Grace (Nicole Kidman) is being chased by gangsters. She hides in a small Colorado town. At first the town folk don’t want her to stay. But Tom Edison (Paul Bettany) proposes that she’d do chores for everyone and in exchange she’d get to stay. At first people agree with this plan. But when they have to choose between preserving their community and saving Grace …





Von Trier is influenced by the work of Bertolt Brecht. This is very obvious in Dogville. Von Trier shows us a stage, literally, devoid of distracting or decorative elements. The viewer expects the pursuit of realism in what’s presented. The viewer gets a bare stage with the setting outlined on the floor in chalk and a few props. We are constantly reminded that this is not reality. Forced to focus solely on the events and the story. This makes us absorb the story more critically. So this is how it’s meant to work. But does it work this way? Eh … yes … kind off. But I’ll get to that later.

And being Von Trier, he has a lot to tell. Or rather, takes his time telling the story. 177 minutes to be exact! The film could’ve done with less. He usually has a message and his films are sometimes meant to be moralistic. That’s clearly the case here. The film is set in an american mountain village and there are obvious comparisons with american society. Which is why more than a few american critics have interpreted this film to be strongly criticising american society. To me, it looks more like an illustration of society in general or even human nature.

On a more superficial level. It’s a story that kept me interested right to the very end. It’s a pity that the film is three hours long. It doesn’t kill the movie, but it makes the film unnecessarily tiring. Can’t this guy make a nice compact 1 1/2 hour film for a change! Dogville certainly is successfull as an experimental film. I don’t know if I like this mix of theatre and cinema. It’s not new, but Von Trier chose a really nice format. Not only the setting, but the style of acting, cinematograpy and editing are a marriage of film and theatre.

I’ve seen a few productions that mix film and theatre. They all leave me feeling unsatisfied. The mechanics of both Film and theatre are about the suspension of disbelief. But the rules and conventions are different. The audience is trained to absorb film and theatre with different ‘manuals’. The actors did a good job, acting theatre-style as well as movie-style. But the oddness was like an itch, keeping me from fully enjoying the film.

Overall, performances are impressive. I wish Nicole Kidman would always perform this well. I especially liked Tom Bettany and James Caan. Very convincing. And maybe kudo’s are in order for the stage. The stage/setting is like an actor. A very good one.

Having watched quite some Von Trier stuff, I get the feeling that his mind must be even creepier than David Lynch’s. I don’t buy that quasi intellectual artistic mumbo jumbo anymore. I think he just gets a kick out of bringing people to tears. Which is good. Moving people is what any good director should do. But on a detailed level, Von Trier applies his ‘moving moments’ with such surgical precision, that it sends shivers down my spine. Scary! So, not a ‘walk-in-the-park’ film. Watch when you’re in the mood for heavier, substantial stuff.

Rated *** (out of 5), for acting and the story.

Be Sociable, Share!

•