mattgrimes-69096 This film is really dumb. All they do is talk about movies. And also why don't thy speak english, reading subtitles is exausting. Lars Von Trier more like Lars Von TrYhard. Such a poser.

MartinHafer While many art house patrons might enjoy this film immensely, the average person would have little interest in the movie. Instead of a conventional plot, the film was created by a documentary director (Lars von Trier) and he interviews veteran director Jørgen Leth about his early art film 'Det perfekte menneske' and challenged him to remake this esoteric film after given certain strict and rather arbitrary parameters ("obstructions"). Some of these requirements help to make up some dandy short films and some are just bizarre. One of the more bizarre ones actually works very well, as Leth had to make an edit every 12 frames (i.e., every 1/2 second) and the final result was unusual but watchable. I also liked the cartoon version Leth created--even though he swore that he hated cartoons. Some were pretty silly.However, while the ideas were intriguing, the original film was just too "artsy-fartsy" for me. Von Trier, by the way, was one of the creators of the "Dogme 95 movement"--an avant-garde manifesto that sought to create simple and "pure" films, free of the usual Hollywood clichés. In some cases (like FESTEN), this was a good thing but in other cases the films are quite difficult to watch and dull. Sure, I love foreign and independent films, but this one looked like it strictly for the beret-wearing, espresso- swilling bohemian crowd. It just wasn't my cup of tea, though the film was at times interesting. But is it really worth wading through the tedium to find a few glimpses of brilliance?

HuffingStardust Slow to start, but beautifully done...the last obstruction makes all the difference. You have to get to the end before you can say anything about the film. It's well worth the subtitles. I suggest watching the film in segments, obstruction by obstruction because it is slow. It does all culminate, however, in quite a lovely way, by the end of the film. Also, you get to see the original film from 1967 at the end. The way the films are obstructed each time creates such new and different, but also exciting, interesting and valuable films that it's fascinating to watch. This is definitely an artsy film, and you will have to read subtitles unless you speak Dutch? I think it's dutch. Anyway, for film buffs it's a great time. If you're just an idiot with no attention span however, you will cry out of boredom at this film.

tuco73 I have a lot of respect for Von Trier's work and find most of his movies clever and stimulating. Having said that I wonder why Lars as a person seems to be so arrogant and un-sympathetic and as a director so self indulgent... The strongest message I could get from this movie was "Ooh, I'm so bloody cool!". It's a pity because a style exercise in cinema could have been a great new idea, something comparable - in literary terms - to what Queneau did, or to Italo Calvino's famous "Se una Notte d'Inverno un Viaggiatore". But it soon becomes a rather boring and self centered exercise. Those are the risks of becoming famous and celebrated... you loose the plot! What a waste of talent.