BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See
FrogGlace In other words,this film is a surreal ride.
Married Baby Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?
Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.
akshizzy There's a few redeeming factors in this movie, mainly Bjork's musical numbers, although they can't seem to make up for the rest of the film. Lars Von Trier attempts to have poorly shot scenes to make some sort of artistic statement, regardless of if that statement means anything to you or not, you're still watching a poorly shot film. Bjork's musical talent simply does not do enough to carry almost two and a half hours of cinematic misery. This goes beyond simply being a sad story or a film that is difficult to watch, there's simply nothing engaging. I'm glad people something in Dancer and Lars Von Trier's other work, but I can't seem to find this film to be anything other than pretentious.
classicsoncall Try as I might, I just couldn't warm up to this film. The directorial style of Lars von Trier, particularly during the early part of the movie, seemed to make it look intentionally amateurish. The presence of David Morse in the story didn't help either. His film roles have always struck me as being spineless and weak willed, and to that he added a streak of unbridled betrayal to the list. This was actually my first look at both von Trier and singer/actress Bjork. Wait, I take that back; she appeared in that goofy looking feather-like gown with the goose head at the 2001 Academy Awards. I'm surprised now that I was able to make that connection.It didn't help my perception of the picture that Bjork looked like she might have been about thirteen years old. Until it was mentioned that she was young Gene's (Vladica Kostic) mother, I honestly thought she was an older sister raising him. Even more shocking was when I went to her bio page here on IMDb and learned that she was born in 1965, so she was actually around thirty five when she filmed this movie. Her youthful appearance kept me constantly distracted over the course of the story.Artistically however, the mixed genre styles of the picture was what really turned me off to it. I get it that Selma (Bjork) was in effect creating her own reality by living in her musical fantasy world, but in the real world, things were working out quite tragically for her. It bothered me greatly that the eye surgeon who accepted Selma's payment for her son's eye operation would not have come forward during the trial to attest to her character. It's not like he wouldn't have known about such a sensational case in such a small community. And why would Selma lie about the use of the money when it came up during the trial? So a lot of the plot elements bothered me to a great degree to the point where much of the story didn't ring true.The one thing I'd point to as noteworthy was when Selma's friend Kathy (Catheriine Deneuve) made her way to the executioner's platform to tell Selma that her son had the operation on his eyes and for Selma to listen to her heart. But the thing is, did Gene really have the operation performed, or was Kathy easing Selma's transition to the afterlife by giving her news that she would have welcomed whole heartedly? In that regard, I was reminded of the ending to the 1938 film "Angels With Dirty Faces", when Jimmy Cagney went to the gallows scared to die. One must decide as the viewer whether he went out like a 'yellow rat' at his friend Father Jerry's suggestion, or did he really face death with the cold heart he had always lived with? In Selma's case, I had to wonder whether Kathy's statement was the truth, or offered instead to ease her anguish at the point of death.
Cinema_Dreams This is my favorite movie from the brilliant director Lars von Trier. I did not only watch the movie with my eyes, I felt it in every corner of my heart. It was so powerful, that every time I think of the movie, I the feelings I had when I first watched it. It is one of those rare movies that will follow you through your entire life. And I appreciate this.
davikubrick Trier is a polemic director who constantly looks only for the shock, but behind the shock there is a message, but sometimes even the message can be "messed up" in some (or most) of his films. Here he delivers a tragic story mostly made for the shock and make the audience cry, and even thought it's a incredibly forced movie, Trier can manage what he wants in some viewers: make them cry. The characters are simple, they have problems (mostly or only of moral, financial and of health), Björk performance is great but her character is too simple (not very well developed). "Dancer in the Dark" is a haunting film, it's incredibly simple and extremely forced, but some how, Trier ended up getting some emotion (even if in a forced way) of the viewer.
