 "Photo: Photo courtesy of imdb")
Cinematic metaphors are typically my most favorite uses of the literary device. It was brilliantly used in the classic 1967 film, “Cool Hand Luke,” where, in the final scene, Luke is shown through a cross-shaped window in a church to symbolize that, like Jesus, Luke is a messianic figure.
The device was used yet again in cinema in the Peter Bogdonavich masterpiece, “The Last Picture Show” where street sweeping was used as a metaphor at the beginning and end of the film to symbolize the futility of life. There are countless other examples (the hedge maze in “The Shining,” the girls falling down the stairs in “Showgirls”) of films that are filled with metaphors and symbolism that truly captivate audiences, but “Antichrist” is not one of those movies.
After watching this film, which is filled with graphic sex scenes and horrifically violent sequences, I tried to research it more to find out what all of the violence and sex stood for. I assumed that after I finished the film and had to close my dropped jaw with both of my hands, that I completely missed the mark. I apparently did, and according to a slew of reporters who loved this film to pieces, the film was a cinematic masterpiece, a “tour-de-force” and a “flawed masterpiece” that comments on the fragile state of the human condition.
So in other words, the baby that falls more than six stories out of a window wasn’t meant to be disturbing, rather, it was supposed to make me applaud the director, Lars Von Trier, for shaking me out of my stupor so that I can appreciate the fragility of life.
When the lovely Charlotte Gainsbourg cuts off her clitoris with a pair of scissors, it wasn’t supposed to remind me of cutting felt with safety, kindergarten shears (it took her a few tries before that sucker came off). Oh no, I was supposed to feel empowered because I’m a woman. Or maybe I wasn’t supposed to feel empowered? I’m not sure; I just know that I was probably supposed to think about women and their place in the world. But I couldn’t, okay? When someone mutilates their body on screen, it’s hard for me to think about the deep meanings life has in store for all of the women of the world.
But really quickly, the cinematography was beautiful. I’ve never seen trees so green or a tear look so shiny in my life. In fact, the first three quarters of the film (if you take out the horrifying death of the baby and the over-the-top sex scenes) was quite lovely and almost exciting to see on screen. Those were good moments. I cherished those moments and think that Von Trier should direct an episode of “Life” sometime. I think he’d be just darling at it.
Overall, I guess Von Trier’s “Antichrist” had a point but I am just too much of a square to see what the point of it was and to be honest, I’m quite all right with that. I’m sure he doesn’t care about what I think and this film wasn’t made for people like me who think that “Tommy Boy” is one of the greatest films of all time.
So readers, as my last piece of advice to you as A&E Editor, please do not see this movie. It’s terrible. Yeah, it’s pretty, but there are plenty of beautiful things in life that aren’t worth paying attention to. Nothing good happens when you give pretty things unwarranted attention. Just ask Lindsay Lohan.
Be the first to comment on this article!