Monday 14 May 2012

Devouring Films: Melancholia

Melancholia would be an accurate description of the state this film left me in. Not because it's all deep and meaningful and life-affirming and whatnot, but because it has such lofty ambitions and glimmers of substance that fall completely flat. Like a really really disappointing cake or something. I was led to believe something different by basically every review of it I read, and I feel really duped by them, or at least that they were duped by this film. Either way, it's all just badness.

Just to take a teeny bit of the sting out of the first paragraph right there, allow me to tell you a few things that were good about this film. Kirsten Dunst's performance as the seemingly bipolar (I mean, she's meant to be depressed, but a lot of her actions, especially early on, seem kind of manic) Justine is really excellent, and deserves all the nice things said about it. That's not to say that I didn't have some problems with the character and her actions, but in pure performance terms, it was really well done. Also... I enjoy Alexander Skarsgard being cast in anything because he's just so... there aren't even words to describe what he is. But as well as being hdjsahfeuafne, he's also a pretty good actor, and I think he does his best with what he's given. Which, unfortunately, isn't a lot.
Problem number one: if this man loved you, you'd be grateful and love your wedding (I realise depression doesn't work like this, but still... SKARSGARD)

Look. I'm not one of those people who needs every single second of a film described to me as it's happening to have any idea about what's going on. I love indie movies, and with most of them, you're pretty much on your own, figuring out relationships and things that might have gone on in the past, and it's all just very enriching so you don't feel so bad about watching a film at like 3pm on a weekday (I rarely do this, I have to add. Really!) But. With Melancholia, it's like the substance was left out entirely. It feels like there are about 10 lines of dialogue in the entire 2 hour and a few minutes running time, and much as I wanted to figure out everyone's thoughts and feelings and past experiences, there just wasn't enough to go on to make any thoughts about it really stick.

Example: Why did Justine agree to marry Michael when she doesn't even seem to like him? (for the record, I like him. I like him a lot.) Because, her saying "But really, what did you expect?" when he just randomly leaves without having an argument with her just isn't enough, and really, who doesn't argue with their new wife when she continually wanders off during her wedding? And whose parents just tear each other apart in their wedding speeches and don't just suck it up and be happy for their daughter? I think there just wasn't enough that was real in this film, emotionally or otherwise- the people in it act in ways that no real people would act, and it's all just ever so wrong. And I'm not just talking about the lack of science behind the planet that's threatening to collide with earth (because that, actually, I don't really care about. I just want my characters to be real.)

I thought, also, that the name of the planet on a potential collision course with Earth being Melancholia would make it some kind of metaphor for Justine's depression, but in fact it wasn't at all, unless it was a shitty metaphor that I missed while I was pissed off with the rich woman for freaking out over something that was beyond her control while she could have just been enjoying the last days. But, in fact, according to Wikipedia, Lars Von Trier said that Melancholia was about how people with depression are able to deal with disasters better because they expect the worst to happen anyway. To which I say, firstly, what the FUCK was the whole first half of the film about then? And also, it fails to even do this! I mean, at no point was I thinking 'oh, look at how well Justine is coping', I just thought 'that chick really doesn't care about what happens...' I mean, granted she does become slightly cool towards the end, but by that point I was just so so over it. Like, massively.

Melancholia is quite clearly split into two parts, so you'd think I wouldn't be able to moan about that, but just watch me go. But really, the thing is, the two parts literally have nothing to do with each other. All that carries over from the first part is that there's this planet thing which is briefly discovered in the first bit, and the fact that Justine is 'scared', which later turns into depression. But apart from that, nothing. Nada. It's basically like two different films, both of which are disappointing and pretentious. And not pretentious in the good way, like how people think American Beauty is pretentious (it ISN'T. Now shut up!) But pretentious in the lack of any real substance, although it does look pretty nice. Here's an example- Justine turns up at her sister's house and can barely walk and cries when Claire tries to bathe her and says her food tastes like ashes (none of which I have any beef with, indeed these were about the only scenes where I felt anything for any character). But the thing is, in about the next scene, without any explanation, or even a hint of time moving, she's up and about, not exactly cured but definitely more functioning than she was like minutes before. It's just all so... unconvincing and hollow, and just bad. Bad film.

So, friends and whatnot. I disliked Melancholia, and then I disliked it some more because I had such expectations for it. This isn't the first time and probably won't be the last time that the promise of Skarsgard has lured me into watching something, and whilst his adorableness isn't really the only thing I want to take away from a movie, on this occasion I'll grudgingly accept it. Unless you have mental health issues like that (and I have them doubly bad- I watched both The Astronaut's Wife and Pirates of the Caribbean 4 for Johnny Depp and OH the badness) I recommend you give this film a wide berth, lest you end up horribly disappointed by something which could have been so much better.

21 comments:

  1. You've described exactly my feelings about Tree of Life, so I enjoyed your rant. :) I was actually captivated by Melancholia; thought it was beautiful. I typically don't like having to figure out what's going on (at ALL) but it worked for me here...not real sure why. I liked how the severe depression and impending doom created such an atmosphere. I guess, instead of being irritated that none of the people were acting like real people, I was trying to imagine circumstances that would prod people to behave in such a manner. (But then, I liked Watership Down too, so there you go!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I... I can kind of see the beautiful things because yeah, at some points it did look spectacular, but story wise I was just like 'this doesn't go anywhere... I really don't care about these people... Hey, where'd Skarsgard go?' So that was a bummer. But I can see how someone (i.e. you, every film reviewer ever) could look at it and look for deeper things in it and I get that because I'm normally that person! But just... not with this. (YOU LIKED WATERSHIP DOWN?! I remember your post about it actually, and it gave me false hopes for the bunnies lol)

      Delete
  2. You're oh so right about the Skarsgard thing. Seriously girl, just MARRY HIM AND SHUT UP!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know right! And I'm not saying like 'oh, you'll just be cured of your depression if you married THE HANDSOMEST MAN IN THE WORLD' because that would be totally insensitive and all, BUT it must help. At least a bit. I think that just knowing you're loved, in fact, would help somewhat.

      Delete
  3. I read an interview with the director and he mentioned that sometimes ppl with depression actually deal with huge crisis situations better because they already are expecting the worst. I liked it, its funny as there are loads of references to the second part in the wedding scenes.

    Hated Tree of Life though - Im completely with Melody

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I read that too, but I don't even agree with that- I'm more thinking that depressed people just don't care what happens and so just remain calm because really there isn't another state to be in... Also, what references are there to the second bit in the first bit apart from Justine looking up at the sky a lot? Cause... I can't really think of any others, and the ones that there were just seemed really like forced and almost like shoved in to make the first part relevant in any way.

      Damn, I really hated this film!

      Delete
  4. I've only ever seen one film with Alexander Skarsgard in, Zoolander, but he looks very....wow...in that picture

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, Zoolander... He looks so young in that film! He is very very wow, and I'm glad you appreciate that :). I have to recommend True Blood to you, because he gets very very naked very very often, which is even more wow. Although there is usually less facial hair which is a bit of a bummer...

      Delete
    2. He's Eric isn't he. I totally have a crush on Eric in the books, so that can only be a good thing!

      Delete
    3. He is Eric... He is like the PERFECT Eric, too. So yeah, watch True Blood man!

      Delete
  5. So glad you reviewed this. I've been reluctant to watch this because I didn't want to waste my time (hilarious, considering that's ALL i seem to be doing these days).

    On a sidenote, have you seen the Girls series on HBO? What do you think of it? I'd LOVE to know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude, DON'T waste your time. Seriously. At least, not on this ;).

      I have seen Girls and I LOVE it. Like, a lot. A billion, at least! I think I'm probably going to write about my thoughts on it after the season has finished (only 2 more episodes, :( ) so, yeah, stay tuned for that hehe

      Delete
  6. I saw this film last year at the Brisbane film festival and I was soooo disappointed! I thought it was beautiful visually, and the acting was top quality, but yawn, what a waste of 2+ hours! I got what Lars Von Trier was trying to do, but I found it the opposite of captivating. It completely overshot the mark for me.

    I also really detested the super long, super slow-mo intro.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OMG, the intro! I was ok with it for a couple of minutes, and then I was like 'seriously... is this going to stop? Like, ever?' That was almost *too* artsy and like piss taking for me!

      And yeah, I do have to agree that it does *look* ever so good (this, clearly, includes the Skarsgard) but it doesn't really go beyond that, you know? Like... it's all show and no substance. And, dammit, I like substance!

      Delete
    2. exactly, it's like one of those cakes that look really tasty and delicious and then you bite into them and they're full of air!

      Delete
    3. I've never had a cake like that! Luckily for everyone, because there would have been RETRIBUTION!

      Delete
  7. This is one of those films that you watch and would be perfectly justified in posting a review that simply read - "Piece of shit."
    However, because of the director, his work and, especially, his reputation, we're forced to give credence to and search for insight and a deeper understanding of a film that just doesn't deserve it.
    It's all well and good for him to say the film was about this or that and that this or that happened because of something or other, but if the film is unwatchable dross, that should overrule the value of the esoterica.

    The critics who raved about it probably did so in fear of being accused of not understanding it. Dicks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well that's it, isn't it? Once a director gets a reputation, it's like you *have* to say that their film is amazing, or risk sounding like an idiot who 'doesn't get it'. But like, I get it! I just didn't think it was clever, or very well done, or anything. It just falls short in like everything ever.

      Also, most film critics ARE dicks, it has to be said! Like... I know that the Mirror's film critic gave Sex and the City 2 (which we're not even going to talk about) like 1 star for men and 4 stars for women, because apparently, if there are shoes in a movie that is utter shit (even shitter than Melancholia because, let's face it, Skarsgard isn't in it) women are going to like it! Aaaaand I'm still pissed off with it like 2 years later! I should probably move on...

      Delete
  8. Glad to have my suspicions confirmed. It keeps popping up on my Netflix, and I waffle but so far have always said no. From now on, no more waffling!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wise wise choice! Although I would recommend the first half from a purely perving perspective, but after that, just nooooo.

      Delete
  9. Lars von Trier's films tend to be divisive. I'm still curious about this one, but I can't say I've loved the other films I've seen from him. Dogville was impressive, but it's not a film I would watch twice.

    Have you seen Generation Kill? Skarsgard was good in that, if I recall. He had a pretty major role.

    ReplyDelete