The Yanks have to wait until October, but it’s “‘Antichrist’ Day” here in Britain. (Hey, it might not be as popular as “‘Avatar’ Day,” but I like the ring of it.) I’m not going to dwell too heavily on the critical reception in today’s papers — you’ve got the gist by now that it’s a polarizing picture, and true to form, the reviews are split right down the middle.
(I’m more interested to see what the weekend box-office figures are like, given that the film has been rather adventurously programmed at a few mainstream multiplexes as well as the obvious arthouse venues.)
Of the credible broadsheets, The Times and the Telegraph are firmly in the “yes” camp (calling it “a fantastically painful mirror” and “a film soaked in the grief of its subjects,” respectively), while the Guardian‘s Peter Bradshaw and the Independent‘s Anthony Quinn remain unconvinced. (“The great artist imposes shape, pattern, order,” scolds Quinn. “The mediocre artist just throws stuff at the wall and hopes audiences will gasp.”)
And no prizes for guessing that right-wing rag the Daily Mail — which ran a now-notorious diatribe against the film from a critic who hadn’t bothered to see it — are furiously sticking to their guns, crying that von Trier “needs psychiatric help.”
None of these reviews, however, nail the film quite as efficiently and effectively as this playful riff in verse from Telegraph critic Tim Robey’s blog. In this extract, Robey settles the ubiquitous accusations of misogyny in a few succinct lines:
Misogyny?
Automisogny. We’re not talking about
Cars not liking women, but a mother driven
To make a witch of herself, one that can’t feel or screw with feeling;
Monstered by therapy and her man; monstering back
In Tarkovsky’s Mirror image of a woodland refuge. No joke.
And with those few lines, Robey presents a more substantial interpretation of the film than the multiple column inches generated by the Christopher Harts of this world. (My own, rather longer, review is here.)
Comments
8 responses to “‘Antichrist’ lands in the UK”
Even Empire gave it 4 stars. Meaning they believe it’s as good as Terminator Salvation.
I hate when English people refer to Americans as yanks. For crying out loud, it’s 2009! Can we please stop calling them yanks?! Stiff English people need to get with the program.
Sorry if you’re offended … it’s meant in a playful sense, not a derogatory one.
For balance, I refer to my own countrymen as Limeys on occasion … I’m equal-opportunity when it comes to outmoded slang ;)
(Incidentally, I recall Todd McCarthy using the word “Yanks” in a recent review. So it’s not just the “stiff English people” who are at fault.)
I love that you made reference to Avatar day!
Oops – I read the earlier post and now realize you were talking about another Avatar day. I thought you were referring to one from the animated series.
You’ve done more crying over negative reviews of this film than the Daily Mail has done about anything.
Funny that all of the reviews seem to have been written by men. (Including that cute little “it’s not misogynist!” poem.)
”The great artist imposes shape, pattern, order,”
OK, I have no opinion of this film, as I haven’t seen it, and though I agree with the “shape” and “pattern” elements of this quote, I feel that too much “order” in a film can often result in what is commonly referred to as “formulaic” filmmaking.
Is the Guardian really a credible broadsheet? (joke)
And did Empire really give Terminator Salvation 4 stars? It seems I hate that magazine even more than I thought I did.