In the Realm of the Senses

Nagisa Oshima's In the Realm of the Senses (1976) is by far the most sexually perverse film I've ever seen. It portrays sex in a very graphic way and occasionally blurs the line between cinema and porn - although the action is never even nearly as sexually arousing as porn (which is hard to do yet Oshima succeeds very well). The film focuses on an obsessive relationship which gradually becomes very extreme as the man and the woman search for the "height of passion".

Sex becomes more ordinary as it is shown most of the time throughout the film and becomes a new tool of storytelling. A lot of character development is portrayed through it instead of dialogue or other action. Their sexual obsession separates them from the surrounding society - only occasionally reminded by the presence of a geisha. There is also a subtle political subtext in the film (takes places in pre-WW2 Japan).

Oshima's form is breathtaking in its beautiful cinematography. Its excessive use of close distance shots is effective - and the few long distance shots are even more powerful and they add a lot of nuances to the film. Even though Oshima depicts the controversial sex scenes from a close distance, he observes them rather coldly with a calm pacing and unerotic compositions.

In the Realm of the Senses was (and still is) a very controversial film and I would recommend avoiding it if you can't watch a film half of which depicts sexual activities.

Score: 9 out of 10

Antichrist

I finally watched Lars von Trier's Antichrist (2009) which has ignited a lot of discussion. Its controversial content turned Cannes upside down. Roger Ebert called it the most despairing film he had ever seen. The film opens with an unnamed couple's (Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg) passionate love scene that almost reaches the levels of hardcore porn. That is crosscut with their child's accidental death. The woman feels guilty of this naturally: they were making love while they should have been with the child. The man's initial reaction is grief, but then he begins to "treat" his wife like a cold psychoanalyst. To deal with this problem, they go to their remote cabin (called Eden for some silly reason) and the shit literally hits the fans there - even to the point of complete sexual mutilation.

After I had watched the film, I spent AN HOUR only reading about the film because I couldnt decide whether the film's content was actually good or not. There are too many distracting moments in the film. In the end the film is about the man whose mind is in chaos although it seems the film is about the woman. The film makes more sense that way. When you take into consideration that this film was developed during von Trier's depression and it was his way to get rid of it, it makes sense to interpret this way. And as such, it is actually quite good, but the distracting moments in the film just rub me the wrong way. I'm not talking about the violent and controversial scenes, but there are hints that give the viewer the wrong impression: non-sense Christian references and weird conclusions about the "nature of women", for example.

For the first time in almost two decades, Lars von Trier finds the right form his film. The Dogme films have been more or less messed up attempts at creating a form that actually fits the film. I've only seen Europa of his pre-Dogme films and that is a better example of good form than any of the Dogme films. In Antichrist, he saves sweet slowmotion and B&W photography (occassionally awesome color photography, too) for the right moments. Even though the rest of the scenes are clearly shot handheld, the shaky camera movement isnt excessive - and that is perfect for the film.

The performances are simply breathtaking. Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg have taken a risk by performing in a von Trier film, but they make the most of it in Antichrist. Their relationship is so intimate and intensive on the film that it is unbelieveable for it to only happen in front of the cameras. The courage of the actors is certainly put to test here.

The film is certainly controversial, but shouldnt be dismissed only as a film attempting to shock: it has a lot more going on under the surface.

Score: 8 out of 10