What Have You Been Watching? (Week of October 02, 2016)

I only saw one film this week which I want to talk about. Spoilers

Dancer in the Dark (Lars von Trier / 2000)

I have been a fan of Björk for quite a while, but it wasn't until recently that she has risen from one of my favourite musicians to the favourite. Which is why I finally decided to watch Dancer in the Dark, which was my first von Trier. And I was quite overwhelmed by it.
Let's start with the center of all emotion: Selma. Björk's performance was already greatly celebrated by many, including cannes, which awarded her with the best actress award, and von trier himself, who called the performance not acting, but feeling. And for me it completely lived up to the reputation. Some early scenes left me slighty confused, as some dialogue parts felt quite staged and off in terms of timing (I later found out, that that is something von trier often does, apparently for the quirk factor). But as the film progresses, It either got less, or I got used to it. Eitherway, Björks ability to believably depicts the immense amount of emotion her caracter goes through in the film is astounding. It became quite apparent how Björk lost herself in Selma during the shoot, when she disapeared for me during the first few minutes in a similar way. The only complaint/question I have about her performance is why she kept her icelandic accent. It confused me, because she's supposed to be from Czechoslovakia. Did von Trier think noone would be able to tell the difference between the accents anyways? Because I know Björks icelandic accent well and it put me a bit out of the film.

The camera during the ordinary scenes was as Dogme 95 as I expected it to be, and I think it works perfectly. It lends the scenes a realistic, almost documentay-type feel which fits with the film perfectly. I wasn't that big of a fan of the camera during the musical scenes. I appreciated the clear distinction between the two styles, but I feel like a more free flowing smooth camera would have given the choreography a more epic feel as opposed to the kind of security camera style it has.

The story is actually rather straight forward, which I think isn't typical for von Trier. It includes many characteristics of a typical aristotle tragedy, such as the plot structure, with exposition in the beginning, a climax+retardation in the middle and a catastrophy in the end, as well as only starring a handful of constantly reccuring characters, letting the plot play out over the course of a few days and the absence of sidestories. I find these connections extremely fitting, given the musical theme that plays throughout. The clear seperation into scenes along with those aristotle characteristics gave the whole film a play-like quiality. A point driven home with the ingenious closing shot, which does three things:

  • It stops the film before the last song is fully played, paralleling selmas habit of stopping musicals right after the next to last song. This is also further contextualised by the quote on the screen and closing credits, in which the actual last song is happening, therefore letting the story go on after it ended, which is how selma wanted it.

  • It puts the viewer in the perspective of an audience member of a play and therefore breaks the 4th wall and brings the whole film into a new perspective. The camera moves inside the rows of spectators, becoming a part of them, before closing the curtain between the "audience" and selma and suddenly I realised how this whole constellation resembles a theatre. Im not sure if execution rooms in 1960 in america really looked like the depiction here, but i really don't care as long as it isn't too unrealistic (which it isn't) and/or serves a purpose (which it does).

  • It shocks and devestates you to the core. Of course, as the ending came near, I expected the outcome to be what it was, especially considering von Triers reputation as a pessimist, but the sudden execution in the middle of the song was a perfect way to make the expected unexpected. It was one of the most shocking moments in film i've witnessed so far.
    Anyways, all these connections to the classic tragedy and plays in general almost excuse the manipulative, almost exploitation-film-type story and the seeming incompetence of selma to work out conflicts by simply explaining people what happened. Tragedies often put the protagonist in similar exploitative positions, and frequently featured conflicts based on misunderstandings, which could have been resolved by communication.

All in all this film wowed me. From the clever way it is written, evident not only in the final scene but also in the court scene in which many already meaningful lines of dialogue take on a second meaning (which reminded me of a similar but even more clever scene in Hot Fuzz), to the absolutely mind blowing performance by björk, to aspects i haven't written about like the excellent music and choreography, I was amazed. I think I saw a masterpiece.

9/10 or 10/10 im not sure yet.

/r/TrueFilm Thread