Octameron | Colta.ru

In fact, this text would be called “in search of lost O”-if the features of the Russian rental did not interrupt the Trier's marathon of sex and philosophy in the most interesting place, exactly at the time of the loss of the heroine of Charlot Gensbur of vaginal sensitivity (the second part of the “nympho”, which will be released in March). Writing about the drama, looking only before the intermission, is a strange occupation, all the more strange that what is happening after the intermission is already known in general terms (the film was released in Europe). Yes, in the second part, dedicated to the clitoris, and not Vulva, Trier breaks down from the chain, is more likely to be Yernia, which is ironic. The second part of the shocking, scandalous, carbon monoxide, the first is thinner, more observant and, perhaps, just better.

The first part is installation. Here we are dealing with a classic literary portrait. “Nymphomaniac” is generally extremely literary - it is structured like thick novels with retreats, or dialogues, or collections of short stories. The battered and selected on the street by old man Seligman (Stellan Skarsgard) Libertink Joe (Hensbur) thoroughly tells the Savior about the stages of his sexual formation. Seligman, capable of and sympathetic, willingly converts these cases and jokes into everyday context, as if emphasizing: what is considered a reprehensible in sex is a common place in other areas. The story of each new partner of Joe (all such chapters in the full version of the film 8) is preceded by a heading and a short content of the chapter. Bed scenes are generously diluted with archival documentary personnel from the lives of people and animals, which emphasizes the claim of “nymphomaniac” to encyclopedism.

The world that this encyclopedia describes is old -fashioned dichotomous - it clearly reads the division at night and day, good and evil, male and female, correct and sinful, spirit and flesh. Seligman is gently trying to blur these hard boundaries, but this disposition itself-a female storyteller and a list of listener-only strengthens their fundamental dualism.

However, this fundamental is ghostly. A solid description of the film clearly introduces into a stupor of critics who are forced to crumble in search of quotes from the past works of Trier or admire the individual copies of this collection of everything - like the tragifars performed by Uma Thurman in the role of a deceived wife, or a prolonged scene of agony of Father Joe (well, how not to crick sex and death). The stability, invulnerability of the universe of the first part of the “nympho” is built on the illusion of the closed self-sufficiency of this world-dialogue.

But is it a dialogue? The position of the nymphomaniac Joe is so active, so defiantly male - this is simply a male position! Joe is Lars (and Seligman too). Starting to the "nympho", Trier undertook to answer the damned, tormenting more than one generation of psychoanalysts the question: "What does a woman want?" The ease with which the director gives the answer does not guarantee its correctness at all - after all, the very formulation of the question is not that it cannot be questioned. And who is a woman in this diades M and F? Does it exist like someone else, different from m? It does not exist - Jacques Lacan believed; And, apparently, Trier, so defiantly endowing Joe for male behavior, shall have the same opinion.

But non-existence does not always mean the absence- especially since we recall from the “Antichrist”, Trier believes in the presence of another scene that plays a terrible “male” “male”, (or phallo-) centric world with the participation of dead chanterelles, htonic raven and women with a shovel. It is not, but it is noticeable - like that invisible forest power that easily knocks down a loaf of bread in Tarkovsky’s “mirror”.

And this is what I would like from the second part of the “nympho” - this is the appearance of this second - even no voice, albeit vague moo, smitheating all the tights written by the press about the condemnation of “double standards”, God -assembly and almost feminism allegedly present in the film. To fight God is not a too easy task for von Trier? It seems to me that he always threw above: in the very terrible forest breeze or in a large O, hiding a whistling void in the center of an imperfect, unfinished - but the only world given to us.

Symbolic castration: what disappeared in the censored version of Nymphomaniac? Eyewitnesses tell

Anton Mazurov: Three close -ups of clit, five members were cut out and a scene of sex in the hospital was shortened.

Larisa Malyukova: The author’s version from the circumcised differs not only with a large number of pornographic pictures (large plans for penis and vaginas), but primarily with a different breath. And, for my taste, for all shocking, this version is more convincing and sensual, primarily due to the growth of the tragic scene of the death of Father Joe. In it, the theme of bodily tests is directed in a different, one might say, humanistic vector.

Anton Dolin: The long version differs from the short one in that instead of a crisis and defiantly imperfect film, we saw a masterpiece. Of course, contradictory, strange, triggering, but in no hurry, not going to sacrifice and compromises from either the substantial or the visual side. It has become possible to finally evaluate the avant-garde technique of the porn, invented by the director: faces and torso of artists, genitals of porno-demubler. It looks incredibly realistic, bravo. True, it is still a little strange that it is half a films, but this is half an outstanding film.

Stas Tyrkin: The full version of the “nympho” gives more novel air and gets rid of the image of the main character inevitable in the digest of schematism. More theorizing for Fibonacci numbers, more entertaining natural science, more thoughts about dessert forks that need to eat Jewish pungal, but porn still a little more. It is completely in place, it does not distract from the “plot” (as it would be if the actors themselves had fallen on the screen), and works exclusively for it, giving bodily weight to the distracted Trierov ideas. Namely porn actors who gave the heroes of Labef, Steisi Martin and others. Their strained genitals participate in the creation of the images of their characters almost on equal terms with actors who work exclusively the face. Trierovskoe know-how, according to the combination of the tops and lower classes, can adequately evaluate precisely according to the full version of the “nympho”, which somehow revived and shone in comparison with the short.