From what I can gather, everyone seems to be on the same page about the book being way better than the movie, but honestly, there aren't that many films where the adaptation actually beats the source material anyway, so there's really no point in stressing over it. For those of you who haven't cracked open the book yet—kind of like me—I’d say the movie is pretty decent and the story itself keeps you hooked enough.
Haha, now this is a juicy topic. But when you really sit back and think about how people treat Oscar winners like they're some kind of ultimate gold standard, it makes me feel like movies aren't even worth all this massive hype. Honestly, not a single one of those winners has made it into my personal top 10, 20, or even the top tier of films I've seen over the last decade.
I mean, let's be real, the Oscars are totally overrated. It’s mostly just a masterclass in high-level marketing.
If I had to pick which one of those mentioned actually deserves a rewatch, it would be American Beauty. And hey, it's actually pretty cool to see so many of you guys feeling the exact same way.
Jose Miller17 said:Yeah... exactly like that... five times cheaper... *cough*... sure.
I don't want to be that person who nitpicks every little detail, but let’s look at the math here: saying a 7–10 Euro ticket in Sweden is five times more expensive than a 2.50–3 Euro ticket in Miami just doesn't add up. It's closer to triple, if we're being honest. Plus, around here in Washington, D.C., I’ve noticed tickets usually hover somewhere between 3 and 4 dollars. Since we’re already out here dissecting the numbers, I’m genuinely curious what the average salary looks like over in Sweden. In Washington, D.C., the average for October sat right around 4,754 dollars, and... In the United States That works out to about $540. Just a little something to keep in mind if you're doing the math. $2.50.
Hey everyone living stateside, jump in here and let me know what the deal is over there—what are we looking at for ticket prices lately, and what’s the typical average salary looking like these days?
In today’s edition of The New York Times, Thursday, January 15, 2004, Jurica Pavičić dives into the recent announcement from Minister Biškupić regarding a proposal where a slice of every single movie ticket sold would go straight into a fund to boost our local film industry. It’s something filmmakers have been begging for for ages, but politicians have just sat on their hands until now.
Basically, this means the federal government would be slapping a little tax on American movies, which honestly sounds awesome to me. We see similar moves being made in places like France or over in Sweden, and let's face it, the Americans aren't exactly thrilled about it. The logic for this kind of levy gets even stronger when you consider that the state treats film as a cultural asset—after all, movie tickets are exempt from sales tax—though I personally find it a bit funny to call a Hollywood blockbuster a "cultural treasure," especially when you're busy with the whole žderanje of popcorn and soda.
To give you some perspective, back in 2002, we saw about 2.7 million movie tickets sold here in the States, which was already a 10% dip from the year before, and it looks like that downward trend is sliding another 10% further in 2003. With people hitting the theaters half as often per capita, the US is looking like one of the least movie-obsessed nations in all of Europe.
Pavičić points out that the actual cash generated from this "per-ticket fee" might be relatively small since fewer people are actually showing up to theaters—especially since AMC Theatres seems to be closing down more locations than they're opening lately—meaning we might only pull in something like 2.7 million dollars, which is basically what Antun Vrdoljak spends on catering alone. In reality, that wouldn't even cover half the budget for a single domestic production. Still, if I knew a portion of my ticket money was actually supporting homegrown cinema, I’d feel a lot better about handing over the cash. I am totally all for this idea. 👍
Yeah, I’d love to take a trip down memory lane with that flick; I actually caught it way back during a pre-screening at the Film Festival. Honestly, it’s high time it popped up on TV again—and trust me, it’ll show up the second we start wishing for it here, I’ve noticed how that works. Rosanna Arquette, man... 🙂
By the way, I just wanted to give a shout-out to the way you write, Patrick Gonzalez76, always dropping all those links to back up what you're saying. That's the only way to do it. 👍 This is the Internet, after all; links are everything.
coastalorca3 said:Your take is just as rude as those pirates' attitudes. Honestly, you are a hypocrite.
Look, coastalorca3, cut the crap. I’m not out here trying to turn a profit, and I’m definitely not some career pirate; I’m just a movie buff looking for films that aren't even available through legitimate channels. I am never, ever handing my hard-earned cash over to some shady pirate for a grainy, bottom-of-the-barrel rip. On the flip side, most distributors are just lazy as hell—I’ve actually sat in on their logic before—and they treat movies like cheap produce at a local farmer's market, only putting in effort for one or two massive blockbusters a year that keep the lights on. They couldn't care less about anything else because everything else is either a total loss or, at best, a wash. Discovery is the big exception, though maybe now Blitz will finally have to step up and buy more content since they just opened those thirteen new theaters. At the end of the day, I just want a solid movie in high quality; if it’s playing in a theater, I’ll go see it, if not, I’ll grab a DVD, and if that’s not an option, I'm going with DivX. So, don't act surprised when I end up burning through a decent amount of DivX.
So, if we’re actually going to talk about how much hypocrisy runs rampant in this industry, let me give you a little something that sounds absolutely insane. You’ve got Sharman Networks—the guys who own Kazaa, which is basically the heavyweight champion of file-sharing platforms for swapping pirated software, movies, and music—and they actually filed a lawsuit against Kazaa Lite++. Get this: Lite++ is a version of the app that doesn't come packed with all that nasty spyware, adware, and other digital garbage that the original Kazaa is famous for, yet they’re suing because they claim it copied their design. It’s wild. The whole Kazaa (FastTrack) network stays afloat by peddling adware, and they reportedly raked in something like $100 million last year just from that, even though they don't actually own any content—they just provide the platform where millions of users swap illegal files. That entire $100 million comes from legitimate business moves; they even charge people to use the software. Meanwhile, over in America, the RIAA has started raiding people's houses just because they have a Kazaa sharing directory open, dragging them straight into court. I heard about this one 12-year-old girl who ended up having 1,000 MP3s flagged, and they basically forced her family into a settlement to pay $2,000. Unbelievable.
The way I see it, the law doesn't even touch the big fish making bank off illegal file sharing; instead, they just swoop in and shut down the server of some small-time hustler who isn't even doing it half as dirty as the heavy hitters. 🙄 🙂
Check out this article about it here: Zeropaid This site is honestly top-tier when it comes to staying on top of all this drama.
The New York Times is running a piece today about unauthorized recording detention
"A professional audit uncovered 1,044 DVDs, 1,182 CD-ROMs, and 537 VHS tapes—all straight-up bootlegs. To top it off, the police seized their 'business assets': six computers, seven VCRs, a DVD-ROM drive, a CD burner, and a whole bunch of other small tools used for illegal copying... The DA is pushing for jail time without parole. This actually marks the first time someone has been thrown in detention specifically for manufacturing pirated media."
And just like that, our unofficial patron saint of the SXSW scene is gone. 😁 Personally, the funniest part of this whole mess is that they actually had a neon sign inside that read, "Today in Pac-Man, tomorrow in theaters." And get this—The New York Times refers to their shop as "Bacman"(?!) in the entire article. 🙂Honestly, if you ask me, catching them was fine, but mostly because of how they treated actual cinema. Most of what they were peddling at DVD prices was absolute garbage—shoddy copies ripped straight from theaters, Japanese flicks with no subtitles, or just random movies with no subtitles at all, plus those terrible DVD-to-DVD transfers... It was basically an anti-cinema propaganda machine. They weren't interested in art; they were just hunting for a quick buck by exploiting people's desperation to see the latest hits. No excuses made here.
My picks for the Academy Awards 2003 for the Movie section
Movie Topic of the Year: 1. Amelia 2. All or Nothing 3. What kind of video store clerks are you?
Post of the Year in Movies: 1. In the topic Sundance Film Festival and Russian Ark by Douglas Robinson12 2. In the topic Citizen Kane by Liberatore 3. In the topic Amelia argument by Žlzc
Forum user of the year in Movies: 1. Douglas Robinson12 2. Copp663 3. Mikilegendo!care!
I’d also like to throw these Special Awards into the ring - Most useful topic: List of films - Entry of the year: Vuco in the topic Good film 2002, specifically that episode where he goes off on how much he hated Lantana and Mulholland Drive - Most intense argument: Amelia argument (that standalone thread from the Amelia topic) - People who actually know how to recommend a good movie: Copp663, Sophia Evans76, Liberatore, Douglas Robinson12, Mikilegendo!care!, and Žlzc (though you shouldn't always trust them just because they say something is bad😉)
Alright, so Academy Awards time is finally here. Since we’re wrapping up the year, us moderators want to invite everyone to jump in alongside our annual movie picks to celebrate the absolute best moments on this film forum. We’re looking to give props to the standout topics, the legendary users, and those specific posts that just hit different, plus a few other fun little shout-outs along the way.
Feel free to nominate up to three top-tier topics, three standout users, three individual posts, and whatever number of Special Awards you think are deserved. If you check out the post below, you'll see a clean template showing exactly how to submit your candidates for the Academy Awards 2003 here on the site. Go ahead and use it. Just make sure you include direct links to the posts and topics so we can actually find them.
Jesus! You're right! That’s not what I meant at all. If that's the case, then forget it. 🙄 Of course there aren't any rights. We'll just hit up the local Pac-Man video rental shop and have them clear everything for us. We'll just rent the movies straight from them and suddenly everything is perfectly legal 😉. It's pretty obvious you aren't part of the DivX crowd if you're even worrying about licensing.
Look, let's be real here—I'm just throwing out these illegal, underground ideas for the hell of it; I'm certainly not going to take responsibility for them or leave behind any actual criminal paper trail. Just think of this as a bit of subversive dreaming.
I'm glad you jumped into this conversation, so let's keep the momentum going. Honestly, I don't see distribution being much of a headache. We could easily handle it using a sort of pay-it-forward model—say, I send you a DivX file if you don't have it yet, and then you just pass it along to everyone in your neck of the woods. You cover a few major hubs like Chicago or Seattle, and boom, you've got an audience. Really, all we need is one high-speed connection at every "distribution hub," and before you know it, the movie has traveled halfway across the country in just a few hours.
I’d say there are actually pretty few people living outside the Western North America who have actually sat down and seen those films. Honestly, let them stay out of it—it just means we get a much better selection committee for ourselves. Besides, movies showing up at FEST or the Sarajevo Film Festival probably already had their big premieres somewhere else overseas anyway, so that doesn't exactly kill the hype for the festival. If anything, I’d argue it makes things even more interesting.
Those titles you’re bringing up are actually pretty fascinating—from what I've gathered in my reading, anyway (I haven't sat down to watch them all yet, though I've got a few on my list), they seem like perfect fodder for a film festival. And honestly, that was exactly the whole point of the thing. We should be out there championing great new cinema, getting people talking about them, and making sure they aren't just stuck in some niche corner. It would be cool to give them an official seal of approval, you know? Like, slap a little "Winner at the DivX festival" or "Grand Prix DivX festival winner" badge on them just to let everyone know they're worth the ticket price. 🙂
And honestly, we shouldn't have to sit around waiting an entire year for the next festival to roll around. I mean, if people actually show up and there’s some seriously hot new movies hitting the scene, they could basically pull this off every single month.
1. Film festivals are just awesome—they turn everything into this big celebration of cinema where the movies feel a bit more special. You end up watching stuff you’d normally skip, and honestly, it feels like a crime if you miss out on them.
2. DivX files are great because they're everywhere and easy to pass around. They make distribution a breeze.
3. Even Bill Gates had this quirky, almost romantic way of doing things; back when he and Melinda Gates were living in different cities, they’d actually coordinate to watch the exact same movie at the same time in their respective towns, then hop on the phone to dissect it together.
4. A little while back, I tossed out this wild, slightly crazy idea about us starting our own virtual film festival.
So, those are my four sparks for a virtual film fest!
What we really need is a festival director and a selection committee to hand-pick the competition entries. We’ll also need a jury to hand out the awards, while the rest of you—the audience and the critics—round out the experience.
Look, I’m not going to get bogged down in the nitty-gritty of how the committee, the jury, and the fans actually track down the films, because I’m convinced that’s just a technical hurdle we can jump over. 😉
It doesn't even have to be about the latest blockbusters; it should be about those rare gems that most people here haven't laid eyes on because they never hit theaters, DVD shelves, or TV, but are easily snagged via DivX. We could treat them like "virtual premieres." We might even throw in some big DVD releases you'd find at a local video rental shop, though I guess that would kill the whole "festival vibe"—that sense of snobbery and elitism. 😉 And that exclusivity.
For the selection committee, we’d want real cinephiles—people who live and breathe movies and know exactly what's worth watching. This crew would work closely with our "distributor" to shape the lineup. As for getting the movies to the people, we’d handle all that through private messages. If a local video store like Pacman is already doing this openly by renting out pirate DivX copies, then what we're doing isn't exactly a felony either. They’re chasing profits, whereas our only goal is this pure cultural showcase. Maybe we could even hunt down some funding from the Department of Arts. If One-take was able to land some cash... 😁
To kick things off, let's say we run a one-week festival with one featured film per day. Everyone watches according to the official schedule at a specific time, each of us tucked away in our own homes... 😎
And that’s pretty much the gist of it. I started writing this as a total joke, but now it’s starting to look like an actual, legitimate concept.
Quick question for the group: do you guys actually track everything you watch? Like, do you keep a running list or anything?
I’m estimating I’ve clocked in somewhere around 4,500 movies at this point. I used to be pretty obsessive about logging them back when I was fifteen, but I haven't really kept up with it lately😢. If that number is even remotely accurate—and I'm pretty sure it is—and we assume an average runtime of two hours per flick, that means I’ve spent 375 straight days just staring at a screen. That’s basically a full year of my life gone without ever sleeping. Jesus!
What’s your typical pace looking like? How many movies are you hitting daily, weekly, or monthly?
Let’s shake things up by rephrasing the prompt a bit. I actually love it when we geek out over movies we genuinely adore instead of just spending all our energy trashing the ones we hate. Look, it’s way harder to get vulnerable and gush about a film you love than it is to just spit venom at one you don't. And honestly, isn't the whole point of this forum to help us hunt down some actual gems? So, let's go with this: what’s a classic you either just discovered for the first time or finally revisited?
As for me, I spent yesterday rewatching the 31-year-old Catch-22 on my DVD player, and man, it still holds up. To be fair, the stuff that used to totally gut me—like those visceral scenes involving plane crashes or Snowden's guts—doesn't hit quite as hard as it used to. Especially not after bingeing a couple of Hellraiser flicks just the other day 😉. This time around, I found myself paying way more attention to the acting. Alan Arkin is even better than I remembered, and the entire cast is just stellar. I even caught a little detail in the scene set in Major Major's office: while the Major is pacing back and forth, there’s a picture on the wall in the shot that switches three times—it goes from Roosevelt, to Churchill, then to Stalin.
Laura Roberts61 said:Does ANYONE actually know where I can track down this damn movie? Ugh...
Man, I actually managed to snag it just yesterday using Napster (only because you can't find it anywhere in the local video stores 😉), two files at 700MB each with English subs included. Haven't even had a chance to sit down and watch it yet.
So, I just got back from a press screening. Okay, first off, some good news: I actually liked this better than the second installment. It avoids those massive pacing crashes and the fights that feel way too rushed. It’s pretty obvious the Wachowski siblings actually listened to how people reacted to the previous stuff. But here’s the bad news—it feels a little too much like Star Wars. Everything they built looks incredibly impressive, but it’s all surface-level eye candy; there isn't much meat on the bones, and once you walk out of the theater, those deep, lingering thoughts you were hoping for just... evaporate.
I honestly don't think this is the last time we'll see The Matrix. The Oracle says something at the end, and she probably knows we're going to see him (Neo) again down the road. Still, there's just too much money on the table here. After these last two films, it’s crystal clear that The Matrix is primarily an action franchise, whereas the first one was a total outlier because it had this raw, original inspiration that barely serves any purpose in this one.
And yeah, Neo is basically Jesus, the man of choice ("I choose"), which is what sets him apart from the machines. That’s why he can beat them and break those endless programming loops. "I believe" is the other big message. We went from an intriguing, intellectual sci-fi flick to something that's straight-up religious. And just like with faith, some people are going to buy into it and others won't, so the movie will definitely split the audience. I can already tell people are going to have wildly different takes on this, which is actually pretty cool.
I'm just sitting here wondering why on earth they titled it "Revolutions."
Watching this one again, taking notes on the dialogue, and man, it hits so much harder than the first time around. You don't even need to overthink it when the movie says everything it needs to say; sometimes the meaning just slips through your fingers, so I think sitting with it after the credits roll is a good move (heads up: spoilers ahead!).
The Players: Chris (played by George Clooney, the doctor sent to fix up the space station in Solaris) Dr. Gibarian (who ends up taking his own life on the station) Rhea (the version of Clooney's wife that manifests on Earth) Snow (a pretty intense character—basically a "visitor" or a cosmic body-snatcher) Gordon (the female black officer, easily the most level-headed person in the room)
Chatting with "Gibarian" Chris: You're not Gibarian Gibarian: No? Who am I then? Chris: A puppet. Gibarian: And you're not? Maybe you're my puppet. Like all puppets you actually think you're human. It's the puppet's dream - being human. Gibarian: There are no answers, only choices.
Rhea and Chris. Rhea: Don't you see I came from your memory of her. That's the problem. I'm not the whole person. In your memory you get to control everything. So even if you remember something wrong, I am predetermined to carry it out. I'm suicidal because that's how you remember me. My voice sounds the way it does, because that's how you remember it. Chris: I don't believe that we are predetermined to relive our past. I think that we can choose to do it differently. The day I left you said you wouldn't make it, I didn't hear you because I was angry. This is my chance to undo that mistake and I need you to help me. Rhea: But am I really Rhea? Chris: I don't know anymore. All I see is you... All I see is you. Rhea: We can never have a life on Earth. And this, what kind of life is this? Trapped here, it's not a life. I don't know what to call it. Chris: It's what we have. It's enough for me.
Rhea's goodbye video: Rhea: I'm not Rhea. I know you loved me there, I know that, I felt that. And I loved you. I wish that we could live inside that feeling forever. Maybe there is a place where we can, but I know it's not on Earth and it's not on this ship. That's All What i Can say right now.
Snow reveals who he really is. Snow: He attacked me. There I am, somehow there I am and couldn't tell how I am, who I am, what's going on... I survived the first 30 seconds of this... life... whatever you wanna call it, by killing someone, and oh-ah by killing someone who happens to be me... This is an incredible opportunity... this is a gift, I'm a gift. Gordon: I say, we use the device on him. Snow: Can I make a suggestion. You can do what you want, but I would... just lock me in here really tight and take the thing back. Wear your seat-belt 🙂
Chris back on Earth. Chris: Earth. Even the word sounded strange to me now. Unfamiliar. How Long have i been goniti? How long have I been back? Did it matter? I try to find the rhythm of the world where I used to live. I follow the current. I was silent, intentional. I made the conscious effort to smile, nod, stand. And perform millions of gestures that constitute life on Earth. I studied these gestures until they became reflexes again. But I was haunted by the idea that I remembered it wrong. Somehow I was wrong about everything.
And then he’s slicing a cucumber again, cuts himself once more, but this time—get this—the wound heals instantly. Aha! And then Rhea appears. Chris: Am I alive or dead? Rhea: We don't have to think like that anymore. We are together now. Everything we've done is forgiven. Everything.
One last little detail for you. The very first thing Rhea says to the Clooney character, after a long, heavy look, is: "Don't blow it." Just imagine the weight of that when someone tells you something like that in your very first sentence.
(It’s honestly kind of a bummer that since we finally have this complete list, it was actually pretty easy to track down where we were talking about this movie before, so I figured I’d just bump the thread a bit.)
Philip K. Dick’s incredible story provides such rich soil for all those deep philosophical and metaphysical rabbit holes. It’s perfect fodder for Tarkovsky, but can Soderbergh really handle the heavy lifting? Look, it’s not a bad flick for an American audience, but he just doesn't dive into those same soul-crushing depths that Tarkovsky does (honestly, nobody touches Tarkovsky when it comes to that level of depth). Even though Tarkovsky’s version moves at its own pace, the whole thing is just one constant explosion of ideas, wild visions, and new horizons hitting you in the brain. To me, Soderbergh feels like the "digestible" version of Tarkovsky—which is pretty much confirmed by the runtime, seeing as the new version clocks in at 99 minutes while the original sits at a massive 160.
Still, it isn't half bad. At its core, there’s a lot going on here, but primarily it functions as a love story wrapped in a sci-fi shell. It’s got a vibe somewhere between classic romance and something like Wuthering Heights.
Lars von Trier’s "Dogville" is such a wild ride, isn't it? It’s one of those movies that just sticks in your brain because it refuses to play by any of the usual rules we expect from Hollywood storytelling. Instead of giving us these lush, immersive sets, he strips everything down to the bare essentials—literally drawing the lines on the floor like a stage play—and forces you to focus entirely on the raw, uncomfortable tension between the characters. It's gritty, it's unapologetic, and honestly, it's pretty polarizing. You either find it absolutely brilliant or completely maddening, but there's no middle ground when you're dealing with a director like von Trier.
With "Dogville" arguably being his strongest work yet, Lars von Trier actually delivered on the hype and single-handedly rescued the Festival from a sea of total mediocrity. It was this raw, unbridled energy and a flood of genuine ideas; the director managed to craft this biting, razor-sharp critique of America—even though he’s never actually lived there—but honestly, it didn't stop him from leaning hard into his own unapologetic perspectives.
CANNES, May 20th (From our special correspondent for Vjesnik) – Honestly, I feel like an American, even though I’ve never actually set foot in the States, but hey, I’m incredibly well-informed since the media has been relentlessly bombarding us since we were kids with every single little detail about that country. I guess I’d paraphrase Kennedy with my own little twist on his famous sentiment: "I am American."
I’d love to get swept up in that sense of absolute freedom everyone talks about in America, but honestly, looking at the results of these election campaigns just kills the mood for me. I’m certain America is a beautiful country, but I’m starting to wonder if I’d actually want to head over there right now, because this version of America definitely wouldn't be the one I have in my head. It feels like the country is being held hostage by a total cultural mismatch. My film *Dogville* isn't some direct critique of America itself; rather, it’s more of a commentary on my own perception of the place. At the end of the day, good and evil live inside every single person and every single society—it's just the circumstances that act like a megaphone, cranking up the volume until those traits finally burst through the surface.
That’s just how Lars von Trier talks—he’s this powerhouse Scandinavian director who’s easily one of the most inventive artists working in the US and Europe right now. He’s got this undeniable genius and a flood of original ideas, fueled by this raw, unbridled energy that just keeps him moving. This provocative guy is constantly pushing his own limits, whether he's diving into avant-garde concepts, sparking the whole Dogme 95 movement, or taking classic genres and flipping them completely on their head. Honestly, he plays with every single facet of filmmaking you can think of, from the pure aesthetics and dramatic structure to the technical grit and deep emotional impact.
So far, he’s actually managed to shape three pretty striking trilogies. You’ve got his first "European trilogy," which kicks things off with those early works like Element of crime (1984), Epidemic (1987), and Europa, Europa (1991). Then there’s the second one, which is really focused on women—it actually takes its name from that children's book, the Golden Heart Trilogy, about this little girl who’s always ready to sacrifice herself. That set includes his heavy hitters like Breaking the Wave (1996), The Idiots (1998), and finally Dance in the Dark (2000), the one that earned him the big Palme d'Or at Cannes.
*Dogville* kicks off the whole "USA – Land of Opportunity" trilogy. It opens with this prologue followed by nine distinct chapters, all tied together by the narrator—played by John Hurt—who keeps peppering the story with these incredibly cynical observations about everything unfolding on screen. The whole thing plays out within this highly stylized, top-down stage set that gives you a bird's-eye view of a tiny little town, situated somewhere in the middle of some remote, forgotten corner of the American provinces near the Rocky Mountains. It’s set during those repressive 1930s years, depicting a community totally cut off from the rest of the world, where people just drift through these seemingly idyllic, yet deeply modest and troubled lives that feel entirely fake and suffocatingly small. Building a highway straight into a small town can trigger a whole new chapter of life—it’s rarely the idyllic fairy tale people expect, but it's definitely a massive, provocative shake-up. It’s just like when this mysterious, stunning woman named Grace rolls into town and completely flips the script; at first, the locals give her the cold shoulder, but before you know it, they're totally exploiting her, turning her into nothing more than a commodity to serve their every whim.
Hypocrisy, a thirst for revenge, that totally flippant attitude toward women—especially those who actually stand on their own two feet—plus all that narrow-minded provincialism and closed-off exclusivity... it’s basically everything you'd expect from the version of America that Lars von Trier lays bare, showing off his massive talent through his uncompromising way of handling the characters he crafts himself as a screenwriter. His Grace is right at the heart of everything here—she’s this woman carrying a heavy secret, someone who is ready to sacrifice absolutely everything, just like all his other heroines in his past films, but there's a twist: unlike any of them before, she ends up transforming into this cold, ruthless avenger.
Even if he claims this isn't some grand metaphor for America—arguing that a story like this could unfold in any isolated little bubble—it feels like Lars von Trier is clearly out to settle a score with them. But since we’re talking about a top-tier artist, this showdown isn't some cheap or basic jab; it goes way deeper than just the plot or the setting, reaching instead into the very way the movie is actually built. Instead of leaning on all those slick Hollywood gadgets and high-end special effects that let directors make things look "realer" than what your average filmmaker could ever dream up, Von Trier decides to flip the script entirely. He pulls everything back to square one, staging the whole thing—the streets, the shops, even the characters' apartments—on what looks like a massive theatrical stage where everything feels improvised. From a distance, you see the blueprint of a city, but get closer and it’s clearly just a theater set. Conceptually, when you look at how these people interact, it’s pure cinema, and through the lens of his own vision, it’s exactly what he needed: a sense of being both everything and nothing at once. It’s the perfect way to capture his vision of America—this strange construction of life that exists somewhere in a dreamscape, a place where even a dog isn't really a dog.
It’s funny how people will jump down any other director's throat for being "old-fashioned" or too theatrical, yet when von Trier pulls off this incredibly modern, innovative return to pure dramaturgy—focusing on the raw power of the script without leaning on flashy tech or cheap special effects—suddenly everyone is totally onboard.
Nicole Kidman is absolutely killing it in the lead role as Grace; honestly, it might be the best performance of her entire career. It’s such a massive shame how much she's been pushed around by big Hollywood productions lately, because as a true artist—something I think she knows deep down—she really only finds her spark in a profound, intimate piece of filmmaking like this one from Denmark.