Why do Many People Hate Lars Von Trier?

Tools    





What would take away my right to judge a person? What gives me the right to judge a manz artistic work but not his actions. If I think Van Gogh is a nut for cutting off his ear I can believe and express that, as I can call VON Trier an idiot for statements he made in public. Or I can call him a genius, either way it's my right.
Right to judge a person? Are you listening to yourself? From what superior intellectual chair are you talking about? Judge his work is one thing, but to judge a person? Is that perhaps you know him personally? Or are you one of those who like to label people without really knowing them and just let yourself go by random statements you heard once?
I repeat you can like it or not, but judge a person? Are two different things.

But of course today most people believe they can judge others by their actions and sayings, as if they possessed the recipe for how to behave determined person. I do not do that, I do not judge a person by that sort of thing (statements and those sort of things). And I do not think anyone has that right.

Different is judge the work of a person, if someone says that Von Trier's work is terrible, or whatever it was, is his right as a spectator of his work. But judge him as a person without really knowing him and insult him is really stupid and lazy, but something so simple and easy to do.



Again why can I judge his work but I can't judge him on things he says to the media, all for the public ear? I'll judge Mel Gibson based on his anti semetic remarks as an ignorant anti semite. I will judge a politician based on his actions. I will judge Ray Rice as a wife beating scumbag. And I will judge a film maker based on his remarks and actions. By your standards I can't judge Hitler, because I didn't know him personally. That's just absurd, of course I have a right to judge people. And sure I will put myself on a higher chair than a wife beater or a rapist. As I will judge someone greater than myself in his actions, and put myself lower. And of course I have a right too, what's stopping me?

You yourself are judging me based on a few statements you've read from this thread.

Right to judge a person? Are you listening to yourself? From what superior intellectual chair are you talking about? Judge his work is one thing, but to judge a person? Is that perhaps you know him personally? Or are you one of those who like to label people without really knowing them and just let yourself go by random statements you heard once?
__________________
Yeah, there's no body mutilation in it



Again why can I judge his work but I can't judge him on things he says to the media, all for the public ear?

I'll judge Mel Gibson based on his anti semetic remarks as an ignorant anti semite. I will judge a politician based on his actions. I will judge Ray Rice as a wife beating scumbag. And I will judge a film maker based on his remarks and actions.

By your standards I can't judge Hitler, because I didn't know him personally. That's just absurd, of course I have a right to judge people. And sure I will put myself on a higher chair than a wife beater or a rapist. As I will judge someone greater than myself in his actions, and put myself lower. And of course I have a right too, what's stopping me?
Now you throw Hilter in the same bag when we were talking about Lars Von Trier and something he said in an interview, which no longer makes sense to continue talking to you. Apparently Hitler and Lars are the same thing for you. No, you have no right to judge anyone by a said, but obviously you like to do easily.

You yourself are judging me based on a few statements you've read from this thread.
Trying to find hypocrisy in my answer? I'm not judging you, I'm not doing that, I was just talking to you, but you're having trouble understanding the difference between simple concepts, but It is ok.



but obviously you like to do easily.
Judgement. How can you say I like to do something easily on from a few of my statements?

*Apparently Hitler and Lars are the same thing for you.
You are judging me assuming that Hitler and Lars are the same to me based on one statement. You have no right to do that. Can a mod please ban "Tenebra"



A system of cells interlinked
He is a great film maker, but his work makes me fell like ****, so i dislike it. He certainly knows what he is doing, though.

@ Donnie: No, I won't ban someone because they disagree with you.

Just a quick note on rights, as well. A right can't be given or taken away, only recognized, or not.

Originally Posted by Tenebra
The "problem" is that many people believe that public figures must conform to a certain type of behavior, as if they were obliged to behave in certain ways, but it isn't so, it is an erroneous preconceptions.
OK, but you are coming down on Donnie for statements he made in the thread, acting as if he was obliged to conform to a certain type of behavior that you think appropriate. Why should he adjust his behavior due to the opinion of a stranger on the internet? Why do you think private citizens should conform to behavior you deem appropriate?
__________________
“It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.” ― Thomas Sowell



I've only seen Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 but it made me not want to watch the second part. Something like Dogville looks a little more interesting, but I'm not in a rush to get round to his films.

I got a similar feeling to another celebrated modern director, Steve McQueen. That he's a director who's seen a lot of art films, and has a great appreciation for them and the power of the cinema, and he knows in terms of style how to create striking and manipulative images, and uses this to create images that attempt to gain some kind of emotional reaction (a negative one). But beyond the style I didn't find anything interesting to watch, it was one-note stretched out and done in a cinematically uninteresting manner for me. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions a bit too early, but there
__________________



"He had some uh talent... that was um kinda possible for him to um use... Okay I'm a Nazi."

Don't really hate him, but he's a bit hilarious to watch during interviews.
Antichrist was great though



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
Well, Daniel, despite what some MoFos think, Nymphomaniac is von Trier's worst, so I wouldn't use that as a baseline. My faves are The Kingdom and Breaking the Waves, although you probably learn more about him personally in The Five Obstructions. As far as why people may hate him. he does go out of his way to reinvent cinema and himself with each film, so people most-likely hate him for the same reasons that they hate Godard, but I like von Trier's films much more. They both have an anti-American bias, so that could bother a few people too.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



I've only seen Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 but it made me not want to watch the second part. Something like Dogville looks a little more interesting, but I'm not in a rush to get round to his films.

I got a similar feeling to another celebrated modern director, Steve McQueen. That he's a director who's seen a lot of art films, and has a great appreciation for them and the power of the cinema, and he knows in terms of style how to create striking and manipulative images, and uses this to create images that attempt to gain some kind of emotional reaction (a negative one). But beyond the style I didn't find anything interesting to watch, it was one-note stretched out and done in a cinematically uninteresting manner for me. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions a bit too early, but there
I think it's too early to judge a director based on just one movie (or even two). In that regard I'd consider someone like Ozu to be one of, if not the most overrated director of all time, but because I've only seen one film of his, I don't.



I've only seen Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 but it made me not want to watch the second part. Something like Dogville looks a little more interesting, but I'm not in a rush to get round to his films.

I got a similar feeling to another celebrated modern director, Steve McQueen. That he's a director who's seen a lot of art films, and has a great appreciation for them and the power of the cinema, and he knows in terms of style how to create striking and manipulative images, and uses this to create images that attempt to gain some kind of emotional reaction (a negative one). But beyond the style I didn't find anything interesting to watch, it was one-note stretched out and done in a cinematically uninteresting manner for me. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions a bit too early, but there
Oh, I absolutely know what you mean. I actually like Steve McQueen and have never heard that criticism before, which sounds really spot-on. It sounds kind of like the "pretentious" criticism I hear about a lot of art films, but hasn't been explained to me very well before. If that kind of filmmaking isn't your taste, I can understand the choice to stay away from Von Trier.

At the same time though, I don't think Nymphomaniac is the best film to judge him by It's still technically very much a Von Trier film, but for me it just doesn't have the magic of his other films. It honestly bored the heck out of me.


I think it's too early to judge a director based on just one movie (or even two). In that regard I'd consider someone like Ozu to be one of, if not the most overrated director of all time, but because I've only seen one film of his, I don't.
For sure. A filmmaker changes technically and as a person so much in the many years that he is creating films, so I think it's important to get at least a handful of the different perspectives he gets throughout a long career.
I'll warn you that you might be disappointed with Ozu though. I'm a huge fan of his, and he's super consistent in his output. His films don't differ very drastically, if at all.



Okay fair enough guys. As I said I'm still interested in more of his films, I heard a bit about Dogville that sounded interesting, and I remember Mark recommending The Kingdom before. I think Nymphomaniac just really irritated me and disappointing me that I didn't care for any of its characters', even the emotional Christian Slater scenes left me with a bad feeling.



Von Trier is very artistic in his cinema form. Daniel, I enjoyed "Medea". Perhaps you should give that a watch. "Mandalay" was a bit different to say the least. "Breaking the waves" was good as well as "Dogville". My personal favorite was "Antichrist" which was the first Von Trier I had seen.

I'm going to catch "Element of a crime" and "Europa" with my movie buddy who is more than happy to rewatch them with me.

I agree with Mark, Nymphomanic is his worst.



matt72582's Avatar
Please Quote/Tag Or I'll Miss Your Responses
I'll come back to this, since I only saw a few replies. I don't hate him, but I don't love him or his films, either. All his movies seem to hover around the 7 or 7.5 (good) mark for me. Someone earlier mentioned "trolling" and I kinda agree. For example, in "Nymphomaniac I" - I loved the conversations between the lead characters, but the "dark" stuff gets old. But, in every movie, there's always a few great lines..

I usually go in order, but sometimes it's just what is available. I might check out "Melancholia" since I'm interested in the topic, first-hand and detached.

Dogville - 7.5
Nymphomaniac - 7.5/10
Breaking the Waves - 7/10



You can't win an argument just by being right!
I've only seen Anti Christ which I found pretty compelling but not a comfortable watch. I also didnt know he was Danish.



Wow, I found this old thread... I wonder how many seen "The House that Jack Built" and hated it?

I personally think its one of Von Trier's masterpieces.



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
I wonder how many seen "The House that Jack Built" and hated it?
Many. It's not a masterpiece, far from it, actually, and as a personal statement it's quite compelling but helluva trite. You know, it has those "torture porn moments" but for a reason, man, and you don't understand the movie! Lars talks to the audience, and fools them. He's low-key trolling, because he can't find enough sincerity and courage to do it in a straightforward fashion. Or maybe that's just the way he wants to do things. The film is very entertaining, tho.
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.