Melancholia (Lars von Trier, 2011)

[hollyharry]

*Some vague spoilers ahead*
At the end, it shows emotional growth on the part of Justine, in that her final action is an indulgence in a ritual that she, and we, know is futile, all to help ease the fear of someone she loves. In a weird way, I think the movie is kind of a coming of age film.

I still think she's rejecting ritual at the end, though (rather than partaking in Claire's proposal that they go out with candles and a glass of wine, she plays along in a silly make-believe game). She still rejects bourgeois ritual, in a way refusing to come of age.

But she recognizes the necessity of it in one instance in comforting her nephew.

[knives]

I think the point he was making is that it may be a ritual, but it's not one that hurts or binds you in the way those cultural accepting ones do. It's a ritual you make for yourself rather than have imposed on you.

[mfunk9786]

Even with vague spoilers, it's wise to use spoilertags. Just FYI.

[Murdoch]

Watched this at a USC screening last night and was severely disappointed. I found the structure to be muddled and lacking a cohesive second act. The first act, as long as it is, was oftentimes engaging (when I wasn't distracted by its similarities to The Celebration) and enjoyable, but unfortunately I couldn't get into the rest. I didn't get the metaphor or meaning of the asteroid either, and I'm not sure whether or not I should blame myself for a lack of effort. This is especially disheartening because I've always been a big fan of Lars Von Trier and have appreciated the fact that I "understood" his intentions and themes more precisely than most other modern day auteurs' works.

Some indelible shots, however. Lots of beautiful images are sticking with me from it.

This basically sums up what I thought. After reading this thread I thought it would be perfect for me, as Justine holds a worldview similar to my own. However, outside of the ravishing opening, I thought the film was circling around some greater meaning that I never picked up on. The disconnect between the two chapters made them feel like two halves of different, unfinished movies which attempt to draw their meaning from each other but never achieve a material connection. I'll hopefully see this again and find something more to grasp on to, but as of now it left me underwhelmed.

[knives]

Is the AE going to be region free?

[domino harvey]

Jens Lekman's song about Kirsten Dunst filming Melancholia

[Jazzkammer]

I went to see Melancholia with a couple friends at a multiplex theatre it came to in my city last week, and here are my brief thoughts on the film:

Admittedly, it did seem like a longer movie than it actually was (I was sure I had just watched a 2 1/2 + hour movie until I checked the running time), and some of the scenes in the first part of the movie (Justine's wedding) seem superfluous in retrospect, but I can't deny that the whole thing was paced and edited suitably. Compared to his last film Antichrist, with its brisk pacing and taut structure, Melancholia is a leisurely paced, sprawling slow-burner. No, probably not all of the scenes from Justine's wedding are essential, but they effectively serve the purpose of setting the chilling mood that slowly sinks in throughout the movie, ultimately culminating in the cathartic final sequence.

Melancholia also strikes me as Lars Von Trier's most mature, restrained work - which also sets in stark contrast to the over-the-top psycho-drama and shock scenes of its antecedent Antichrist. Nor does Melancholia resort to manipulating emotions from the audience, at least not in the overt ways that Dancer in the Dark and Breaking the Waves do. This may be a misgiving, but I firmly believe Lars Von Trier is a director that will keep getting better with age, especially if Melancholia is any indication.

The theatre was unsurprisingly about 1/3 full, and the two gluttonous women sitting in front of me seemed like they had resorted to checking Melancholia out only because Twilight or whatever else they had intended on seeing had sold out. Not only was the one woman talking on her cell for the first ten minutes of the film, but at the end of the the first part of Melancholia, she said to her friend, "No wonder the theatre is only half full!" Twenty minutes later they promptly walked out (when things were just beginning to get riveting!)

[wattsup32]

I finally got to see it, though it was at very shabby theatre. From the description of other posts here, it seems I missed out on great sound mixing because of the poor sound system in the theatre.

I had a very difficult time following the chronology in the film. I'm not sure if that was a failing on my part or if it was VT's intention. At some point I began to believe that the two parts in the film would have been running parallel and concurrently if they ran in real time. That lead me to believe that the first part of the film was Justine's version or perception of reality in that timeline and the second part was Claire's perception.

Is this possible? Or, is it a complete misreading?

The ebbs and flows of the emotional state of Justine lines up well if the two parts were played simultaneously. And, some lines of repeated dialogue would also line up accordingly.

[knives]

I think you are over thinking things just a tad. The film, at least as presented, is basically chronological with the opening scene essentially being a summary of the film with the wedding sequence being the real start of the picture and the Justine sequence taking place a few months later.

[mfunk9786]

Knives, I think you mean the Claire sequence. And watts - not to be harsh in my analysis, but I think that is indeed a complete misreading. Your comments about Justine's emotional state don't really even match - she's happy at the outset of her wedding and has all sorts of bipolar issues throughout swinging from one extreme to another. Her depression is really flared up towards the end of the wedding; whereas in the second sequence, she is at [most likely] her lowest point ever at the beginning of the sequence, and is excited by the prospect of everyone's death approaching and, as a result, becomes happier as that becomes more of a reality.

[knives]

Right, I've never been good with character names.

[wattsup32]

Knives, I think you mean the Claire sequence. And watts - not to be harsh in my analysis, but I think that is indeed a complete misreading. Your comments about Justine's emotional state don't really even match - she's happy at the outset of her wedding and has all sorts of bipolar issues throughout swinging from one extreme to another. Her depression is really flared up towards the end of the wedding; whereas in the second sequence, she is at [most likely] her lowest point ever at the beginning of the sequence, and is excited by the prospect of everyone's death approaching and, as a result, becomes happier as that becomes more of a reality.

I don't doubt that it is a misreading. Misreading though it likely is, I am confident in my memory of Justine's emotional swells. For instance:

SpoilerShow

If the two parts were running concurrently, her emotional outburst at Stellan Skarsgaard occurs when her emotional outburst at Claire occurs (The terrace and a glass of wine scene). Each is followed closely by the line from Claire, "I hate you so much sometimes."

Also, the euphoria Justine is experiencing in the beginning of part 1 is rooted in frustration with the limo ride. The despair in the beginning of part two coincides with her cab ride. And, there are, as you state, many swings mixed in.

If my theory were correct, and we seem to be in agreement that it isn't, then the difference in what those emotions look like could easily be accounted for by the different perspectives. Since my original reading is likely wrong, it doesn't really matter. Even if my original reading is incorrect, I do think my assessment of Justine's emotional graph in the two parts has some merit. Though, I doubt it adds anything to anyone's reading of the film.

[swo17]

I think the second part clearly follows the first chronologically, but I'm sure there are several parallels between the two halves such as the ones you have astutely pointed out.

[mfunk9786]

She was tickled pink by the limo ride, and I don't just throw that phrase around!

[wattsup32]

I think the second part clearly follows the first chronologically, but I'm sure there are several parallels between the two halves such as the ones you have astutely pointed out.

That seems to be the consensus and I'm happy to go along with it. As I said, I had a very difficult time following the chronology of the first part (and, as a consequence, the second part's relation to it). The only thing I was sure of was that the opening was a film-in-precis. After that I lost the trail for some reason.

I have another question: Was Justine being called "Auntie Steelbreaker", "Auntie Dealbreaker", or both? It seemed to me that she was Auntie Dealbreaker in part 1. That was reinforced for me when Keifer Sutherland had the conversation about the their "deal." I was pretty certain she was being called Auntie Steelbreaker in part 2. Is there something I missed that should have made it clear to me which it was (if it wasn't both)?

[mfunk9786]

You're overthinking the two-part structure. You might want to take the film more at face value than you are. Steelbreaker.

[John Cope]

I don't have much use for this movie personally but for those thus inclined, this is about as good a piece on it as I've seen.

[dad1153]

Caught "Melancholia" over at NYC's Angelika Center. If you had told me at the start of the year that my two favorite movies of 2011 would both deal with the emotional states of their female leads as a new out-of-nowhere planet orbits around Earth’s atmosphere (with the planet being the ‘B’ story on both movies) I would have said you don’t know me or the types of movies I like. “Another Earth” enthralled me with the introspective journey of wish-fulfillment its characters embark on as metaphors for the humanity-changing extraterrestrial events surrounding them. “Melancholia” expands this canvas by looking at family relations (which “Another Earth” chooses to ignore) and human traditions (the wedding that takes nearly half the movie's running time and its like a movie-within-a-movie), then brings the main protagonist sisters and themes together for one of the most monumentally sad-but-uplifting final moments I’ve ever felt watching a motion picture. And this coming from someone that, except for ‘The Kingdom’ TV series, hasn’t liked anything else Lars von Trier has done (“Breaking the Waves” literally gave me a headache). Maybe I just got used to the ‘shakycam’ technique after everybody else (Paul Greengrass movies, the new “Battlestar Galactica,” etc.) started using it. But damn if “Melancholia” isn't gorgeously-lit and nicely-framed from start (the amazing slow-motion prologue) to jaw-dropping end. These aren't just visual/aural shock stunts though, but exclamation points to the things von Trier is trying to express about himself, depression, clarity of thought and humanity. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I may have to check "Antichrist" after seeing "Melancholia" because the latter has left me hungry for more of whatever it is that Lars is selling.

I honestly didn’t think Kirsten Dunst had this kind of performance in her. She’s never less than riveting even during the portion of “Melancholia” where Charlotte Gainsbourg (who’s no lightweight) is the focal point of the story. Keifer Sutherland is wasted but does the most he can with the thankless role of John. He's probably meant to represent the hypocrites in the world that marvel at celestial things (i.e. religious fanatics) but, when confronted with the errors of their ways and facing the consequences of their charlatan tongue, choose the "easy" way out of not facing the repercussions of their actions (i.e. facing his son and wife with the truth, etc.). He definitely didn't belong in the 'spiritual' stick tent Justine built, as there was only room in that tent for an innocent (Leo), a person at peace with themselves (Justine) and an average terrified 'normal' person (Claire). That John took Claire's pills and left her to deal with Leo and what was left of their lives says volumes about how he truly felt about her and their son. Every moment of inner pain Claire has to endure during her remaining minutes on Earth go exactly like she didn't want to endure them... thanks a lot pussy Jack Bauer! The supporting cast (Charlotte Rampling, Jesper Christensen, Udo Kier, John Hurt, Alexander and Stellan Skarsgard, etc.) do their small parts so well I found myself wondering what each were doing on their own when the 2nd half of the movie unfolds. I can totally see Udo's character blocking the incoming Melancholia threat by using his hand until the last possible second.

You can tell "Melancholia" is a European movie from an old-school, old-world director because, unlike “Another Earth” (which also limits its impact on the narrative to a couple of key scenes), the media (TV, cell phones, internet, etc.) doesn’t intrude into the quiet build-up of character development that’s the laser-like focus of “Melancholia” even as its not-so-fantastic ‘B’ story gathers momentum. Beautiful, well-acted, introspective and the ultimate what-would-I-do-if-this-were-me play-along scenario, “Melancholia” is the type of experience I (rarely) go to the movies to experience anymore. Shame most people will only see it on Video On Demand or (eventually) DVD/Blu-ray because the experience of seeing/hearing "Melancholia" on a big screen with surround sound is something I’ll never get to experience again. Guess that means I'm going to have to go see it again before it leaves theaters because here in NYC (unlike 90% of the country) that's an actual option!

[dad1153]

...von Trier is in fact a genius... a peerless instinct for casting actresses in roles they were born to play. Dunst is beyond belief in this. I don't believe anyone else could have brought her to this, and obtained so much back from her.

Penélope Cruz was originally cast in the Justine role, which gives me pause as to whether Charlotte Gainsbourg would have been as convincing with Cruz as sisters. With Dunst the chemistry and dual opposites relation with Gainsbourg (blond vs. brunette, free-spirited vs. repressed, sick and helpless vs. protected by family institution, etc.) is just so perfect. Guess this is one of those instances in which the movie lucked into a substitute lead actor that was the perfect choice all along.

[mfunk9786]

Paul Thomas Anderson suggested Dunst to Lars von Trier.

[J Adams]

I would prefer the actual obliteration of the Earth to having Cruz star in this. Horrifying.

[mfunk9786]

I thought she'd have been the more interesting choice - she's capable of great things (like her criminally overlooked performance in Volver) and I'd love to see her collaborate with von Trier.

[domino harvey]

I'd like to see her in that porno von Trier's making, if you catch my drift

[Reliakor]

I found the first part of this film watchable enough, though I thought Dunst's character more obnoxiously psychotic than depressed, but the second half or so was excruciatingly dull.

[Jeff]

I thought Dunst's character more obnoxiously psychotic than depressed

What did she do that led you to that conclusion?