CriticSociety- film reviews

Review

Dogville

Director

Lars von Trier

Year

2003

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Monday, August 25, 2008

The ever controversial Lars von Trier took Cannes by storm in 2003. His Dogville was widely considered the favorite to take the Palm d’Or, but Gus Van Sant’s little-seen Elephant (2003) took it. It doesn’t matter; after all he doesn’t care and keeps making very interesting and provocative movies. And actors know that. The ensembles he’s able to put together are dreamy despite the tough subjects he’s known to tackle and his unusual directing ways. Dogville proved to be the love-it-or-hate-it movie of said year, confirming the old adage that when your work provokes strong reactions then you must’ve done something good.

It is 30’s Dogville, a small and quiet Colorado town with about 15 citizens up in the mountains. Tom (Paul Bettany) is their leader, an idealistic writer who welcomes Grace (Nicole Kidman) when she arrives while escaping from gangsters. Tom manages to convince the townspeople to cover up for her so she ends up staying. In return she tries to help each citizen in every way she can, thus changing the place in unexpected ways.

Lars von Trier directed Dogville from his own screenplay. I don’t always love the way he shoots his movies; whether using too much hand-held cameras, shitty photography or mainly improvised dialogue, he always has a peculiar way of putting his message across. In this case, there’s none of the aforementioned devices, but he came up with a new one which certainly alienated some people: the entire movie takes place in an almost empty soundstage in which there are chalk signals drawn on the floor indicating where the different houses and streets are. Besides that, there are only basic props that are needed for the story to be understood. The gimmick is surprising at first, but I instantly got used to it and loved it. It’s strikingly original, effective and different; it also demands something extra from the audience.

Then again, the story taking place in front of our eyes is so strong that it’s easy to forget about everything else. Von Trier has been very critical of the American society for years, and this is his definite insult movie towards the country. What’s funny to me is that I didn’t feel like the movie belonged to America if it were not because it takes place there, for the themes he touches are mostly about humanity in general.

Von Trier does an almost unbearable study on the human condition, which at one point he compares to that of the animal nature. It’s difficult to say what we would do in the situations these characters are faced with, but one thing is for sure: perhaps the movie is not that far away from reality. And that’s scary. I was especially intrigued by the way Von Trier shows that a good, innocent person can almost never survive uncorrupted in a world like ours. No matter how good your intentions are, there’s always going to be something that will come your way and either you are strong enough or you end up joining the enemy. The ending is such a shocker; I still marvel at how far it goes; just brilliant.

Dogville clocks at around three hours and is divided into nine delineated chapters. It also has a well-written (and delivered) John Hurt narration that is nicely complemented by the use of music.

As performances go, it’s really hard to go wrong with a cast like this. Every single performer is extraordinary. And it also helps that every character is given enough time to become three-dimensional. Nicole Kidman, leading them all, is astounding; she’s luminous, credible and very talented. Paul Bettany also does a fine job and the supporting cast, which includes Chloe Sevigny, Stellan Skarsgard, Lauren Bacall, James Caan, Patricia Clarkson, Jeremy Davies, Phillip Baker Hall and many more is top-notch.

“Some things you have to do yourself.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Other reviews of Dogville (2003): Groucho

Review

Dogville

Director

Lars von Trier

Year

2003

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Thursday, March 17, 2005

As I told my friend Morris right after seeing this movie, which was his favorite from last year, and took me several months to finally watch, was that 1) I hated it, and 2) It sure was worth watching. But boy, did I hate it. Every second of it, every line, every character, every twist and turn, everything. Then I started thinking about it. I hated it even more because it stuck to my head. It wasn’t just the fact that it mostly lacks scenery and relies on an empty set with chalk-drawn locations. It was the fact that I had seen a mean, twisted, bizarre movie whose message I didn’t quite get. Does Lars von Trier really enjoy making women suffer in his movies for the hell of it? Couldn’t have been that; after all, his previous efforts worked much better. This must have been an allegory of some sort. I hear he’s anti-American, but who knows, the subject here appears to be more universal. If anything, I would say he created a metaphor for international abuse and what happens when a formerly subdued entity becomes a world power. But maybe that’s not it. I’d like to see it more as a study of human behavior and human nature. But even in that way I would say it goes over-the-top and creates caricatures mostly. Let’s get into further detail.

Fragile Grace (Nicole Kidman) gets to the insignificant town of Dogville, Colorado, during the 1930s, while escaping from killer gangsters. She’s rescued and protected by self-appointed spokesman Tom (Paul Bettany), who falls in love with her almost immediately. The other 14 adult citizens of Dogville don’t really love the idea of protecting such a fugitive, but they will agree if she proves to be an asset. So she works for every one of them and is finally taken in. But, as things get worse from the outside world concerning Grace, including the fact that the law is also after her (probably after the mafia pulled some strings), Dogville’s citizens naturally require more from her if they’re to take such chances. More work, less pay, and every little extra anyone can think of, would probably do.

The first thing worth mentioning about this movie, which I already did by the way, is its lack of scenery. Just like that famous play, “Our Town”, it kind of leads the spectators into grabbing the story for what it is and just imagine the rest. It creates a less distracting environment, and I loved that. And maybe because there’s nothing to distract us, it’s easy to appreciate the excellent performances of everyone, and the intense subject matters of the story.

The story goes from compelling to ridiculous to absurd. It’s got to be an allegory, because there’s no way anyone could do what the main character does. I just don’t see a way, especially halfway through. I’m sorry I can’t get into detail, but it’s just unbelievable, mostly when you get to realize the way things really were since the beginning. The process of people transitioning from friendly to thankful to abusive is credible though, and I would believe that under the circumstances they would react that way. But all of them? Twisted town. Maybe it could happen, but I would think someone would’ve stepped front to demand a different behavior. Does Tom count? I don’t think so. I think he’s the worst of the bunch, and apparently someone quite important agrees with me.

Now, the story is quite demanding, that’s for sure. I appreciate von Trier’s effort because it’s pretty obvious he wanted to propose, and he achieved that. I don’t want to look dumb or anything, I obviously enjoyed the fact that it was so strikingly original, and so dense, too. Nothing farther from mainstream entertaining, but quite a ride for those who appreciate different stuff. Problem is, I just didn’t connect with the story. I wonder how someone can. And I wonder how I could get through the whole section with the anti-escape device. Whoa boy.

The cast is uniformly magnificent. This is the kind of role Kidman does best so she’s great in the lead. Accompanying her with awesome results are Lauren Bacall, Patricia Clarkson, Philip Baker Hall, Ben Gazzara, Stellan Skarsgård, Chloë Sevigny and many more. John Hurt provides the narration, which is outstanding except for the fact that sometimes it’s intrusive and says a lot that I’d like to have heard in dialogue. I won’t accuse von Trier of being a lazy writer, but I do think he exceeded the narration a bit.

So with a solid cast, striking direction, original ideas, and a weird, unsettling story not quite handled the way it should, Dogville is well-worth watching… but not a good film.

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Other reviews of Dogville (2003): Morris