The Idiots (Lars von Trier, 1998)

Message

Tribe · #1 Post by **Tribe** » Tue May 17, 2005 9:03 pm

Just read John Rockwell's BFI monograph on von Trier's The Idiots, is this movie as good as it sounds? I know nothing at all about it except for what I just read.

Tribe

ben d banana · #2 Post by **ben d banana** » Tue May 17, 2005 9:37 pm

Damn, I'm going to have to pick that up off of the floor and read it. The film is typically divisive von Trier. I know someone who hates it and hated Herzog's Even Dwarves Started Small, while I, and others I know, am a big fan of both, so maybe that's a decent litmus test (someone will surely shoot this theory down, and I prefer the Herzog). In any case, I assume if you have a taste for his work you'll enjoy the film, or at least get something of worth from it. However, if you think he's just a dick looking to shock everyone with his games then The Idiots is pretty likely to strengthen your position.

Seeing as it's been awhile since I've watched it and you've just read a book on it, I don't think I'm up to a more thoughtful reply.

King of Kong · #3 Post by **King of Kong** » Tue May 17, 2005 10:53 pm

It's an interesting film, though at times annoyingly pretentious. Nevertheless, it's probably the best Von Trier movie I've seen, but that's not really saying much, since he's not exactly a favourite of mine.
Look out for the orgy scene.

Tribe · #4 Post by **Tribe** » Tue May 17, 2005 11:03 pm

Well, I hate to venture an opinion or analysis on a movie just based on what I've read. But I've yet to see a von Trier movie I didn't like (along with The Idiots, I haven't seen Medea, and The Kingdom)...and yeah, I think he's a dick, if not just plain mean-spirited at times. Rockwell intimates that he pushed plenty of buttons during the filming of The Idiots (he also references the documentary The Humilliated by Jesper Jargil, made during the filming of The Idiots...sounds like a fantastic 2 disc set from somebody). But, notwithstanding von Trier being an ass, I have to say he has made some of the more compelling, intense, and beautiful movies over the past twenty years of any other director whose work I like.

Tribe

justeleblanc · #5 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed May 18, 2005 12:10 am

I think conceptually THE IDIOTS is his best film. Mostly because it's typical von Trier where he takes one of his beautiful paintings and shits on it and says "It's crap." (That's how I explain the bell shot at the end of WAVES, the tex at the end of DANCER, or the end credits of DOGVILLE) In the case of IDIOTS, it's not so much the film itself that's criticized but the whole dogme movement. I liked how von Trier pretty much says the dogme 95 manifesto is a bunch of naive bullshit, like the IDIOTS in his film. Besides that, it's an okay film. It's not as interesting or as moving as his other ones, but it never drags. To me, ZENTROPA is still my favorite. I've yet to see THE KINGDOM though.

ben d banana · #6 Post by **ben d banana** » Wed May 18, 2005 12:48 am

Ah, but being a mean spirited prick who'll do whatever he can to get the reactions he desires out of his actors hardly puts him in a category of his own.

I thought I'd remembered previous posts by you (Tribe) stating your appreciation of his work (to go along with you just reading a book about one of his films). The DVD is available in Canada (and I'm sure US importers) so you don't have to worry about having a multi-region player, and while you're at it you can pick up the Canadian DVD of the first series of The Kingdom, which is absolutely wonderful (not hurt by the fact that I'm a TV junkie).

dvdane · #7 Post by **dvdane** » Wed May 18, 2005 2:25 am

Mostly because it's typical von Trier where he takes one of his beautiful paintings and shits on it and says "It's crap." (That's how I explain the bell shot at the end of WAVES, the tex at the end of DANCER, or the end credits of DOGVILLE)

You really have a lot to learn about von Trier and his mise-en-scene. What you say couldn't be further from the truth.

The "Bell shot" at the end of Breaking the Waves has nothing to do with taking something beautiful and saying its "crap". As the film is pitching light and dark religion (as defined by Dreyer) up against eachother, von Trier ends the film with Bess going to heaven and God ringing the bells to signal her arrival, thereby not only saying, that there is a God, but that he is a pretty decent guy, but also that he understands us more than we give him credit.

And there is nothing beautiful about the end credits of Dogville, where von Trier, as the iconoclast he is, pulls no punches in showing us the full extend of the subtext of the film, showing us the true face of the richest country in the world.

In the case of IDIOTS, it's not so much the film itself that's criticized but the whole dogme movement. I liked how von Trier pretty much says the dogme 95 manifesto is a bunch of naive bullshit, like the IDIOTS in his film.

The Idiots is not a critic of Dogme, and von Trier does not say that Dogme is "naive bullshit".

The central element of The Idiots is, it being the second film of his golden heart trilogy, where his heroine remains naively good despite everything. Again, an iconoclast, it, perhaps stronger than any of his other films, convey von Triers idea, that "a film should annoy like a stone in the shoe", that films should be painful to watch, and simplified, the pain will bring catharsis and make the audience react.

In terms of honest emotions, no film of von Trier can match The Idiots. He constantly displays situations deeply humiliating, making us squirm. The essense of the spassing is rebellion, against everything. Sort of emotional anarchy, conformity and rules of conduct are objected. But where the idiots function well amongst themselves, as they all are in on the joke, as they all have defined rules of co-existence, society reacts by their rules. When "society" is unaware of the joke, it is merciful and supportive, when "society" is aware of the joke, it reacts offended. Pulling no punches, Karen is punished with being slapped at the end. For her, the spassing has become a tool of personal freedom, she so desperately desires to be "normal", to belong, that she spasses in front of her family.

And society is an important issue in The Idiots. Free from its restrictions, the group find uninhibited freedom, even allowing the group to openly have sex with eachother. But this is never real. It is all orchistrated by Stoffer. To spass is his idea of rebellion, and either you accept his demagoguery, or you won't be accepted. And that is why spassing fails. What begins as a joke amongst friends, becomes a political manifest in the eyes of Stoffer, and the more political Stoffer becomes, the more normal the groups members become.

To spass is to begin with an outlet, a way to let one go and shake of the frustrations of a conformed society, but it is still a facade, a mask. Just as normal people carry a mask in normal society, so is spass a mask, but with a mirror quality, as those who see the mask, see their own frailty, and thus act as human beings. But it is a too extreme a mask, and that is why the idiots retract to normality.

The Idiots is also a brilliant examination of both satire and tragedy. As long as the spass is unknown to the observer, the idiots imitate people "inferior" to normality, but the moment their spass is realised, their imitation assumes the form of being "superior" (arrogant), and with it, satire is altered to tragedy.

One can, if so inclined, use the metaphore of von Trier to suggest it being about Dogme. Both deal with self imposed rules of uninhibited freedom. But here the parallels end. While Dogme never, according to von Trier, became more than "a little blup" (here making parallels between the nouvelle vague and the blup of Dogme), Dogme was an attempt to shake things up, a provocation, attacking the institutionalised film industry; something which von Trier earlier has attacked directly with Epidemic. There is no demagogism in Dogme, there is no public humiliation in Dogme, there is no blind acceptence of Dogme, as long as you don't get "the joke". To suggest, that The Idiots is a critic of Dogme, is both missing the point of Dogme and missing the point of the film itself.

ben d banana · #8 Post by **ben d banana** » Wed May 18, 2005 2:44 am

But it sure is easier to say he's just pissing all over himself and everyone else.

While I was putting my two cents in I was drawing a visual blank on the film, but reading Henrik's response (precisely the one I anticipated after JusteLeblanc's) whole chunks of the film and the emotions it elicited came flooding back to me. It certainly deserves your further investigation Tribe. I don't know if you even bother w/ VHS but I believe it was only available in censored form on that format so do check out the Canadian DVD.

jorencain · #9 Post by **jorencain** » Wed May 18, 2005 7:17 am

JusteLeblanc wrote:...typical von Trier where he takes one of his beautiful paintings and shits on it and says "It's crap." (That's how I explain the bell shot at the end of WAVES, the tex at the end of DANCER, or the end credits of DOGVILLE)

I just cannot understand how someone could interpret the ends of his films like that. I don't feel like Von Trier does that at all, and to think that he's being anything but sincere at the end of Breaking The Waves or Dancer In The Dark is so alien to me. The bells ringing at the end of Waves is the redeeming moment for the film; without them, I don't know what the point of the movie would have been. It really makes the ending as powerful as the miracle at the end of Ordet. In Dancer, I feel that the text is less necessary, but I surely don't think it's any attempt to shit on his own artwork.

As for The Idiots, the Canadian disc is worth the low price, so I would definitely recommend getting it. I'm a little less enthusiastic about the film than others on here, but if you like anything that Von Trier has done, then it's worth taking a chance. I wouldn't necessarily recommend this as an introduction to his work, but it's worthwhile to see, at the very least.

yoshimori · #10 Post by **yoshimori** » Wed May 18, 2005 10:37 am

jorencain wrote:I just cannot understand how someone could interpret the ends of his films like that.

Not so hard, actually.

Here're a couple bits of von Trier's 1996 interview re Breaking the Waves -- quoted from Sight & Sound.

"When I was little I had a children's book called Golden Heart (a Danish fairytale) which I have a very strong and fond memory of. It was a picturebook about a little girl who went out into the woods with pieces of bread and other things in her pocket. But at the end of the book, after she's passed through the woods, she stands naked and without anything. And the last sentence in the book was: "'I'll be fine anyway,' said Golden Heart." it expressed the role of the martyr in its most extreme form. I reread the book several times, even though my father regarded it as the worst trash you could imagine. The story for Breaking the Waves probably has its origin there. Golden Heart is the film's Bess."

"If Breaking the Waves had been rendered with a conventional technique, I don't think you could have tolerated the story. ... It would have been far too suffocating. You would not have been able to stand it. What we've done is to take a style and put it over the story like a filter. The raw, documentary style which I've laid over the film and which completely annuls and contests it, means that we accept the story as it is. That is, at any rate, my theory. The whole thing is very theoretical."

These seem to leave open the possibility that von Trier is playing some type of game with his audience, serving them the syrup he knows is, contentwise, fanatical (Bess is a "martyr in the most extreme form") and potentially "suffocating", and finding a way for them to swallow it.

Tribe · #11 Post by **Tribe** » Wed May 18, 2005 11:11 am

Henrik, or anyone else, have you seen The Humilliated? Any thoughts on that?

Tribe

justeleblanc · #12 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed May 18, 2005 11:49 am

jorencain wrote:The bells ringing at the end of Waves is the redeeming moment for the film; without them, I don't know what the point of the movie would have been.

The bells yes. The shot of the bellls was what destroyed the film. For me at least. But yes, I had no problem with them hearing the bells. That would have been a great ending. It's kitsch. Super-kitsch actually, and I can't stand super-kitsch.

And the text at the end of Dancer completely shits on the film. I was so moved and then there's text on the screen which completely pulls the carpet out from underneath the film. It's as if von Trier is saying "Haha, I'm making them cry at such a cheesy moment." What was that line from Woody Allen's SMALL TIME CROOKS, where they want to place ads for their cookies in Playboy magazine so the readers will think they're drooling over the cookies?

And you may not see this method as much with Waves or Dancer, but you have to at least see it in Dogville. With the Bowie credits at the President Nixon moment. Surely someone must agree with me.

I guess you can also see it in his other films. Epidemic, with the word Epidemic on screen the entire time. Of course, that wasn't as cruel to the audience, because he never lets the audience into that film before destroying it and then laughing at them. Though I think all of you can agree that the tesxt is such a bad idea. That's sort of what von Trier seems to do. He says to himself "What can I do to make my film look amateurish?"

I'm rambling....

backstreetsbackalright · #13 Post by **backstreetsbackalright** » Wed May 18, 2005 2:38 pm

For my money, The Idiots is Von Trier's strongest and most interesting film, even better than Dogville, which I like a good deal. I also find it pretty impossible to not see a clear Dogme critique in the film. The film's merits aren't restricted to this, and at no point does the film fail to work on other, less topical, levels -- but even if Von Trier doesn't intend the film to be about Dogme, it speaks volumes on the topic.

#14 Post by **zedz** » Wed May 18, 2005 5:29 pm

JusteLeblanc wrote:
jorencain wrote:The bells ringing at the end of Waves is the redeeming moment for the film; without them, I don't know what the point of the movie would have been.
The bells yes. The shot of the bellls was what destroyed the film. For me at least. But yes, I had no problem with them hearing the bells. That would have been a great ending. It's kitsch. Super-kitsch actually, and I can't stand super-kitsch.

I agree completely. That shot of the bells serves no narrative purpose (the sound of the bells in the middle of the ocean is indeed a great ending) and is so gratuitous and kitsch that I think it does destroy the impact. To me, it reads as if Von Trier is so uncomfortable with the bare emotion of the scene (or the supernatural implications) that he has to turn it into a joke. It's like God walking on-screen at the end of Diary of a Country Priest and reassuring the audience.

I was also disappointed by the crushing obviousness of the end of Dogville. As if it wasn't clear enough from the rest of the film what Von Trier was trying to say! The scenes in the film in which the mise-en-scene really pays off (that transparent town where people go on with their everyday activities while a woman in raped in 'plain view') express those ideas far more eloquently. That whole montage seemed like a callow film-school regression (there's poverty and pain in America - no, really?): Irony 101.

The ending of The Idiots is less compromised and more uncompromising, and much more effective, for me. I think it's his most successful film.

justeleblanc · #15 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed May 18, 2005 5:34 pm

That's an interesting comparison between Idiots and Bunuel. I'm actually thinking about it now and I would argue that Zentropa also has a Bunuelian sense of humor to it -- especially when the main character is forced to make the bed while a bomb is about to explode on the train. Even the whole hypnosis/dream type structure of von Trier's first three films are semi-Bunuelian. Enh, maybe not.

sevenarts · #16 Post by **sevenarts** » Tue May 23, 2006 12:37 pm

sorry to bump an old thread, but i've been having trouble figuring out the best versions of Von Trier's films to get ahold of & where to find them... what are the best available editions of The Idiots, Breaking the Waves, Europa, etc?

kieslowski_67 · #17 Post by **kieslowski_67** » Tue May 23, 2006 1:23 pm

sevenarts wrote:sorry to bump an old thread, but i've been having trouble figuring out the best versions of Von Trier's films to get ahold of & where to find them... what are the best available editions of The Idiots, Breaking the Waves, Europa, etc?

The R2 Europe Trilogy (4D9) is possibly the best version available for "Europa".

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReview ... boxset.htm

The Danish versions for "Idiots" and "breaking the waves" (Sandrew Metronome release) are arguably the best, if not for the loaded special features that are rarely found in R1 releases.

BTW, I absolutely hate "the idiots". I usually love Von Trier's films to death. But that POS does not stand a chance when compared to his masterworks "breaking the waves", "Dogville", and even "dancer in the dark".

justeleblanc · #18 Post by **justeleblanc** » Tue May 23, 2006 1:46 pm

kieslowski_67 wrote:
sevenarts wrote:sorry to bump an old thread, but i've been having trouble figuring out the best versions of Von Trier's films to get ahold of & where to find them... what are the best available editions of The Idiots, Breaking the Waves, Europa, etc?
The R2 Europe Trilogy (4D9) is possibly the best version available for "Europa".

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReview ... boxset.htm

The Danish versions for "Idiots" and "breaking the waves" (Sandrew Metronome release) are arguably the best, if not for the loaded special features that are rarely found in R1 releases.

BTW, I absolutely hate "the idiots". I usually love Von Trier's films to death. But that POS does not stand a chance when compared to his masterworks "breaking the waves", "Dogville", and even "dancer in the dark".

Idiots is a masterful, self-loathing take on his Dogme movement and on artifice in general. For me at least it's quite wonderful.

Tartan's PAL R0 release is unedited and probably the best release of that.

For Zentropa, R2 is available and there was an R1 you could find, but I'll predict it will be released in a special edition format sometime in the near future so I would wait on that.

ola t · #19 Post by **ola t** » Tue May 23, 2006 3:14 pm

justeleblanc wrote:Tartan's PAL R0 release is unedited and probably the best release of that.

The Tartan disc isn't cut but they got the aspect ratio wrong (all "true" Dogme films are 1.33:1). The hands-down best release of The Idiots is in the Danish "Dogme #1-4 Kollektion" box set that was released by Zentropa late last year. New transfer, loads of extras including commentaries and The Humiliated, English subs on everything. The other films in the set are The Celebration (a.k.a. Festen), Mifune and The King Is Alive; lots of extras for those too, especially The Celebration, which incidentally is a masterpiece. DVD Beaver review (with impressively un-work-safe screencaps) here.

montgomery · #20 Post by **montgomery** » Tue May 23, 2006 3:57 pm

The Idiots isn't my favorite, but any Von Trier fan should see it.
I agree completely with Zeds assessment of the bells at the end of Waves. Not that the shot of the bells isn't moving in its own bizarre way. And though I don't take the ending as seriously as jorencain, he's right to compare it to Ordet...but the ending of Waves does not compare favorably. Von Trier seems to always be directly referencing Dreyer, but Von Trier is too post-modern and provocative to get away with the emotional climax that Dreyer is able to achieve with a "miracle."

The ending to "Dogville" was mildly amusing but dvdane can't be serious when he says this is "the true face" of America. It's one true face, but anybody could make an equally horrific montage showing the "true face" of Europe, or any country in Europe, or the "true face" of mankind.
But any effect the ending originally had was pretty much wiped out by the identical ending in "Manderlay." Von Trier has never appeared so desperate to provoke, and I'm pretty confident that every American viewer of the film remained unprovoked throughout. Of course, Von Trier is always conscious of whatever reaction anyone might have to any of his films, enough to undermine any reaction one might have. If you're provoked or unprovoked, angry or excited, you either don't get it, or you've been manipulated, or worse. But Manderlay was just a total failure--it's Von Trier who looks like a fool.

Antoine Doinel · #21 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Tue May 23, 2006 4:09 pm

I would agree that The Idiots is essential viewing for Von Trier fans if only to show how his insistence on provoking his audience sometimes comes at the expense of having something of substance to say.

I loved Dogville, but I actually felt the montage at the end wasn't so much in poor taste as completely ineffective. It's such a broad, easy strike at America that's it difficult to take seriously. The ending credits aside, I find Dogville works strikingly better as a fable about religious and moral fundamentalism than anything else. Whatever parallels he tries to draw to America specifically are particularly weak.

As for Manderlay, it's a lesser film than Dogville - I don't think its an outright failure - and as a broad statement on imperialism/colonialism it works very well but again the parallels drawn to contemporary America will only work for those whose personal views of the nation are skewed in that direction to begin with. As an overall argument, it's not very compelling.

I think the large problem with his America trilogy is that is leans too heavily on von Trier's personal biases at the expense of a good script.

numediaman2 · #22 Post by **numediaman2** » Wed May 24, 2006 10:40 am

One person's "biases" are another person's "beliefs". Why would having a negative attitude towards modern America be a "bias" as opposed to simply being an opinion?

montgomery · #23 Post by **montgomery** » Wed May 24, 2006 10:56 am

His opinion that America sucks may be a belief (although he claims he does not hate America), but the films represent a bias, because he takes great pains to avoid showing the whole picture (not to mention that his particular targets could be equally applied to European countries individually, or Europe as a whole) . If he really "believes" that America is only Ku Klux Klan members, slavery, hate crimes, the exploitation of others, and everything else that comprised the ending montages, then clearly Von Trier is stupid.

Antoine Doinel · #24 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Wed May 24, 2006 10:58 am

It's a bias insofar as they are presented in his films. I actually agree in principle with much of what von Trier is trying to say about America, but he doesn't provide a dissenting point of view. Moreover, I find his arguments are only fulfilling if you're entering the films with at least a window into where he is coming from. People who don't share his beliefs are probably totally alienated from the films simply because he does nothing to prove or elaborate on his beliefs, but merely lays them out as fact (in the America trilogy).

chaddoli · #25 Post by **chaddoli** » Wed May 24, 2006 5:58 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote:It's a bias insofar as they are presented in his films. I actually agree in principle with much of what von Trier is trying to say about America, but he doesn't provide a dissenting point of view.

But I don't think it matters there isn't any dissention. Bullshit like Thank You For Smoking or Saved is hailed because it "attacks both sides equally." Well, I couldn't care less about that. I would much rather watch a film with a distinct, fierce point of view.