Dogme 95 films - classic or dud , search/destroy

However, I gather many people hate Dogme films. Do you?

Search: Festen, The Idiots, that American one about people coming back to their hick town for a school reunion (i.e. all the ones I've seen)

-- DV (dirtyvica...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:40 AM. (dirtyvicar) (link)

Answers

Can I post my dissertation here? ;)

-- Nordicskillz (t1nym1n...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:44 AM. (Nordicskillz) (link)

Festen is a great film, but whether that is a triumph of Dogme principles (as opposed to just decent actors/script) is debatable. DV is essentially an actor's medium - they can move around a lot more, go off on tangents without wasting film, and the random, serendipitous nature of Dogme keeps things from getting predictable and repetitive, which is death for an actor. That's why Dogme engenders that drama club style of acting, which in turn provides the "raw emotion" that you attribute to the directors. The most successful Dogme films have large, ensemble casts, usually engendering stories about actual (Festen, julien donkey-boy) or surrogate families (The Idiots).

-- Nordicskillz (t1nym1n...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:59 AM. (Nordicskillz) (link)

I like films that look good, so no, I do not like Dogme. Donkey Boy looked pretty good though.

I just find the whole idea of applying a group manifesto to art or entertainment self defeating and limited. So far Dogme has produced nothing that makes me think otherwise.

It's cool if a director or writer has a "manifesto" that's individual to them. knowing what you like and dislike in a film , is in itself a kind of unwritten doctrine. Most good directors are aware of their aesthetic and tonal preferences in a very specific way anyway.

-- PVC (thedevi...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 11:00 AM. (peeveecee) (link)

It's clear that Dogme itself was nothing more than a publicity stunt but the notion of getting raw emotions up there on screen uncluttered seems to have worked and I've been very, very excited by the Dogme films I've seen - Festen, The Idiots, Mifune and Italian for Beginners. And I do sincerely believe Lars Von Trier is a bona fide genius.

-- Tag (tagoi...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 11:27 AM. (Tag) (link)

yes on Lars.

The american Dogme film I saw (Reunion) was interesting in that it didn't really have the same raw emotions on display thing going for it, which was interesting.

the thing that is really great about digital video is the way everything looks like it's someone's home video, thereby making Dogme films look like documentaries.

-- DV (dirtyvica...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 12:10 PM. (dirtyvicar) (link)

i thought festen was brilliant- the beginning and end of dogma film as far as i'm concerned. the idiots had some amusing moments but could have gone much further. mifune was terrible romantic drivel. julian donkey boy i couldn't even get through more than 25 minutes. i read about a dogma film about a bunch of people stuck in a mine shaft or something - that sounds interesting, and i'd like to see it.

-- j fail (unhalfbrickin...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 3:58 PM. (cenotaph) (link)

Search: Festen, julien donkey-boy
Destroy: The Idiots

(I had a hard time getting past the pretending-to-be-retards shockah! of The Idiots. I watched it with a friend of mine who loves WEIRD SHIT, so he thought it was great. But I wanted something more, I guess.)

-- jaymc (jmcunnin...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 4:28 PM. (jaymc) (link)

I think what makes the Idiots any good is that the film gradually reveals the group of people who pretend to be retards to be mostly a bunch of emotionally stunted arseholes retreating from reality for one reason or another. I especially like the scene where the nice woman brings along some rather jolly Downs Syndrome people to hang out with the "idiots", many of whom are distinctly nonplussed. To be honest, though, the Idiots is essentially all scene-setting until you reach the last scene, which is one of the most heartbreaking in cinema history.

-- DV (dirtyvica...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 5:11 PM. (dirtyvicar) (link)

I like films that look good, so no, I do not like Dogme.

come on, Festen is one-chip-video-gorgeous.

-- s1utsky (saltykmurk...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 5:27 PM. (link)

i think the idiots and festen are tremendous: mifune was pretty feeble

lars VT is the MOST MANIPULATIVE ARTIST/DIRECTOR/WHATEVER EVER

everything (inc.dogme) is a stunt to get you going — i don't mean it;s a con, i mean his projects don't being and end w.his movies, he's always on: the prank never ends, the performance includes the rest of yr life blah blah

he grew up in some lefty free-love commune, so he knows a think or three abt emotional mindfuck, and what suckers we all are for "principles"

-- mark s (mar...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 9:33 PM. (mark s) (link)

I actually like how Von Trier's recent films have all incorporated and rejected certain tenets of Dogme 95--except The Idiots, which was his only proper Dogme film. It seems like an odd species of self-criticism. The problem for me is that his films' status as anxious objects, their being sort of impossible to square with habitual ways of categorizing and appreciating contemporary films, means I can indeed "like" them but it's hard to access them emotionally. I almost walked out on Dancer in the Dark but I'm not quite sure why.

-- amateurist (amateuris...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 9:46 PM. (amateurist) (link)

No doubt some of his stunts are either offensive or stupid, generating more heat than light. Like his claiming to be channeling the spirit of Carl Dreyer when he made Medea.

Gossip: Apparently Nicole Kidman was giving the producers and crew of Dogville hell and they fired her, but Von Trier ordered them to hire her back and promises to work with her again. I always get the sense that part of Von Trier's pranksterism has a lot to do with his working with a lot of the same people from the same little Danish film community time and again, while all the time introducing new actors and DPs etc. from around the world, and sort of setting the two camps against each other. Sort of like bringing the new girl/boyfriend to hang out with the old poker pals. . . . Also Dogville is now the frontrunner for most convoluted European coproduction: under "country" the IMDB lists:
Denmark / Sweden / France / Norway / Netherlands / Finland / Germany / Italy

-- amateurist (amateuris...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 9:49 PM. (amateurist) (link)

And doesn't it all take place on several-meter square plank of wood?

-- slutsky (parrisactava...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:36 PM. (slutsky) (link)

I mean several-meter-square. whatev.

-- slutsky (parrisactava...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:37 PM. (slutsky) (link)

someone needs to make a movie about Von Trier. actually, Von Trier should make that movie. he seems like an enormously friendly guy in his commentary to DITD.

-- ryan (augustuscaesar2...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:39 PM. (ryan) (link)

trier: tv show The Kingdom is absolutely great but Dancer in the Dark made me wanna scream for disgust

-- francesco (fratenagli...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:41 PM. (link)

I think he did make a movie about himself, it was called The Humiliated.

-- slutsky (parrisactava...) (webmail), May 2nd, 2003 10:44 PM. (slutsky) (link)

The Conversation was interesting, but Mifune was basically the same shit you could see in a mainstream film except filmed shoddily. Dancer In The Dark also hid a fairly rote story (lots of masochistic weepies in the b&w era) beneath its shitty visuals - and admittedly Bjork's powerhouse performance. Haven't seen any others.

I like Dogme in the sense of it telling young directors how little they need to make a good film. The problem is when people assume not having the fancier shit inherently makes their film better. I think Clerks is better than any Dogme I've seen and probably a better influence in that it says you should at least be funny if you're gonna be trite.

-- Anthony Miccio (anthonymicci...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 1:02 AM. (Anthony Miccio) (link)

the humiliated is interesting to watch, esp if you enjoyed the idiots. i really loved celebration, idiots, mifune. italian fb was OK but unremarkable. king is alive was very very depressing and not very involving. i had a hard time with julien, but might give it another go sometime. i was at the time very interested in how it got approved cuz it seems to break rules, but i'm in agreement that the whole manifesto thing is ridiculous. of course some of the motivations are sound.

on the marquees here, they'll put "Xxxxxx Xxxxx DOGME FILM" so it really just boils down to people paying $1000 for a piece of paper and a few plastic letters over the theater.

i once got in an argument with a friend who wanted to lump all of trier's movies under the dogme name. there may be some similarities but i tend to view it as a strict definition. he's one of my favorite directors though, based on the movies themselves - i might kick his ass for being mean to bjork.

-- ron (ohronn...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 1:16 AM. (ron) (link)

Most of Von Trier's work, especially before Breaking the Waves, is so far from Dogme 95 it's not funny.

-- amateurist (amateuris...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 8:16 AM. (amateurist) (link)

eh, could I just remind people that Dancer In The Dark is not a Dogme 95 film? It's a film made on digital video, there is a difference. Van Trier himself has said in interviews that he does not intend that every film he makes will be a Dogme film.

-- DV (dirtyvica...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 10:03 AM. (dirtyvicar) (link)

I thought we cleared that up above; The Idiots is his only Dogme film.

-- amateurist (amateuris...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 11:42 AM. (amateurist) (link)

he grew up in some lefty free-love commune, so he knows a think or three abt emotional mindfuck

to call this comment "fascinating" would be an incredible understatement

i might kick his ass for being mean to bjork

it's my favorite thing about him!

-- J0hn Darn1elle (edito...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 1:45 PM. (J0hn Darn1elle) (link)

you want some too? ;-)

-- ron (ohronn...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 6:54 PM. (ron) (link)

haha john my research on that is based on a lightning dose of "write a good friend's son's film BA for him, in return for a nice meal and a ticket to see the idiots UK premiere"

i. i'd already been at a bfi panel discussion of dogme, chaired by my v.old pal j0nathan r0mney (with whom i disagree bt everything ever btw) (IMO he didn't "get" dogme and asked all the wrong questions)
ii. read everything abt dogme that had been in s&s
iii. at my friend's house we watched three documentaries (danish w.subtitles) abt dogme and lvt
iv. brainstormed an actual shape and content to my friend's son's thesis (up till then its entire content = "it's about dogme 95")
v. wrote some of it up (neither of them knew how to use the laptop)
vi. had nice meal
vii. my friend discovers a giant dead rat under the dinner table, put there — he hopes! — by his dog
(his wife is away in new york: my friend doesn't normally "do" hospitality on his own)
viii. write up some more of it, and i go home
ix. the night before it has to be handed in, friend's son fucks up his computer and loses entire thesis, every word

anyway: what you got up-thread is what i can recall realising, from watching those docs — esp.von trier — and his own discussion of his own early life (danish w.sub-titles), and then extrapolating from watching the idiots

(i have a v.close friend whose parents took her and her brothers with them to a leftoid nudist colony every year until she finally escaped by going to college: her words on this, more or less, "there is are few situations more hypocritically coercive than one in which everyone is insisting they have freed themselves from all inhibitions")

-- mark s (mar...) (webmail), May 3rd, 2003 12:37 AM. (mark s) (link)

(bfi panel discussion = nft panel discussion)

-- mark s (mar...) (webmail), May 4th, 2003 1:01 AM. (mark s) (link)

Thomas Vinterberg is currently over on alt.fan.momus asking a question about lush 60s and 70s Japanese pop, so if you can enlighten him, hie thee thither.

-- Momus (nic...) (webmail), May 7th, 2003 10:07 AM. (Momus) (link)

there's no way you could call 'zentropa' or 'the element of crime' dogma films (and they're my favorite von trier films).

-- j fail (unhalfbrickin...) (webmail), May 7th, 2003 3:24 PM. (cenotaph) (link)

well they do pre-date the whole dogma thing--which I do find a little hard to take seriously as an actual mission statement

-- slutsky (parrisactava...) (webmail), May 7th, 2003 4:12 PM. (slutsky) (link)

I suspect it's more than just a publicity stunt, but it's not simply a manifesto either; I think there's quite a bit of self-loathing in it. Sort of like Pete Townshend wanting to eliminate the Internet because he can't police his own desire for pornography.

-- amateurist (amateuris...) (webmail), May 7th, 2003 4:29 PM. (amateurist) (link)

Yeah, I don't think it's a total joke--but I don't think it was written with a straight face either.

-- slutsky (parrisactava...) (webmail), May 7th, 2003 11:00 PM. (slutsky) (link)

I'll explain my point better later when I don't have a migraine.

-- slutsky (parrisactava...) (webmail), May 7th, 2003 11:13 PM. (slutsky) (link)

has anyone seen dogville? or the 'tranceformer' documentary on lars von trier? is that his real name? 'von trier'? c'mon?! after having seen 'the five obstructions' i think i need to see a lot of his films again in its light, its frictive warmth. i thought his vision of earth ws one of hell but it's really one of earth. (or more specifically anti-heaven?) when ppl complain abt the 'loss of enchantment' they're normally talking about the demise of spirituality under weberian administrative bureaucracy and modernism's capitalism right? but i ws thinking wht lars thks is not that we've lost enchantment bt that we're not enchanted ever no not at all ever. anyway, answer the thread question maybe. i think tht i ws too quick to put bullets in von trier's body and tht 'he's a nuisance' is not necessarily a criticism.

(ps this is imported from ILF. apologies?)