Posted by at 6:08 pm
Mar 302010

What in the sweet fuck did I just watch?

My bewildered queasiness is somewhat my own fault. When this movie opened with a black and white slow motion scene of Willem DaFoe boning a chick that looks like Joseph Gordon-Levitt while a baby jumps out a window, I should have known right away that nothing good could come of this. Hell, I should have known the second I saw a black and white Willem DaFoe. Problem is – I’m a fucking idiot. So I just kept on munching my Family Time Gourmet Hot Cheese Popcorn™ all like “I wonder when the demons are gonna show up derpa derpa derp I like movies”.

After being lulled into a false sense of security by a confusing, dynamically odd, and downright boring first hour (in which there is a lot of crying and weird fucking and silence), I was ready for some action. “Bring it on!” I seemed to say with my cheesecorn filled fist. The film obliged by showing me a deer with a stillborn fawn hanging out of its vag, apropos of nothing. This came suddenly and gave me pause, but being the asshole I am, I laughed it off as a weak attempt at a metaphor-laden gross-out preluding awesome demonic gore.

“Ha!”, I sneered. “Is that all you got Lars Von Trier, critically acclaimed Danish director of such stunningly artful films as ‘Dogville’ and ‘Dancer in the Dark’?!”

I could almost hear Lars himself say “Alright, faggot. Buckle the fuck up.”

It was then that I stared in silence, mouth agape, as I was optically assaulted by two scenes that regrettably, I can never un-see.

Seeing as these scenes are the only interesting things that happen in the movie, they may be considered spoilers. Click here if you want to read them. ▼

It should be noted that neither of these scenes are merely suggested. There is no cut-away to a screaming face, leaving us to fill in what happened with our imaginations. Just a steady camera shot capturing the events. Absolutely fucking horrifying on a level so primal that my lizard brain wanted to barf.

And to what end did I sit through these jaw-droppingly abhorrent scenes? Other than showcasing the great advancements in labia prostheses, they essentially served no purpose. They were just horrible, fucked-up, vomit-inducing things that happened. Then, a little while later, the movie just sort of ends without explaining anything.

I’m sure some would argue that the myriad of bizarre happenings in this movie can be chalked up to symbolism, but you know what? Fuck that. I’m not that smart. That’s why I watch movies called “Antichrist”.

And in case you’re wondering, no – there are no demons or devil-babies or sacrifices or secret cults. There’s not even an appearance by the Antichrist himself, which may seem weird being that the movie is named after him, but is understandable considering he’s never even mentioned in passing. This movie should have been called “Dead Babies Make You Do The Darndest Things” or “Hey, Do You Never Want To Be Able To Get A Boner Ever Again? Watch This Movie”.

I give Antichrist 2 out of 5 buckets filled to the brim with vomit (the vomit symbolizes the fact that this movie made me vomit).

  One Response to “Antichrist”

  1. you left out the fact that she was writing a thesis on gynocide and started to believe that women are inherently evil. thus implying an idea of someone being anti-christ. not THE antichrist. although there was a reference to the antichrist when he was listing her fears. this film is actually pretty deep. watch it again. it becomes far clearer after the second viewing. i personally thought it was a fantastic film. and to be honest, i really havent been into much of what ive seen of lars von trier. except for the five obstructions, which is a really good film. im not saying you’ll ever appreciate antichrist, but you should definitely watch it twice.