Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Cannes 2009 – Día 6

Von Trier

Lars Von Trier en el centro junto a sus dos víctimas, Charlotte Gainsbourg y Willem Dafoe.

Cannes es el único lugar del mundo donde se puede presentar en competencia una película sobre una pareja traumada luego del suicidio de su hijo tras haberlos visto teniendo sexo. Una película en la que hay desde eyaculaciones de sangre hasta organos genitales femeninos mutilados en close-up.

Y Lars von Trier es el único director que pudo haberla pensado y hecho. Un provocateur que luego de años sin dar nada de que hablar sabía que la única forma de volver a la palestra pública era con un proyecto como Antichrist, una película que hizo durante un período de dos años de depresión profunda que hará a sus esfuerzos anteriores Dancer in the Dark y Breaking the Waves parecer películas de Disney.

Esquivando preguntas que le desagradaban en las ruedas de prensa, autoproclamándose el “Mejor Director del Mundo” y dejando claro que esta película la hizo para agradarse sí mismo y no para un público al que considera sólo un invitado, Von Trier logró lo que buscaba:

But my God, what a screening! What a reaction! Critics howling, hooting, shrieking.

There's no way Antichrist isn't a major career embarassment for costars Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg, and a possible career stopper for Von Trier.

It's an out-and-out disaster -- one of the most absurdly on-the-nose, heavy-handed and unintentionally comedic calamities I've ever seen in my life. On top of which it's dedicated to the late Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky, whose rotted and decomposed body is now quite possibly clawing its way out of the grave to stalk the earth, find an axe and slay Von Trier in his bed.” – Jeff Wells, Hollywood Elsewhere.


Whether this is a bad, good or great film is entirely beside the point. It is an audacious spit in the eye of society. It says we harbor an undreamed-of capacity for evil. It transforms a psychological treatment into torture undreamed of in the dungeons of history. Torturers might have been capable of such actions, but they would have lacked the imagination. Von Trier is not so much making a film about violence as making a film to inflict violence upon us, perhaps as a salutary experience. It’s been reported that he suffered from depression during and after the film. You can tell. This is the most despairing film I’ve ever have seen.

What can be said is that von Trier, after what many found the agonizing boredom of his previous Cannes films “Dogville” and “Manderlay,” has made a film that is not boring. Unendurable, perhaps, but not boring. For relief I am looking forward to the overnight reviews of those who think they can explain exactly what it means. In this case, perhaps, a film should not mean, but be.” — Roger Ebert.

“As if deliberately courting critical abuse, the Danish bad boy densely packs this theological-psychological horror opus with grotesque, self-consciously provocative images that might have impressed even Hieronymus Bosch, as the director pursues personal demons of sexual, religious and esoteric bodily harm, as well as feelings about women that must be a comfort to those closest to him. Traveling deep into NC-17 territory, this may prove a great date movie for pain-is-pleasure couples. Otherwise, most of the director's usual fans will find this outing risible, off-putting or both -- derisive hoots were much in evidence during and after the Cannes press screening -- while the artiness quotient is far too high for mainstream-gore groupies” – Variety.

“Una tomadura de pelo notable, una provocación barata.

Una estupidez que tendrá cierto éxito entre su parroquia, pero que para cualquier espectador normal es para darle una hostia”. – Carlos Boyero, El País.

De la otra película en competencia, Looking for Eric de Ken Loach, mejor ni hablar ya.

I'm reading: Cannes 2009 – Día 6Tweet this!

No comments:

Powered By Blogger