Erik Nietzsche

Erik NietzscheDe Unge Ar
Jacob Thuesen :: Denmark :: 2007 :: 1h32

With the script written by the provocative Lars von Trier, Erik Nietzsche is a lightly veiled ironic autobiography. The young Erik, a dreamy, naive social incompetent, is rejected from one school after another, until, by a miraculous coincidence, he is admitted into the Copenhagen film academy. At the impoverished, grotty film school, the poor fellow does not book much progress in any direction – he remains as awkward as he was when he started, and his lack of artistic vision or talent does not help either. His teachers are equally incompetent, his fellow students no better, and the general educational system employed by the school is silly. This could have had the ingredients of an amusing absurd flashback into the past, but the biggest problem with this all, is that it is not funny enough.

Interwoven into the main story-line, we get to see collages of images and a series of bad little films made by the students. This variation alleviates the boredom, but does not argue in favour of dedicating time to the production. All the characters walking around in this film academy are repulsive, leaving the viewer with nobody to cheer for. Erik, the main character, is so passive a loser that you can not expect him to ever get anywhere, in this cruel world, or any other. He does, however, adapt himself somewhat, not to his credit, taking over characteristics of this world in which he finds himself. Of course, that does not make him any more interesting as a character, nor does it make the film any better. That such a dropout at such an institution would later give the world the likes of Dogville, as Lars von Trier does, is completely unbelievable.

As the story drags on, the audience becomes less and less interested in what can only be far from the biographical truth. The Danish master may have studied at a worthless film academy, but he must have learnt something about cinema somewhere. The climax American pretentious “I’m the best” speech in reply to the badgering of the incompetent professors is just beyond cheesy. If you really want to see this movie out of principle, choose a cinema-café where you can talk through it – one and a half hours of this in silence is really just pushing it a little too far.


Adam’s Apples

18616334Adams æbler

Anders-Thomas Jensen :: Denmark :: 2004 :: 1h34

Adam, a misfit neo-nazi is sentenced to spend three months at naive priest Ivan’s parish in the countryside. Obliged to set himself a mission by the priest, Adam says he will bake a cake with the priest’s prized apple tree. A curious and absurd harsh-colored script ensues, with a dark, dark humor looming over. Because of the quantity of Christian symbolism which is used seemingly arbitrarily, it is hard to discern meaning in the absurdity. Perhaps the image of crows (symbol of death) eating up the Church’s apple tree (knowledge) should be indication enough that there is no wisdom to be found in the absurdity… None the less, there is a conscious effort of Mr Jensen invite the viewer to try, a challenge I will here accept.

(SPOILER – attempted analysis ensues)

The mission taken on by hate-monger Adam is the gaining of knowledge (the baking of the apple pie from the wisdom tree). It’s completion is jeopardized by divine intervention. None the less, Adam is re-invigorated in the face of this adversity to achieve his goal. He is presented, again by divine intervention, with the book of Job.

For those who need reminding, in the book of Job, the pious Job was tested time and time again (by Satan), stripping him of all he cherished in life, to see if he would renounce his faith. Job’s faith withstood any challenge posed. Eventually, God restored the good fortune of Job. If this tale is to have a direct parallel in the movie, who would it be?

The Sinner: Adam is removed from his life of violence into the Parish garden. His primitive reactions (brute force) no longer have the same effect, rendering them useless. He discovers a moderation in evil through the adversity, without a concrete change of heart. If the devil was taunting him, it could only be through irrationality, but even there I think that would be taking it too far. From evil to moderate with flashes of kindness is mild as far as transformations go. There is not much of a link between Adam and Job. Let us try to see if he can serve as a pawn for the priest.

The priest: Ivan is surrounded by misfortune and evil. He recognizes it as a challenge set by the devil (as if he was Job), but he lives with it by obliterating it from his experience instantaneously (even if it slaps him in the face by the hand of Adam). But Ivan has neither the faith, nor the right attitude towards his misfortune to be able to consider himself as Job. His surreal care-free attitude to life, blocks out the very suffering which would be testing him. He does, however, get some solace, when one grave misfortune miraculously cancels out another. Also, his existence brings about some good into the world (not really the case for Job), although the providence of his condition seems to bring it about rather than his conscious effort. The priest’s misfortunes are not restored nor compensated for, further removing the parallels with the book of Job.

As none of the side characters fit into the mold of Job either, we must be expected not to take it too literally. That view would be supported by the lightning destruction of the apple tree after it had been eaten bare. Without the tree of knowledge, without a guiding priest, without a hate-mongering fascist, we are still left with drunks and crooks. Beyond good and evil, there is still kindness possible, in an, admittedly, absurd world without direction.

A curious and enigmatic movie which invites to reflection, but it is not at all certain where that leads us. Try for yourself, or just watch for the dark, dark humor. (in Danish)


 Blogger 3370 1691 1600 18453869[1]

(Saga USA – Land of Opportunity part II)
Lars von Trier :: Denmark :: 2005 :: 2h19

After her disastrous stay at Dogville, Grace arrives on the Southern US plantation of Manderlay, which is run as if slavery were still in place. Grace uses her father’s gangster muscle to restructure the farm, ‘liberating’ its inhabitants. The awkward question of ‘Now What?’ turns Grace into a reluctant moralist preacher. A satirical jab at race relations in the New World (American dream – American nightmare theme), as the idealist clashes with the harsh reality. No doubt suggesting that the US has hardly progressed since the age of slavery will not go down too well on the other side of the Atlantic, but all viewers will be rewarded with an aesthetically pleasing and philosophically challenging satire on contemporary ethical discourse.