I haven't seen the movie yet, but I love Moodyssons (odd name by the way, any "sweet brothers" who can explain?) previous movies and find it hard to believe that the rating is so poor. Of course, not many votes yet and the movie is supposedly quite explicit, but 4,4? I'm wondering....
I dont want to kill time. I want it to live. - Underworld
a) Not many people have seen the film yet.
b) Not many people like such intense, controversial, unplesant subject matter.
But just wait, eventually the film will gain a cult following and the rating will go up (just look at Irreversible, Gummo, or any such difficult film).
http://www.ymdb.com/user_top20_view.asp?usersid=11491
No.
*beep* Åmål and Lilja 4-Ever are amazing movies.
This movie was seriously the worst movie I have ever seen.
This film is so incredibly pretentious! It tries to be artistic but just employs every cliche there is in the experimental/independent genres. It fails miserably at conveying any form of emotion. It's amateurish and the acting is HORRENDOUS. Lukas M has gone crazy. I can't believe he's wasted his talent on this tripe.
I am the poster formerly known as alexanderrushworth.share
No.
*beep* Åmål and Lilja 4-Ever are amazing movies.
This movie was seriously the worst movie I have ever seen.
This film is so incredibly pretentious! It tries to be artistic but just employs every cliche there is in the experimental/independent genres. It fails miserably at conveying any form of emotion. It's amateurish and the acting is HORRENDOUS. Lukas M has gone crazy. I can't believe he's wasted his talent on this tripe.
I agree 100 %
Had to walk out of the cinema halfway through the movie...
Unbearable crap
No.
*beep* Åmål and Lilja 4-Ever are amazing movies.
This movie was seriously the worst movie I have ever seen.
This film is so incredibly pretentious! It tries to be artistic but just employs every cliche there is in the experimental/independent genres. It fails miserably at conveying any form of emotion. It's amateurish and the acting is HORRENDOUS. Lukas M has gone crazy. I can't believe he's wasted his talent on this tripe.
WORST MOVIE EVER!!!!
this will never be a cult, this pretentios waste of celluloid.
wtf Lukas was thinking?
seriously, worts movie ever!
Wrong
This film is great
Ball-sacks, vomit, deformities, porn, a hot girl masturbating, and interesting characters.
7/10, well worth the watch
[deleted]
It fails miserably at conveying any form of emotion
"Not many people like such intense, controversial, unplesant subject matter."
I've seen it, along with two others by the same director, *beep* Åmål[/i] and Lilja 4-Ever. I thought Åmål was brilliant. Lilja was very good also, but disturbing and sometimes difficult to watch. But this was simply a piece of junk. I give it some credit for being an experiment worth attempting, but the outcome was a failure.
Intense and unpleasant subject matter doesn't mean a film is doomed to audience rejection. Requiem for a Dream was a very intense film with a very unpleasant end for several of the characters, and it did pretty well. Likewise parts of Hotel Rwanda and many Holocaust movies. Borat did fine in spite of its controversial subject matter. The Passion of the Christ was unpleasant and controversial, and was one of the top grossing movies the year it was released. Hål flopped because it was a bad film, not because it was intense, controversial, or unpleasant.
[deleted]
"This film will gain a cult following."
You live in a dream world.
Well, may be this is just because this one is much different in using cinematographic means of expression than his previous films. To my opinion, the main point is the same as in "Lilya 4ever" - that the nordic (and Western European) society is very ill (psychically), but this time it is treated from a different angle. The film is quite deconstructivistic and experimental (especially the cutting), and this does not appeal to the wide public, including me.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I said it before: As an experiment (not only the end-result, but the whole process of making it) I appreciate and even applaud the effort.
As a movie, however, I did not like it.
"Tomorrow begat tomorrow"
I have seen it and I agree with the points of view express here, the subjects analyze in the film are rather not pleasant and by far really hard hitting on todays empty society.
This movie is not intended for everyone, thus the fact it will have few votes and most of the votes here are done by people not really familiar with this kind of cinema, perhaps as I said in this board before, the movie is done in the thin line between genious and trash, perhaps when this movie opens in the USA, more people will actually have the chance to vote after seeing the movie.
From the begining till the very ending, hole in my heart is a disturbed and "in your face" cinema, the one that makes people walked out of the theater.
Moodysoon has proved himself as a powerful and unique voice in todays corporate crap cinema world
thanks and see it
It is also possible, that this movie truly is pure crap. Although Moodysson is one of the most overrated directors (IMO) right now, even the superior directors doesn't always hit the spot.
share"Although Moodysson is one of the most overrated directors (IMO) right now, even the superior directors doesn't always hit the spot."
that sentence doesn't make any sense!
anyway how can you say he is overrated?
in my opinion he's underrated.
I try again:
I can see why many think Moodysson is great director (although I don't think his movies are anything special). Even if Moodysson is good director, it doesn't mean that all of his movies should automatically be great. The poster who started this thread wonders why this movie has got so poor reviews, as if the movie should be praised just because it's Moodyssons movie.
Therefore: even the greatest directors don't always make great movies.
And Moodysson is vastly overrated here in Scandinavia (I presume that you are from USA).
yeah what you say is true, obviously.
by the way, which scandinavian directors do you think are better than Moodysson? in my opinion he's one of the few worth mentioning.
I'd like to mention Hans Petter Moland. I highly recommend "Aberdeen".
shareby making a film like "sånger från andra våningen", roy andersson is by far the best swedish director. roy and lars von trier is the two best directors of scandinavia.
share[deleted]
What?
I do like Moodyson, but Von Trier is a legend. He was, and still is, brilliant. I haven't seen 'Manderlay', but 'De fem benspænd' was very very good. I don't think he has lost his touch at all.
I would also say von trier and roy andersson. there are some other good danish directors I dont know by name and... no more from sweden. and in the filmclimate in sweden an director like moodysson cant be overrated
share"which scandinavian directors do you think are better than Moodysson?"
Funny thing. I couldn't remember not one Scandinavian director, that I think is worth mentioning (excluding the obvious ones like Lars von Trier and Ingmar Bergman). Many Scandinavian director have made good movies, but most of them (IMO) have too uneven career. For example Aki Kaurismäki has made many good movies, but there are few bad moves in his filmography. Definately worth mentioning, though.
I just think, that Lucas Moodysson and especially Michael Haneke are overrated because their movies are so obviously thorough calculated (into my eyes atleast) that I just can't take them seriously.
It's true that their aren't many Scandinavian directors worth mentioning. But I must say that some of them truly deserve being mentioned, but not by me and not here since it seems to be an infected matter.
But what I do have to say is that Aki Kaurismäki is NOT Scandinavian. And since I reckon that you OlliK is Finnish you should know better. Many people these days think that Finland is one of the Scandinavian countries, but it's simply not true. The Scandinavian coutries are Denmark, Norway and Sweden. No more no less. Finland is part of the Nordic countries though...
I don't agree. The most COMMON definition of Scandinavia includes Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Although the CORRECT geographical definition says that Finland is included, and it is also included in official contexts. Many Finns consider them selves as scandinavians, don't know if Aki does though.
What!?! I've never heard of any definition of Scandivia including Finland and I'm Scandinavian myself.
sharehaneke an overrated scandinavian director? he's an austrian and except for funny games almost no one watches his movies. i think he is brilliant tho. as i do think moodysson's movies are very much worth watching. if anyone is overrated, then i think it's von trier, whose movies do nothing for me but even when he would *beep* on a platter the general public would eat it warm.
i don't think he meant he's austrian he just stated he thinks he's overrated like moodysson.
by the way, haneke's "the piano teacher" is held on much higher regard than funny games. i don't know if he's overrated. about von trier, yeah, i kind of agree with you.
I watch their movies for this "calculated" method of theirs. It says to me they know how to direct a movie and not do some half-assed job, like the rest of them. Moodysson and Haneke have filmed some of the best stuff I've seen as of recent.
I was gonna mention Erik Skjoldbjærg just based on the film, Insomnia. But then I remembered he directed that crappy movie, Prozac Nation, so he's a hit or miss. Same with Pål Sletaune, who directed Budbringeren - that's the only movie I've seen by him. I'm interested in what horror films Scandinavians have done since that's one of my favourite genres. Something done in a "giallo" style. The only director I've seen who's done this is Ole Bornedal in Nattevagten. I bought the video right away when it first came out because it looks a bit like a rare piece seldom done outside of Italy, Spain, France, and North America.
Do The Mussolini! Headkick!
[deleted]
If Miike did it, it would've been a comedy :o)
...if your hand touches metal I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you.
I do like Moodysson's movies. But this one, it just wasn't my cup of tea, if you know what I mean. I just didn't like it, at all. Waste of my time. Well, not really, because now I have seen it, and I can join the discussion. And I can say way you'd better not see it. But, each his own...
shareI have enjoyed some of Moodysson movies but this movie is one of the worst I have seen. Not because of the gory scenes but because it is terribly bad. In every way.
shareOne more opinion. Probably as meaningless as the rest.
It's a few orders of magnitude away from the simple brilliance of Lilya 4ever, but as an exploration of the cheap n cheerless homeporn industry, it's not that far off the mark.
Cheap Europorn is still being made by paunchy old farts in cramped municipal tower blocks. It's not all glamour and glitz, as desperately as the US porno industry might like us to think it is.
This is more in the Readers Wives category of no-budget, zero script hump and grind. So the skanky sordid nature of the participants is actually quite realistic.
The whole dysfunctional ensemble isn't meant to be glamourous or erotic. Far from it. Moodysson is exploring the banal, pointless, grasping stupidity and ludicrous ambitions of a bunch of terminal losers.
I think he succeeds admirably in his aim. The problem with this approach is that they're totally uninteresting as characters. Anyone who's met these kinds of simplistic airheads in the real world could vouch for thir dullness, so it strikes me as wilfully obtuse to make a low budget zero script non movie about them. It's almost as abysmally and relentlessly unwatchable as current mainstream carcrash reality TV.
Maybe it's a directorial in-joke?
Regardless of the artistic pretensions inherent in the production style, it's still a fairly arid exercise. Maybe that's why it has such a mediocre rating on the imdb vote?
For me, it's a step backwards for Moodysson. Somehow, I doubt that he'll attempt to repeat the exercise.
[deleted]
This is ... also about the abuse of film and video.
Seriously, this might be the worst movie I've ever seen.
DONNEZ RACHEL WEISZ L'OSCAR!
The rating is outstandingly high. It deserves a negative rating.
"And the Oscar goes to... Rachel Weisz!"
-Morgan Freeman
This is truly one of the worst movies ever. And to follow up such wonderful films with this schlock makes it even worse. I guess I can see how some people would think that it's supposed to be exposing something about the human psyche that most people are "afraid" of, but the characters were far too poorly conceived of to make anyone care about that aspect. If there'd been more development of them, or more of them in a setting that was not the totally hellacious apartment they spent all their time in, maybe it would've made them more viable characters for us to give a damn about. As it was, they were horrible, the visuals were horrible, the whole film failed completely.
share[deleted]
It's a very good film - and not that the divided, extreme reactions prove that necessarily - but, considering the film's subject matter - if it hadn't got this reaction, I think it would be a failure.
share[deleted]
"if it hadn't got this reaction, I think it would be a failure."
I agree with that, but it doesn't necessarily make it a good film. I've only seen the film once, but I'd very much like to see it again because I'm still not sure whether the film was about shock for the sake of shock, or whether it really did have some kind of message.
I enjoyed watching the film BECAUSE it was shocking, but was there really any reason for it all?