Genres

Visitors Review

grazielakeller 2012-05-25 06:03:09

A rape of science

I have never seen a movie so scientifically incorrect in my life. Atsome point I was laughing hysterically. From the half of the movie on,every scene is a rape of science. It was so bad... I never thought I would see something like that... The rest of the story is not interesting enough or believable to makeup for the horror of very basic scientific mistakes. So basic ones!Unbelievable! First graders can see the mistakes! Another thing that displeased me on the movie, but that is a matter oftaste, is the shaking camera, which made me sick of my stomach to theextent of having to close my eyes during some periods.

juneauz 2012-05-24 15:27:40

A masterpiece.

Loved every second of it. Intense, visually stunning, true in itscomplexity, with an amazing, rewarding final. I don't think I canpraise it enough. The first sequence is a passionate tribute toTarkovskij, but not without a meaning: it displays immediately wherethe movie is heading to, a pact with the audience that amplifies somuch the climax throughout the movie. You know what's coming... youjust can't stop it, like pessimism itself. The acting from both Dunstand Gainsbourg deserves applause, maybe even awarding, but in a movielike this you can't separate the actors from the master behind it: withhis photography and his timing, the director amplifies every smallsentence with new meaning, adding more levels to the naked script.Mystery, love, anger are hidden behind whispered words just like asmall planet is hidden behind the sun. There's so much you can learnfrom this movie, and learning has never been so beautiful. Thank youLars Von Trier.

moonis-929-246299 2012-05-22 20:55:54

One of the Best Films by the visionary film maker

Life is only on earth & not for long. That quote by Kristen Dunst - thelead actress of "Melancholia" hit me hard. It is a powerful film withan easy & slow pace. I have never seen a movie with so painfulbeautiful emotions. It is a milestone visionary film with breathtakingphotography.Story is simple. In first part, we see Justine getting married and sheis very happy. However, her family does not support her much. They livein their own world of materialism & caring only about expenses. Herdivorced mother hates her, as she does not believe marital blissanymore. During her wedding, Justine notices a bright star in the sky.In second part, we found that bright star is actually an anothercelestial body called Melancholia which is going to hit earth.Consequently, we see how people find the importance of life when oneactually loosing it. Instead of focusing on end of the world, thecomplicated human emotions have shown with dash of realism.Kristen Dunst has given performance of her lifetime. She willdefinitely win an Oscar for that. The direction Lars Von Trier issimply masterpiece. He is one of the best European filmmakers. Overall,one of the best films of the year so far.

Guy Schellens 2012-05-22 11:15:16

A voyage

Yesterday I had the chance to see Melancholia. I was a bit anxiousgiven the mixed reception here (either euphoric or very negative).It seems the media are talking more about thedisaster-press-conference-from-hell Lars gave in Cannes. Which is ashame.Like always, Lars von Trier does not want to appeal to the generalpublic, but in stead wants to present the viewer something unique andhonest.It was influenced by his own "melancholia", of which he suffered whenworking on this project.I, for one saw solid acting and great directing from a person whocarefully observes and understands human interaction. For me it works.This movie is by no means perfect but it was thought provoking, andheart touching and that's exactly what a decent movie should try toachieve. Thank you for reading my opinion.

edgemarty-152-556428 2012-05-21 15:51:19

Time I'll never get back.

The first ten minutes were awesome. The last ten minutes were great!But, that long period in between was tedious.The film had a great cast but the accents differed wildly. Are we tobelieve these diverse looking and sounding people are all closelyrelated? Things could have been better. The director has talent. Iloved Breaking the Waves. I have not given up on Von Trier despite hisCanne interview. It will be interesting to see if this film wins anyawards. The story takes place at a golf course with a hotel on it. Thedysfunctional family and friends are mostly a loathsome bunch. Selfobsessed and quarrelsome, why did these people ever gather together isa mystery.

Ann Hornaday 2012-05-21 05:18:43

A masterwork of grandeur, millennial angst and high romantic style, "Melancholia" takes themes that have marked the best films of 2011 and spins them into a blast of cosmic sparkle dust.

Gidim_Xul 2012-05-19 15:18:46

In Trier's nicest movie, the world ends

One important thing about "Melancholia" is that we're already told thatthe world WILL end in it. Lars von Trier has said it, and if you don'tbelieve a trickster like him, then we have it in the epilogue of thefilm. The epilogue shows really visually stunning scenes from throughout the movie we are about to watch (or rather, more artistic versionsof what is going to happen). This is very reminiscent of "Antichrist"with the occasional artistic slow-motion shots we got in it, excepteverything is packed in the start of the movie here.After this we're presented with two acts. The first act is "Justine",which is about her and her wedding. Justine (Kirsten Dunst) is aseemingly happy newlywed, and at first we're really feeling theconnection between her and Michael (Alexander Skarsgård) as they laugh,hug, kiss and celebrate their wedding day. As Justine notices a weirdstar in the sky, she also starts acting strange and dozy, andeventually do some things that mess up the party. Claire (CharlotteGainsbourg) and her husband John (Kiefer Sutherland) are the hosts ofthe party and paid for the whole thing, so needless to say they're nothappy with how Justine is screwing up her own party. The second act is"Claire", and it starts at the aftermath of the wedding party. Justineis staying with Claire, John and their son and is really weak. So muchthat she can't even take a bath without help. Mean while Claire isworried about the planet that is suppose to be flying by Earth, but herhusband assures her that scientists have said it will miss.It's hard to know how much to write about the story when everyonealready knows that Earth will end. The fact that we know this makes itvery interesting because even though the audience knows it (as I said,we even see it in the epilogue) we still get some weird hopes that itwon't be true after all. Sometimes we even forget the planet alltogether because the first half of the movie focuses much more on thewedding and Justine. It's in the second act that everything reallystarts going as the planet Melancholia gets close enough to be spotted.The two sisters are really interesting to study, with Justine getting apessimistic view at life and almost feels an attraction to the planet.And Claire is the much more humane part, with all the worry and panicthat you can imagine getting in a situation like this.The movie is shot, as usual with Lars, with hand-held. Most of the filmis pretty classic Lars in that sense, and most of it is also lessvisually striking than "Antichrist". But when the movie really doesfocus on beauty, it beats "Antichrist" hands down. And that's saying alot because to me that "Antichrist" is one of most visually stunningfilms I've seen. Even though the style is directly influenced by AndreiTarkovsky, I think Lars made it his own. "Melancholia" shares some ofthat visual style but as the planet becomes part of the visuals and notjust the story, it's really amazing. The effects of the planet looksreally good. Lars clearly knows how much and how little to put in hisfilms to make it feel more than it looks. This movie is the leastdisaster-like disaster movie that I have ever seen, as thepsychological aspect remains the goal and the planet is the backdrop.And of course it ends with the best shot of the movie, it's reallybeautiful and I'm happy I got to see it on the big screen.Our two main leads, Kirsten Dunst and Charlotte Gainsbourg are bothgreat in their roles. Kirsten won Best Actress at the Cannes festivaland she actually did a great job with her dozy, off-beat performance.I'm not sure I've seen her act as well as she did in this one. And thenwe have Charlotte... Her performance in "Antichrist" is absolutelyharrowing and must've been a tough act to follow, but luckily she wasgiven such a different part as the good, humane sister. Yet again shedid a brilliant job and quickly make you forget her as the crazy bitchin "Antichrist". I wouldn't know who to give the Best Actress Award toif I were to pick between Kirsten and Charlotte.Even though "Melancholia" probably is Lars von Trier's nicest movie todate, it's not without playing on your feelings. There are funnymoments, very sad moments and extremely intense moments. It feelsstrange to say that it's his nicest when the world ends, but it is.It's one of his most innocent, calm and atmospheric films. It doesn'tleave you happy nor sad, you just feel hollow and empty. Ignore thescientific factual errors, you've got what you came for - Lars vonTrier's film about the end of the world. Yet you're not sure if you gotwhat you wanted when it finally ended. It ends in such a bang, but it'sa peaceful bang. Too peaceful? Not at all, it goes hand-in-hand withthe rest of the movie. Would I say it's his best movie? No, I stillthink "Riget" (I&II), "Breaking The Waves" and "Antichrist" are abovethis movie. This might be tied with some of his films, but I'm justclarifying where I stand on it. I think "Melancholia" is a fantasticmovie, and I want to watch it again when I get a chance.For more reviews: FilmBizarro.com

Thomas Teuber 2012-05-18 23:31:18

Just Puzzled (and bored and thus angry)

Yes, also this review may contain spoilers. I have not much to add tothose who wrote that it may be best to watch the first 5 minutes of thefilm, then go for a dinner or doing the dishes or mowing the lawn, comeback after 2 hours to watch the last 30 seconds and you will not havemissed anything.Except some exceptionally bad acting (who said Kirsten Dunst will getan Oscar nomination for what is called "acting" in this movie?). And ofcourse the unavoidable hand-camera. Another one of LvT's pieces of art:let a cameraman who heavily suffers from Parkinson Disease make amovie, add some very bad lighting technicians and yipeee... we have anew style of film-making, we call it the "Dogma"-style and declareeverything that is done this way a "work of art". Period. Like it orleave it... I prefer to leave it.And I did not even mention the script which is as bad as the wholemovie (coming as no surprise, as the author is the same).My best guess (and excuse for LvT) is that he was watching too much"2001 - A Space Odyssey" and wanted to make an evenly mysterious workof art. In being mysterious he may have succeeded, but the result isnot a work of art. It's the product of a man who apparently doesn'tcome to grips with his life and the world he lives in, so that in theend the only question that remains is: What does the man want to tellus???I really tried to approach this film open minded, but Mr. Trier hasjust wasted 2 hours of my life.

Philip French 2012-05-15 18:56:52

Heavy, though without weight or gravitas - a solipsistic, narcissistic, inhuman affair.

Christian_Dimartino 2012-05-15 08:00:38

Von Trier's film has a slow start, but definitely delivers.

Controversial director Lars Von Trier is back once again with hislatest dark marvel, Melancholia. With his last film, Antichrist, hetackled the topic of the outcomes of losing a loved one, and it wasn'tpretty. This time, he tackles a topic that many have tackled before:the end of the world, and tackles it better than anybody in the historyof disaster films.Kirsten Dunst gives the performance of her career as Justine, adepressed newlywed who is a frightened, self destructive wreck. Thefilm focuses on her, and her sympathetic sister, Claire (playedpitch-perfectly by Charlotte Gainsbourg, the underrated actress whoscared the hell out of me in Antichrist), and their relationship.Amongst their relationship, there is a planet named Melancholia that isdrawing nearer and nearer to planet earth.The prologue is fantastically filmed and gripping, but I just wish thefilm went back to it.The first part, which revolves around Justine'swedding party, is engaging, yet slow. The film really kicks into gearin the final hour, which revolves around Claire's relationship withJustine, her husband David(played by Keifer Sutherland), and theearth's demise.What sets Melancholia aside from other disaster movies is it'scomplexity. also, it's more of a character study, while other disastermovies give a little bit of character, and mainly focus on the disasterat hand. But here's the thing: The film's hero, the mystery that sheis, is a disaster. Justie is a wreck, and in Von Trier's world, earthis going to be wrecked next.Overall, Melancholia is supremely acted, strangely beautiful,beautifully strange, beautiful to look at, but a little slow in thefirst act. Though not many have heard of it, Melancholia would be therole model for any disaster film in the near future.A-*Note* I re-watched the film that same night, and more makes sense.After giving it thought, Melancholia deserves an A. A-

blackvenom-1 2012-05-10 18:04:13

An interesting visual and psychological experience

Lars Von Trier has never disappointed me with his polarising but deeplyinteresting films. After several triumphant efforts ('Breaking theWaves', 'Dancer in the Dark' and 'Dogville')- films that can be calledmasterpieces-he gave us the rather underwhelming 'Manderlay' and afterthat the highly interesting and quite shocking 'Antichrist'. With'Melancholia', Lars decides to settle down and deal with his own demonsin a different, much subtler way. Though the film deals with severalscript problems-for instance the film is divided into two main chapterswhich feel a bit disconnected and the main character's arc isunderdeveloped in several occasions-, it offers a beautiful canvas ofemotions and visually breathtaking imagery.The prologue of the film along with the very last sequence left mecompletely breathless. That was poetry on the big screen. Strengthbeyond emotions. Chilling and and mesmerising, shocking yet beautiful. The film follows Justine's (Kirsten Dunst) growing depression throughthe night of her wedding party, as she eventually collapsesemotionally. Meanwhile, the planet Melancholia is approaching theEarth, causing uncontrollable anxiety to Justine's sister, Claire(Charlotte Gainsbourg), who deals with the possibility of the earth'sdestruction in a totally different way than her depressed sister. Kirsten Dunst gives the best performance of her career. Subtle,poignant and nuanced, Kirsten dives into her character and becomes thisdepressed emotionally destroyed woman. She's absolutely magnetic. I'vealways admired Kirsten. She has given some very underrated performancesin films like 'The Virgin Suicides', 'All Good Things' and 'MarieAntoinette'. In 'Melancholia', she manages to captivate the audiencewith the strength of her performance. Meanwhile, Charlotte Gainsbourgkeeps not disappointing with the maturity of her body of work. Thoughshe doesn't reach the level of brilliance she achieved in 'Antichrist',she gives another beautiful performance, becoming a wreck by the end ofthe film, showing the contrast between her character and Justine's in avery impressive way. Congratulations to both ladies.The cinematography is brilliant, Wagner's Tristan and Isolde prelude ismesmerising and elegiac and there is some haunting harmony andpeacefulness in the film that's actually building to a breathtakingfinale.As I mentioned before, the script faces some several problems. The twohalves definitely feel disconnected, the film doesn't surprise you inthe end (I expect more twists, knowing Lars) and the characters feel abit underdeveloped. That's my main grip with the film. Lovely supporting turns by John Hurt, Charlotte Rampling, KeiferSutherland, Stellan and Alexander Skarsgard, but the two leading ladiesare the ones who steal the show. It's a poetic-yet flawed-and beautiful study of the human soul,refreshing the typical 'disaster movie' genre and focusing on thecharacters rather than on the 'disaster' itself. A worthy effort,another important film in Lars Von Trier's already significantfilmography.

misty_77 2012-05-10 08:54:44

Powerful and meaningful if you've been there

There's a serious polarity in the reviews for this film,and I'm notsurprised. If you've ever suffered depression this bleak movie will hithard, and you'll pick up on all of the subtle messages it sends out.It's done so well it can't be anything other than achingly familiar.The despondency, and the frustration the sufferer feels at their owndespondency, in particular, is well conveyed. Unfortunately I think a large chunk of the people who've seen this film(and there aren't many who have, sadly) went to it expecting a slightlyarty apocalypse movie. It's not a smarter Deep Impact. The (blue)planet Melancholia is just a metaphor for depression. Unrelenting andirresistible, Melancholia has the main character in its thrall.For those who don't "get" this movie, no it's not a pretentious, pseudointellectual flick. Rather it's a well crafted take on the fine detailof a subject matter that you have been fortunate enough to not have hadto understand. Long may that be the case.

Rex Reed 2012-05-09 22:21:45

What, exactly, is the point? Only the director of a pile of crap that includes Dogma, Dancer in the Dark and Antichrist knows for sure, and even that is severely doubtful.

Chris_Docker 2012-05-09 16:04:41

Perhaps one of the year's most important movies

What is the one thing of which you are most certain?. . . certainbeyond your wildest dreams? your worst nightmares? Justine is gettingmarried. A wonderful wedding. Best wedding planner. And as she liftsher head to enjoy the kisses of her groom we sense the sparkle of loveentering what almost might be a world of darkness. Kirsten Dunst comesof age as an actress in this finely sculptured character as asuccessful career woman, enjoying a magnificent day in all its finery,where no expense has been spared. Yet somehow we can sense, in thisbeautifully interiorised performance, that the tinsel of the outerworld means little to Justine. It is not that she is some new-ageunmaterialistic hippy: on the contrary, her powerful mind commands ahigh salary as a tagline creator for a powerful advertising concern.The truth is that Justine suffers from clinical depression. A diseasewith which our director, Lars von Trier, is also afflicted. Yet doesthe film tell us how depressing the world is and ask us to feel sorryfor its leading protagonist? Not at all. While von Trier has used hisown experience to create a vivid reconstruction that goes beyondsympathy or melodrama, the film is ultimately a celebration ofJustine's strength and inner clarity. Her non-attachment to thetrappings of happiness – things in which most people would seem to findsuch joy – is almost Zen-like in its conviction. Why do we go to suchlengths to find meaning in transitory and superficialsense-gratification? Love, the deep and wonderful communication of oneperson with another, can't be bought or bartered. Yet we spend ourlives building castles of sand – even as expressions of 'love' – and ifJustine can't have the real thing in each touch, she certainly doesn'twant to settle for lust dressed up in lace.Von Trier is becoming increasingly operatic in his films. The thememusic from Wagner's Tristan and Isolde, both as a soundtrack and, byimplication, the doomed love it's saga represents, is a perfect settingfor this grand vision of life and meaning. The leitmotif reminds usthat, beneath everything, there is a more serious theme at work. Ifdeath is the only real certainty of life, this is symbolicallyillustrated in the second half of Melancholia. For someone who isdeeply depressed, death is a mere detail. But for others, it is theworst of all possible eventualities. To get the point across in themost vivid way, and also show how Justine's illness gives her astrength denied ordinary mortals, von Trier turns his film into anend-of-the-world movie. A rogue planet (aptly named Melancholia)hurtles through space and, having narrowly missed some of the otherplanets, is on a collision course for Earth. As the actual collisionhas been previewed in the film's opening scenes, we already know thatlast minute intervention (for instance, to save the earthHollywood-style) is not likely.As supporting characters struggle, and eventually lose the battle toconvince themselves that everything is OK, Justine warmly embraces thedevelopment. There are two nude scenes – when one might say that ourheroine is not only naked but that her soul is stripped bare. One iswhen her sister, trying to care for a 'mentally unbalanced' Justine, istrying to persuade her to have a bath. The wretchedness of her sorrowis profound: having endured the symbolic show of an overblown weddingreception, she has lost the one thing that meant something to her. Itis stark contrast to her self-assured second half of the film, whereher calmness is like something I have occasionally witnessed in gentlysmiling hospice patients (who know they are about to die). The secondinstance is more beautiful, although completely unglamorised. As othercharacters swither between denial, fear and bravado ("Let's have aglass of wine outside"), Justine calmly enjoys the epiphany.Identifying with the earth about to meet its nemesis, she bares herselfto the onslaught of the coming planet in a gesture that finds hersprawled in adoration on a hillside.Von Trier's controversial furore at the film's Cannes premiere ensuredwider distribution than might otherwise be expected for an art-houseoffering as dark as Bunuel. This maybe misleads some people into seeinga film with the false expectation of something more mainstream. As oneteenager exclaimed, walking out of the multiplex screening I went to,"I've never sat through such gash in my whole life." But to cinephilesmore attuned to von Trier's style of filmmaking, it probably representshis greatest triumph since Dogville. One could even imagine allusionsto Justine's name with the eponymous novel of de Sade, an abusedprotagonist who accepts approaching death. Raw, original anduncompromising, yet also a work of uplifting beauty, Melancholia is anend-of-the-world movie the likes of which you have never seen before.

SebastienPatenaude 2012-05-08 01:19:23

Warnings and musings from a romantic melancholic

I went to see this in the theatre because I read good critics andbecause the subject matter appealed to me. I tried to keep myexpectations low, but I was disappointed anyway. Disappointed might notbe a strong enough word. Here are my honest impressions, 2 hours afterseeing Melancholia, but first what is it about? Melancholia refers tothe name of a recently discovered planet that's on a collisiontrajectory with Earth. It might or might not hit, but it if it does,it's the end of the world. The film takes mostly place at a very fancymanor, complete with stables and 18-hole golf course, during a weddingreception and then in part 2, some unspecified time later. It focusesmostly on 2 sisters: the younger blonde sister being the bride (KirstenDunst) who seems to struggle with depression, and the older marriedsister (Charlotte Gainsbourg).The start is pretty powerful stuff with super slow-motion scenesdepicting unconventional, dramatic vignettes of the end of the world.Those are not your standard, spectacular scenes, they're more likepaintings featuring the characters or planets. However, even in theintro, some scenes just linger a bit too much. There's some kind ofslightly distorted, older recording of a classical musical pieceplaying in the background (Tristan and Isolde), that will be recurringthroughout and basically the only music you'll hear. This lingeringscenes (without slow-motion after the intro) get worse as time passeson. I understand the need to take this approach sometimes, but in this,the pace is so slow, can stop on such trivial things that it becomestedious and boring. This tedium is aggravated by the almost constantlack of music and/or outright silences. Emotionally, the movie feltempty and disconnected, and seriously, with the impending end of theworld, it shouldn't. The director (and writer) likely wanted to avoidmelodrama, but by doing do evacuated most of the emotional impact. Asfor any romantic drama, you can mostly forget about it. There's a fewaffectionate moments, but mostly I found the film rather cynical andvery nihilistic. Those don't necessarily make for a bad film, but don'twatch this expecting romance.Kirsten Dunst was praised for her role, perhaps unjustly so. Basically,she plays a very depressive woman. It's the art of smiling with yourmouth but not with your eyes, keeping them blank. Yes, she showsvulnerability, dares to be a little topless, she does the job, but it'snot great or very demanding. I found her sister (Gainsbourg) and thesister's husband (Kiefer Sutherland) better. Unfortunately, his subtleperformance was undermined by, what I found, an out-of-character"exit". The kid, who should have been the emotional anchor, wasexpressionless in what I would call "under-acting" as compared toover-acting. I went with a friend, and I asked him what he actuallyliked about it, because he did like it somewhat. He told me there weresome nice images. I replied quickly that there was the intro and themoon clearing scene with Kirsten Dunst, but that, for me, nice pictureswere not enough to make a good film. I would add now that there were afew other nice looking scenes such as those showing Melancholia or thebird's eye view of horses galloping in the mist. However, besidesthose, the camera work was pretty average if not amateurish with thehand-held shaky cam and the mostly static scenes often overstayingtheir welcome.I thought the subject matter of this film was fascinating and there wassuch great potential for something wonderful and thought-provoking.What would you do in such a situation? If you knew that in a year ortwo, everything could seriously end? Not talking about that 2012 Mayanend that has no basis in scientific fact. Let's imagine a chorus-typeof film like Magnolia or Crash with several intimate, personal stories.In fact, let's just imagine one or two personal stories, but well told,emotionally-gripping with stuff actually happening. You won't get thisin Melancholia. I think most people will be bored senseless. In fact,several people walked out during the screening, and I heard otherssaying they were thinking of doing so when the credits were rolling. Inconclusion, I found Melancholia to just be so very dull and such awaste of a promising concept. Neither the stunning beginning nor theshocking ending could save the rest of this disappointing feature.Rating: 2 out of 10 (one extra point for some of the images)

malul12 2012-05-07 08:25:07

The beauty of it

As been said in many reviews before me it blew my mind.Astonishing!Five couples left the movie in Dublin during this movie,i guess thosepeople are the ones writing the bad reviews around here :)The helpness is the strength throughout this movie,it never really getstoo joyful or happy but instead it scales down to pure soul.So here are some thoughts to you want to see something different;1.Do you and your partner want a love story,choose something else. 2.Doyou love Hollywood movies,choose Independence Day.Otherwise,this is the kind of movie that just after seeing it youreally can't put your finger on it.The next day you really appreciatedit.2 days later you realize you have been watching those rare one thatjust like a strong memory lasts with you until you go old and start toforget things.I love to forget this one and see it again for the firsttime,remarkable.

jrmmgr 2012-05-07 19:27:32

Metaphors Galore in Melacholia

If you love parsing out metaphors in films, you'll love this one.Current cultural phenomena are reduced to the interactions of just afew people on an isolated estate, and the metaphors are interwoven,interconnected, apt and rich, which is why I enjoyed "Melancholia".I also loved the 1951 film "When Worlds Collide". Compare that to"Melancholia" and you'll wonder at how the world has changed.Compare it also to "The Road" which attempted a realistic vision ofhumanity faced with the end times but left room for hope. Von Trier has no hope, but the audience craves it, which is why"Melancholia" will not be a popular success.

Terrell Howell 2012-05-06 22:30:23

Good, but not incredibly deep

When a planet is headed on a crash course towards Earth what do you do?You lay down in a pond full of lily pads, that's what you do accordingto Lars von Trier's new apocalyptic art film, Melancholia. KirstenDunst stars as Justine, a young woman whose wedding reception is notgoing entirely as planned. Charlotte Gainsbourg plays her sister,Claire. The film follows the relationship of these two sisters as theyprepare for a planet called Melancholia to crash into the earth,destroying everything. It begins on the night of Justine's weddingreception as things slowly start to fall apart due to the impendingdoom heading for Earth. The film is a visual wonder, yet the storyisn't as thorough as you would expect.Melancholia is a unique film that chronicles the end of the world inits own very special way. There is a lot going on in this film with thestory surrounding Justine and Claire and how these characters evolve asMelancholia gets closer and closer to Earth. Yet, this film seems toboil down to nothing more than two sisters and their reactions to theend of the world and the way they cope with it. I searched for hiddensymbolism and creative nuance that would make this story more thanthat, but I was not successful in my search. I really feel like therewas no more to this film than what you can easily make of it. Perhapsthere doesn't need to be and my expectations were just set too high,but with all the strange occurrences shrouded in ambiguity I expected alot more.Yet, despite the lackluster effect of Melancholia, it is actually avery fascinating film to watch. It has a superb visual quality and apowerful soundtrack to go along with it. The film opens with abeautiful symphony washed over a collection of slow motion frames thatdon't make a lot of sense at the time, but by the end of the film itall makes sense. This haunting montage also throws in glorious shots ofspace, in the vein of Tree of Life, ending with a moving outer spaceshot of Melancholia crashing into Earth.After these wondrous 10-15 minutes we are introduced to all of our maincharacters and the visual style turns into a hand-held shaky cam stylethat exemplifies a kind of fly on the wall perspective. The style hereswitches from slow and tense to jumpy and shaky, full of quick cuts andsporadic edits which do indeed make for an interesting watch. But thisstyle is drawn out so long and so pointlessly at times that it doesn'tstay interesting for the entire film, which clocks in unnecessarily atover two hours.Melancholia is a memorable film with its own style that warrantsattention. Lars von Trier has definitely made the film he wanted tomake in his own special way, and I would say he did a fine job atmaking an interesting film. I just feel like my expectations were notfulfilled when this film, emotionally, didn't strike me at all. It'sslow, mundane, and even trivial at points. I didn't get the sense thatthere was a lot going on here, even though it seems like there shouldhave been. Melancholia is a good film, but nothing incredible.

Joe Morgenstern 2012-05-02 02:42:42

It's about depression, but it isn't depressing at all. In the hands of Mr. von Trier, himself no stranger to emotional distress, bedazzlement is depression's surprising byproduct.

Peter Reyes 2012-05-01 15:19:08

I just don't get it....and neither will you

This is one of those movies that goes nowhere very slowly. It is veryartsy and has hidden meanings that nobody can uncover. There really isno true plot. Rather, you can interpret its many isolated scenes tomean whatever you want. The first hour seems so unconnected to the restof the movie. The last half is even more frustrating because it justdoesn't go anywhere. There really isn't much character development.Everything you need to know about the characters could have been summedup within a 5 minute scene. No depth. No explanations.Basically, its a confusing movie that nobody seems to want to say theyhad no idea what was going on after watching it so they just say, "Thatwas a nice movie," so that they don't look stupid.