Horror Chick, With Melissa Lafsky: 'Antichrist' Might Give You a Penis-Ache, But That Doesn't Make It Misogynistic
I don't have to tell you that Antichrist sucks. Plenty of highbrow places like the New York Times and Slate have already done so, their writers leaping to slather disdain on this latest morsel of art-horror crap. Oh, it's so distasteful! And offensive! And (gasp) misogynist! Though that all raises a question: if this audience-chafing, Cannes-enraging glob of rubbish is so irredeemable, why the hell is every publication still in existence racing to write about it, as opposed to, say, The Gay Bed and Breakfast of Terror (now out on DVD)? The answer is twofold: Antichrist was made by Lars Von Trier, and it's probably the only film ever screened at Cannes that centers entirely on penis mutilation.
Here's a rundown (since I don't expect anyone to actually subject themselves to this movie): We open with snooty black-and-white shots of a toddler leaping from a window to his death while his parents get it on porno-style. (Get it? Having sex after procreation will KILL your CHILDREN! As will reading and/or contributing to mommy blogs.) Mother is despondent, father emotionally void. From then on, their itinerary looks like this: sit in bed and have conversations where she pulls out stereotypical fuck-with-your-head comments like "You never loved me" while he sits there like a rock. Have graphic sex. Have more retarded conversations. More sex. Head to their summer cabin, which is apparently located at Camp Crystal Lake. More sex. Then the wife has a few communing-with-nature moments, starts channeling Jack Torrance, and predictably goes postal. Cue more sex, and the much-ballyhooed genital mutilation scene-which, at the very least, means no more sex.
Yes, it's as awful and pointless and self-indulgent as everyone says. But it KNOWS this. It is a movie aware of its own awfulness-Von Trier practically admitted as much. This film was his therapy, and was made on a depression-addled whim. So when you take it on those terms, it actually does a few interesting things. Case in point: it's not often you see a woman smash a penis on film. Most directors won't go within a mile of penis-smashing (perhaps because 95% of them have penises themselves), and the ones that do usually steer clear of the full smash. Sure, Hostel II had a graphic penis cut (more on Eli Roth's Portnoy-esque complaint at a later date) and Hard Candy got about 15 yards from the end zone (girls: for a good time, watch that one on a bad date). And of course, there's always Teeth.
But here, the Danish wonderdirector goes for that rarest of things: the full-contact smash. He sets it up so blatantly, you could almost call a play-by-play: And the wife is starting to really lose it now… she's going for the blunt instrument… she… could… go… all… the… WAY!!! (Ahem-not that I'm condoning penis smashing. I don't have one myself, but I certainly understand that those in possession of penises have a strong vested interest in not seeing them smashed. In fact, I thought the scene was one of the most horrifying things I've ever seen on screen. As did the guy I was watching it with, who shrieked and ran out of the room.)
As for the whole feminist debate, come on people-let's reserve the "misogyny" battle cry for stuff that's meant to be taken seriously. This is a marginal movie about a marginal viewpoint-our society has come far enough that it's no longer a commonly-held view that women are hysterical nutbags bent on destroying men (no thanks to Joanne Lipman). These reviewers crying lady-hate manage to be as pretentious as the movie itself, by making this silly film into something that deserves our feminist attentions. Misogyny? How 'bout we talk about mainstream Hollywood, where practically EVERY movie marginalizes female roles? At least Von Trier has the balls (intact, one hopes) to be laughably blatant about it, and to vent his lady-anger in a forum that limits the physical and emotional violence to one short crappy film. After all, it's just a movie, people-no one's ever gonna force you to watch it.
Except me (sorry Steve).
Melissa Lafsky really likes horror movies.









The NYT panned it? Really. That's funny because I think the IFC cinema in NY has a glowing "Superb!" type blurb attributed to the NYT on its "Antichrist" marquee.
actually, it's a blurb reading "Audacious!," from ebert; pretty anemic, as single-word pull quotes go.
also: career point-misser david edelstein on von trier's misogyny:
"it’s tough to care about the bad, slutty mother"
so there's that
Really? I swear I saw a NYT mention. Does Ebert write for the NYT now?
"Brilliant" is the word on the marquee attributed to the Times. And A.O. Scott did pan it in the official Times review. I sent IFC an email calling them out on it. They replied that Holden used the word to describe it in some audio clip. Questionable.
Thank you! I thought so.
I'v heard that clip:
"Say it! Say it now!"
"No, goddamn it, I won't!"
[sound of splashing water]
"Say it!"
"No, it's a piece of crap, I don't care if he's an auteur!"
[screaming]
"OK, OK…brill-…no, I can't!"
[screaming]
"…-ant."
"Thank you. You may leave."
Also: Poor Defoe. From Platoon to Wild at Heart to Last Temptation to English Patient to, apparently, this film, the guy really takes a beating.
and I'm sure Christian Bale gave him a thorough tongue lashing on the 'American Psycho' set.
He didn't make out too well in Existenz, either.
Or in Body of Evidence, apparently.
Don't forget Spiderman!
I think about that a lot too. <3 Dafs
STRONGLY [dis]AGREE.
Fantastic film. I avoided women for weeks after seeing it.
Docked a full grade for Von Trier's failure to cast Vincent Gallo in the male lead.
I've started to watch it a couple of times but have turned it off after the first 15 minutes. Charlotte Gainsbourg is just too sweet and lovely and I just don't want to see her get hurt.
If only he'd cast, oh I don't know, Paris Hilton.
It's even more painful to read the press tour interviews with Gainsbourg where she obviously knows it's a piece of twaddle and does verbal backflips to not say as much.
Isn't that, like, just about every actor on just about every press tour interview ever?
Great write up by the way.
Is there such a thing yet as mistersogyny?
misterectomy?
misandry
misogyny = hating women.
misandry = hating men.
misanthropy = hating everybody.
Miss Paris Hilton = self-evident.
miss paris hilton? no, no i don't.
One, please!
Hey I learned a new one on S3 ep1 of Mad Men last night (yes I'm trying to catch up so I can feel part of the Zeitgeist!):
Gynocracy
Good lord do I hate Lars Von Trier. I read this interview with him when he was promoting … I forget which, the one that was all on an empty set, like Our Town, except Nicole Kidman is gang-raped in it, and he was going on about how it was his searing indictment of America, a place he's never actually been to, and eventually it came out that while he was doing this interview he was engaging in the extremely virtuous European-style behavior of driving his Porche a gazillion miles an hour while shouting into his cell phone. So, yeah, fuck him, and his hopefully smashed penis.
No kidding. What a douche.
Is there a point at which this kind of movie doesn't get the label 'entertainment' because it's so clearly not?
And by the way, he was born Lars Trier. The "Von" he added to his surname himself.
He's an immense talent, and as far as I know, hasn't raped any teenagers. Most great artists are douches. It seems to come with the territory.
Think younger, he's Catholic. Or was, until it ceased to piss off his mother..
"our society has come far enough that it’s no longer a commonly-held view that women are hysterical nutbags bent on destroying men"
You haven't met my last 2 girlfriends.
Well now, this begs the question, who was the common denominator in both those relationships?
I'm generally opposed to penis mutilation on film. In real life I think it's appropriate in the case of Joe Lieberman.
Why did Ted Kennedy have to get the brain tumor? It's just not fair!
Real women call that male appendage a DICK right after they cut it off. As I remember is was sewn back on, but never was the same.
As I remember his was sewn back on, but never was the same.
For about 5 minutes I thought that "The Gay Bed" was a separate movie from "Breakfast of Terror". I may be short on sleep.