Truly Deeply Evil Anti-Human, Anti-Sex Anti-Life 'Movie' - Breaking the Waves (1996) Discussion

True

"The Kingdom" makes me forgive his loathsomeness.

reply

Look up the word 'subversiveness' and think of other artists (in paintings, graphic art, movies, music, etc.) who display such behaviour and how their collective impact was on the western culture (and in this case, the broad variety of films that have been made).

If you never get confronted, would you be able to put things in perspective? Would humanity have progressed if no-one dared to stand up and do things differently, in order to progress?

reply

[–] poetcomic1 13 years ago

You are barking up he wrong tree! I'm a Catholic who so happens to think that 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf' is one of the greatest Catholic movies ever made. I also think Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of Christ' is S&M Porn. You have a truly sophomoric idea of what is 'transgressive'. If you have descended to the point where you think that everything ugly and intrinsically offensive is an 'advance' for humanity, we've nothing left to say!

reply

[–] m_antonioni 12 years ago

I'm a Catholic

Ha! Roman Catholicism is anti-sex and anti-life. Sex is nice, so nice in fact that it's nice to have it even if you do not intend to produce a child. But Catholicism forbids that. So, since having sex for the sheer pleasure of it is part of life, Catholicism is against life.

reply

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

You have a very good point. Man was made for pleasure and will only give up one pleasure for a greater pleasure. St. Thomas Aquinas himself said that. It is called sacrifice. If you found the woman of your (wet) dreams but for the whole week before your date spent all your money on phone sex and didn't have any left to take her out, you have failed to sacrifice present pleasures for a greater pleasure later on. If you can't see any sublime pleasures in, say, sacramental marriage that are greater than the pleasures of animal rutting (granted that IS quite a great pleasure!) than allow that MAYBE there are others who CAN. A prig and Christian hypocrite will look down on you - a true Catholic knows we are all
in the same boat and hopes you can find something more pleasurable - yes even than THAT.

reply

[–] bengalopal 13 years ago

truly, Von Trier is the most evil of filmmakers and surely one of the greatest.

reply

[–] emmaemmaem 12 years ago

You saw that this was rated R, probably knew why, watched it anyway and then felt so incensed you started a message board on it? Why don't you just stick with happy family favourites if this is how you feel? I think this is definitely in my top ten movies but I can see how it's not for everyone. A lot of people do love it though, which is why it won 41 international film awards and was nominated for 13 others.

So you don't watch films with cruel or evil characters in them? You don't agree that there are small villages in the world where people live to fundamentalist Christian values? You don't think that people in desperate situations do things they wouldn't normally do? I had to write to you because your title was just too amusing to not write back.

As for the bit about Lars's appearance. Hilarious. Icing on the cake.

I think you're trying to tell us you didn't like the film?

.....
"No time for the old in-out,love-I'm just here to check the metre"

reply

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

I'd be interested in your reply to my SECOND post on this same thread. You certainly have your set ideas about who and what I am.

reply

[–] emmaemmaem 12 years ago

I'd be interested in your replies to my FIRST response. :)

Again, do you prefer movies with good characters and happy endings? Do you think these make you think about society?

To be honest, your religion isn't that relevant to me - I don't see how you can't see it as an interesting film. I also think it's weird that you can't see the amount of reputable awards this film has won internationally and think that maybe there's something you are missing from the way you describe it. I think you are giving it far too much power by describing it as evil and anti-human. It's a movie.

I am a woman who thinks that female sexuality is way under-explored in movies and Lars Von Trier at least attempts to explain the possibly destructive nature of the notions of 'obedience' and 'submission'.

I don't want to have an argument with you and I'm sorry if you think I have pigeon-holed you into some set ideas but I do find your thread a bit bizarre as you don't even attempt to explain what you don't like about it. Is the fact that you are Catholic meant to explain your position entirely with no further explanation needed? Or are we supposed to automatically know what you mean?

Would you prefer a world where we can't explore or talk about nasty things that happen? They now think at least 1 in 6 US women will be raped or attempted to be raped (most rapes are still unreported). Would it be better if we pretended this didn't happen and represented an idealistic (and, at the moment, unrealistic) world where this didn't happen?

I think films perform a social function by challenging people's opinions on difficult issues like these. Personally, I would prefer more movies dared to deal with tough topics and generated these sorts of discussions.
.....
"No time for the old in-out,love-I'm just here to check the metre"

reply

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

I'm just discussing a movie. I didn't think the people in it, the relations the sexuality were realistic. One of my favorite Catholic movies is Edward Albee's 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf'. I also so happen to think that the film, "The Passion of Christ' is worse than this movie because it is far more dishonest - it is disguised S&M porn passing as a religious film.

The dissociation of sex from both reproduction and deep interpersonal relationship leads to a debased humanity. I've seen it happen in my lifetime.
I hold to the Thomistic proposition. "Man was made for pleasure." It is our created nature. Mindless, mutually agreed upon rutting is indeed intensely pleasurable! But can you conceive that there are higher pleasures though that entail some sacrifice? I believe that to 'use' another person for sexual pleasure as though they were less than a full human being in ANY way by ANY one (and in marriage too) is intrinsically wrong. There is a continuum of sexually 'using' a person (even in a subtle sense) to outright rape.

Women exploring their sexuality is getting boring. I'm a child of the sixties and they have been exploring their 'sexuality' as long as I can remember. If I was a young woman I'd rather take the time to become expert in martial arts. Also, I believe every woman between 18 and 70 without a police record should be issued a concealed hand gun and taught to use it. Now THAT would be really 'socially helpful' in preventing rape.

reply

[–] emmaemmaem 12 years ago

OK, I agree with you on some points. I don't think what happened in the movie was right either - and I agree with you that people should always respect each other as humans - but I don't think Von Trier wanted us to agree with what was happening either. I think this movie works as a cautionary tale for blindly trying to please other people, instead of yourself and the problems with this sort of sacrifice. I think Von Trier is a great moralist and wants us to see how dangerous a world where we obey without question can be.

I am a young(ish) woman and I don't think women are done with exploring their sexuality. I also don't think sex leads to "a debased humanity", I don't see any problem with consensual sex at all - "deep interpersonal relationship" or not. Rather, I believe that violence and censorship leads to a debased society. Your solution of giving every young woman a handgun doesn't sound that good to me. (I'm not American and don't believe people should have guns. I live in Melbourne and don't know anyone who has a gun. Maybe it's a cultural difference). I also don't see how you can know how you'd feel if you were a young woman, I have no idea how I'd feel about all this if I were an older man :)

In regards to the movie, we see different things. I am a Lars von Trier fan from way back (particularly this film and Dogville). I know he isn't for everyone but I was particularly amused by your subject line. I still don't see how it is anti-human, anti-sex or anti-life and I wish you had answered the question I have asked you twice - do you prefer movies with happy endings and nice characters? - because I am bored to tears with those! I'd rather see something where I don't know how characters are going to react or what is going to happen, even if that means they are less realistic at least they are saying something different. So I seek out quirky, arthouse films like this one.

I wasn't bought up Catholic, I am agnostic and do not watch movies through religious eyes so maybe that's another way we are different.
Haven't seen Passion of the Christ so don't have anything to say about that.

Having said all this it's nice to debate movies like these and I have enjoyed reading your responses. :)
.....
"No time for the old in-out,love-I'm just here to check the metre"

reply

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

I like happy endings that arise out of legitimate hope - I'm only human. I just watched Buffalo '66 by Vincent Gallo and it had a happy ending but WHAT unhappy characters! Believe me, if you've never seen it, it is NOT 'The Sound of Music'! I was joking about the guns. I don't see any 'problem' with consensual sex except the fact that you will never, ever know what you have lost forever. Its like having an immensely valuable wooden crucifix and burning it in a stove to keep warm and saying, "what's the problem, I was cold and I feel good?". It has been nice talking to you! Agnosticism and free thinking simply means that a person has decided never to have a definite opinion about the ONLY important things in life. It is not 'good' at all and no 'good' can conceivably come of it.

reply

[–] emmaemmaem 12 years ago

I'd like to leave it there but... wow. I have trouble not replying to some things you say.

How about if you have consensual and responsible sex with a few partners in your early twenties and end up in a loving relationship when you are a few years older and your priorities changed? That's what has happened to me (and most of my friends) and I don't understand what you mean by "never knowing" what I have "lost forever". I have no regrets at all. I certainly don't feel like I have burnt any crucifixes. I have supportive parents who are aware of my lifestyle choices (which have not been that wild, IMO).

I don't understand the problem with sex at all. Why is it seen as so bad? It's not one of the commandments (except for adultery, which is a different issue). As a society, our views on sex have changed frequently over the years. In Shakespeare's time it was acceptable to have sex in the engagement period, and it was quite common for people to conceive in this time. There's been lots of periods of society where we have been more permiscuous and more prudish. Surely it's more important to be nice to others and to care for those less fortunate than to repress natural animal instincts which don't hurt anyone else?

And I wasn't trying to say your religion was wrong, was just offering an idea as to why we seem to have seen such a different film. Not sure why you had to explain to me why my outlook on life is wrong. (And BTW agnostic doesn't mean I've decided never to have a definite opinion, it just means I haven't made up my mind yet).

Anyway, I'm sure we're not going to convince each other - I was just pretty curious about the whole sex thing. I don't see how it's an abomination to God, even to religious people.

I'm human too and happy endings aren't essential to me. As long as a movie is cleverly made, compelling viewing, makes me think and generates good conversation then it ticks all my boxes. Breaking the Waves meets these requirements.
.....
"No time for the old in-out,love-I'm just here to check the metre"

reply

[–] nissebror 12 years ago

First off, emma, love the Clockwork Orange reference as your signature! Good stuff, good stuff indeed.

Now, to the movie, I've always found it amusing how involved some people get in discussions. Granted I've read far worse discussions than what you two had going but the 'like a rock' standpoint of people is always interesting to follow. Can't people just say, 'this is my standpoint and that's your standpoint, let's leave it at that?" or in the words of L.B. Jefferies "That's your opinion and you're entitled too it".

I'm also puzzled that this discussion mentioned anti-life, anti-sex and anti-human but hardly touched on what I found to be the major subject here and that's anti-religion. I don't think it rejects the potential benefits of religion, it merely gives a extreme example of what might happen if an emotionally unstable person gets too involved in a religion and the standards/obligations that come with it. The fact that Bess blamed herself for Jan's accident because she had asked God to bring him back, and the continuous acts she does to prove her love for Jan in the eyes of God, both show the damaging effects religion can have. Now, like I said, the example set forth in the movie is obviously a worst case scenario.

Also, I didn't find it to be anti-sex as it actually celebrated consentual sex between two individuals by referring to it as 'making love' while Bess' adventures as a woman on the prowl was simply referred to as 'just sex'.

reply

[–] usernumber655321 12 years ago

I've read all the posts here and I've come to one conclusion; OP was in over their head with this movie.

reply

[–] emmaemmaem 12 years ago

Hi nissebror and boogienights1, glad to have dragged some other people into this discussion... :)

And cheers, nissebror - glad someone knows what my signature is from.

.....
"No time for the old in-out,love-I'm just here to check the metre"

reply

[–] Tiptoeturtle 12 years ago

Hej, I think "metre" should be "meter", as in electricity meter. But check that, I could be wrong.

I regard myself as a spiritual person, but not a religious person, meaning I am more than just a bunch of atoms, molecules, organs, tissues and so forth, or meaning that I am a thinking sentient being that is self-aware. But I do not believe in god, other than as a word for an idea devised by people long ago, that has now taken on a "life" of its own in languages, books, dictionaries and so forth.

Why did I write that ? Well, all that said, to me this film should go down well with subversive followers of Christianity... If I were in their shoes, I would count this film as having a happy ending:- a naive, pure and innocent woman unintentionally died and went to heaven, to save her husband (ironically) from dying/perhaps also going to heaven. (I don´t believe in heaven either, but Bess did, and I might be wrong, so I give her the benefit of the doubt, it´s her creed.) Added bonus for the subversives, the conventional church elders are depicted as bigots, that was the 1970s. Apart from Catholics, there are still now factions in the Church of England holding out against the ordination of women too.

I am thinking that besides the similar character to the simpleton messiah in Ordet, and the reminiscent setup of the ending shot to Solaris, there is also something here by way of an inverted Orpheus and Eurydice. I think there is quite a lot one can probe through in this film. But most postings miss these openings.

"Med venlig hilsen" to Melbourne, my home town (Heatherdale) from way back --- but I am typing this in Danmark.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 10 years ago

"Agnosticism and free thinking simply means that a person has decided never to have a definite opinion about the ONLY important things in life."

Wow, just wow...Worrying about what's up there in the sky is about the least important thing in this world (and that includes space travel). The world down here on the ground is so deeply messed up and needs so much work to make it even remotely livable with decency for the vast majority of its people and animals, that I daresay, it is humanity's top priority.

reply

[–] poetcomic1 10 years ago

A free thinker is not very trustworthy - who knows what 'free thought' she will have next! Maybe to kill me to prevent Global Warming.

reply

[–] ripvanwallace 9 years ago

A free thinker is not very trustworthy - who knows what 'free thought' she will have next! Maybe to kill me to prevent Global Warming.

This is one of the most disturbing things I have ever read.

reply

[–] Errington_92 9 years ago

I don't think what happened in the movie was right either - and I agree with you that people should always respect each other as humans - but I don't think Von Trier wanted us to agree with what was happening either. I think this movie works as a cautionary tale for blindly trying to please other people, instead of yourself and the problems with this sort of sacrifice. I think Von Trier is a great moralist and wants us to see how dangerous a world where we obey without question can be.

You made some relevant points. It is clear that Von Trier wants us to see the religious dominance within Bess' community as detrimental. One could interpret Bess' destructive commitment to Jan as reflecting her communities' contradiction. They made Bess an outcast for her actions, even though it is made clear by the film's final moments that she fulfilled Jan's fantasies out of love, therefore staying true to her husband as expected. There are various moral dilemmas that the characters face, which audiences are also forced to reflect upon.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not.

reply

[–] Jerry-137 12 years ago

WoW! It's hard to believe you actually watched this if you are so upset by it. Evidently a very large majority of folks liked this film a lot and not only based on the ratings here at IMDB but by awards it garnered world wide.

Movies are watched for entertainment, escapism for many. That so many thought this was entertaining it does make one wonder the mindset of many of them but it would be nice to hear more comments on what the film meant to them. I watch all kinds of movies, mostly serious dramas, and enjoy a lot of horror types. This interested me because of the husbands physical situation and his strange ideas on what would satisfy him in life. It's dark but many films are dark and still entertaining. Life is not a bowl of honey and there are bad people who do bad things and learning of these people is just part of life and in some cases educational.

Still I don't understand why you watched this to begin with. What possessed you to either rent or go see this film in the theater? Did you not know what the plot was or have some inkling of the depravity shown?

**************************************
My favorite: "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"

reply

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

Funny, but there was something so evil about this movie. Then the director went on a shocking antisemitic rant at Cannes that left everyone bewildered. i watch all kinds of films and I am not a prude.

reply

[–] amnesiac-kid 10 years ago

it was not anti-human nor life-hating it was pro human and life loving. it was anti church, anti religious nutheads and anti society. you misunderstood. you just value the wrong things as life loving.

reply

[–] poetcomic1 10 years ago

I really, really, really HATE this movie SO much. I don't even want to know somebody who liked this movie.

reply