I'm saying this only being lukewarm to Von Trier. I haven't seen that much from him, and had no desire to see Dogville, but I just saw the trailer for Manderlay and it looks like a very new approach to theatre/film. It takes place within a stage envirnment, and will feel an aweful lot like going to the threate. But Von Trier doesn't shoot straightforward like some of the movies that cover stage performances or operas. So to me, Maderlay is a new technicque of cinema.

His content, i know less about. The information was frenetic, and I have a general gist of his content but not much more. I really want to see how he merges his technique with the discussion of race-relations sevent years after the Civil War. One of the most progressive spaces addressing race has been the theatre, more so than film, I would venture. I want to see how Von Trier handles the two.

I went to rt and the Manderlay official site and couldn't find official release dates. Anyone know when it begins its run here?

Dolce, if that interests you in the least, definitely check out Dogville. Same schtick, but from the looks of it far more compelling. If you dont like Dogville, chances are you can just skip Manderlay, probably.

Or don't. Whatever. I just really can't imagine skipping Dogville and being excited for MAnderlay.

Limited release Feb 3, btw.


And yeah, I'm looking forward to it, if only because Dogville was so incredible and memorable an experience for me.

Definately check out Dogville Dolce.

Seriously, it is a very hard but very engaging movie to watch. I couldn't do it in one sitting, which I think is fine. But it definately plays out like a theatrical performance. The entire cast is amazing by the way in both of them.

I like how most of the original cast members are not returning for this film. Kidman was great but I honestly think Howard will do a better job.

Manderlay was a good movie, but by far not as good or intense as Dogville. Bryce Dallas Howard was the standout, she really gives a great performance and is a good looking woman. For me, she's on par with Kidman.

Dogville - A

Manderlay - B+

You really should see Dogville, it's pretty much everything you described about Manderlay as well, and in my opinion one of the best, most memorable movies so far this decade.

I saw the Manderlay trailer for the first time today. REally intrigued, particularly about Bryce Dallas Howard not only because Kidman was so good in the role, but also because physically she was perfect for it as well.

It looks like more of the same from the trailer to me...wether that will be good or bad, I don't know.

Apparantly Lars Von Trier wants both Kidman AND Howard to play the lead role in the final film in the trilogy, Wasington, something similar to what was done in Luis Bunuel's Cet obscur objet du désir.

Rod, if you check out the official site, you can download the first 8-1/2 minutes of the film. Quite interesting.

Anyone else seen Manderlay by now?

Not yet Riggs. Opens here next weekend, and I'm going to try to catch it as soon as it does.

Not sure when it will open in Atlanta though I'll be seeing it when it does. Didn't catch Dogville until DVD so I'm looking forward to seeing this in theaters.

wow, it's already opening? I hope it comes around here...

The reviews area little worrying

Danish filmmaker Lars von Trier (Breaking the Waves, Dancer in the Dark) rubs a lot of people the wrong way, including his audiences and his actors. Nicole Kidman, who starred in von Trier's controversial Dogville in 2003, chose not to return for Manderlay -- the second film in his planned trilogy. For von Trier, who fears flying and has never visited the U.S., the opportunity afforded by the trilogy is to reveal the flaws in American democracy. Bryce Dallas Howard, Ron Howard's daughter -- she starred in The Village -- steps in for Kidman as Grace, the gangster's daughter who teaches moral lessons in the George Bush manner: If you don't listen, she retaliates with violence. Like Dogville, Manderlay is set in Depression-era America, which von Trier filmed on a Copenhagen soundstage, bare except for lines drawn on the floor and a few props.
Grace has left Colorado for Alabama, where she finds a plantation, Manderlay, run by Mam (Lauren Bacall) as if slavery had never been outlawed. Grace sets out to restore freedom, despite warnings from house slave Wilhelm (Danny Glover) to go easy on her reforms. Now it's the whites (in blackface, yet) serving the slaves, who control the production and sale of cotton. It's tough going, especially when a dust storm hits, starvation threatens and Grace's dad (Willem Dafoe, in the role created by James Caan) returns with new options. Howard struggles with the role Kidman nailed. And the graphic nude scene in which "proudy slave" Timothy (Isaach De Bankole) puts a towel over Grace's head before ravishing her pale body is as rugged on the audience as it is on the actors. Von Trier's hand isn't as sure in Manderlay as it was in Dogville. His film exasperates and illuminates in equal measure. But no film addict will want to miss his cinematic brilliance.


It's fairly positive, but Dogville got 3 1/2 stars from Rolling Stone.

They are mistaken by the way, Kidman was not offered the part.

Von Triers has stated he wanted two different actresses in the role of Grace and apparently the third film is rumored to feature Kidman and Howard.

Conflicting reports from IMDB:

Nicole Kidman, who played Grace in Dogville (2003) was intended to star in Manderlay (2005) as well as a third trilogy installment, but pulled out of the project in July 2003 due to conflicting schedules.

Interesting.

Kidman pulled out, Von Trier originally wanted Kidman to star in all three films.

Wether it was because of another moie...or? though I don't know.

I think it adds a little bit of interesting motifs to the film if it is handled correctly. Perhaps showing Grace changing in between the films.

What would be really good is if Kidman and Howard work together in the third film.

I own Dogville on DVD. For over two years already. Still haven't seen it...

I know I've told you already but you really should watch it. It's a great commentary on American life.

What is interesting I think is that Von Triers has never in fact stepped foot on American soil and so it is sort of a commentary from a distance. Interesting concept and I'm looking forward to seeing Manderlay soon.

Well, I saw it finally. Now, I"m going to give my brief initial response, since I'm still not sure about it and have to think, but I'd like to pre-empt the discussion by saying I haven't seen Dogville.

So, visually I found this film very infigorating. I've never really seen such a good use of theatre and stage within the actual big screen, and more over, I think its the appropriate language for a movie of this content and language style. I found the topic would be inherently dramatic and Von Trier's rooting it to a space that he did, it works. That being said, I'm not sure if what he said, or how he said it, was all that great.

I am not one of those people that cares if a foreigner condemns the states rather than his own country, and I don't at all mind his point that Jim Crowe was just as bad as Slavery. The lesser of two evils discourse around post re-construction South is very true. But it also ends at a point, and the issues shift. Lars does not deal with what, once answers are proferred to old problems triggers a completely new set of questions. Or rather, he does so in the last two minutes in a montage set to rock music. The split is odd, and quickly shows more contemporary events of heavy violence and racism, but all the leaders he showed in the photos (King and X included) were not advocates of a return to slavery just because the situation was still bad. So the addition of all these figures seems out of place.

He goes on to show how half of them were assassinated, lynchings, etc, and I get it, every advancement is met by White resistance, then hopelessness, then violence, often in multiple directions (this being shown, in the actual movie, by the death of two of the members of the community, one by vote, and one by chaos). But he does include this modern montage while basically failing to mention modern issues. Basically financial distribution, affirmative action, literacy, poverty, in any think more than a couple snap shots of how it "still sucks," in this racist country. It does, but affording two minutes to the topic against the full length of the film makes the film itself seem oddly dated. I'm not being clear. Its not dated in its larger message. Social and historic responsibility, repression, living conditions, chaos in transition, but it is dated in how the suddenly free slaves respond to it. It worked as a message of "the lesser of two evils," but it somehow didn't responate beyond that.

Overall, its an okay movie, but I'm still trying to stew over its intention and if it really managed to relay itself of got stuck somewhere in 1900 with 1950+ being upended on the back end when Lars realized he may have gone astray in relevancy.

Entertainment Weekly gave it an F.

Manderlay is turgid and hollow. The movie ends with yet another ''Young Americans'' montage, this one set to shameful photographs of U.S. racial history: lynchings, cross burnings, Martin Luther King Jr. lying in his coffin. Von Trier, there's no doubt about it, has become a taxidermist of America's sins, but the way he puts those sins on display only to thumb his nose at them marks him as a new style of prankster-hypocrite.

The rest of the review's on their website, it won't let me link for some reason.

They did give Dogville an A-, but you have to consider that it was reviewed by their other major movie critic. I'm curious to know what she thought of this one.

One of these days I'll try to muster up the patience to get through Dogville...

double post

If you put the time in to Dogville to get through it I personally found it very rewarding. It is one of those films that isn't necessarily entertaining but has very strong moral undertones which are interesting to discuss. As film, similar to The New World, it is much more cinema as art, not entertainment which I find quite interesting.

God the reviews are awful...his films always divide critics but Dogville had a 76% fresh cream of the crop rating i think. and many of those that called dogville a masterpiece are giving this very negative reviews.

i'll still catch it, on dvd, but i'm not really expecting much. maybe that'll be good.

Well, I take issue with this review. I could care less if someone else was a taxidermist of our sins. If we didn't have them, no one could keep track of them. I'm not sure what thumbing a nose at something means, but if it means take lightly, I think its because of the kind of random ineffective montage at the end. I do wish Manderlay had just stopped before that point, and then it could have stood as a metaphor, even for such things as our public housing projects. But when Von Trier adds that montage it goes off kilter and shoots itself in the foot.

I mean, part of the actual body of the work wasn't too great either, but other parts were quite good, so they averaged out. But there wasn't really much in the ending. Like Von Trier was trying to "update" it, only while doing that he failed to actually include contemporary issues and just had point white hats and 1960's assassinations. All of a sudden it didn't allow you, the audiance, to relate the parable to contemporary times, and instead dictated how and to what you should do so. Eh, I don't know if I'm being clear. I need to go work out the review for this.

Actually, Lisa was the one that gave Dogville an A-. Owen, however, put Dogville on his worst list (which I assume is an F), so it is no surprize that Owen gave this an F as well. I am not sure on Lisa, but I think she like it alot better than he did.

In Australia out version of Ebert & Roeper are Margaret & David. Margaret always gives Von Trier films 5/5. David always gives it an 0/5.

Von Trier really does divide the critics. Most reviews are either totally +ve or totally -ve. Dolce's review is really the first one I have seen to give it a B-/C+ sort of grade.