Unless you’ve been living under a rock for a couple months, the debate over Lars Von Trier’s latest film ‘Antichrist’ continues to rage on. With it being released in the UK this Friday the amount of blogs, news pieces and interviews with the Danish “bad boy” has reached fever pitch. Surprising? No, not really. But just as I thought everyone was being rather adult about the whole matter and actually conducting proper conversations about the connotations, messages and point of this film, out of the blue comes a piece like this, labelling it grotesque, making calls for it to be banned and even taking a pop at the British Board of Film Classification. For all the righteous blathering and cries to protect children from such extreme content (Won’t somebody please think of the children?!) it brings an interesting point to films that push the envelope and shock audiences and critics alike. And is it just me or you can you hear Mary Whitehouse giggling manically from beyond the grave?
Although that’s not the only one, critics giving it a positive review have left disclaimers apologising for recommending it, some are calling it misogynistic, depraved and asking whether it’s the sickest film in the history of cinema. Everyone seems to be entirely missing the point, isn’t all of this chatter and outrage only serving to play directly into Von Trier’s hand? All it’s going to do is stoke up interest in people who would never usually bother with this sort of film (me, a person who is still scared of Chucky and cries when getting an injection, being a prime example) and Von Trier is laughing at our expense.
But isn’t shock sometimes a good thing for films to do? It was shocking when Bambi’s mum was killed, it was shocking when Malcolm McDowell sang “Singing in the Rain” whilst beating the crap out of a couple, it was shocking when Linda Blair’s head spun around and there was outrage when Monty Python dared to satirise religion. I’m not saying that ‘Antichrist’ is going to be heralded as one of the greatest films ever in the future but in an age when we all complain about the remakes and sequels that are saturating our cinemas surely a new or daring film (even though I’ve heard of the similarities with Vinyan) should be celebrated, shouldn’t it?
After seeing ‘Antichrist’, like with most hyped films it was somewhat of a letdown. And if you want to see something truly misogynistic why don’t you try and watch anything starring Kate Hudson. But then again that’s just my opinion and unlike that journalist who didn’t bother, you should see it for yourself, just don’t take a date you intend on sleeping with afterwards.
