Lars Von Trier on Kubrick, Contemporary Filmmaking, and Authenticity (2003)

In an interview for Dogville in 2003, Lars Von Trier discusses “filmic” aesthetics and why they have lost their meaning as filmmaking techniques have become highly manipulated. Praising the work of Stanley Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon, he suggests that this kind of patient filmmaking has been replaced by armies of technicians who produce similar imagery to lesser effect, so Von Trier champions authenticity as a response.
Nearly 10 years on, where do you think this debate is at now?

[@bengszy8124]

Film is just prettier than digital period.

[@mishtaromaniello8295]

The barrier between practical and digital effects is shrinking. 21 years ago when this interview was shot, computer effects were nowhere near as capable as they are now. The issue isn’t practical or digital, but how tasteful the effects are used. CGI is a tool, not the result itself. Obviously Lars has come around on this, he uses CGI in almost everything he does now.

[@decencywarrior9598]

He will adopt , it's about the expense and getting your pov or creation out to the masses, try doing that in a world of vintage cameras .

[@CarsGuitarsARs]

The Element of Crime is a trip

[@ShreveportJoe]

I immediately think MCU movies… and Scorsese comparing them to amusement park rides. Though, those films have more problems than just CGI hoo-ha.

[@DirectedByLimb]

It’s a similar argument for sure, the never-ending wave of CGI popularity we’re experiencing feels incredibly soulless for the most part (there are of course some exceptions) and I think he’s foreseeing that here. Although, when used right and for the right reasons the technological leaps should be expanding the medium rather than closing it down.

[@psychomantis183]

Go Lars! 100% right. Fuckin’ love that guy!

[@neburarieiv]

he is criticising David Fincher

[@DirectedByLimb]

Fincher definitely came to mind for me too, I agree with his sentiment but also believe there is craft and affect in the manipulated techniques too. It seems to me Lars has embraced the ‘filmic’ again himself in his later career.

[@ziademad4707]

@@DirectedByLimb yeah totally , the house that jack built is a great example for this

[@user-zv7lm8uk7h]

fincehr is trash. closeted too.

[@psychomantis183]

@@ziademad4707 Best film made since Eyes Wide Shut

[@ysp1784]

He’s talking about Lotr lmao

[@StreetHierarchy]

Lars: You just push a button Teams of overworked Animators: 🙄🙄

[@user-zv7lm8uk7h]

Well it sbetter than his Melancholia speech...

[@kre_dopeprod.3766]

When films take two month to made lighting was not cool cause some director goes legends for 3-5 movies for all life and u cant say is that talent or drugs and luck

[@kre_dopeprod.3766]

His first films are most boring shit in the Universe. Thx God that period is over

[@ToxicTurtleIsMad]

Similar things were said about digital when it came out and is still being said but Lars was one of the first to champion the format. He is being unnecessarily romantic here I think. I dont see his point.

[@DirectedByLimb]

I agree, I think ‘overly romantic’ is definitely a good term for his views here. Although I understand a love for the original notions of cinema as capturing life, there is as much artistry, even if different in the manipulated. I believe he learned to embrace it later with a lot of the ‘filmic’ as he calls it present in Melancholia, Antichrist and THTJB