Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 25
 Manderlay August 10, 2009
Abdul S. Musa
We caught the tail end of this movie on Encore, there is no rewind or start over. I was so intrigued by the little I did see, I felt I needed to see the entire movie. It was a good investment.
 Young mistress takes a brief tour on the plantation. May 23, 2009
Ankur Mukherjee
Unique film indeed. Rarely films are made on such subjects. Film highlights race relations. A true image of America during the 1930's. Bryce Dallas gives a close to perfection performence, Isaach De Bankole... oh boy, he almost stole the show, his decent action results in a very neat chemistry with Bryce and you just can't take your eyes off the pair on screen. Its a bold film, quite bold. You will smile, you will be shocked, you will keep staring. Its a film with a brilliant cast performence. Worth watching.
Von Trier takes on slavery February 4, 2008
Reader (Boca Raton, FL)
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
For anyone who has seen "Dogville" it is a natural progression to see "Manderlay", part 2 of the American trilogy by the famously difficult to work with director Lars Von Trier. I personally like his films because the center of the story is inevitable a woman: strong, independent if not naive. In this film we come actross the plantation where black inhabitants are still enslaved despite the fact that slavory was abolished 70 years ago. Our main character Grace takes it upon herself to free them and teach them how to become (economically) self-sufficient. As much as Von Trier's critics were complaining about this work that they claimed was racially charged adn anti-american, when one thinks about it, Von Trier simply wanted to make it quite human. We learn that regardless of racial characteristics, people are people and they can be categorized into seven types. Film is actually psychological profiling that explains that it is our innate psyche that makes us what we are, who we are and how we see ourselves - not race, color or class. Definitely a powerfuil message but film still gets only four start. I do not understand why such gifted visual storyteller like Von Trier would resourt on making a film that looks as if it is made on the ordinary theatre stage with minimal props. If you have seen his beautiful film "Medea" that is so visually rich, you would know what I am talking about. Still, this is one of those directors that should not be ignored.
 Not as good as "Dogville"... December 30, 2007
Adam (SC)
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
Man, I was so disappointed in this film. "Dogville" is one of the most powerful and moving experiences that I have ever had in a theatre before, and they had to follow it up with this, "Manderlay", starring Bryce Dallas Howard as Grace, who was originally played to perfection by Nicole Kidman. Bryce Dallas, while I loved her in "The Village", doesn't seem to know what to do with this role. She seems lost, and she's the main character, and everything rests on her performace.
As with "Dogville", von Treir has taken the minimalist approach again, and we have the sporadically decorated, but otherwise bare, soundstage where all of the action takes place. It worked in the first installment of this supposed "trilogy", but here it all looks cramped and thrown together. The acting is sub-par, the narration is long winded, and could be considered slightly offensive to some, and it is just lacking in every way. Don't get me wrong, there are some powerful moments here. However, there is just nothing to ponder after the credits have rolled. It's like sitting through a big, long sermon with a pastor who doesn't know the source material that well. Eventually, you just find yourself tuning it out...
Recommended with reservations...
Would you agree.... ? November 24, 2007
W.Kim (Los Angeles, California United States)
2 out of 5 found this review helpful
Beginning last night, and passing into this day, I watched "Dogville" and its' sequel, "Manderlay." I was hoping for something along the lines of Claude Berri's "Germinal" by way of John Sayles' "Matewan."
Given:
1. that "Dogville" suffers terribly from its' slow pace,
2. that any sense of continuity between the two films suffers terribly from the loss of Kidman (replaced by a very limited Bryce Dallas Howard) and Caan (who was replaced by Willem Dafoe).
2. Von Trier's (and his teams') obvious ability as a director, as evinced by the power of their "Breaking the Waves," and other films ...
... Would you agree ...
3. That Von Trier's treatment of his socio-politcal themes (forgiveness and compassion have limits, ultimately power, even dignity, comes from the barrel of a gun, the unexpected outcomes of attempts at social engineering abroad) are pointed, Bergman-bleak and have some validity as critiques of American's bungling and costly efforts to influence events abroad?
4. That it's a goddamn shame Von Trier hadn't decided to drop his theatrical conceit (of adapting the modernist staging of Thorton Wilder's "Our Town") and chosen to shoot these scripts more naturalistically (like Terrance Malick's "Days of Heaven") ? The theatricality of the staging limited the effectiveness of the storytelling medium in both films. These scripts are solid agitprop, and would've made for some solid, if didactic, even operatic, visceral filmmaking. They would have made Von Trier the next Costa-Gravis.
6. That - as it stands - we'll likely never see the third part of the trilogy realized on film?
7. And finally, that I can be a terribly pretentious sod?
Showing reviews 1-5 of 25
|
