Hacker Cinema
Nymphomaniac: Vol. II
2013 · Film · 124 min
Directed by Lars von Trier
The continuation of Joe's sexually dictated life delves into the darker aspects of her adult life and what led to her being in Seligman's care.
1 negative3 neutralfrom 4 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
4 comments on Hacker News
egh, as much as I enjoyed his Dogme 95 fayre when I was young and far more self-important, I find his later 'big cinema' output turgid twaddle.
Melancholia was just about bareable but from Mandalay onwards I could barely struggle through to the end of his flicks.
Nymphomaniac made me almost literally angry at its denouement. Just.. shit.
I'm always skeptical about claims that $MOVIE couldn't be made today that was made in a past decade. Lolita's title character was 3-4 years older than the character in the book in both films. Pretty Baby was very controversial when it came out. (ADDED: And I'd entertain the thought that it might be even harder to make today/be even more controversial.Might be more like HBO material.) Nymphomaniac is a European art film. Whether or not Rocky Horror and Holy Grail would be appealing to modern audiences I don't know but I see no reason they couldn't be made.
In another vein, I've also seen the claim made that Heathers couldn't be made today because of school shootings, yet it was made into a Broadway musical within the past decade.
Fuck all that mass-media social programming propaganda. Murder and violence are "okay," while sex and sexuality are "bad."
I'll walk around naked, look at women, and hookup whenever I damn well please. Sex is awesome, bodies are beautiful, and no shame is necessary for either.
Films that cannot be made in modern America:
- Laura, les ombres de l'été (1979)
- Lolita (either)
- Pretty Baby (1978)
- Caligula (1979)
- Rocky Horror Picture Show
- Monty Python and The Holy Grail
- Nymphomaniac I or II
Partially, there is great sanitization of Western films to be accepted by foreign censors.
I appreciate your taking the time to reply.
Obviously suggestions of being underage would be hugely problematic. While I don't see anything illegal about an adult performer pretending to be younger in a fictional context (but with the requisite 2257 filings in place) it would certainly border on commercial suicide due to adverse publicity, not to mention international problems (eg UK law is now considerably stricter on obscenity, banning the appearance of various acts as well as the performance thereof in real life).
Now I can certainly see how a fictional kidnapping and rape could be similarly problematic, and the material I've seen steers away from such themes (but there's some self-selection bias there as that's not erotic to me anyway). But ISTM you'd have a very strong defense under the first amendment notwithstanding the graphic nature of the amterial. I mean, I can watch films like Nymphomaniac or The Night Porter on Netflix or DVD even though they are both graphic and include scenes of sexual coercion. They're not as graphic as a porn movie, obviously, but differences of degree haven't usually been enough to get an obscenity conviction in US courts in recent memory, eg US v. Stevens being found overbroad.
You mentioned having written some articles and I'd certainly be interested in reading those even if they're primarily aimed at HR contexts. By chance I recently downloaded the Meese commission report to refresh my knowledge of the area so I would be interested in hearing more of your professional perspective (same name at gmail if you prefer). I eke out a living in indie film and have never worked in porn myself, but from a political and professional standpoint freedom of expression is a huge issue for me so I feel obliged to go to bat for other producers even where I find their output distasteful or straight-up trashy.
Thanks again for engaging with me on a difficult topic.