The (Now-Overrated) ILX Top 100 Films of the 2000s Poll Results

von trier just strikes me as one of those trolls who is clever but not very clever, more momus than cankles for instance

― caek, Wednesday, February 3, 2010 3:16 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lool

Middlebrow indie has become such an easy target for so many critics - Anthony Lane and Peter Bradshaw, to name just two, love to use it as a punching bag. Most of the time I agree, but it can be done well - it's not de facto A Terrible Thing. Incredibly unfashionable to defend, obviously.

― Dorian (Dorianlynskey), Wednesday, February 3, 2010 7:19 PM (57 minutes ago) Bookmark

yeah but they're both feebs, and p-brads especially gets things REALLY wrong when he tries to go lowbrow. it's a punchbag for a reason tho.

'together' is moodysson's bestest film.

a lot of it has to do with challenging the audience, and what the audience wants and expects from film - denying them the conventional pleasures. I actually think Von Trier is very clever, in that you can appreciate/read his films on different levels, and there are interesting formal/structural parallels with the theme and narrative - more so than Haneke, who I feel is a bit more heavy-handed.

― sarahel, Wednesday, February 3, 2010 8:22 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

er, what? LVT viewers are not "challenged" in the least: they get exactly what they pay for, ie a woman slicing her clit or what-have-you. they don't WANT conventional pleasures, they want unconventional ones, because they are highly educated, sensitive people. haneke is more heavy-handed but they're both useless.

a lot of it has to do with challenging the audience, and what the audience wants and expects from film - denying them the conventional pleasures.

come on von trier gives his audience the greatest and most conventional pleasure of all - feeling superior

haneke has crazy skills, deployed in the service of utter obnoxiousness

<3 him btw

The model for yr well-crafted posts!

jeez, feel so conflicted when nrq is OTM.

lol

come on von trier gives his audience the greatest and most conventional pleasure of all - feeling superior

― Lamp, Wednesday, February 3, 2010 12:31 PM (1 minute ago)

-- Do you feel superior when you see Von Trier films? I don't. I feel like I'm implicated in them - that's part of what I meant by challenging the audience.

xp Tuomas - Dancer in the Dark is the one Von Trier film I disliked.

loved dancer in the dark, courteney cox is v cute in that

lol

Okay, like I said I've refused to watch any von Trier movies after DitD, but this "suffering women" trilogy (Breaking the Waves, Idiots, Dancer in the Dark) is certainly much more about conventional pleasures than any Haneke movie I've seen. Like I said, they're all about catharsis, which is as conventional as a cinematic pleasure can be, and Haneke certainly doesn't want to provide the audience anything like that.

(x-post to Sarah)

Do you feel superior when you see Von Trier films? I don't. I feel like I'm implicated in them - that's part of what I meant by challenging the audience.

lol sux 2 be u. i know you're *supposed to be* implicated, because that's what brechtian dramturgy is *supposed* to do. but does it? not ime.

feel so conflicted when tuomas is otm.

picking it up again, taking it down to #86 and then continuing with 85-71 tomorrow...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v212/etienne_saint/lives-1.jpg

I wasn't really that fussed about it until the epilogue section, and then I found it very affecting. But the final scene went over my schmaltz limits, yes.

Before all that, there was a good sense of claustrophobic paranoia evoked, I guess, and it did sort of make me see how a man could get into the mindset of justifying torture to himself, but other than that, yes, the main body of the film I found a bit disappointing, given the hype.

― Alba

I think a bigger influence on his change of heart was supposed to be him realising that his colleagues were corrupt. He was an idealist who believed in the communist project and had come to justify brutality in its defence. When he saw others being cynical andd using the party system for personal gain, the whole thing started to unravel for him, and that allowed him to start to see his victims as real humans rather than counter-revolutionaries.

― Alba

Sure, I think that's definitely true - maybe my issue was more that I was never truly convinced of Spacey's absolute faith in the Stasi project. I wanted to understand why this guy had total faith in the system that was keeping him living in a shitty apartment, eating gnarly frozen dinners, and ordering mega-boobed prostitutes.

― Ben Boyerrr

i thought this was pretty great.

my favorite detail was the naievete of the GDR writers when they got serious about being defiant -- it was the editor from the West that knew more about what their government can do and will do and is doing.

― gff

#89

The Lives of Others
Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
2006
Germany
(221 points, 12 votes, 1 first place)

suckd fat commie dik

Watching vt films, I get the impression I'm watching someone who thinks he's clever by being outrageous and saying nothing at all. "look at these half-assed ideas I've got aren't they challenging and provocative? Jokes bruv I didn't really mean any of it or did I?" thanks for wasting my time, asswipe.

TLoO maybe the worst yet.

i hope morbs is going to do a worst 10 of these 100

The Lives of Others is one of my favorites - it wasn't my #1 pick - the people that disliked it, why do you think it's awful?

xpost I can see how Haneke tries (and fails) to implicate bourgeois viewers in Cache but I can't see how Von Trier's doing that. BTW and DID are just absurd, sadistic rituals which leave me completely estranged. Haven't seen Dogville though, so maybe he gets implicatin' there, but I can't imagine ever wanting to see one of his movies again.

the words "yeah you like that doncha" should flash on the screen at the end of every von trier movie

― 鬼の手 (Edward III), Wednesday, February 3, 2010 1:24 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^ I'm gonna make this every 10th post in the thread if you ppl don't stop talking about lvt

Lives is sentimental twaddle, but i'm sure the film's thread has my contemporary thoughts.

my contemporary thoughts by dr morbius

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_370/1235758790ZmJX78.jpg

it's the sequel to my antediluvian thoughts

lol

lives was utterly ponderous, leaned heavy on the lol art house tactic of using inert pacing and gloomy lighting as a proxy for gravitas

Not seen Lives. Probably should, but foreign film oscars tend to be red flags.

Breaking the Waves (and probably Dancer in the Dark - which I feel asleep halfway through, so I won't pretend that I really "saw" it) - I read in relation to traditional melodrama, as well as all sorts of films where you sit in the comfort of the theater or your home and watch people suffer. It's just taken to extremes. The Idiots is less about suffering, and more about performance and in a sense, avant-garde-ness and art. But I could be finding things in these films that are idiosyncratic and weird.

"a bit schmaltzy," you bet.

If only more playwrights and actresses had introduced Stasi loners to Brecht, the Wall woulda been down in 1970.

― Dr Morbius, Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:48 AM (1 year ago

Breaking the Waves (and probably Dancer in the Dark - which I feel asleep halfway through, so I won't pretend that I really "saw" it) - I read in relation to traditional melodrama, as well as all sorts of films where you sit in the comfort of the theater or your home and watch people suffer. It's just taken to extremes. The Idiots is less about suffering, and more about performance and in a sense, avant-garde-ness and art. But I could be finding things in these films that are idiosyncratic and weird.

― sarahel, Wednesday, February 3, 2010 8:56 PM (45 seconds ago) Bookmark

no, that's about right... they are like psychologically implausible and unpleasant-to-watch melodramas. i don't know why you think people watch melodramas, but im p sure it wasn't to gloat. i think 'the idiots' is better than those films but basically feh.

like this Alfred post:

Then there's also this. Please ignore that it was posted on the fucking Corner.

1. The fundamental element of the plot, the Stasi officer Wiesler helping Dreymann, is such utter nonsense that it ruins the whole movie. It would never happen that some one with over 20 years of continuous indoctrination by the Stasi would help a mortal enemy of the State (and by Stasi definition, that's what Dreymann was). Even if Wiesler could have somehow come to see Dreymann as something other than an enemy, he still would have done what the Stasi expected, because he (Wiesler) would always have been watched and his work constantly checked.

2. That Dreymann could think he was not being observed and bugged is also utter nonsense. This guy was a top playwright who associated with the highest cultural officials and he thought he was not of interest to the State !?!? My wife was continuously watched and bugged simply because she had foreign diplomats as patients. Being watched and bugged was something every East German assumed was part of their life.
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Friday, April 27, 2007 1:42 PM (2 years ago)

btw i just checked out the ILM thread and uh... never mind

lol

although i mean realistically not sure what u wanted this thread to be if its not a discussion of pros and cons?

also lives of others was deeply boring and proud of itself

bring on the statham

i don't know why you think people watch melodramas, but im p sure it wasn't to gloat.

- Not on a conscious level, no, but with some there is a sense of superiority in the relationship between audience and character/scenario. Melodrama provides opportunities for sympathy/empathy (among other things) - and one could argue that the "Oh, poor thing!" response from the viewer is in a sense condescending and comes from a superior position.

i think 'the idiots' is better than those films but basically feh.

The Idiots I really like - I prefer Von Trier movies where he's examining institutions or ideas about art, performance, film than his takes on gender dynamics.

although i mean realistically not sure what u wanted this thread to be if its not a discussion of pros and cons?

― Lamp, Wednesday, February 3, 2010 4:03 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ya i guess i find it more enjoyable to read why people like stuff than the other way around, but i am just as guilty as anybody else of this

i guess i just find the whole "i hate this! i hate this! i hate this!" vibe a little wearying tbh

*lies down on couch with damp washcloth over eyes*

im looking forward to keepin it pos if some of the stuff i voted for arrives, but so far i either didnt like this stuff or haven't seen it, with the exception of capturing the friedmans, but idk how to verbalize why its as good as it is.

Thought this was going to be about shitting on everyone's taste my bad.

ya i guess im just tired of complaining about most of these movies

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v212/etienne_saint/memoriesmurderdrainage.jpg

memories of murder is astonishing. it veers between unbearably intense drama and disturbingly dark humor--actually it doesn't really "veer between," it sort of stays in both registers at once.

- Amateur(ist)

Memories of Murder (great film about South Korea's first serial killer with a v moving ending)

- xyzzzz

Just finished watching Memories of Murder. It owns my soul.

- jeffrey

#88

Memories of Murder
Bong Joon-Ho
2003
South Korea
222 points, 10 votes

discussion of pros and cons >>>>>>> ballot discussion >>>>>>> fantasy football

Not on a conscious level, no, but with some there is a sense of superiority in the relationship between audience and character/scenario. Melodrama provides opportunities for sympathy/empathy (among other things) - and one could argue that the "Oh, poor thing!" response from the viewer is in a sense condescending and comes from a superior position.

mm. this is actually the critics/theorists displaying *their* superiority to the target audience of melodramas. when they say "oh, poor thing", it's because they project themselves into the film and because they relate to it. i don't see why you'd think they imagine themselves to be superior.

it's not how i watch films anyway. what's wrong with sympathy/empathy?

(i'm aware this is linked to a marxist analysis (of sorts) but it's now just a rote and condescending routine -- no-one who thinks this is setting out to, you know, "change society", as the 70s film theorists reckoned they were.)

hey when marebito makes the top five i will write a short form essay on its merits, pinky swear

xxxpost ok hahaha that gives me some hope actually

we are keeping it pos, ie I can't believe you ppl voted for that piece of shit!