Quoted from James McClung Also, it might help to keep in mind that Lars von Trier is a really weird dude. I talked to a Danish guy in Lyons (France) who said that while he respects von Trier as a filmmaker, he swore the guy is dangerously close to being committed. He was pretty serious too. I'm not sure I would go that far but the dude definitely has a unique personal history and is not without eccentricities.

Yeah, his mental instabilities and eccentricities are well documented. He was battling depression when writing & filming some of Antichrist…but again, do you take this seriously?

He left his wife for his babysitter but I guess that's neither here nor there, babysitters are stereotypically hot, right? At least according to porn.

I remember listening to an interview with Defoe when Antichrist came out last year and he talked about when he met Lars for Antichrist. Von Trier picked him up from the airport, barely exchanged a word, drove him out to the country, stripped naked and jumped into a freezing cold lake naked (I don’t remember if Defoe partook), got out and drove back to his home, so that might give you an idea of his personality.

Although, it must be said that Defoe had already worked with him on Manderlay in 2005 (stylistically similar to Dogville and the forth coming Wasington) so they knew each other prior but still, you know, twas a pretty random thing to do.

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Yeah, his mental instabilities and eccentricities are well documented. He was battling depression when writing & filming some of Antichrist…but again, do you take this seriously?

I've read a number of interviews about the film and in none of them does he seem to make the connection of his depression to the film's content, only its production. So it hardly seems like something worth milking for notoriety.

I think it's refreshing you don't have to read into everything in von Trier's films as opposed to, say, Michael Haneke's films which are equally extreme (thematically speaking) but completely humorless. I like that he puts his audaciousness out there but his films are still powerful regardless. I feel like they're better appreciated without completely dismissing them as the work of a prankster... which, I suppose he is, to a certain extent.

Quoted from James McClung I feel like they're better appreciated without completely dismissing them as the work of a prankster... which, I suppose he is, to a certain extent.

Of course, Breaking the Waves was predominantly a very sad, repressed, cold film as was Dancer in the Dark in parts, gravitas should be respectfully given to his work appropriately. As I've said, I was scared shitle?s through the majority of Antichrist. I just say to be aware of his humour too and keep in mind his tendency to "put on" the audience sometimes.

As for Haneke, your correct, he is virtually humourless and sometimes overly didactic (one can almost see a subliminal, wagging finger admonishing the viewer through the screen at times) but having said that "The White Ribbon" was easily in my top five films of last year, loved "Cache" (Hidden) & the original "Funny Games too", I desperately need to see more of his stuff.

Anyway, whatever we may like or dislike, understand or misinterpret about these kind of filmmakers and their work, I always tell myself to be very, very thankful they exist in today's monochrome, industrialized film community. In that these artists can maintain their vision (to varying degrees) and still get their work out there for us to enjoy, abhor, discuss or dismiss…at least its there.