 |
 |
Dogville - Great movie
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England | San Francisco
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
we don't have time to stop for gas
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Also check out Dancer in the Dark. I think it's part of the same series as Dogville, which I haven't seen yet.
|
"I start fires!"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Peter
Agreed, sadly it's underrated movie. Very few people have seen the movie.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator  Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Peter
Dogville (2003)
Really cool unique movie 
there is no scenery or anything, great idea -- check it out! 
That’s sort of a joke, right? Dogville is horrible. I remember Lars von Trier telling my grandfather very enthusiastically about this great new idea he’d had about shooting a movie with no sets or anything, just stuff drawn on the floor, and remember how exciting and original it all sounded then—but when I saw the movie, it was just extremely awkward and fake-looking. By far his worst movie (with the possible exception of The Idiots, which lives up to its name very well).
Dancer in the Dark I agree with, though: amazing movie with amazing acting performances and a damn good soundtrack.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Oisín
That’s sort of a joke, right? Dogville is horrible. I remember Lars von Trier telling my grandfather very enthusiastically about this great new idea he’d had about shooting a movie with no sets or anything, just stuff drawn on the floor, and remember how exciting and original it all sounded then—but when I saw the movie, it was just extremely awkward and fake-looking. By far his worst movie (with the possible exception of The Idiots, which lives up to its name very well).
Dancer in the Dark I agree with, though: amazing movie with amazing acting performances and a damn good soundtrack.
Maybe you should watch Dogville it again…
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
I love Lars von Trier but Dogvill was horrible! It was a experiment in filmmaking and it failed, it is interesting to watch but it is not a great film 2.5 Stars
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: In the South
Status:
Offline
|
|
So what's the deal with it? What's different? I watched the trailer. Splain please.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
What’s ‘different’ about it is simply that the whole movie takes place in the same space, and that this space is made without an actual set. Houses, doors, etc. are painted on to the floor as mere lines, and there are no real walls or doors or anything. There are still chairs and tables and such things, but no actual houses.
When characters enter houses (etc.), they knock on thin air, open imaginary doors, and so on.
Trier did a much better job of making it sound exciting and new than I do.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
I love it. Needs to be watched in the right mood and setting though.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by MaxPower2k3
Also check out Dancer in the Dark. I think it's part of the same series as Dogville, which I haven't seen yet.
The only thing that in any way redeemed "Dancer in the Dark" was that they fuсking hanged Björk. I jumped for joy. The rest of the audience snivelled into their handkerchiefs.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
