Riviera Maya Film Festival: NYMPHOMANIAC: VOL. I Review

by     Posted 201 days ago

nymphomaniac-stacy-martin-slice

[Note: This review is of a censored, abridged version of Nymphomaniac: Vol. I.  Director Lars Von Trier gave this version his approval, but did not create this cut.]

Lars Von Trier clearly delights in messing with his audience.  His films are abrasive, but they carry an arthouse sheen and a thoughtfulness that makes them more than pretentious trolling.  But just because his movies aren’t empty-headed, that doesn’t mean they’re immune from being incredibly dumb.  Nymphomaniac: Vol. 1 swerves wildly from a story that demands deep consideration about the relationship between lust and love, and an absurd comedy where characters try to top each other with hilariously idiotic dialogue.  It appears that Von Trier wants to have his cake and fuck it too, but with the exception of one terrific scene, the absurdity almost always derails the tenderness.

Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) is found beaten in an alley by Seligman (Stellan Skarsgard), and he takes her to his sad, dingy apartment to heal up.  While she convalesces, she says she’s “a bad human being”, and to prove it to the kindly, nerdy Seligman, she launches into a long story about her life as a nymphomaniac.  Vol. I takes us through five chapters: “The Complete Angler”, “Jerome”, “Mrs. H”, “Delirium”, and “The Little Organ School”.  Each story shows how the young Joe (Stacy Martin) was willing to ruin lives in order to feed her sexual urges, but also wrestled with being in love with the man to whom she gave her virginity, Jerome (Shia LaBeouf).

nymphomaniac-shia-labeaouf

To his credit, Von Trier lays out very early the kind of whiplash he plans to give us.  The film opens with ambient noise, fades in on the alley, and slowly gazes over the setting.  Then he pulls the camera back to show Joe unconscious in the alley, and hard rock comes booming in, obliterating the quiet, pensive tone that had come before.  This implies the conflict of love and lust that will be present in Joe’s story, but also prepares us for the ridiculousness of what’s to come.

Von Trier has a specific kind of humor, but it’s tough to get a handle on it.  Joe tells her story in a flat, distant tone, and so when she says “I discovered my cunt as a 2-year-old” followed shortly thereafter by defending her sexual behavior as “I’ve always demanded more from the sunset,” it’s difficult to keep a straight face.  It becomes nearly impossible as we witness Joe’s explicit sexual behavior with Seligman butting in to compare it to fly-fishing.

nymphomaniac

Eventually, I began eagerly awaiting Seligman’s idiotic metaphors because they were either laughably overbearing or painfully forced.  Because Seligman happens to have a fishing fly on the wall (it should be noted this is the only object on the wall, so it looks like it was placed there specifically so it could be referenced), he’s able to say, “It’s called a nymph.  It will tie in with your story of nymphomania”  (shockingly, this is not his worst line). The room is also filled with other conversation starters like a portrait bearing the words “Mrs. H” at the bottom and a tape player with organ music on it.  In retrospect, I wish there had been other objects so Seligman could helpfully provide other prompts and interjections.  “That’s a tube of K.Y. Jelly.  It should be familiar to someone who has had so much anal sex.”

This bizarre comedy is what Nymphomaniac: Vol. I does best, and Von Trier struggles any time he gets away from this tone.  He’s in his element when going over the top, and even when Seligman isn’t saying ridiculous things, the movie can still reach heightened levels that aren’t unintentionally comic.  Joe competing with her friend B. (Sophie Kennedy Clark) over who can have sex with the most strangers on a train to win a bag of “chocolate sweeties” is as preposterous as their fuck club, “Mea Vulva, Mea Maxima Vulva”, a name they and their fellow nymphomaniacs chant like they’re in a cult.  This is the “hard rock” side of the movie, and it’s entertaining if not always illuminating.

nymphomaniac-christian-slater

But when Von Trier has to move for real, human emotion, the movie grinds to a halt.  Perhaps he feels a kinship with Joe in that they both understand lust better than love, but we’re still saddled with dull scenes between Joe and her father (Christian Slater) talking about trees.  The Freudian subtext of their relationship is intriguing (Joe hates her mother), but never developed in a meaningful way despite the strength of the performances.

The only time when the emotional and comic blend together in a powerful, moving scene is in “Chapter Three: Mrs. H” when a jilted wife and mother (Uma Thurman giving a powerhouse performance) comes with kids in tow to Joe’s apartment to confront the homewrecker and the husband that has just walked out on his family.  The scene perfectly mixes the absurdly comic (at one point, Mrs. H politely asks Joe if the children can see “the whoring bed”) and the earnestly sorrowful.  This is what Joe means about being “a bad human being” because she not only lied to the husband about loving him, but also carelessly destroyed a family in the process.  It’s where the devoted love of a wife smashes up against the selfish lust of a mistress.

nymphomaniac

Von Trier is almost always taking us to the polar opposites, and it’s clear that he’ll probably never reconcile love and lust considering the cynical way present-day Joe talks about love.  Instead, we’re mostly in a world of lust, and while that’s appropriate for a movie called “Nymphomaniac”, the actual sex can also become exhausting and surprisingly dull.  There’s plenty of room for Von Trier to do exciting things like shoot a triptych of sex scenes and compare it to a musical composition, and changing the shooting style depending on the setting.  However, a large amount of time is spent on the sex scenes, which consist largely of a topless Martin bouncing up and down, sweating, and occasionally moaning.  There’s no need to be titillating, but the redundancy makes these scenes increasingly tedious.  I’m sure there’s an argument to be made that the increasing boredom of the picture is meant to mirror Joe’s diminishing sexual sensation, but as the triptych scene shows us, the young Joe still seems to appreciate sex depending on the partner.

There’s a thoughtfulness lurking around the movie, but it’s either drowned out by the moans or smothered by the silence.  Von Trier lives in the extremes, and while his subject matter lends itself to extreme measures, the extremity of the comedy outmatches the extremity of any real emotion; emotions that Von Trier truly seems to want.  But eventually even Seligman has to point out a moment in Joe’s story that breaks his emotional investment.  She replies, “How do you get the most of my story: by believing in it or by not believing in it?”  In the case of Nymphomaniac: Vol. I, not believing in it provides a more pleasurable experience.

Rating: C+

nymphomaniac-volume-1-poster




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

    “However, a large amount of time is spent on the sex scenes, which consist largely of a topless Martin bouncing up and down, sweating, and occasionally moaning. ”

    that confirms what we already know: A porn movie.

    • kerat

      Why don’t you try watching the movie first, dumbass?

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        No need dumbass. Matt did it for me.

      • kerat

        Matt watched the movie for you?
        No, he watched it for himself.

        Reviews aren’t written by Gods onto stone. Double dumbass.

        Mind you, what’s the point of arguing with the incorrigible Tarek, who doesn’t even need to watch a film to deem it of no merit, passion, thought, artistry or entertainment, and who has been spouting his pseudo-cinematic opinions about von Trier and pornography since this film was announced?

        Definitely a “porn movie,” in the same way you are definitely a “critic,” Tarek.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        “Reviews aren’t written by Gods onto stone. Double dumbass.

        Right triple dubass. And matt isn’t a god I want to worship. But he is a good critic, even though I don’t agree with him on many aspects.

        If Matt says that the movie was bloated with dull “sex scenes”, then I must trust him. So no need to watch it to confirm.

        But if Matt says that the movie was not that great, it’s another thing. He can get bored in a movie when others find it enjoyable. It’s a matter of taste.

        and you are definitely a scalded cat. Keep cool. and accept other people’s opinions . You will live longer. Trust me.

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        All this ass talk is titillating.

      • kerat

        I have nothing against Matt, never did. Haven’t said anything bad about the guy…
        I have something against YOU. Saying that you don’t need to watch the film to confirm the opinion of someone else makes no sense. You can’t confirm someone else’s opinion, only agree or disagree with it. But you are a shallow-minded buffoon who wants to dislike this film and will based on the first negative review you see of it.

        “If Matt says [...] then I must trust him.” What kind of backward world are you coming from here, Jack? The age-old adage of “would you jump off a bridge if [blank] told you to” seems to be coming into force here.

        No need to reply to confirm, Tarek. You are a moron.
        Fully entitled to your opinion, yes; but totally devoid of one as of now.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        “No need to reply to confirm, Tarek. You are a moron.”

        Wait. I need to confirm something at least: You have no balls because you are this kind of people who hides behind multiple alias to call people dumbass and morons. How much alias do you have on this site ? Kerat – Smiles – etc.

        Still, If you need to enjoy sex, no need to hide. Lars von Trier is not an alibi for your hidden desires. just go on Youporn. It’s free at least.

      • kerat

        Yeah, maybe you’re from another country where talking about sex openly is forbidden. Or maybe you really are a certain type of moron who doesn’t distinguish sex from the animalistic act of sticking your dick somewhere that’ll have it.

        And you’re the only person I’ve insulted. Because you have insulted everyone else on here by being the lowest common denominator of film-enthusiast around. If YOU are not interested in watching this film, having your own opinion on it, responding to criticism with a weighted and balanced answer based on personal experience, accepting of the fact that some people are not as mindless when it comes to sex as you, someone who enjoys film for more than explosions, exposition and endless thrilling sequels than pack up and head off to another page and chat away there, you filthy troll.

        You think calling a film like this pornographic will push away all the attention you attract by acting like such a prude – really, it makes us all wonder what you have against the human body, or whether you’ve ever even seen one in the first place. And YouPorn doesn’t count. This is a film about people, not tits. You boob.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        “Yeah, maybe you’re from another country where talking about sex openly is forbidden.”

        Ahem. Yeah. and showing people having sexual intercourse is commonplace in “your” country ?

        If sex is that “normal” then you will not complain certainly if you see two people having sex in the street. Right ?

        “And you’re the only person I’ve insulted.”

        Said the guy who hides behind multiple aliases.

        ” If YOU are not interested in watching this film”
        No. I’m not.

        “having your own opinion on it,”

        That’s what I did, before you called me dumbass and moron.

        “responding to criticism with a weighted and balanced answer”

        Like “dumbass” and “moron “? You are a good mentor for good manners.

        “someone who enjoys film for more than explosions”

        Hummm. Yeah. I enjoyed 12 angry men. and there was no explosions. How could it be ?

        “You think calling a film like this pornographic will push away all the attention you attract by acting like such a prude”

        I always call a cat a cat.
        So for you, if I’ll masturbate on the street, to express a new form of art, you will encourage me ?

        and stop lurking in the shadow to my boobs Bob.

      • kerat

        NO. You DO NOT have an opinion on this film and NEVER WILL if you REFUSE TO WATCH IT.

        You have an opinion on another guy’s review. Which is worth nothing. And a film about sex is entirely different to INDECENT EXPOSURE.

        What’s the point of arguing. You really are a prude who cannot deal with sex as an adult emotion and action. You are truly pathetically idiotic.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        What is “indecent exposure” my Precious ?
        I am all ears.

      • kitkat

        Yes. You are nothing but ears.

        You have no eyes to watch films and form an opinion from such vision. So you spend your time wisely LISTENING to the thoughts of others, and then assuming they would be close enough to your own to warrant you being a fool.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        this is no film. this is a porn flick.
        I don’t watch porn. Sorry.

      • kitkatpaddywhackgivetarekakick

        Then fuck off somewhere else you self-righteous bore.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        stop posting with other aliases kerat. I am losing the count.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        What is “indecent exposure” my Precious ?
        I am all ears.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        where are you kerat ? I’m still waiting for your enlightenment. .

      • kerat

        You want me to tell you what “indecent exposure” is? Is that it? You can’t just google it? Because that’s what you left the conversation with… Looking like even more of a tit-spak.

        Look, I’m sorry that you can’t understand what I’m typing to you because English ain’t your first language. And I assume that’s the only reason you thought you were able to make a point about anything.

        This is pointless, you are worthless, and I’m glad not everyone on here is as blind-stupid and pig-ignorant as you are when it comes to having an opinion.

        But, if you really want me to “enlighten” you -
        ME: ” If YOU are not interested in watching this film”
        YOU: No. I’m not.
        ME: “having your own opinion on it,”
        YOU: That’s what I did, before you called me dumbass and moron.

        You are a DUMBASS and a MORON. You can’t even understand how stupid you are. You are NOT interested in watching this film, HAVE NOT watched this film, and yet HAVE AN OPINION of it? No, you don’t. You have, and I repeat for the umpteenth time, a pre-conceived and prudish notion that the sexually graphic content of this picture would be too much for you to handle and instead of admitting that you’re ashamed of looking at other people’s naked flesh (because to you it seems to be PURELY sexual) you insist that this is pornography and everyone must be a pervert who wants to go masturbating in the streets if they want to watch it.

        Grow up, tarek.
        We’re all done with playing with our balls around here, except you – but you’re probably just really attached to ‘em (I’m calling you a DICK, by the way.) x

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        good try Bob. This is a beautiful gesticulation But still, you didn’t explain to me what you meant by “indecent exposure”.

        Are you running out of arguments ?

      • Bob

        Cool story, bro… You don’t even remember what you’ve written.
        Here is a quote from YOU: “I always call a cat a cat. So for you, if I’ll masturbate on the street, to express a new form of art, you will encourage me ?”

        YOU brought up indecent exposure by talking about masturbating in the streets. Sorry I have a better understanding of how the law would deal with things such as this and what they’d call it – it’s called having a brain and an education and not being a close-minded douche.

        And no, Tarek, I haven’t “run out of arguments” it’s just you are blind to them. And deaf. And retarded. In fact, you carry on living in your bubble. I’m sure it’s nice in there.

        (And nice try looking smart with that “big word” ‘gesticulation’ – you do realise a gesture is an ACTION, without speech, or words. So really it doesn’t belong in your sentence. But what would you know? You probably don’t understand half of what I’ve said. You CNUT.)

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        But why the law will be against the sex ? you told me that sex is something normal, like eating. You wouldn’t be arrested if you eat a hotdog on the street right ? So why having sex on the street is wrong ?

        And why masturbation on the street is an indecent exposure ? is it not a normal sexual practice ?

        did you smoke meth bro ?

      • tarek is a fucking idiot

        I’m going to give you time to re-read what you just wrote. Then you can take a long step back and jump head first into your monitor.

        You seem to be confusing our conversation with something you’ve spoken about with yourself. Obsessing about hot-dogs and sticking one in-and-out and in-and-out of your mouth, like a cock-hungry whore.

        I used QUOTES to accentuate your idiocy, you have just made up a statement that isn’t based on anything (I.E: I never said sex in the street is like eating a hot-dog, you did just now and it’s the first I’ve heard of it. As it is also something fucking stupid that only you could say.)

        You are and have been talking out your ass this entire time. So I need no longer make you out as the moronic troll that you are. Your thick and effervescent shit is pasted up and down this wall, I just thought you might want someone to point out how you’d let your arse spray such nonsense up and down and all around – but no, you like it that way, spouting nonsense and farting out noises like a baby attempting to negotiate language for the first time. Only babies are allowed to be stupid, they’re young. You have no excuse.

        Seriously, re-read everything we’ve said and see if you still want to ask me “did [I] smoke meth?” Bro.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Re Read all the Bs written by kerat…
        5 mn later…

        I am sorry Bob, but I have to ask you this:

        Did you smoke meth bro ? you seem confused in your mind.

      • tarek

        Least I can type, tarek.

        And come up with an argument.

        And counter someone’s idiocy with another argument while they ask me if I’ve ever smoked meth… Is that really the BEST you can do? Now that you’ve exhausted the whole “this is porn, this is porn, all that flesh, must be porn” diatribe you’re going to try and insult me?

        You’re confused. Understandably so, I genuinely don’t think you can even read the English language properly. Let alone type it.

      • tarek is a fucking idiot

        You know what, maybe you’re just upset that I keep insulting you too.

        So, I’m sorry that I had to resort to such language because you are a fucking goon.

      • kerat

        NO. You DO NOT have an opinion on this film and NEVER WILL if you REFUSE TO WATCH IT.

        You have an opinion on another guy’s review. Which is worth nothing. And a film about sex is entirely different to INDECENT EXPOSURE.

        What’s the point of arguing. You really are a prude who cannot deal with sex as an adult emotion and action. You are truly pathetically idiotic.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        “Yeah, maybe you’re from another country where talking about sex openly is forbidden.”

        Ahem. Yeah. and showing people having sexual intercourse is commonplace in “your” country ?

        If sex is that “normal” then you will not complain certainly if you see two people having sex in the street. Right ?

        “And you’re the only person I’ve insulted.”

        Said the guy who hides behind multiple aliases.

        ” If YOU are not interested in watching this film”
        No. I’m not.

        “having your own opinion on it,”

        That’s what I did, before you called me dumbass and moron.

        “responding to criticism with a weighted and balanced answer”

        Like “dumbass” and “moron “? You are a good mentor for good manners.

        “someone who enjoys film for more than explosions”

        Hummm. Yeah. I enjoyed 12 angry men. and there was no explosions. How could it be ?

        “You think calling a film like this pornographic will push away all the attention you attract by acting like such a prude”

        I always call a cat a cat.
        So for you, if I’ll masturbate on the street, to express a new form of art, you will encourage me ?

        and stop lurking in the shadow to my boobs Bob.

      • kerat

        Yeah, maybe you’re from another country where talking about sex openly is forbidden. Or maybe you really are a certain type of moron who doesn’t distinguish sex from the animalistic act of sticking your dick somewhere that’ll have it.

        And you’re the only person I’ve insulted. Because you have insulted everyone else on here by being the lowest common denominator of film-enthusiast around. If YOU are not interested in watching this film, having your own opinion on it, responding to criticism with a weighted and balanced answer based on personal experience, accepting of the fact that some people are not as mindless when it comes to sex as you, someone who enjoys film for more than explosions, exposition and endless thrilling sequels than pack up and head off to another page and chat away there, you filthy troll.

        You think calling a film like this pornographic will push away all the attention you attract by acting like such a prude – really, it makes us all wonder what you have against the human body, or whether you’ve ever even seen one in the first place. And YouPorn doesn’t count. This is a film about people, not tits. You boob.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        “No need to reply to confirm, Tarek. You are a moron.”

        Wait. I need to confirm something at least: You have no balls because you are this kind of people who hides behind multiple alias to call people dumbass and morons. How much alias do you have on this site ? Kerat – Smiles – etc.

        Still, If you need to enjoy sex, no need to hide. Lars von Trier is not an alibi for your hidden desires. just go on Youporn. It’s free at least.

    • GrimReaper07

      This is one of the very few negative reviews of the movie. And most reviews say there’s fewer sex scenes than what was lead to believe (and less graphic). So yeah. Matt’s the most inconsistent reviewer I know. He always has something interesting to say but I tend to disagree with him a lot.

      • smiles

        They certainly were not too exsplisit in the ones we watched!
        I think we may have to wait for the director’s preferred cut for all of that – yes, there was sex, was there “too much” no way!

        I think it would be a bit prudish to be put off by this film from the sex scenes alone – you’d have to be quite the awkward teenager haha. Furthermore, this reviewer has not yet seen the completed picture – as in this is a film of two halves, not two films distinct from one another. Perhaps once he’s seen the final two hours it will all click in place – or maybe he should stick to more American fare! :D :D :D

      • GrimReaper07

        Yeah, I agree on the prude thing. Reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, which is weird seeing how this is a Von Trier film and his work tends to be more polarizing. If I’m not mistaken both uncensored films are available on VOD.

      • smiles

        Not just yet, I believe it’s still the Director-authorised Producers-cut for the time being.
        Give it a few more months. I’ll be more than happy to rewatch it in all its renewed glory! haha.

    • Blind_Boy_Grunt_1235

      That confirms one thing: you don’t know how to think.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        coming from a blind grunty boy, it sounds like a compliment.

      • sanchezohoolihan

        “grunty” isn’t even a word so it just sounds like you’re talking down to the vision-impaired

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        yes it is. it means fart.

      • tarek smells of grunty

        Wow. Did you just make up a definition to a word you just made up to make yourself not look like an idiot, when in fact it’s done just the exact opposite?

        You’ve still insulted the blind, tarek. So good job there. And now you’ve insulted all our collective intelligence. But you do that daily. In fact, many times daily!

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        no. I just smelt the suspicious odor you left when you had let your lower part breath.
        the blind is not the one who doesn’t see with his eyes, but the one who doesn’t see with his heart.

      • tarek smells of grunty

        So your heart doesn’t want to see the film…?
        That’s your excuse for being so bigoted and ignorant… I guess you’ve got a bigoted and ignorant heart then?

        That’s a shame… Let’s just hope you never have kids. Because they will probably be raised as cunts. By a cunt.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        too late. I am your father kerat

      • tarek

        Yeah, your kids are locked in a basement somewhere (if they’d even still be alive) being taught not to masturbate, or to think of anything even remotely sexual, or believe in the sexual union of willing partners being anything more than an unpleasant and lasting biological stayover from when we were cavemen and needed to reproduce.

        You are LAME.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        au contraire! I learn them to masturbate on street. to educate other people on how great is sex. If you give me your address, I will send them to you to masturbate in front of your home.
        I know you will be glad. You love watching sexual contents.

      • tarek

        Cool. Now you’re a paedophile! (With really bad English skills!)

        Good night, dumbass.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        you don’t even know the definition of pedophilia. Lars Von Trier has fuck.d you brain bro.

  • The Flobbit

    Lars von Trier is one step above cheap exploitation. He just took that step down.

    • The Shut-it

      No. Turning the Hobbit films into 3 movies is cheap exploitation.

      Least this guy does something new and original for a change (or at least, as new and original as cinema gets nowadays!)

      • The Flobbit

        No. Turning the Hobbit films into 3 movies is giving us another chance to stay with our favourite characters for the last time in at least 30 years.
        By your reasoning, if a director shoots snuff films of teenagers shooting cows with rifles he should be lauded, because hey, it’s original.

      • The Shut-it

        “giving us another chance to stay with our favourite characters for the last time in at least 30 years” -
        YEP!
        You are one of many reasons that Hollywood will continue to pump out
        closely-related and easily digested brain-numbing mind-fart
        entertainment instead of playing part to something that may be a little
        more taxing, but a little more expanding, revelatory and a whole lot
        less less loud and in your face. (And your comment barely hides the fact
        that you secretly cannot wait for the eventual remake of the LOTR
        trilogy, and the Hobbit films, in roughly thirty-or-so years… So enjoy
        the wait… I’m sure the Potter films will be remade by then.)

        It
        would be great to hear your reasoning behind your original comment
        about Lars von Trier being a “step over cheap exploitation” and now
        being well and truly a part of it – but I won’t bother because I’m sure
        reading it would be akin to plugging pig faeces into my ears and
        pretending I can hear the voices of angels.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Why do you write in prose format ?

      • tarek

        You realise you are writing in prose too, right?
        As in, the “ordinary form of spoken or written language, as distinguished from poetry or verse.”

        Christ, you are fuckin’ stupid.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        the Christ is not stupid bro. but you are.

      • GrimReaper07

        If by giving us a chance to stay with our favorite characters you mean making each film about an hour too long and filling it with unnecessary scenes that neither develop the characters in any way nor add any relevant information to the movie then you’re right. I was cautiously optimistic about The Hobbit being 3 films, even if I felt they could have done it in one long movie or maybe two, two-hour long movies, but my fears came true. The Hobbit films reek of money grab. They could have just added the new scenes in an Extended Edition Blu Ray, but instead opted for the route that gave them more money.

        Not everything that’s original is great, but as long as it has something on its head and something to say then it can be, which many say is the case with Nymphomaniac. I haven’t seen it yet but I will sometime in the next few days.

      • The Flobbit

        To me they reek of a superfan of the books finally taking advantage of his unlimited resources to make an adventure for Tolkien fans everywhere.

      • GrimReaper07

        Regardless of whether he’s making good films or not? Yeah maybe. They do reek of someone who’s trying to cram as much as they can into their movies too. I’ve no doubt that for Tolkien fanatics who only care about seeing the universe’s characters and events on screen they must be terrific, but the surprisingly sloppy storytelling and film making puts me off. I have a hard time believing they come from the same guy who made the LOTR movies some of my favorites of all time.

      • The Flobbit

        Look, as a Tolkien fan, my critical senses are blinded whenever I watch a Lord of the Rings film. I JUST DON’T CARE WHAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT THE HOBBIT ANYMORE. They are great films, and I enjoy them more than anything. I fail to see what’s wrong with that.

      • GrimReaper07

        Ok so you’re saying you don’t care about whether they’re good or not, you just love that they’re films that transport you into that universe you love. Fair enough.

      • Norrtron

        I miss downvotes.

      • The Flobbit

        UPVOTE.

      • The Flobbit

        UPVOTE.

  • ScratStitch

    How on earth do you discover your c— as a two year old?

    • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

      Maybe she attended a kindergarten brothel

      • tarek takes it up the chuffer

        tarek said: “you don’t even know the definition of pedophilia”

        THIS is the definition of paedophilia.

        And learn how to spell. You’re typing on the internet. It ain’t hard.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        we spell it this way also bob.
        you okay ? get back to your meth bro.

    • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

      Maybe she attended a kindergarten brothel

  • ScratStitch

    How on earth do you discover your c— as a two year old?

  • Traffick

    For anyone interested in understanding von Trier’s films, I highly recommend this article.
    http://zircillius.com/2013/09/03/visual-analysis-of-lars-von-triers-expressionism-from-europe-to-eden/

  • Traffick

    For anyone interested in understanding von Trier’s films, I highly recommend this article.
    http://zircillius.com/2013/09/03/visual-analysis-of-lars-von-triers-expressionism-from-europe-to-eden/

  • jay

    i saw the movie and enjoyed it more then matt did but i do agree with him on the points hes making here.

    1.Matt’s right, when the movie tries to get serious it fails miserably. In fact the last 20 mins of part one are god awful because of this. Sometimes i think Von Trier thinks serious means stagnate and boring because he has a tendency to drag scenes out with people saying very little and looking at each other with expressionless faces or some pointless voice over. I had the same problem with Melancholia, i was captivated by part 1 and midway through part II, then it crashed to a screeching halt and i just wanted it to end.

    2. The sex is boring, aside from one scene (on the train) its actually kind of unnecessary and gross. i mean i get shes a nymphomaniac but i didn’t know that meant you had sex with a bunch of different people and look bored while you have it. i thought it meant you had an uncontrollable desire. she came off more slutty than addicted.

    i felt like Steve McQueen character study of a sex addict in Shame was much more focused it allowed a much better opportunity to understand(and pity) what a sex addict’s life is like. i liked nymphomaniac it just could have been better.

  • jay

    i saw the movie and enjoyed it more then matt did but i do agree with him on the points hes making here.

    1.Matt’s right, when the movie tries to get serious it fails miserably. In fact the last 20 mins of part one are god awful because of this. Sometimes i think Von Trier thinks serious means stagnate and boring because he has a tendency to drag scenes out with people saying very little and looking at each other with expressionless faces or some pointless voice over. I had the same problem with Melancholia, i was captivated by part 1 and midway through part II, then it crashed to a screeching halt and i just wanted it to end.

    2. The sex is boring, aside from one scene (on the train) its actually kind of unnecessary and gross. i mean i get shes a nymphomaniac but i didn’t know that meant you had sex with a bunch of different people and look bored while you have it. i thought it meant you had an uncontrollable desire. she came off more slutty than addicted.

    i felt like Steve McQueen character study of a sex addict in Shame was much more focused it allowed a much better opportunity to understand(and pity) what a sex addict’s life is like. i liked nymphomaniac it just could have been better.

  • Scott

    Not sure it’s fair to judge the movie based on viewing a sanitized abridged version of the film. The sex scenes were boring? Maybe that’s because all the good bits were edited out?

    • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

      yeah. they left in the editing room all the shots from the Blow job bob.

      • lul

        wot??

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        bless you. your nose is leaking.

    • Tommy Pickles

      Plus he’s only watched the first HALF of the abridged version…

      Released in two parts, but definitely one movie.

    • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

      stop posting with different aliases kerat. It is useless. Your stupid style is your trade mark.

      • terak

        Lol. Totally wasn’t me.

        You’re just insulting some random guy.

        And that “stupid style” is called grammatically correct English…

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        you are breaking bad kerat.
        The meth is strong with you young padawan.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        you are breaking bad kerat.
        The meth is strong with you young padawan.

      • terak

        Lol. Totally wasn’t me.

        You’re just insulting some random guy.

        And that “stupid style” is called grammatically correct English…

  • tarek

    Hi, I’m Tarek.

    And when I’m not practising a strict regime of self-mutilation and celibacy, I like to kick back and unwind with a four-hour movie. I don’t watch it though. I just read the reviews. But only the bad ones.

    And then I get really upset at the thought that there is a film that has a lot of naked bodies in. Because if someone is naked they are obviously a porn star. And if a movie has sex in, it’s obviously a porno. That’s why I never take off my pants. And why my balls smell like a rotten dog carcass. And why I will die alone in a nasty old hovel without any children to carry on my name – what a world that’ll be, eh!

    But seriously. This is pornographic. In fact, my Mom only lets me watch PG and U films. Sometimes I sneak the first Spider-Man on though (that’s a 12!) But skip any scene with Mary-Jane because she has tits.

    Hi, I’m Tarek and a lot of people wonder why I even bother posting!

    • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

      We call this schizophrenia kerat. You are not far from madness bro.

      Stop the meth. Or it will be too late.

  • Pingback: NYMPHOMANIAC: VOL. 2 Review. NYMPHOMANIAC Stars Charlotte Gainsbourg and Stellan Skarsgard | Collider

  • Pingback: Nymphomaniac: Director's Cut Teaser is Extremely NSFW

Click Here