being tired of journalists, for rebelling against his parents, and even, when it could not be avoided, for his own film, a film that seemed to have disappointed both himself and the public, for its over-heavy tone.

“I am at war with myself,” he concluded, taking his hands and swinging fists at each other, rather as if the battle were aimed at his own frame.

Below is our interview, conducted May 20, 2005, in Cannes.

How many Lars Von Triers are there? Everyone who sees your movies expects you to be an angry person, but here you are the kindest person, with lots of humor.

I am actually quite a nice guy, not mean, not idiotically positive either. I am just reacting like a slave to the world you meet, the different people you meet. I have always been very mean to myself.

Why did you call Bush an asshole this week?

I was just speaking my mind, to explain that I am not anti-American. And then some Israelis yesterday said you called Bush an asshole, and I said it’s not so good. And they said, well how do you feel today, and I said, “I feel the same. He’s still an asshole.”

Did you say America is sitting on the world or shitting on the world? Both comments were published in the international press.

America is sitting on the world. Face-sitting they call it in erotic terms, which is a good thing for both parties I hope, it’s nothing I practice, oh sorry for that.

Why do you keep apologizing?

I am a little tired. A situation like this, no matter how friendly you are, is hostile. You must know this as a journalist. It’s like being back in the schoolyard, there is something hostile about the situation. I get easily provoked by situations like this because I was always the one who was beaten in the schoolyard. Especially in press conferences, I feel surrounded by the group. Perhaps it’s because I say a lot of things, and I provoke, and then it becomes a game, but I feel fragile. I was beaten at school because I was extremely small, and I came to school a year before the others. My parents were a little bit more wealthy than the other parents, this was not a good neighborhood, and they moved there for principled reasons, because they were socialists. I wanted to go to a private school. I had a terrible time in school.

Why is Manderlay so cynical? Usually, your movies — even Dogville — show a great faith, an idealism reminiscent of Carl Dreyer. What has happened between the first Grace and the second Grace?

Has Grace already forgotten that she has killed a whole town, and this is two months ago, and now she is just eating chicken, yum? There is no real reflection. She is cartoonish and cliché; she is from a gangster family where okay, they have to do these things.

But is it true that your movies are motivated by a great faith?

No, I have no faith. I am very happy when we go another 50 kilometers without being killed. My self-worth, my physical self-worth is low.

What about faith in God, in the world?

I wish.

But the focus in other films such as Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark has been on faith. Have you changed your focus?

No, I am trying to draw this whole story out in three movies. You haven’t seen the end yet. Although I don’t make a plan when I do a film, I just write a story and film it. I was fascinated by the story, and I wrote it. I was very happy when one night I found out that the Danny Glover character wrote “Mam’s Law,” and that was after I did most of the script. It’s quite smart. But if I were to criticize this film, it is that it is too smart. Story-wise everything fits too well. It’s superficial in that sense. I blame myself for doing things for the smartness of it, instead of for what I really feel. It’s not the kind of director I want to be.

Are you going to redo the movie?

No, no, no, it’s over now!

Is Nicole willing to act in your next movie?

Yes, I asked her, and she has time in the spring. My version of it is that she always wanted to do the film, and that she was very sorry, very angry when it did not happen, because it was a matter of our schedules. When she does a film, maybe it takes two months or maybe it takes a year. I try to support my actresses the best I can, but in a way that I want them to be the best they can be in film.

Since Medea, you have had only women heroines. Why not men?

Well this was Carl Dreyer’s speciality, and I’ve gotten used to it. Also my contact with actresses is better. The problem with men is that they will always piss up your back, like when all the deer are together in the woods. That’s fine, you can change your shirt. But also men hold back a little, that is very masculine, so there is always something to give in case there is a crisis. A woman has a tendency to give it all. Also, my main characters are also built on my own person. I think women are better, more understanding. This is my female side.

In your film [Manderlay], the town is destroyed basically because Grace is busy masturbating, and then has sex with Timothy, the night watchman.

Yes, you can say that.

So are you implying that there is something wrong with women satisfying sexual needs?

Not at all. Nobody should be blamed for it, only me. I just had a good time writing the scene when she goes by the chicken house — when she gets kind of turned on by the chickens, I thought that was quite funny.

In the sex scene, is Grace living out a racist fantasy?

Oh yes, she loves Black men. There are plenty of clichés in the scene: black/white clichés. There is also a little joke there about the ritual that the woman shouldn’t look at the men. All these political issues have an erotic side, that we don’t like to talk about. Maybe we vote for people because he looks good, or maybe it’s more complicated than that. We always talk about politics as if it is only the decent part of the brain that makes the decisions. We never talk about how erotic issues and political issues collide.

In Europa, there is the erotic connection between Leopold and the woman….

But here sex is a problem for her. Here Grace is saying she is a revolutionary, but she is trying to get rid of her erotic fantasies. By the way, Zentropa, our film company, decides to have some porn figures for women, by women directors. It should be interesting. Maybe I am not man enough to see some bald German guys being sucked, but it depends on your taste, although women think that is what men want. I would like to see what it looks like, just to learn.

What angle on America are you going to take in part three of your trilogy entitled Washington?

Can’t tell you. I have been working half a year on a script, it didn’t work, and I have thrown it all away, so I will postpone this film, which is dangerous, because it might not get done. We had planned to do the film this spring, and the idea was that there would be a sister, and that we would have Nicole and Bryce would be playing at the same time. I don’t know who should be the sister. I worked a long time on the script, and it was no fun, it didn’t sparkle, so my producer said: well, throw it away, which was great. You need somebody else to see that. I am going to make a comedy now instead, a Dogma film, a Danish film that is unpolitical, stupid, completely empty. It is like cleansing myself. I will cheat like hell on the Dogma, because everyone cheated, I was the only one who didn’t cheat. Now I am going to cheat. It will be called The Director of It All. This is a reaction to this exhausting trilogy. I am exhausted. Also from my psychological problems. Yes, there is a chance I won’t finish the USA trilogy, if I get hit by a car, but I absolutely will do it, but then suddenly I might rebel against this will. I actually have these two personalities struggling all the time.

In this film and in The Idiots, a father comes back at the end. In The Idiots, the father comes back to get Karen, and here a father comes back to get Grace. What does the father mean to you? Is the father “the law”?

It might be. I had several fathers. Lots of my work is a discussion between me and myself. We are arguing like hell all the time. I also rebelled against my parents. I was show-off Nazi in high school; no, I didn’t go that far. The rebellion was to dye my hair. What color? No color. I never got to it, because my mother broke down behind a closed door. She should have told me who my real father was, instead of using her energy on this! She told me on her deathbed that my father was not my father, and that I was not Jewish!

One final question: why so many jump-cuts in your films?

I love jump-cuts, because on one hand I am trying to do something that is very controlled, on the other hand, I am trying to do something that is not so controlled at all, so it is kind of a medicine against myself.

[ulicar]

e, hebo ga ja, haj'mo se sada svi ufatiti za ruke i pjevati kumbaja!

ako neko kaze da je dogville dobar film, jer je scenografija u njemu uradjena kredom, jedina stvar koju mozes reci na to je da je taj neko glup. nista vise.

mis en scene se vodi kao osnovna stvar koju imas u filmu, neki ce cak reci da film bez nje ne postoji, a ona bez filma postoji, da je to osnova i okosnica svega i onda ce doci neko, ko nije cuo za izraz mis en scene i reci da je super ako je nesto uradjeno kredom? de, ba...

kumbaja maj Lord, kumbaja...

[ulicar]

Pa daj nam onda te tvoje ekspertne argumente koji zagovaraju tvoju tezu! Kani se websajtova, superbowla, Danaca (?!) itd.

Pa vi care nemate ono osnovno poznavanje materije. Kako onda da ja tebi objasnim zasto je nesto glupo, ukoliko tebi pojmovi koje ja koristim nece biti poznati?

PS: Kursevi razumijevanja bilo koje umjetnosti postoje da bi učesnike naučili kako da "šupljiraju" o svom razumijevanju.

Jeste, tako je. Biti ce da si tu u pravu sto posto. Kako da ne. Svakako. Jo, i onda kazes da ti objasnim nesto? Svakako. Evo sad cu, samo da otpjevam kumbaja, sto zapoceh u prethodnom postu.

[johnnykola]

joj frajera jebote!!!
pa covjece boziji, ja se iskreno nadam da vecina
ljudi na ovoj planeti film gleda da bi nesto iz njega
naucila, produhovila se, nasmijala... cisto sumnjam
da je ovdje iko napisao da mu je dogville dobar
zato sto je tamo neko risao po daskama koje zivot znace
kredom. s tom svojom mizanscenom razguli na
kafu ako ti je toliko draga, a meni nadji u kojem god hoces
drugom filmu bolji prikaz ljudske gluposti kao
u dogville-u u sceni kad kidmanovoj zena od silovatelja
predbacuje da je sama nicole kriva sto ju je njezin
muz silovao. sva prica iz haaga u minuti i pol.
ako si se u toku odvijanja te scene ti osobno satirao
da negdje na platnu upratis mizanscenu to je, ali fakat,
samo i jedino tvoj problem.

[Dirty Harry]

Gledao sam Dogville, svidio mi se, uzivao sam i sta sad?

Trebam reći film je sranje jer neki lik, koji je lafo stručnjak, tvrdi na forumu da je film sranje ....

E pa drug moj, od*ebi u skokovima, ako mi se nešto sviđa onda mi se sviđa i ne znam što bi isključio svoj razum i rekao oh yes, ulicar je u pravu, jer on je stručnjak.

[debela]

heh, naletjese dobri i posteni forumasi na ulicara - arogantnog kompleksasa koji ne zna sastaviti recenicu ako bar dva puta nije nekoga oslovio sa glupan i to mu je otprilike jedina osnova za razgovor. previse ste mu paznje poklonili. osokolice se