Anti-American??


Roger Ebert and other critics have accused von Trier - and this movie - of being anti-American. Ebert really savaged it: "His dislike of the United States (which he has never visited, since he is afraid of airplanes) is so palpable that it flies beyond criticism into the realm of derangement."

I didn't get this impression at all. I took it as being a commentary on human, not specifically American, nature. Not sure what the Depression-era (I believe) photos, and Bowie's "Young Americans" over the closing credits are intended to represent.

I'd be interested in any theories.

reply

Well, those photos, along with the story being set in an American town are meant to represent why he hates America. Of course it is a commentary on human nature in general, and that is what makes it such a timeless masterpiece. But he still does hate America and I believe he perfectly explains the reasons in the film. Those who can't get past that, if you ask me, are close-minded patriots that cannot accept (possibly any form of) criticism. And I usually agree with Ebert's reviews, but this one really let me down.

By the way, Lars has critisized Europe too.

I Sympathise with Lars Von Trier.

reply

Hm, it's not anti American... He chooses the setting there because it would appeal to most people. They came to America for a fresh start, less bound to there previous cultural guidelines, more free. But it's just why he chose it, because it made most sense.
Of course Trier took it to the extreme, like he does with most of his films, to reach a point across, to make us more aware, and understand. People are more or less the same everywhere. Put people in a small community like this for a long time, when their kids are adults, with minimal interaction with the outside world, you would see very similar state of mind. Not to say that people in general act differently, it just enhances this psychological state.

reply

[deleted]

Accepting "just" or "due" criticism is one thing but to portray us(the USA specifically) this way is my problem. It conveys the perception that we, in particular, are the bearers of this evil.

These messages are unfair given that everything depicted in this movie has had it's practitioners throughout history and not just since the birth of our relatively young country.

I see Stupid People...

reply

do not fast forward after the closing credits. There is a slow and long montage of all those photos without credits over them. Quite a statement of the way Americans treat themselves.

reply

My copy didn't show anything after the credits but I have an issue with what you're saying, psalmverse6. "Quite a statement of the way Americans treat themselves." What statement is it making? And your statement is proof that this movie can influence the lesser intellect to believe this is an American problem more rather than all of humanity. Lars Von Trier's effort has paid off with you.

The pictures I saw were of impoverished people from maybe 200 years ago. The only thing I saw that could be construed as inhuman or immoral were the pictures of blacks, if you assume they were enslaved. It should be acknowledged though that we didn't invent slavery and African's even enslaved their own. Europe had it's hand in African slavery as well.

I see Stupid People...

reply

200 years ago? You sure about that?

reply

No, I said maybe.

Yea, Tho I Walk Thru The Valley Of The Shadow Of Political Correctness...🇺🇸

reply


Ebert was in denial. in America, and the rest of the world, there are so many real people who think and behave like the characters in the township of Dogville that the film is nowhere near the realm of derangement


2014 Screenings: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls054830628/

reply

Okay, we get it. You don't like America. That's perfectly fine. Just don't wrap your contempt up in an idiotic (and generic) blanket statement about a massive group of people. Try to be clever or something.

reply

I'm just copying and pasting my other post since there are several anti american threads about. But I'm pretty passionate about my view this movie is not anti American because Clint Eastwood did the same thing almost.

I don't believe it is anti-american. Although you could make a case for the closing credits, but I'll discuss those later. The closing credits didn't seem to have anything to do with the film. To say this film is anti American is to say Clint Eastwood is anti American for making High Plains Drifter and Unforgiven. Which is what this film reminded me of. Those films came first, so this film ripped off those films. And it is possible those films ripped off films that came before it. Not too many people are going to say Clint Eastwood is anti American for making dark movies of evil towns. The only reason they are saying this here is because the director is European.

The closing credits however, are a little different. But they seemed to be a cheap dig at capitalism. I say cheap, because it's easy to paint the worst of capitalism, but it's cheap because you aren't portraying the best of capitalism. If I may be so presumptuous, I'll include myself as the best of capitalism. I rose up from poor to upper middle class. I have no debt, and significant assets. People act like only the rich can invest in the stock market. That is not true. Much of my money was made that way. The rest was made using my brain (I do physical labor too, but that's not a major part of my job). Work smarter, not harder. Get an education, and by education I don't mean BS classes for a piece of paper, I mean actually improve how your brain thinks, and try to learn to think logically and problem solve. The left will have you believe it is impossible to raise to a higher economic class in this country, I call BS because I have done it. And if I had kids, I have enough money to send them to an ivy league school, and they could be even richer than I. That's how you build wealth.

It's also cheap because you are not showing the worst of socialism. I didn't see any pictures of Caracas in the ending. Why not? Because the director was a weenie. He made a great movie, and almost ruined it by the closing credits. The closing credits had nothing to do with the movie. Unless the director is trying to imply that had the town's residents been wealthy with the extravagant wealth Socialism brings, they wouldn't have committed such evil acts. But I don't even think the director is that stupid. Only liberals in the U.S. are.

reply

For a brief moment there it seemed as though you might be making a serious attempt at constructing a coherent point of view. And then you went all cliche conservative on us.

What the *beep* is it with right-wing nutcases that no matter what subject material they happen to be commenting on, they'll inevitably drag it into the mud so they can rant about "dem damn commies" some more.

1. No one gives a rat's about your rags to riches story.
2. Only the most paranoid of GOP faithful would assume that the closing credits was an "attack on capitalism". Does the mere mention of The Great Depression leave you in a fit of capitalistic rage?
3. Your personal experience is in no way indicative of the experiences of many others who suffer as a result of unfettered capitalism.

Yet another conservative self-parody.

reply

While it's a general commentary on human nature, there's also a clear intention to talk about a supossed bad treatment of immigrants in the US and yes, capitalism. In that sense you can say it's anti-American.

I much prefer the psychological reading of the film than the political one.

reply

I don't see any such political message in this film. If anything, the ending seems pro-Capitalism and anti-immigration. The psychology or morality that the film destroys in Grace is the morality held by communists.



~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~

reply

Yet another conservative self-parody.

I voted for Obama, and plan on voting Demo again, I'm not a conservative. The Republicans haven't been any good since the 50's (although realistically since the 19th century).

I support things like gay marriage, and I'm athiest. It's impossible for me to be a conservative. But I do believe in Capitalism (with regulations of course). It works. It's hardly perfect, but it works. You Bernie Sanders supporters can shove it. You belong in Venezuela.

reply

The message of Grace's father in the film is somewhat similar to Trump's message, and to a classic American message: we (America or the Western world in general) have power, and it's waiting for us when we grow up, and we just have to assume it and take responsibility again and stop giving away our power to everyone else, believing that it's the "moral" or "good" thing to do (such a moral view is really just an even more egotistical and sick view than a more natural selfish view). The West is currently in decline and is allowing foreigners to take advantage of them and plunder their wealth (led by their own treacherous government) just as Grace allowed herself to be exploited and abused. Finally, hopefully, some day, we will say "enough" as she did and stand up for ourselves again.



~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~

reply

I wonder if Von Trier, who has described himself as a ‘socialist’, realised that he accidentally made a film that exposes the evil and hypocrisy that lie at the heart of socialism, then scrambled to conceal this truth by shoving a montage of photos of America set to Bowie’s ‘The Young Americans’ at the end.

Or perhaps he cunningly always intended Dogville to dissect socialism and knew that if he plastered some anti-American pablum at the end he could get the braindead Lefty arthouse establishment to promote a film that savages their own ideology 🤣

reply

The film itself might be regarded just as a commentary on human nature without being overtly anti-American. However, the choice of having the film set in a town in the Rockies (in a country which von Trier has never visited), together with Ebert's familiarity with von Trier's other works, might have led him to that conclusion.

However the end credits showing the pictures of people in the US in the Depression era together with David Bowie's song, gave von Trier away completely. Those were completely out of tone with the movie, and there was little doubt which country he was indicting. What was the point of having President Nixon in the song and even showing his picture - if the theme of the film was meant to be universal and not a specific attack on a certain country?

reply

Those were completely out of tone with the movie, and there was little doubt which country he was indicting. What was the point of having President Nixon in the song and even showing his picture - if the theme of the film was meant to be universal and not a specific attack on a certain country?


He wasn't indicting any country, it was an 'attack' (a joke, really - Von Trier's sense of humour is pretty warped, see e.g. that infamous Cannes incident) on critics who said he couldn't make a film about America.

Is this your homework, Larry?

reply

[deleted]

So, von Trier is a Eurotrash communist lunatic. Who gives a rusticated rodent's rump what he thinks? Just a Danish Michael Moore.

They sucked his brains out!

reply