Review of Antichrist (2009) by Filipeneto — 05 Oct 2018

When I first started watching this movie I thought it would be just another horror junk but I was wrong. It's one of the most painful movies that I've seen in my entire life. Its not properly horror because it doesn't frighten us, despite having shocking and graphic scenes, but it also takes us totally out of our comfort zone. Its not pornographic, although making use of strong sex scenes and the camera, sometimes, do some frontal shots of the actor's genitalia. What is it then? I don't know, perhaps a mixture of everything, wrapped in lots of philosophy and tied with religion strings.

The film is separated into chapters (Preface, Grief, Pain - Chaos Reigns, Despair - Gynocide and Epilogue) and essentially addresses the process of madness of a mother after the death of her child. None of the characters have a name. They are what they are. Its possible that the Wife feels guilty: there is a moment when it seems that she understands what will happen to her son but chooses not to interrupt intercourse. The film uses mourning to address issues such as fear (and the way we face it), pain, anxiety and shock. At one point, Husband, who is a psychologist, decides to take the Wife to a forest that he knows frightens her, to show her that even our worst fears can be beaten. But in the middle of that hostile environment, Wife will conclude that Evil is a part of the Nature and manifests specially in women, so Nature ends up being the Antichrist and Woman ends up being a vehicle for Evil. There's a lot of philosophy and religion implicit in this part of the movie, and so it takes a bit of brain to figure it all out. I will not say how it ends or what happens next, but I think its wise to warn you that there are real shocking scenes, particularly for the women in the audience. In fact, many critics accused Lars Von Trier of being misogynist here.

Although the script can be shocking and even sadistic sometimes, the film presents itself as a work of art. Cinematography is perfect, with a very elaborate color and light, a great care in the details, great visual effects and a wise use of blur and black and white. The prologue is full of sad poetry, and we see everything happening to the sound of the famous aria "Lascia ch'io pianga", from the Handel's opera "Rinaldo" (one of the most beautiful arias of baroque opera). The end repeats this formula. Sound effects are excellent, and the idea of ​​using acorns falling on the roof as a sound effect to amplify dramatic tension was truly brilliant.

There's still time to talk about the actors. We almost only have the two mains characters, starring Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsburg. Both were fully up to the challenge, particularly her, with a performance that was intense, painful and insane. I really don't know to what extent such a dramatic exercise could affect me psychologically, but I'm not a professional actor. She really deserved the award for Best Actress at the Cannes Film Festival, and it was really sad that Hollywood Academy didn't valued this film.

This film, according to what I read, is the first of the "Depression Trilogy", as Von Trier was healing from a depression while filming, so his mental state may have had weight in scriptwriting. I don't agree with some critics who said that this movie is full of gore. There's more gore in "Hostel" or any movie in the "Saw" franchise than here. The problem is that the few gore here can shock us three times more because it makes more sense and we almost feel the pain and despair of the characters.

Personally I enjoyed this film, I was quite surprised. It was my first contact with Lars Von Trier's work and I will certainly look for his other films, but I understand who didn't like it. Even my mother would hate this movie, and I can understand why. It's not a movie up for anyone or any audience. You have to be prepared.