DOGVILLE


After having seen Lars Von Trier's latest in a string of strong morality-play style films, I think I'm finally ready to declare it: Lars Von Trier really is becoming an extraordinarily good storyteller

That's not to say that `Dogville' isn't yet another experimental departure in form for Von Trier: it is. While its sheer lack of sets and on-location shooting causes the film to far more closely resemble the kind of front-row view that you might expect of a stage play than that which you might expect of a fully realised film, the effect of that is two-fold. Firstly, it focuses the eye on the pure performances that are laid before it, and secondly, it focuses the mind on the moral and philosophical issues that underscore the film.

With regard to the former, all of the performances in this film are excellent, and Nicole Kidman's central role is well played; subtle and perfectly paced, and in many ways reminiscent of her equally stellar performance in Gus Van Sant's To Die For.

As to the philosophical themes which Von Trier slowly and deliciously unfurls during the course of this film, I don't intend to go into their narrative specifics in any great depth for fear of ruining the film for anyone who hasn't seen it as yet; but suffice it to say that during the course of this film, Von Trier takes his audience on a journey that begins with an act of pure altruism and ends with one of pure vengeance.

In the midst of that journey, Von Trier confronts his audience with the following philosophical question: should we forgive in others things that we would not permit of ourselves? The answer that the film gives is, quite plainly: no.

For forgiving of others things that we simply would not do ourselves, Von Trier avers that we are placing ourselves above them, essentially imagining their characters' to be inferior to our own, and consequently permitting more of them. The film argues that this kind of behavior is not so much the hallmark of a kind and altruistic heart, but rather a display of pure arrogance.

I have turned this logic over in my mind half a dozen times since I first saw the film and still cannot find a flaw in it. Even where Von Trier's theory intersects with the very Christian ideal of `turning the other cheek', it doesn't seem to falter: for the film's criticism simply cannot extend to the biblical acts of Christ himself (who, as the son of God, had every reason in the world to be arrogant - but was not).

Von Trier's film loops back at its end to pick up the thread of another biblical theme (as many of his films do) but to find out which one it is, those of you who haven't seen the film yet will need to.

Please do!

Vanessa Long



Subscribe to film-optimist

This site has been visited times


+ Return to film page ..+ Return to homepage ..+ Go to guestbook