Archive for January, 2014

Nymphomaniac Vol. I – Lars von Trier


umaAre we by any chance subject of an experiment here? After a certain number of screenings will Lars von Trier hold a press conference presenting his conclusions based on the wild frenzy that made hundreds of people rush into the theaters to see Nymphomaniac vol. I? An experience to prove that sex is the catchiest subject is useless, we all know is the best selling item… Than what is it?

Is Nymphomaniac the latest hip movie we’re all to forget sooner or later or is this a spectacular splash that will rock the boat on the long term? Will it be there in the Pantheon? I can’t wait ten years to pass to see how the film historians will remember this.

The most intriguing thing for me is the gap between the wrapping and the content. Lars von Trier spent a lot on a publicity campaign that is, if not misleading, at least more tricky than usual.

Trailers have to be tricky and sometimes they promise a slightly different if not more interesting story than the movie itself. That’s not new.

With Nymphomaniac everybody expects sex scenes. But we get just a few short ones, absolutely relevant though. More sex scenes would not have been too much either, probably, but I think that the pinch of sex scenes used is the perfect ratio. A film about sex should not necessarily contain sex scenes.

The poster is a bit unusual. We can see the characters in photographs that look like excerpts from the movie but they’re not. I am not saying that this is cheating but it stuck with me.

The title is money in the bank but I am curious if Gainsbourg’s character is really a nymphomaniac or she/we just think she is.

Nymphomaniac vol. I is about sex from the first minute to the last excepting(?) some moments when ash-trees are involved. So there should be no complaint against the publicity campaign.

Yet the contrast is intriguing because what Lars von Trier is actually doing is connecting us through the topic of hyper sexuality to mysterious and delicate abstractions such as music, mathematics, poetry and vice versa.

This is the contrast that makes me so uncertain; the content of this film is so sensitive and the publicity around it is so cynical: “Forget about love” is the triumphant motto.

The conclusion of Volume I is that the secret ingredient to sex is not love. Does sex really need a secret ingredient? Then what is it? Has this secret ingredient anything to do with Bach, Fibonacci, Poe, with the arts?

In case I’m asking the right questions I’ll definitely have the answers in Nymphomaniac volume II, unless I’m not too much of a stupid dilettante to recognize the answers. I’ll soon find out…

P.S. Of what I’m certain of is that Uma Thurman’s scene is the top of this cake so far.

%d bloggers like this: