It’s hard to “get into stuff” on Twitter, so I’m opening up a thread to discuss Lars von Trier’s Melancholia. I reviewed it when it first came out in 2011, and I also wrote the capsule review of it in The Dissolve’s 50 Best Films of the Decade series in 2015 – when I had had a bit more time to percolate with it.
Worth noting: as I said on Twitter, I reviewed the film in 2011. I was profoundly moved by it. “Moved” like earthquake moved. Relevant context, in terms of my review, which is very strange to read now: I had had numerous breakdowns throughout my life, starting with a massive one when I was 12. When I wrote the review I was coming out of a BEAR of a one in 2009, and little did I know I was about to be hit again at the end of 2012 – and that would be the one that led to hospitalization and diagnosis, finally.
While I stand by my initial review of Melancholia, I will say that
1. it was the film that turned me around on Lars von Trier, although I still can’t stand Breaking the Waves. I look forward to his films like Breaking News now, an amazing transformation, especially considering the bitching I do about my issues with him at the start of the review.
And 2. I would write that review very differently now, since it was written pre-diagnosis. I wasn’t completely unaware that something was wrong with me, but I lived my life like Kirsten Dunst in the stunning prologue, running in agonizing slo-mo through the grass, with thick grey yarn twined around her legs and body, slowing her down. That was me. I was IN it when I saw it.
There’s a reason the film moved me like an earthquake when I first saw it. There was a huge planet approaching ME, and I wasn’t even aware of it. But somewhere I knew. Even in 2011, I saw Melancholia as almost documentary-like in its evocation of the malady, and what it feels like. I also understood totally why the depressive Justine would be galvanized and calm in the face of disaster, while the more “well-adjusted” sister disintegrated. Depression makes you tough as nails. And pessimism … well, I am very pessimistic, but I usually use the word “realistic.” This film really struck a chord on that level in its validation of a pessimistic outlook – this is something almost NEVER shown in American film, since we love “optimism” and “feel-good” endings to an almost pathological degree.
Melancholia has just grown in power in subsequent viewings.
So here’s an open thread for discussion of this magnificent film.
Oh, God. I don’t even know how to put my thoughts about this into words. I was clawing my way out of a pretty dark place when I saw it, too – to the point where I actually felt a little envious of the ease of it all. You don’t have to feel guilty about not wanting to wake up every morning if the world is about to end.
And all the pressure on Justine to be happy! And the blame and bitterness about how she wasn’t. Like she was being deliberately depressed to spite them. It was so subtle, and sometimes well-intentioned.
I felt like that movie GOT me.
Natalie – I’m so excited to hear your comments. I really relate to them. I felt the same way – I hadn’t seen a movie before that actually put into images (not words) what it FELT like to be in that emotional place – up to and including the giant planet approaching. When you’re that low – it does feel like an outside force is working on you.
// And all the pressure on Justine to be happy! And the blame and bitterness about how she wasn’t. Like she was being deliberately depressed to spite them. It was so subtle, and sometimes well-intentioned. //
This is so right on.
As though she’s “acting out” or being willfully perverse or whatever –
and then by ignoring it, or trying to cajole/scold her out of it – it explodes and suddenly she needs help getting in and out of the bathtub. Like, this is what happens if you don’t RESPECT the monster she’s dealing with.
In a weird way, I found the second half really validating. People in my life had found my pessimism off-putting. But I knew how strong I was. I felt I was stronger in a lot of ways – since I took life on the chin and I took it alone. It made me tough. Obviously it’d be wonderful to not have to be so tough – but I don’t live in a fantasy world. I live in the real world. I don’t go for romance or utopias or “everything will work out.” And Melancholia GETS the strength of that – and how that strength, or toughness – intractability – can make sufferers better equipped to deal with tragedy. This is something our Oprah-dominated emotional/cultural landscape does not want to accept. It digs its heels in and REFUSES to accept. From my point of view – our culture’s optimism obsession was practically psychotic – and everyone was trying to make ME think I was crazy. When THEY – with their optimism – looked like the delusional ones. (This is what Joseph Heller described so perfectly in Catch-22. In an insane world – the ones who accept the rules are actually the insane ones even though they have societal acceptance – and the ones who go “hang on a second, this world is INSANE” are treated like the crazy ones.)
Plus – in the film there is the dangerous thought that there’s something sexy about Melancholy – that there’s something beautiful about it, and it’s a relief to surrender to it – the way she lies in the grass naked, welcoming the apocalypse. I mean … this is really far out there!
Natalie and Sheila — yes to all of this. The wedding (the happiest day of one’s life? yeah, no thanks) was excruciating. All those remarks on her beauty and the way she becomes less and less capable of smiling.
I am a fair way away now from my darkest days, thankfully, but I still felt that electric sense of the movie GETTING it. A couple of weeks ago I experienced a big mood crash after an outing and the way I could see it coming, the way it hit, the way I felt close to incapable of getting out the car under my own power — there’s so much truth in this movie. Christine on the phone at the start of her chapter, encouraging Justine through the steps of opening a door and leaving a house.
And yes — you are spot on Sheila about the seductiveness and beauty as well. This is not a Baudelairean spleen of dust and maggots and gloom.
// and the way I could see it coming, the way it hit, the way I felt close to incapable of getting out the car under my own power //
Ouch. Yes. It’s an outside force – and this is nearly impossible to explain to people who have never experienced it. They think you can just decide to be another way, think different thoughts, have a better attitude.
I re-watched last night – and I had forgotten about her fiance’s TERRIBLE speech at the reception. (God, he’s so good.) All he says is “I can’t believe my luck at having such a gorgeous wife … and that’s all I have to say” – and he’s all shy and submissive about it – totally charming – but you realize how empty his words are, how he has no IDEA who she is. It’s not entirely his fault, right – she really DID want to make a go of it, maybe the “trappings” of happiness really EQUAL “happiness” in her mind (I really understand that mentality. It’s a total dead-end but I get the appeal.)
There’s so much more to unpack.
Charlotte Rampling! Keifer Sutherland.
It’s kind of amazing, von Trier’s critique of men. None of the men in this film can deal with reality – and yet they are the power brokers of this world. Movers, shakers, organizers. But Justine’s boss – her fiance – the new protege – she runs right over all of them. None of them can deal with the REALITY of her. Even her loving gentle father … flakes out, and leaves – even after she begged him to stay the night so they could talk.
and then Keifer Sutherland – calming his wife down about the planet, getting all excited, aligning himself with “the scientists” – he’s in total denial, and yet he’s so CERTAIN – the certainty of men – the unwarranted certainty of men. When he finally sees the reality – he freaking kills himself like a COWARD. Leaving his wife and his child to face the apocalypse without him.
I was so obsessed with Kirsten Dunst’s journey my first couple times watching – this last one, I was overcome by fury at Sutherland. (It’s a wonderful performance.)
After a day of reflecting I’m still not sure how to really talk about this movie! It was just about exactly what I thought it would be — delicate and overwhelming in its mood, precise and gorgeous. It hit a real sweet spot for me. Both of your reviews were very astute — in particular the way you explore how the movie is dedicated to the physicality and externality of depression.
Some things I appreciate then.
The simplicity of the structure and the way it is dedicated to the present (hello improvisation), and the way the present is hooked into the past and future. Much of Justine’s chapter has no narrative consequence for the events of Claire’s. Her parents and job don’t become an issue again. Even the golf course stops playing such a prominent role. A few things like the horse-bridge incident and the bath and the bean-counting (har de har! just got that) repeat but mostly it’s just like — this is. Enjoy or endure it.
Refutation of the totally abstract. Everything is both itself and a stand-in for something else. This is what I was trying to get at when I was talking on twitter about the shifts between internal and external. And yet as well there is a dedication to mystery — LVT doesn’t care about the astrophysics of it all (again, it just is) — while there is no discussion of faith everything is at once grounded-personal-intimate and transcendent-symbolic-iconic. The Prelude, signifying the End, which as you note hangs over the whole movie. The dual shadows, the dual sisters, the various symmetries. The way Justine knows things, the way knowledge is in her at the same time as a thorough ineffability saturates the film and takes events to a place beyond human articulation. (exploration of the ineffable and what is beyond articulation gets me every time, it is one of my absolute top themes in visual media)
The use of art (in particular Bruegel of course but also Dunst as Millais’ Ophelia, which appears as she swaps the art around.) I love how disturbed, physically distressed she was by the geometric-abstract works. She needed representational art, which of course carries its own complex layers of reference and symbolism. (incidentally — this may be obvious — I don’t know a lot about von Trier or Dogme. I’ve seen Dancer and Dogville and thought they were good but never had much impulse towards his other work. But with The Sacrifice on my mind I was sure his use of Bruegel and art at the end of the world was a reference to Tarkovsky and it turns out he’s a huge fan so I feel pretty smug about that haha).
So in my research (read: a quick google and wiki) I find that LVT is not a big fan of the perfectionism of this movie, which I find one of its greatest strengths — those of you who know LVT better, I would love to know your thoughts on this. Does the think it should be harder to sit through, as The Sacrifice is? Does he think it should be less beautiful, or its beauty less traditional?
I wish I knew more about German Romanticism, Wagner, and T&I — Helenaaaaa where are you — but I loved the way the prelude was used, initially and in its reappearances.
What is there to say about Dunst? When she first appeared in the second half I was stunned. She is shockingly good in every frame.
Also: it’s funny! Thank you for noting what a comic performance Kiefer gives! Udo Kier had me screaming and the post-prelude opener in the limo was so charming. I also really enjoyed Skarsgaard (the Younger)’s besottedness.
I don’t know if any of this makes any sense but that’s enough of my word vomit for now!!
I’m here! But I need to watch one more time before I can even begin to comment. I mean, where do you start?
But in the meantime, the Brueghel Is definitely a Tarkovsky reference – it appears in Solaris. And the wedding scenes – to me at least – are very Breughelian, with Kafka as wedding planner.
I didn’t know where to start, middle, OR finish. I’m excited to hear your thoughts whenever you’re ready!
And the wedding scenes – to me at least – are very Breughelian, with Kafka as wedding planner.
oh my god, just a nightmare
Re: Solaris, ha, yes — I just watched it today. Also featured: profoundly depressive women and A Horse Who Knows What’s Up.
Horses always know what’s up.
The horses … yes. Abraham is like, “I am not going over that bridge, lady. No way no how.”
Kafka as wedding planner! Helena, this is so spot on.
I re-watched last night – this is around my 10th time seeing it and each time I see something new.
One thing that I “missed” before is so obvious I don’t know how I missed it: the wedding guests are CLEARLY not friends of Justine’s. She has no friends. There isn’t even the slightest intimation that anyone at that wedding was invited by her personally. Everyone is middle-aged or elderly.
She’s a guest at the wedding – not a participant. It’s unbelievably alienating.
And the fact that her boss is also the Best Man – how does THAT work? Like, what was the relationship there?
The whole thing felt like a business merger.
Good pick! I sensed this but didn’t realise it explicitly. None of the other guests seem like relatives. And the boss, what a piece of work.
Another thing that the wedding got absolutely right is every interaction feeling like a cul-de-sac of superlatives. Justine is either told she is the most beautiful, the smartest, most talented, the best employee, the ultimate prize — or the the most hateful, least grateful, least considerate, most selfish. All to her face. Where do you go in that space, especially when the positives feel like a lie? Responding to compliments gracefully takes a peculiar kind of exhausting energy.
Another amazing moment in which the her response-performance fails: when Skarsgaard The Younger gives her the photo of the orchard he’s purchased. It’s so sweet, and you can tell that he’s devoted to her and trying to understand her but by then she’s in too deep. At another time it might have been something she could embrace but after the battery of that reception she’s dead to the possibility.
The superlatives! Yes! And watching it now – after multiple viewings – it is touching how hard she does try. Her sister doesn’t see it – no one does – but she is honestly trying. And that opening sequence with the stretch limo debacle – it’s funny: she’s so not stressed out about it. She’s enjoying it. Her fiance is getting VERY stressed and annoyed. Her? Not at all. A stretch limo trying to take a sharp turn is exactly what life feels like to her – it all makes perfect sense to her – and she’s not thrown at all. She thinks it’s funny and fun.
She’s almost the Platonic Ideal of “not sweating the small stuff.” Or the “big stuff” either. The world is going to end, and she doesn’t fall apart. It’s such an interesting and insightful character.
and oh man, yes, his sad little speech about the orchard. and he envisions her sitting there under the apple trees. But … you can see her expression like … “I’m just gonna SIT there? What else will I be doing?” His vision of her is a woman at peace, able to sit quietly underneath an apple tree, content. The gap between his idea of her and who she actually is is just too big.
I also felt like I could see on her face something along the lines of … “You bought this land without telling me? You made this huge decision for me?” It’s amazingly retro … and controlling. Although he’s so sweet it doesn’t seem controlling.
I wonder what he does for a living?
How are he and the boss connected? Like, why is the boss the Best Man?
Come to think of it – HE didn’t have any peers/friends at the wedding either.
yes — she TRIES! She tries and tries until she has no more try left. It is so touching. When she reaches out in turn to her mother and father — I need to speak to you — I’m frightened — and the opportunities slip like water between her fingers.
I definitely saw that “you bought this without consulting me?” look on her face too, and the exhaustion of being burdened with an expensive unwanted gift by someone well-meaning. Poor guy! He’s probably the nicest person there aside from Abraham!! And slightly less cluey than Abraham.
// yes — she TRIES! //
The moment she tries to rehearse the smile before going back to the people is heartbreaking.
//he envisions her sitting there under the apple trees.//
And yet: “What did you expect?”
He’s not surprised, really, he’s not shocked when she says that.
I’m so excited to get a chance to discuss this movie again – especially with people who have just seen it. It’s thrilling.
// Much of Justine’s chapter has no narrative consequence for the events of Claire’s. Her parents and job don’t become an issue again. Even the golf course stops playing such a prominent role. //
I know. Fascinating, right? So … the wedding is at a golf course … but then in the second section … that “clubhouse” mansion is their private home? There was a real disconnect. also that it’s almost impossible to imagine Justine as a protege of Stellan Skarsgaard’s predatory boss – but then there’s that great scene near the end of the first section, where she tells him off – and you can see how alike they are. How clearly she expresses her hostility. The whole ‘get the tagline from her’ sub-plot of the first section is so silly – and it’s the kind of thing that used to turn me off about LVT – until I clicked with him (through this movie).
I’d love to hear more thoughts from you all about Justine and her job – and her boss – and the tag-line – and all that.
I think Kiefer’s estate has an attached golf course — which makes him even more absurdly wealthy? But aside from the gold cart and the fact that they’re on the green at the end, the course disappears — the time devoted to it in the first half doesn’t “pay off” (not a criticism — just a note on how it’s different from a typical screenplay).
I think it’s Highly Telling that she works in advertising, haha. I don’t doubt that the artificiality and emptiness of her profession (any beauty in which is the fool’s gold beauty of Kiefer’s estate) contributes to her depression. The primary action of modern advertising is to invoke anxiety around lack in order generate desire for a commercial product — but at this point, how can Justine create desire when she desires only lack — absence — nihil — Nothing? I love how she says even Nothing is too good for her boss!
// (exploration of the ineffable and what is beyond articulation gets me every time, it is one of my absolute top themes in visual media) //
I love the way you put this!
In re: swapping the art around: Such a great scene, and yes, filled with so many symbolic thematic images.
Side note: that very same Breughel plays a huge role in the first “frame” of Abbas Kiarostami’s final film 24 Frames – which just came out over here, at least – as art lovers, you may all really groove to this film. It’s very post-modern – and meditative – and it’s all about the images, and slight movements and transformations within the images.
// Does he think it should be less beautiful, or its beauty less traditional? //
I think, yes. The whole Dogme thing was all about removing any sense of artifice. No lights, no production design, hand-held camera, etc. Their manifesto is so … Nordic in its austerity and severity. They were so dogmatic (ha) about it. “The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. (Music must not be used unless it occurs where the scene is being shot.)”
So for me – the funny thing about Melancholia – was just how MUCH of a “break” with Dogme it represented. I mean, you have computer-generated planets, and sweeping music, and highly stylized sequences! LVT has moved away from Dogme – the Anti-Christ features a lot of stylized moments – these are highly artistically designed films. And the Nymphomaniac movies too! But still – there’s a rawness to his approach, particularly in the hand-held camera sequences – which you can see in the wedding section of Melancholia. I saw an interview with his cameraman (LVT was going to shoot it himself but then decided not to) – and he said something really interesting – that LVT told him not to “refine” the images, even in subsequent takes. The camera should not have a POV – one of the Dogme “rules” – the camera should be discovering and “finding” the action AS it happens. (I think they really achieved that in the wedding sequence. You don’t sense the camera telling you what to think.)
At the time Melancholia came out, I wondered if I liked it so much beCAUSE it was a “break” with LVT’s old style – but I don’t think that’s really true. I love a lot of the Dogme stuff. I finally realized that it was only Breaking the Waves I disliked – that it wasn’t a problem with LVT, it was that my reaction to Breaking the Waves was so negative I couldn’t get over it. (I had an argument with the guy I was seeing at the time on the sidewalk right after we came out of the movie. I was SEETHING.)
I’ve done a 180 on LVT. He’s now one of my favorite film-makers – and his sensibility is extremely close to mine. I really felt that in the two Nymphomaniac films, which almost felt like they were made with me in mind. Sex and cerebral activity and religious symbolism and pure Dionysian exploits clarified by library research into medieval rites … I was in HEAVEN.
Maybe I had such a strong negative reaction to him beCAUSE we were so close in sensibility and I wasn’t ready to deal with it. That’s a possibility.
I still really dislike Breaking the Waves.
I saw an interview with Lars von Trier about Melancholia and he said, “This film has the happiest ending of all of my films” and I just LOST it laughing. The world ends!! But I knew exactly what he meant!
Thanks for the 24 Frames recommendation, that sounds great. And The Hunters is also central to A Pigeon Sat on a Branch Reflecting on Existence of course! Although it’s beyond me right now to draw out useful connections aside from the existential. It’s a potent painting obviously!
Thanks for providing extra info about LVT – very interesting and the evolution of your response is epic! I confess to avoiding BTW and his recent works — I appreciated Dogville for the gimmick and Dancer for the music but I don’t know if I have the ovaries for the others. I’m certainly more intrigued than I was before though.
Happy ending — LOL
I think they really achieved that in the wedding sequence. You don’t sense the camera telling you what to think.
very well put.
Jessie – oh that’s right, A Pigeon Sat on the Branch!! That played at Ebertfest a couple of years ago – I’ve never seen anything like it. It was my mother’s favorite film in the festival.
The Anti-Christ is another one of his which I despised when I first saw it – and now I think is kind of brilliant. Very tough to take (one shot in particular). The Nymphomaniac movies are grand treatises of sex – filled with Byzantine icons and floating Virgin Marys and erect penises “rated” by the women and it’s all extremely nuts – but I found it his funniest film. He’s so FREE about what he’s obsessed with. Men are obsessed with women, okay that’s a given. But HIS obsession is matched with intellectualism and cerebral torment – so instead of being like “Okay I love women’s bodies, let’s make a movie with women cavorting in bikinis” – he’s like “Okay, WHY am I obsessed. What do I think is going ON with this obsession? WHY are men obsessed with the vagina? What the hell do we think is IN there? Why are we so fucking SCARED all the time?” (That’s what The Anti-Christ is all about.)
He’s clearly insane. But I love how out there he is. These are very personal films.
Udo Kier!! He’s so bitter at her he puts his hand over his face whenever she walks by. So hilarious!!
In re: Tristan & Isolde – I can’t speak to all of that but I do know that LVT chose that music because it was romantic. He saw the film as a romance. Between Justine and the planet – between Justine and her melancholia.
Friends, thank you so much for including me in the convo that led to this post.
I watched the movie yesterday morning, and the rest of the day has been WEIRD. I did not have an obvious, strong reaction, but it keeps working on me on some level. I don’t know that I’ll be able to articulate most of it.
I did not expect it to have humour and I was afraid it would be pretentious, to be honest. Sheila, I read your reviews, and I’d love to know how your opinion on LVT has evolved. I saw Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark when I was a baby and it didn’t make me want to see more. I’m glad I changed my mind.
“Are you happy? Are you happy?” That was excruciating. But I also really feel for Claire. Everyone leaves her to deal with the shit! She wants to go to people, to not struggle alone, but that bridge! She is stuck with the family drama, she can’t escape it.
I have very, very strong feelings about Abraham. From the moment we see him in the opening scene – my god, that opening! – he never left my mind. And I do realize Jessie might make fun of me for saying that. :) I’m actually a little obsessed with both Abraham and the opening scene.
“What did you expect?”
Lyrie, I really feel for Claire, too, and having to compensate and carry her variously god-awful and – to her – un-cooperative family members. My family dynamic right there.
That must be incredibly hard. Claire is so isolated. She has no space to voice her own struggles, and when she tries her feelings are rejected (husband) and met with more flamboyant despair – not to diminish her sister’s pain, but I can see how it sucks the air out of a room.
How about those useless husbands? In complete denial, until they can’t be anymore, then they bail. No wonder the mother has decided to stop even trying. Charlotte Rampling was so great!
// How about those useless husbands? In complete denial, until they can’t be anymore, then they bail. //
USELESS.
and yet still the world supports such men, believes them more when they speak, pays them more, idolizes them more. It’s appalling.
LVT gets that and calls it out.
Helena – ouch, that sounds really difficult.
Even Claire’s whispering voice … it’s amazing because it shows in no uncertain terms her whole life of tiptoeing around this sick sister, the monstrous mother, the womanizing floozy father – Claire has absented herself from her own voice. When Kirsten Dunst speaks – in those clear hard tones – you can almost feel Claire cringe away from how clearly her sister speaks.
The fact that Claire actually thinks her sister will join her for a glass of wine on the terrace before the end of the world …
God, it’s so deep. Her relationship with her sister has never been like that. And even though it’s slightly delusional on her part, it still hurts when you see Justine’s contemptuous response.
I know what it’s like to be as sick as Justine is – but I too CRINGE at her total lack of gratitude.
It’s weird: the planet approaching allows Justine to finally be herself. Kirsten Dunst said that she approached the role as a transformation of Justine being influenced by the planet to Justine become a representation of the planet. She IS the planet.
Her work is just so extraordinary here.
She IS the planet.
Oh man. She’s the best.
Love your thoughts on their voices.
“What did you expect?” — ahhhhh!!
Lyrie I would never make fun of you for your Abraham obsession! At any rate I share it. I found him really interesting actually. A magnificent Friesian stallion, in immaculate English riding gear, in the capacious stables (maintained by invisible labour) of a castle, who can only be ridden by one person (not quite, scoffs Kiefer). Real little princess dream material. That she beats him later is — hard to believe I know but I’ll tell you — Highly Significant.
(I swooned so hard when Alexander Skarsgaard said to Abraham “nice to meet you” in his little Kermit voice.)
Re: Claire
Gainsbourg is great too. A difficult performance. There was a moment right at the end when Justine takes her nephew out to hunt for sticks and I felt this huge relief for Claire, that she could have a moment to herself. You don’t see her but she haunts offscreen.
// and I felt this huge relief for Claire, that she could have a moment to herself. You don’t see her but she haunts offscreen. //
I know. That poor woman.
Her terror about the planet is – turns out – totally justified – and she lives with that fear all by herself, because her husband infantilizes her and her sister can barely get out of bed. When it finally becomes clear that her terror WAS justified – her husband kills himself and her sister has amassed her strength in a totally alienating way. Her sister will not grieve the planet’s demise. We had what’s coming to us, is Justine’s view. Nobody will miss us.
Poor Claire.
You can see why LVT sees this as the happiest ending he ever filmed. Justine’s cold-eyed view of what’s coming melts when she deals with her nephew: HE is not evil, HE is not part of the problem – she will help him build a cave where he can pretend to be safe. And in the final moments, she ushers Claire into that cave too – and now SHE’S the one holding up her weaker sister.
//That she beats him later is — hard to believe I know but I’ll tell you — Highly Significant.//
Ha ha, Is It?
All jokes aside, it might seem obvious to you but I’d love to read your thoughts about it.
It’s worth noting that Catherine just (just!) rides a bog-standard gorgeous nice riding horse (this horse would be worth tens of thousands of dollars). But Justine — well, if you’re a horse-mad girl then Abraham is the epitome of horse-mad desire. Friesians have a mystique. They’re always completely black, with thick manes, tails, and feathering on their legs. They’re powerful-looking, the stallions especially so, but calm and people-friendly. In movies and TV Friesians are the quintessential aristocratic riding and carriage horse (think of every Regency drama you’ve ever seen — in fact they were mostly used for agriculture and in harness at this time and almost became extinct at the end of the C19th — they are Fantasy). Abraham is, of course, a magnificent example, in the same way that the golf course is magnificent, and the wedding magnificent, and the castle magnificent. He’s the perfect fantasy of having your own horse, one who is yours alone, loves only you, who you can whisper secrets to, who grants you independence and power. With the fantasy of a horse like Abraham comes the fantasy of another self.
When she is forced to ride him, and he refuses the bridge, and she beats him cruelly — that is the last remaining spark of fantasy and artifice gone. And notice as well that he doesn’t buck her off, he doesn’t rear or neigh — he just lies down in surrender. And she looks up at the sky with an almost victorious expression and says, There it is.
Wow, thanks Jessie.
I know nothing about horses – except that they’re magnificent and they smell nice – so thank you for sharing this.
How about the fact that Abraham is male? Everything is so gendered in this story. All the men are, at best, useless. But there’s Abraham and the child. Uncorrupted? Don’t they pay for the other males, the ones who fled?
The boss’ nephew is in between, he’s still very childlike, he’s clearly uncomfortable and doesn’t quite know how to “be a man” yet – until, ugh, he does.
And it’s interesting that the nephew isn’t really the “man” in that scenario, anyway (at least not stereotypically)! She’s on top, he barely does anything, he just lies there and she doesn’t let him do anything. He’s TOAST. No match for her. And then … and THEN … later … he “comes onto her” but not in a sexual way – he comes onto her in a romantic way (which is so funny – and so insightful in that weird LVT way. I have always felt that men were more romantic than women. Or more romantically inclined.) The nephew says to her something like “I think we make a great pair. We’re smart, we love advertising, we just had good sex…” and it’s so ridiculous! But kind of sweet too, in its cluelessness. I think, “Oh, honey, no no. Don’t get all mushy about her. Don’t read into it! She just used you. Be happy about it, move on.”
Oh my gosh, Jessie, this is so interesting. Thank you for filling in the Abraham character. I don’t know anything about horses – although I can obviously tell he is a gorgeous animal. This is great – perfect casting.
And then later – if I’m not mistaken – Abraham is seen eating grass calmly out on the lawn. After the horses stop freaking out. That’s him, right?
//And it’s interesting that the nephew isn’t really the “man” in that scenario, anyway (at least not stereotypically)!//
Yes, that’s exactly what I meant!
//And then … and THEN … later … he “comes onto her” but not in a sexual way – he comes onto her in a romantic way//
That’s so funny, I read it completely differently! I saw it as opportunistic, and more controlling that sweet, really. As in: “she doesn’t belong to another, more powerful man, so I’ll take a chance.” Maybe not consciously on his part, but still.
But I’ve only seen the movie one time, so maybe I might change my mind about it.
His cluelessness is certain, ha ha!
Ha. Yeah, I think he’s totally smitten! Which is so delusional but also kind of … sweet? In a ridiculous way? He’s a romantic. He doesn’t feel entitled to her. He never would have followed her out onto the golf course if he hadn’t been ordered to by his rapacious uncle! When she turns him down, he’s like, “Yeah. Okay. Thought I’d give it a shot, though.” hahaha
Unfortunately, because he’s a man in this world – he’s doomed. He’ll harden up soon enough, his uncle will see to that!
Or … come to think of it, no he won’t. Because the world just crashed into another planet ending the human race! Oh well. Sorry, kid!
But yes – I think he’s more child than man – like you observed. He’s not “formed” yet.
Come to think of it – the same is true of her groom.
He’s kind of childlike too. He’s an optimist. He’s a romantic.
He has no idea what he’s getting into, but he thinks his soft-focus romanticism will be enough.
I WANT to get angry at the groom, for not being willing to SEE her, for being so complacent, etc.
But somehow I just feel bad for him.
I am pretty sure LVT does too – although his sympathy is clearly with Justine always.
In a way, the groom is the perfect example of just how far down into the DNA “male privilege” can go. It doesn’t have to be wielded like a hammer, like the boss does. It can be almost totally unconscious – you’ve absorbed it since birth. Woman is “other” in this type of scenario – you just can’t see things her way, you are not capable of stepping outside of yourself.
But I’m not sure about my take on all of this.
How do we feel about the groom?
// But yes – I think he’s more child than man – like you observed. He’s not “formed” yet.//
He’s clearly on his way to that (or, would have been, OOPS – I love that we’re so amused by the end of the world). I see him as still in a liminal space.
Whereas I have no sympathy whatsoever for the groom. Sure, he is childlike too. Justine’s father too. Guess what? They are childlike because they can afford to be, because someone else will take care of shit for them – the in-law with money, and mostly, Claire.
// I WANT to get angry at the groom, for not being willing to SEE her, for being so complacent, etc.//
I am. Maybe not angry, but frankly annoyed. I totally get why, how, most people would find him sweet. But as far as I’m concerned he can shove his romanticism and his apples wherever he wants.
Because:
// In a way, the groom is the perfect example of just how far down into the DNA “male privilege” can go. It doesn’t have to be wielded like a hammer, like the boss does. It can be almost totally unconscious – you’ve absorbed it since birth.//
Yes. And it is so much harder to dismantle, really. Because everything is opposed by “he’s a nice guy” and “he means well.” He might, but in the meantime, he refuses to deal with who Justine is and what she’s going through.
Again, he’s not surprised by “what did you expect?”
He just hoped that by wishing it really hard, things would change because otherwise he’s left with his hard-on and his apple trees.
Tough.
He, himself, is not a horrible person at all. But he is part of a system – kinda like a planet, you know, ha ha.
// he’s left with his hard-on and his apple trees. //
hahahahaha that is so perfectly put.
I love your anger. I think it’s right on.
Lyrie – The first thing I saw of LVT’s was Breaking the Waves and it made me violently angry. In a way few films have. I was mostly suspicious when most of my male friends were raving about it. What’s to rave about? This woman loves this man to DEATH, literally. I have felt no desire to go back and re-watch, but maybe I should!
I was then furious when he made a movie criticizing America – a country he has never been to. Not once. I hated his lecturing tone, his superior attitude, his “purity” test concept of cinema – as evidenced by the Dogme manifesto – and I also thought he was misogynistic in the EXTREME. (Based on Breaking the Waves and how he idolized this simple woman who was basically gang-raped to near death in order to show her love for her husband. Like, I can’t even, Lars.)
Suffice it to say – my attitude has changed, and it was Melancholia that changed it. I felt like it was one of the most insightful films about women I’d seen in the last 20, 30 years – and that feeling has only intensified in the films that came after. As someone who has always been a little bit wild – or a lot wild – I realize now that his films really GET me. I don’t know – I saw Breaking the Waves when it first came out, and I was pretty lost then. I don’t know if I was ready to confront the reality of a lot of these things about myself. Who knows.
LVT is also extremely obnoxious – or he can be – look up the brou-haha at the press conference at Cannes for Melancholia – as of now, he’s been banned from ever returning to Cannes after that debacle. (which I think is dumb. If you watch the press conference and his controversial statement – it’s pretty clear he’s being purposefully provocative, but he’s doing so in a very bratty way. He has a “brat” side.) That bratty side was always a turn off for me – he seemed like a snotty college kid who had just figured out that bad shit happens in the world and needed to lecture everybody else on their naivete and stupidity.
In my opinion, this is a total mis-read of LVT on my part.
I’m not sure how much of this has to do with me being so much older now – so that I can watch an insane double-movie like the Nymphomaniac movies – and laugh hysterically throughout, and not once feel “offended.” They are profound explorations of sex – and – in the end, in the very final shot LVT shows that he understands the issue of “consent” on a deeper level than most commentators, male or female.
So anyway, that is a long and winding digression about my tormented relationship with LVT.
BACK TO THE MOVIE:
I feel for Claire too! She has been her sister’s nursemaid probably since childhood – especially when you consider those two narcissistic parents!!
I, too, have very strong feelings about Abraham. I love how she puts off going into the reception to go say hi to Abraham. Her priorities are clear – which is why her beating of him later is so devastating.
Thanks for expanding on your feelings about LVT. Like Jessie said: epic!
It’s been a journey!
It’s also one of the reasons I trusted my strong response to Melancholia. I went in there with my guard up, my opinion set in stone: “I hate this guy. Screw him.”
and then look what happened!
Okay so this is hilarious and perfect timing – literally half an hour ago I saw on Twitter that Cannes is considering inviting LVT back for his new film The House That Jack Built (which needless to say I am very excited for. 3 years ago they were like, “Never step foot here again, sir!” Now they’re like, “Uhm …. okay, you can come back.”
Basically, at a press conference in 2014 – with Kirsten Dunst sitting next to him – he was asked a question about his German/Nazi ancestors and he said something like “Well, you know, I understand Hitler” – and Kirsten Dunst started shaking her head like, “Oh. My. GOD. WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY?” She was laughing too but you could see her go, “Oh NO.” But in the context of the press conference and the question – the outrage was so ridiculous. It’s not like he was walking around shouting “White Power” – it was a perverse response to a kind of unfair question that had nothing to do with anything. That brat thing I mentioned. You ask a contrarian brat: “How do you feel about the fact that some of your ancestors were Nazis?” you’re gonna get a bratty answer.)
At any rate – it seems like he is now negotiating with them to be able to return. Probably signing a statement saying “I’ll be a good boy and I promise not to make jokes about Hitler” or whatever.
His new one stars Matt Dillon (!!!!!) and Uma Thurman – who was in only one scene in Nymphomaniac but it’s one of the scenes everyone remembers. She was so fantastic – so I’m so excited that now she’ll be at the center of this new film.
Lyrie/Jessie –
that thread up there is way too clumsy now. Moving us down here.
Lyrie:
// They are childlike because they can afford to be, because someone else will take care of shit for them – the in-law with money, and mostly, Claire. //
That’s so true. I think LVT really nails the childishness of men – and how the whole world supports that childishness.
How about when Stellan S goes to smash the plate – and it bounces off the wall instead? It didn’t “go” the way he planned – his glorious tantrum – so he picks up the plate again and makes SURE it shatters the next time. I would bet that that was improvised. That Stellan assumed the plate would crash the first time. and he’s so brilliant to just keep going – pick up the plate again, try again. It’s so what the character would do! And he feels totally FREE to tantrum like that, because he’s a man, and tantrums are understood as part of being a man. (Grrrrr. It’s so fucked up.)
Even when he looks silly – like, dude, the plate didn’t shatter – you look kind of silly – he refuses to step back and say “Okay, I’m being silly.” Nope. He goes to try again – in front of everyone – totally not ashamed. He REFUSES to be “bested” by a plate refusing to crack.
Ha ha, yeah! Doesn’t he say something really ridiculous, before trying again, though? Not owning that his anger is not as grandiose as he would’ve hoped. But you’re right, he might be slightly embarrassed that he missed the first try, but he’s absolutely not ashamed of throwing a tantrum.
That actor is so great. This boss character is horrible, but also so funny.
I need to re-watch, but I like staying with my first impressions and discussing them for a while before going back.
// And he feels totally FREE to tantrum like that, because he’s a man, and tantrums are understood as part of being a man. (Grrrrr. It’s so fucked up.) //
Yeah but you know, women are emotional, irrational beasts. Ha!
Yeah, I think he says something like “It was supposed to break” or “The Plate didn’t break” – hahahaha I’d have to see it again.
When she calls him out on how much she hates him??
I don’t know where Kirsten Dunst “went to” to tap into that LEVEL of hatred but it gives me chills.
She is so so talented.
// I like staying with my first impressions and discussing them for a while before going back. //
Oh absolutely. Welcome to the world of the Film Critic! Where first impressions live forever!
// women are emotional, irrational beasts. Ha! //
Exactly! and that is reflected in how Kiefer Sutherland treats his wife’s anxiety about the planet. It’s “soothing,” she’s being irrational, she’s reading the wrong scientists – not the scientists HE’S reading.
and he holds her head in his hands and soothes her – and he obviously loves that role. Strong Man soothing Weaker Lady lovingly. But if you think about it – the way he treats his wife is how SHE has been treating her sister in her illness.
People really get something out of being the “stronger” one.
I haven’t thought too much about this aspect of it – but I mentioned it briefly above when I was talking about Claire and Justine’s voices. Claire’s whispery voice – the “caretaking” voice – the voice with no OOMPH to it – and Justine’s strong hard voice. The relationship between nurse and patient is an interesting one – sometimes the patient is reinforced in their illness by being treated like they’re sick. The whole family dynamic is geared around Claire being the strong practical one and Justine being one breath away from a nervous breakdown. (And yet, to complicate that further: Justine isn’t some flighty person unable to hold down a job. She’s clearly a powerhouse in some realms.)
It’s all so beautifully rich and textured.
I’m so glad you watched it too. Loving this discussion.
Sheila, your comments on their voices is great!
It reminds me of something we said about SPN at some point: if the writing were simplistic, the depressed one would be voiceless and the “strong” one would have the strong voice. But dynamics are actually much more complex. Their voices here go with how they occupy space, and Claire has almost none.
It’s interesting to see Charlotte Gainsbourg using that again. I haven’t followed her career closely, but I remember when she was young, her roles were of the shy child, almost always whispering. And at some point she finally got to play comedic roles, and to use her full voice, and people were so amazed! So it was interesting for me to see her go back to that – it was a strange callback to childhood for me.
One of the favourite acting classes I took was a voice class, and of course we talked about vocal fry and how it’s not just annoying as fuck, but that it means stopping your breath. Here, Claire’s voice is ALL breath.
I remember during the “I want to drink wine with you on the terrace when we die” scene thinking how odd it is that two sisters would have such different accents, too. Justine is other.
I was so caught up in the drama I completely missed the fact that Justine is probably a powerhouse in her job. Given how she deals with the man-child nephew and her boss, it’s not surprising, but I think because she’s treated like a complete fuck-up by her relatives, I didn’t think that outside of that, she is competent.
// if the writing were simplistic, the depressed one would be voiceless and the “strong” one would have the strong voice. But dynamics are actually much more complex. Their voices here go with how they occupy space, and Claire has almost none. //
Lyrie – really interesting! Yes!
It’s not a cliched choice – and in a way, it’s Lars von Trier’s vindicating viewpoint: The Depressed among us often have a much clearer idea of what’s REALLY going on.
// we talked about vocal fry and how it’s not just annoying as fuck, but that it means stopping your breath. //
Vocal fry – I have recently learned – is a very controversial subject, and women who get criticized for it take to Twitter about how it’s a misogynistic “take.” I mean, I can see the fact that men feel perfectly fine to say “Hey, loved your radio interview, your voice is totes annoying” is misogynistic – BUT … at least from an acting class standpoint: vocal fry does not fly with actors. There’s a reason no actors have vocal fry. You need your breath not to come from your throat in order to make sound – it needs to come from your belly.
So much of beginning acting classes is about getting young women to learn to speak without vocal fry. If these Twitter people took one damn acting class – maybe they would understand it’s not just Mean Men criticizing their voices.
Vocal fry is a way to not be IN your voice. It’s habitual. It’s also socialized: women socialized to not take up space, even vocally.
I don’t get into the vocal fry debates on Twitter – it’s a whole thing – all I say is: “Actors can’t have vocal fry. The breath can’t come from the throat – you need air to have a voice that resonates. Voice classes are necessary to teach actors to stop the vocal fry.” Just to give another less limited and defensive perspective.
Claire is whispery-incarnate. It drives me crazy! But it also makes me feel bad for her. If Justine withers away in her depression – Claire has alREADY withered away. She is withered from the jump. It’s awful.
// The Depressed among us often have a much clearer idea of what’s REALLY going on.//
// Vocal fry – I have recently learned – is a very controversial subject//
Ha ha, oh no, I didn’t mean to bring up a controversial topic!
I can really see how that’s used in a misogynistic way. It’s like a lot of things which are stereotypically feminine: we are expected to do it, and we will be criticized for it at the same time.
But it seems silly to me to say that it is automatically sexist. What we are talking about here is, if anything, deconstructing that aspect. Vocal fry, like high heels or tight skirts, are physically limiting.
Back to the movie, whispering is kind of the opposite, it’s too much air. It gives that feeling that the wind could make her fall.
One of the things that strikes me about Melancholia, and I have returned to this idea many times over the last couple of years, is how the film depicts Justine’s self-narrativization of her depression. It sort of lingers in the space present and becoming, and no one clarifies how long she has reconciled with this as a part of her life. She repeats, “I smile and I smile and I smile”, and when she describes walking through yarn, it feels ageless. I feel very similarly, as if I am constantly thinking about how depression is both new and kind of old to me. I think the film’s acute understanding of that paradoxical relationship to depression is why I’ve loved it even more over time.
Kyle – hi! :)
That’s interesting – I hadn’t really considered this before but of course you are so right.
It’s almost like: how do you tell the story of yourself to yourself? And how can you actually step outside of yourself enough to understand your own brain and emotional makeup? This is why the opening sequence – of her laughing in the limo, and finding the limo’s struggle funny – is so important to me, in understanding her. I totally understand her in that scene. That’s not phony. She really does find the whole thing funny – and her groom being stressed out and irritated doesn’t touch her at all. Like I said above somewhere – her conception of life is already that it is not neat. (And in this way, she is far stronger than all the supposedly stable people around her – who completely fall apart when something really bad happens.) She knows the mess of life in her bones. She could never be a perfectionist (except at work – which she can control) – but perfectionism is not possible in life, and so … oh well, the limo can’t fit in the curvy lane, and of course it can’t, and isn’t it hilarious that anyone even thought it could, and everyone getting stressed about it is even FUNNIER. Like you say, this is very old knowledge to her – and I’m curious about how it manifested first in her – as a child, probably.
You can tell in the way Claire treats her that this is kind of their “thing” – the dynamic is set in stone. This is not their first time dealing with Justine being in a dark state. She says to her something at the wedding like, “Please, Justine. No scenes tonight.” And Justine hasn’t even done anything at that point – she’s sitting there with just the SLIGHTEST shadow on her face. But Claire is always looking for warning signs.
// I feel very similarly, as if I am constantly thinking about how depression is both new and kind of old to me. //
I know just what you mean.
Thanks for commenting!
Hi, Kyle!
// She repeats, “I smile and I smile and I smile”, and when she describes walking through yarn, it feels ageless.//
That is beautifully put.
//how do you tell the story of yourself to yourself? And how can you actually step outside of yourself enough to understand your own brain and emotional makeup? //
How can you explain this to others when your “normal” is not their normal. Who gets it? It can take so much time to realize it yourself. And then to comprehend.
// How can you explain this to others when your “normal” is not their normal. //
Right!!
and – like Helena (not SPN Helena, just fyi) observed below – when her fiance says “a little sad” – like, that’s his understanding of her depression – how on earth do you say, “No. It’s not just ‘a little sad.’ It feels like a giant rogue planet has entered our atmosphere. THAT’S what it feels like to be me”?
I have experienced this before (not recently – but back in my 20s) – when people would try to “understand” my black moods that would last for 4, 5 months. “I was so heartbroken when I broke up with Todd. I really get it.” No. This isn’t “heartbreak.” This is nihilistic doom and darkness. I know these people meant well – although I don’t feel Justine’s family really does mean well. They are OVER her.
Oh, I know what you mean, Sheila. And yes, some of those people might have good intentions, but how many among them are really ytying to say “pull yourself together.” I might be wrong – I hope I am – but just like Justine, usually people are over my shit, ha!
And I did see HelenaG’s great comment. I’ve kept thinking about the dress after I read it – it seems so obvious now, of course!
“If you still have days when you’re feeling a little sad, I think that will make you happy again”. To me, this shockingly offensive prescription that Justine’s new husband proposes (apple orchard as therapy), encapsulates so clearly the cluelessness of Justine’s family members, when it comes to her depression. That word “still”, as if this is something that is magically going to go away, or a phase that she will grow out of. And “a little sad”, which suggests that what Justine is suffering from is minor, trifling. I mean, EVERY single human being on this planet gets “a little sad” from time to time and this is not something that will ever go away for any of us. For someone with clinical depression, the suggestion is absolutely ridiculous.
I love how Kirsten Dunst modulates her expressions throughout the film, but here, just the merest flicker of “Are you fuckin’ kidding me???” crosses her face, before she reverts back to her smiles, and murmurs of appreciation. Owning a bunch of apple trees is clearly a dream that he has, which has nothing to do with her – does he even know her at all? Just previous to the very romantic revelation (ugh) of his bent photograph, she apologizes for her difficulty in being able to enjoy the proceedings as expected and he says something like “It’s because I haven’t had time to take care of you as well as I should”. This is laughable and again, offensive. He has no idea of what she suffers. I can’t imagine he would have any skill in “taking care of her” whatsoever.
And then…he wants her to keep the photograph! Besides the fact that she couldn’t care less about the picture, logistically, how does he expect her to do that exactly, when she is wearing a wedding dress? As far as I know, they don’t usually sew pockets into those things, unless he was hoping that she would shove it down the front of her dress, the better to keep it close to her heart. Which brings me to the next point, which is the wedding dress itself.
In order to achieve that look of frothy convection, Justine must wear yards and yards, and pounds and pounds of heavy fabric (I’m sure that Claire chose that dress for her). So when Justine has fallen asleep on her nephew’s bed, and her sister tries to rouse her to rejoin the celebrations, Justine starts describing that she feels as if she is being dragged down by heavy gray yarn. Besides the obvious metaphor for depression, I said to myself: “Well, of course you do. You’re wearing a wedding dress”. She’s been woken up, wearing likely the heaviest mass of cloth that she has ever had on in her life. And remarkably, nobody ever offers to help her with it. Brides are usually surrounded by a gaggle of bridesmaids, or at least one, to make sure that the bride can negotiate doorways, and toilets, and to ensure that all the fabric is flowing as it should. I’m assuming that Claire is Justine’s maid of honour, but she never once offers her assistance with her dress (not one single person offers Justine any support of any kind throughout the entire night, they just want to take from her, constantly). Claire is too distracted by the program she carries with her, listing the ponderous procession of events that MUST take place before the night is through, to offer Justine any help.
I do like how Justine gradually sheds layers of that dress (as she becomes less and less concerned about the artifice of the reception) until she is left wearing just the dress (without the train, veil etc.), but even that would be very heavy, as there are clearly many layers of crinoline beneath the skirt. After Michael tries to force himself on her sexually, ignoring the cues that Justine is so obviously not interested in having sex with him at that moment, she asks him to zip up her dress, so she can leave, and she flinches as he does so. Although it is unclear to me whether he has caught her skin with the zipper, she clearly cannot stand the constriction of that dress. She has difficulty breathing, which is akin to how she feels about the wedding reception, the stillborn marriage of less than a day, of how her family members treat her, of the depression itself.
When Justine manages, by herself, to free herself from the trappings of the wedding dress and climb into a hot bath, one sees all the different pieces of her getup on the floor. She is finally free, yet she manages to get back into costume, when John calls her to cut the wedding cake. How she rallies herself for this inane ritual is anyone’s guess, when no one ever offers her any help. John explains the delay to the guests by stating that there is something wrong with “the dress”. Of course there is.
Justine is constantly berated by Claire and John for being late, for being distracted, for not being happy enough, for taking too long. She is not deserving of anything that would count as care or concern. Forget about a wedding supposedly being a “bride’s day”. Mother, father, sister, brother-in-law, husband, employer, potential fellow employee, wedding planner: all of them are so self-absorbed that they can offer Justine nothing. Even when she pleads for help from both of her parents in turn, one is cold and callous, and the other is silly and hedonistic, and both dismiss her. By the way, I love Gaby’s outfit for the wedding, with that sort of tie-dyed psychedelic bull’s-eye on the front. At first, I thought the choice was rather strange, but then when we find out how she feels about weddings and marriage in general, it made perfect sense.
And that never-ending wedding reception! I have seen anything quite like this on film. That interminable reception that takes up the entire first half of the film, and captures so well how ridiculously boring these events can be, with their absurd rituals. Does anyone really care to see a bride and groom feed each other cake? Would it not make more sense to inform the group that the bride is unwell and please continue on with the onion soup from the food truck on your way out? No. Because Claire has her list of things that must happen before she can feel complete, and that is all that matters to her.
Every time a scene ended and I thought there would be a cut to something completely different, we are still at that excruciating reception! My favourite of these scenes was the bouquet toss. Justine is so bogged down at this point that she does not possess the strength to throw the flowers. As Michael stupidly looks on, Claire rushes in and tosses the flowers with annoyance at the crowd. For the first time, in my memory, there is no shot of who caught the bouquet. That shot is in every film I’ve seen where this event occurs. But no, we have no idea where the flowers went, all we see (and hear) is that insane group of guests continuing to clap, shout, and cheer at the happy couple, completely oblivious to the bride’s pain.
There are a tonne of other things that I would like write about, but this is getting ridiculously long. I just want to say that I was intrigued to see this film the last time you wrote about it Sheila…it’s been on my list since then. When you just posted about it again, I was determined to see it this time, and I am so thankful I did. What an incredible film! I have seen quite a few good movies lately, but this is the best one I’ve seen in a long while.
HelenaG – WOW. WHAT a comment. I am so thrilled you saw this film and also commented so soon after you saw it. These observations are so specific, so right on – I loved all the moments you pulled out. The wedding corsage! Claire just taking over, “Oh, for god’s sake …”
And who at that wedding isn’t married? (Besides their parents, of course.) All of the guests are 60 years old!
Your thoughts on the heaviness of her wedding gown are fantastic: this is something I sensed but also wasn’t quite conscious of. I really can’t add to anything you say here – except that I share your frustration with the dress, and the fact she is so dragged down by it. I feel this weird nervousness when she’s in the bathtub, dress on the floor – I think, “Wait … how will she get back into that thing?” And also, yes, the worry that the zipper pinched her skin.
The two scenes where the dress becomes irrelevant – when she squats to pee, and also when she has sex with that helpless young dude lying beneath her – are startling – the dress billows around her, but underneath it, she’s human – all you have to do is squat down (to be blunt – but that’s what LVT seems to be getting at).
// That word “still”, as if this is something that is magically going to go away, or a phase that she will grow out of. And “a little sad”, which suggests that what Justine is suffering from is minor, trifling. //
It is truly infuriating. Such a lack of respect – and no wonder she dissociates. If these people think what comes over her is “a little sad” then they will never know her, she will never ever be properly cared for or loved.
Still thinking about your comment – thank you so much for these observations!
//The two scenes where the dress becomes irrelevant — when she squats to pee, and also when she has sex with that helpless young dude lying beneath her — are startling — the dress billows around her, but underneath it, she’s human//
Yes! That is such a good point. And…I feel really silly now, but I did not realize that she was peeing, lol. I wondered why she was ceremoniously sitting on the golf course, but of course, she was peeing, duh. And, with that in mind, you helped me to realize then that if one were to go back to the inherent difficulties in wearing such a dress, she would not have been able to manage a conventional toilet with that thing on, without help. There’s just too much material to hold up, and negotiate toilet paper etc. So, I’m going to assume that she knows that no female in that house is going to help her use the bathroom, so she just takes care of it herself, on the 18th green.
Besides this, I do appreciate Justine’s connection with nature. When she approaches the house/castle, the first thing she wants to do is connect with “her” horse. During the same scene, she is also the first to notice that something is off with the stars. Although she cannot see Melancholia yet, she senses its presence, behind the other star. And although she is not able to have sex with Michael in the wedding chamber, she is able to knock down a guy in the sand trap (I think that’s where it was) and fuck him there. She does not want to stay in the house, or on the terrace when the world ends, she wants to be in nature, in a “shelter” created with natural objects. And when Claire follows Justine into the forest, she is shocked to see Justine lying naked on the bank of the creek, free, strong, and aroused by the presence of Melancholia.
Lots of powerful images here. I do want to see this film again, soon. When I was watching it, it seemed to me that every frame was suffused with meaning. And I really liked the super-slow-motion shots at the beginning, which “give away” the events to come. For me, I think it would be less interesting if we learned with the characters, that the world is about to end. Since we already know exactly what’s coming, we get to really study how everyone reacts over time, which is very interesting. Claire, especially, is the most interesting, as we see her slowly lose it completely. And John, whose entire identity (science toys included) are based on his economic superiority, gives up instantly, the moment he realizes the earth is doomed. It’s funny because, at least in the first half of the film, these two seem to be the only two who, at least on the surface, have their shit together. It’s all a façade, compared to the real inner strength of Justine.
I couldn’t come back to participate as fully as I liked for the rest of this discussion but loved reading your comments all — especially loved your discussion of the dress, bouquet throw etc HelenaG! Thanks for the impromptu movie club Sheila :-)