How you described the "enlightenment" that comes out of movies like Lars makes couldn't have explained any better my enjoyment of his movies. It lets us go through these harsh and disturbing scenarios and understand them better, maybe even help us reflect on our own similar situations. It's almost therapeutic.
@ashraykotian14 жыл бұрын
Just got to say this, this might be one of the best reviews you have done. I have heard people talk about this film but none for me has opened up a way to think about it and make sense of it for myself the way this review does with all the points you bring up. Good job!!!
@Turtleproof4 жыл бұрын
I found little symbolism other than Her describing her dreams, that their names are so impersonal hints at how this movie is a situation any two people can end up in. The moral of the story is that He shares just as much responsibility for the catastrophic finale. My background: I spent years taking psychology courses and was engaged to a woman with dangerously severe Borderline Personality Disorder. In short: 1) We were taught to NEVER treat your own family, and He does that, 2) The way She acts is only slightly exaggerated (I am not kidding). I once askes my fiancee, "Am I going to wake up to you clawing my eyes out?" Rather than screaming or hitting me as she usually would, she got quiet. As for the witchcraft angle, people with BPD latch on to a narrative for why they deserve to be in pain and to hurt the people who love them most: she dabbled in witchcraft and told me that she is, "a piece of shit, I'm useless," and that she deserved to be exploited by the creepers and pornographers of the city. It only seems like a shock movie because nobody who hasn't studied it or lived it could ever believe that these things happen. It's not an ugly movie to me, it is mostly a gorgeous fugue with moments of the ghastly that were seared into my mind.
@Guigley2 жыл бұрын
This movie makes a strong case for Charlotte Gainsbourg being the most fearless actress who ever lived.
@homerjs225 Жыл бұрын
I hear you but I always looked at her like, you need an actress to do something really fucked up call Charlotte
@jellybeanz19894 жыл бұрын
You can break down the film to humanity's struggle between rationality and primal animal desires (in other words NATURE, also represented by the woods and the animals). The psychiatrist husband character is the representation of rationality and the crazy woman represents nature.
@fune34873 жыл бұрын
yeah, to me the 2 characters didn't even represent humans but more of an inner dialog between the natural primal instinct vs. the human rationality. (almost exactly how Defoe's character sets up the game where he says he plays nature and she has to be rational.(but reversed)) And how loss, and depression more generally, is the struggle where you cant kill of your natural instinct to feel fear and despair. And when she burns in the end its almost like comming out of a depression, he also somewhat comes to terms with the different feelings in form of the 3 animals in the epilog. Obviously theres alot of ways you can interpret this movie, but to me its more of an inner struggle or turmoil.
@giniwelle3 жыл бұрын
Apollo vs Dionysius or Wojack vs Pepe
@sevenlines22383 жыл бұрын
@@giniwelle lol
@whitedragoness232 жыл бұрын
I didn’t realize the Fox eating itself represents self destruction. It’s literally ripping itself to shreds kinda like some one who is having mental issues might feel.
@austynmcneil72532 жыл бұрын
I find it very humorous that in trying to research movies that I want to watch, it inadvertently leads to your channel. And I always enjoy your take, whether I choose to watch the movie after or not. Cool stuff 👍
@styleissubstance4 жыл бұрын
I believe the film is also about self-fulfilling prophecies when it pertains to misogyny. Patriarchal societies frame women as evil, and it's this negative framing that becomes reinforced by the woman. Dafoe's character exists as a counter to this, but his dismissal of her thesis research is simultaneously contributing to devaluing her efforts as a woman. It is all paradoxical and I think you articulated some of my thoughts quite well.
@deepfocuslens4 жыл бұрын
Thank you very much. You articulate your points extremely well also. :)
@Turtleproof4 жыл бұрын
I was prepared for Tumblr nonsense and found a thoughtful observation that properly uses the terms and historical context, hot damn!
@styleissubstance4 жыл бұрын
@@Turtleproof that's my whole channel lol
@mabusestestament4 жыл бұрын
I disagree. Antichrist imo primarily is Von Trier trolling his radical feminist critics.
@ryanrudolph5667 Жыл бұрын
One fantastic KZbinr commenting on another. You guys should each check out the others’ stuff on Possession(1981).
@VINYLandSTUFF4 жыл бұрын
This movie reminds me of Possession (Andrzej Zulawski) another break up, transformation, depression type of movie. I really enjoyed the movie it was a blind but for me.
@grantkistel3411 Жыл бұрын
This was so cathartic for me. As someone who wants to make film, but being 20 from a poorer background, right now the dream as I work a job is just to make reviews and to explore and give myself up to what I can watch as much as possible. Thank you, as someone who looks up to this channel a lot, it was very affirming to hear you had a near identical takeaway from this film as I. Not only did it strengthen my strong feelings and the poignancy of this film to me to know it can be universally read the same, but that someone who’s bread and butter is analysis of film could see what I did and voice it nearly the same. I’m rambling, I just wanted to say thanks for always being an inspiration for how to analyze film and truly subject yourself to the art.
@Wes_5kyph19 ай бұрын
stop trying so hard. ppl sense that.
@jarommossey2338 Жыл бұрын
I like to interpret the movie as abstractly as possible. The conflict in the movie shows this almost inherent underlying pattern that shows itself in our perceptible reality on so many levels. On my first watch I immediately interpreted it as the fundamental conflict of self suffering. However, there are so many fitting interpretations of the movie like your own, that I feel the movie is capturing a deeper pattern underlying the human experience. There are ideas about humanities complex relationship with nature and the self, and how neither are multually exclusive. There is something fundamental about conflicts of masculine and feminine, and chaos and order within human nature. When I watch this movie I understand it on such an instinctual level that I can't help but feel it is capturing the experience of life itself.
@lacrimatorium4 жыл бұрын
Well this is Timely. A friend just said that the breakup with her long time boyfriend was like this film. To which I said whoa. I knew enough to know how crazy this film is. So I just ordered it to understand what my friend was saying. It should be arriving anyway. Then I'll come back. And finish watching this. Thanks!
@7547JAMES4 жыл бұрын
Crazy...anyone would think your phone was listening.
@rutherfrogp.wilmington49077 ай бұрын
Alex Garland’s “Men” is a perfect companion piece to this one. Both excellent films by consistently solid directors.
@lacrimatorium4 жыл бұрын
Well I finally saw it. And though I wasn't expecting to be I was quite impressed. Thanks for prodding us with your thoughts on it. What does Antichrist mean? I think the final dedication to Tarkovsky, who certainly was a Christian, gives us a clue. And it is no simple name tacked on. Many images in the film call to mind Tarkovsky. Particularly films like Stalker and especially The Mirror. While Tarkovsky lens moves through the landscape seeking out the meaning of images set before us. Von Trier does just the opposite. He surveys the landscape, and the human relationship, as meaningless, even dark, matter. Yet he gets to the heart of one of the paradoxes of humanity, the love/hate of men and women. Truly worthwhile subject. And interestingly enough, by focusing on that darkness, by implication, he can't help but wrestle with the actual meaning of this life. Which Tarkovsky certainly believed was there. I like your interpretation. And because it really is a work of art, flawed yes, but real, it is indeed open to various interpretations.
@GeauxSaintsNation4 жыл бұрын
Watching this movie while high on acid was absolutely insane and I highly recommend it
@j-dog8517 Жыл бұрын
I'll have to do it with shrooms 😂
@jamespader4 жыл бұрын
Would love for you to review Night of the Hunter truly one of my absolute favorite films ever made.
@deepfocuslens4 жыл бұрын
I certainly will at soon point. :)
@jamespader4 жыл бұрын
deepfocuslens also would love to finally hear your thoughts on Us. I’ve seen it maybe 6 or 7 times now and it’s still so incredible just the craft alone and I actually think I prefer it to Get Out at this point just because of the sheer ambition.
@jamespader4 жыл бұрын
Also I know there’s probably a long list of films you’d like to review in the near future but I would LOVE to hear your thought on My Own Private Idaho it’s one of my absolute favorite films ever made and I know you love movies that operate their narratives through dream logic and it’s always reminded me so much of Mulholland Drive.
@sydIRISH4 жыл бұрын
KILLER FILM!!!!!!!!!! Robert Mitchum was a GREAT villain.
@ruygranja8 ай бұрын
Excellent review. Lars von Trier is a master showing the human nature that most humans fake not to be aware of. It takes a lot of courage to be Lars von Trier. All those metaphorical scenes are also a promise of awareness and emotional maturity.
@styleissubstance4 жыл бұрын
Good video! I think the opening sequence is one of the strongest of the decade (interestingly it's rivaled by two other films of 2009, being Enter the Void and Watchmen). I think there comes a point where something is so articulately crafted and over-the-top, that it triggers different emotional responses for different people: laughter or terror. I think Zulawski's films like Possession do something similar. Night of the Hunter is a very interesting comparison, but there's a lot of merit to it, both visually and thematically. The contortion of Christianity is definitely present in both.
@ronbock82912 жыл бұрын
Interesting. First, yes, the first scene of this one is maximum Von Trier. It’s the Avon Trieriest. Personally, Melancholia is the one of this trilogy that stays with me to this day. It’s like a nightmare that I swear I have had, so I internalized it thoroughly. Anti Christ, if I had to choose one theme, why i’t’s “about”, is grief, but the larger sense of grief, the grief that is embedded in existence.
@atticusxey3 жыл бұрын
I just saw Melancholia for the first time about a month ago and was completely taken in by it - totally mesmerized by its dichotomy. Nihilism meets hope. :)
@whitedragoness232 жыл бұрын
I thought it was nihilism consumes all
@ThelastDJ19768 ай бұрын
Finally watched this movie for the first time, quite the experience. Loved the review and agree about the open-endedness of the movie - I could see this impacting 100 different people 100 different ways.
@DD-zu9fy3 жыл бұрын
best film i've seen made in the past 20 years. Feels like a retelling of Bergman's "Through a Glass Darkly" (probably my fav film of all time)
@wailer273 жыл бұрын
It's completely misguided to say that she's not evil...The whole turning point of the film is when we find out she was abusing her son by forcing him to wear his shoes on the wrong feet... also how about mentioning the flashback which reveals how she watched him jump out of the window and did nothing about it... Could possibly be worth a mention somewhere in this 20 minute analysis.
@drmollycules4 жыл бұрын
I think it’s odd that, although this movie is inextricably connected to Von Trier’s “nature is Satan’s church,” nihilism and pessimism are almost never mentioned in regards to this movie. I think of that part of Burden of Dreams when Werner Herzog describes nature - “Nature here is vile,” he said. “I see fornication and asphyxiation and choking and fighting for survival and growing and just rotting away . . . the trees here are in misery, the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing, they just screech in pain.” The whole man v. Nature dichotomy subtext seems sort of false but I haven’t really done an analysis of this movie nor seen in it a while, so I could be misremembering things.
@whitedragoness232 жыл бұрын
I saw it as the failure to help women/ people with mental issues (if you want to be neutral) and how the woman was suffering pain and she killed her kid because she wasn’t being cared for and probably had a kid she didn’t want or eventually her depression got so bad she did what is the opposite of what women are supposed to be. They are supposed to be nurturing, loving, comforting but her mental state ruined it or maybe she wasn’t meant to be a mother and was pressured by society’s standards to depict a typical woman. She tends to be overly emotional, something else is brewing and is the source of her mental issues but it’s never figured out in the movie because she isn’t being treated.
@dandylion64 жыл бұрын
I feel that my opinion was warped because I watched Tarkovsky’s major works prior to.
@mabusestestament4 жыл бұрын
No that's the best way to watch Antichrist, as it's an intertextual piece that (explicitly) relates itself to Tarkovsky's work.
@taytum1984 жыл бұрын
Just found your channel, very insightful comments. Alot of the reviews on your channel are some of my all time favorites, I do have a feeling without scrolling all the way through that I will not find a review of the cinematic masterpiece "Big Mommas House"
@kristopherthomas71663 жыл бұрын
Just stumbled upon your channel. It’s really good. You’re really good at this. Subbed and belled.
@dandavenport45658 ай бұрын
Viewed this movie for the first time last night. Struggling to make any sense of it. So many symbols and so much allegory with very few answers. Certainly a depressive view of nature. We often view cabins in the woods as serene and affirming locations. However, a depressed person is consumed with the tragedy and cruelty in nature. Would love to hear from the Director about the final scene, because I am at a complete loss.
@ChaosReigns454 жыл бұрын
Do you plan on doing a review about any David Cronenberg movie soon? i'd be very interested to hear your opinion about eXistenZ, Videodrome, Naked Lunch, Crash.
@unluckychloe13Ай бұрын
just rewatched this film for the first time in around 10 years. when i first saw it i was in my mid 20s and attracted to edginess for its own sake, and latched on because it was provocative and extreme. i laughed at the pretentious music and slow-mo, and thought of von trier as an admirable prankster and troll. but this time it was different - i went in looking for that same experience, and was caught completely off-guard by how deeply it affected me emotionally. i went through a lot of awful things and a years long battle with depression since my last viewing, and now suddenly all the things i laughed with/at as pretentious or trollish rang true. just my view of course, but at its core this feels like a movie made by somebody very sick and tired of being told "the way out is through", that confronting terrible things will magically make them go away. in the film the natural world seems to represent these naturally occurring feelings, with dafoe's character pushing his wife to confront them, to become one with them, to live inside of them. but the film seems to argue that just because something is "natural" doesn't make it holy - nature has no right and wrong, only chaos reigns. same as our own instincts & natural functions, the human nature we put on a pedestal, but which leads to the historical horrors the film also depicts. it feels like a warning against rationalizing and narrativizing suffering, a condemnation of our reverence for the natural, and most of all a command to just take the damn medication sorry for the essay comment 4 years later lol
@_xntrk3 жыл бұрын
The House That Jack Built is my first experience with Von Trier. I experienced many of the emotions you expressed in this review while watching that film. Antichrist is my next watch, for sure. Peace.
@BennyValdesMusic4 жыл бұрын
I love your videos. Thank you for the time you put into them.
@Cedric.Q4 жыл бұрын
I am very happy to discover your channel. I don't know how you choose which films to watch but I would like to hear your take on The Neon Demon by Nicolas Winding Refn. :D
@ananta45772 жыл бұрын
I think it is about the manifestation of guilt which is too much to be worked on or even acknowledged.
@ananta45772 жыл бұрын
For me the most monumental scene is when she finally acknowledges that she saw her son while he was on the edge but was too deep in the throes of sexual ecstasy to do anything. The violence spirals from there. I agree with what you said about how her conclusions from her research are a form of internalized misogyny. And I felt that her not reacting in time to save her son was a manifestation (or what she sees as the manifestation) of what she has come to believe about the inherent evilness of women. This is what she struggles with and is unable to deal w it. Which is why she turns violent towards herself and her husband, quite literally destroying their sexuality.
@SeymourKilmore2 жыл бұрын
Your observation that she researches gynocide BECAUSE she hates herself and not the other way around is an observation that went right over the head of every male reviewer of this movie. I am glad I tuned into a woman's perspective on this movie
@thePANDEMlC4 жыл бұрын
I watched this movie prob when it came out, by watch I mean I watched the first 10 mins with a group of friends before I had really got into art house or more non traditional films. Some of us died laughing, some of us were completely put off and weirded out, but it always stuck in my mind all these years later and I've wanted to revisit it now that I'm an adult.
@Turtleproof4 жыл бұрын
It's so embarrassing to go to a real movie with a group of nitwits. "Yeah, art is sooo dumb, where's the fart jokes or jump scares? I didn't get it! It was sooo weird!!!"
@crappymcdick4 жыл бұрын
@@Turtleproof It's fine not to understand a movie but a certain level of self awareness is also needed, even if you don't completely understand a movie you must understand chunks of it. That is why I hate when people pass movies like Antichrist as bad when they don't even try to understand it.
@Turtleproof4 жыл бұрын
@@crappymcdick Right. There are certain movies that aren't for me but I can still tell that they're quality or at least digestible for certain people.
@josesequerosvalle4 жыл бұрын
Great review. What is the exact title you mention in 8:56? I'd like to watch it, but I don't understand you.
@deepfocuslens4 жыл бұрын
Night of the Hunter
@NaliniKluth4 жыл бұрын
Regret because of neglect caused by selfishness.
@aaronshouting5884 жыл бұрын
Please review Dancer in the Dark next!!!
@giniwelle3 жыл бұрын
That movie destroyed me.
@Suite_annamite4 жыл бұрын
This might not make much sense, but *based on the sounds and general "feel"* of this movie, I'm *reminded of 3 other, totally different movies* : Jean-Jacques Annaud's *"The Name of the Rose"* (1986), Wolfgang Petersen's *"The NeverEnding Story" (1984), and Akira Kurosawa's *"Ran"* (1985)!
@youssefhmz68764 жыл бұрын
We miss you and I like all your reviews especialy this one .. but would you ever consider doing a trainspoting review please ?
@elfsieben14504 жыл бұрын
Thanks for your insightful thoughts on this movie! I don't have a conclusive answer to your questions, but I feel that your questions are exploring into the right direction when it comes to understanding this film. I really like your interpretation, it is very close to my own thoughts after watching "Antichrist". I also feel a certain kinship between "Antichrist", "mother!", "The VVitch" and "The Lighthouse", as all these films explore historical myths in terms of the psychological thriller, psychoanalytical drama, and horror genres.
@northnova13584 жыл бұрын
I know the movies 10 years old so I don’t really know the protocol for spoilers but.. I wish I didn’t known what happened with the son. That took away the shock of The event. 🙉 still excellent review. The intelligence which you broke down and explain the over arching themes really helped me enjoy the movie on a deeper level. Thank you👏🏻👏🏻
@wailer273 жыл бұрын
It's billed as a movie about grief, wtf did you think was going to happen to the son?
@pbnjelly999 ай бұрын
You do, i don't feel discomfort. You need to step back and recognize.....KAREN
@tjebbedonckers4 жыл бұрын
Great review. Amazing t-shirt.
@josephreusch Жыл бұрын
Just watched this movie today for the first time. To me by the end of it the arc I got most was a mothers guilt that she put her own pleasure over the duty to protect and care for her child as you see in the end that she saw her child approaching the window and did nothing to intervene. She wants her husband to share in the guilt and feel as punished and trapped by it as she does, but in the end she succombs to the guilt and punishes herself through self mutilation of the source of pleasure that led to her child’s death. There is a lot more in there too but that was the through line i picked up on.
@Craigsmovieexploration4 жыл бұрын
Sounds like one of those movies that leaves things up for interpretation.
@Turtleproof4 жыл бұрын
It's slmostly quite literal, the final scene could be ... how to put it non-spoiler... the character(s?) could be experiencing symptoms from the real things that happened or maybe something symbolic or paranormal is happening.
@scottcoz4 жыл бұрын
Silly question, but I've always been kind of curious - why do you do your videos sitting on the floor? It doesn't bother me, mind you - I'm just kind of curious why you choose that location?
@deepfocuslens4 жыл бұрын
I dunno. I just like sitting on the ground more.
@scottcoz4 жыл бұрын
@@deepfocuslens Fair enough. btw I love that you often bust out reviews of non-current films, like this - mixing it up with current releases. I also like your commentary topic videos, like favorite scores, can "bad" people make good art, etc. You provide interesting content :)
@78deathface4 жыл бұрын
This is maybe the only film that’s made me physically nauseous.
@user-lr8pk7un1x4 жыл бұрын
Between "that" scene in antichrist and "THAT" scene in nymphomaniac part 2, I swear Von Trier is doing his best to make certain people pass out in the middle of his movies...
@giniwelle3 жыл бұрын
Don't forget the movie was dedicated to Andrey Tarkovsky. Which means you are free to interpret the film as you please.
@flippert06 ай бұрын
What is this movie _really_ about? Here's my attempt: we must remember that von Trier used his own script for 'Antichrist', like in any of his movies. He made a movie about his own mental illness (depression). Everything, every person is a metaphor, facet or stand-in for himself. IMHO 'Antichrist' is the depiction of an unsuccessful attempt at self-healing. Von Trier splits himself up into a supposedly sane and rational "He" and an irrational, neurotic "She". But "He" is not really a doctor and choses the wrong approach for curing "She". And who is the titular "Antichrist"? *Everything* in this movie is "anti": anti-sex leads to anti-life (death). Nature isn't nice but an antagonist. "Antichrist" is both a skewered worldview (depression) and a false approach of salvation (by turning to the wrong person - yourself - and medical treatment - self-healing).
@azhybekaitaliev45764 жыл бұрын
Can you please review Marriage Story please? Its on Netflix
@deepfocuslens4 жыл бұрын
Hoping to get to that soon.
@legendarygigolo8233 жыл бұрын
I knew for certain Von Trier was a massive troll right at the opening scene's ...uuhhh...close up. "Chaos reigns" reminds you of it and the ending scene confirms it.
@LegitimateKill3 жыл бұрын
A woman’s opinion was much needed on this one, my guy.
@gamji57484 жыл бұрын
I’d love to see you review Kids (1995)
@SheepdoggXL Жыл бұрын
🤔After watching this movie a few days ago I see why it’s called “Antichrist” I think a lot people missed it but I see the story that Lars Von Trier was telling and it is very abstract. Anyway it’s called Antichrist because the movie is describing how Satans “nature” infected the entire world through his relationship with Eve. Also the three beggars: Grief, Pain and Despair are the tools she uses to get her way whenever she’s into her emotions. Her husband aka her “therapist” is really Satan himself documenting and telling her what those feelings of emotions are how she will act or express her emotions out there in the wilderness(world).
@bullseye69694 жыл бұрын
when movie was near to end I literally thought is it possible she saw her child climbing on window and let him die still she was watching, and then in the end I saw flashback. -_0
@anndrezzz44834 жыл бұрын
I’m dying on knowing your books title collection ❤️
@KerminSR13 күн бұрын
von Trier walked so Aster could run...IYKYK
@johns1232 жыл бұрын
Have you ever considered reviewing Salo? It's a disgusting film, but it is also profound statement about evil, and it's visually beautiful too
@drmollycules4 жыл бұрын
Maybe I’m crazy, okay probably, but describing something as supersaturated, washed-out, AND sterile is saying it has three different competing aesthetics. Is that what you’re trying to say?
@carlosdumbratzen63323 жыл бұрын
This is the first review of this movie that I actually felt was accurate to what I saw
@sofia-dv1nk4 жыл бұрын
I just saw this movie called American Pop (1981) and it is AMAZING. I wonder if you have already seen it
@dominicconti62783 жыл бұрын
Since you asked (in your video), I see this film as a cult film; even though the cult is just two people (for most of the film, anyway). There's a lot else going on, but that's what I took -- I need to see the film again, to be sure. It's similar to the play/film BUG in that one man (the leader) uses whatever he can to control the woman (his "follower") with whom he is connected.
@RooftopKilla2 жыл бұрын
Firstly I would like to say that I really enjoy your content (Hey everybody), but maybe I read this film completely wrong but I thought it was about witches and witchcraft.
@heathershuler7592 жыл бұрын
Just saw if for the first time so im looking for everyones input.. deffinately a lot to discuss in this one. To me the movie is about control and [repression/expressions] of the same emotions at different ends of a gender binary. SPOILERS The man wants the woman to overcome her trauma by facing the fear and anxiety, a manifestation of the grief, pain, and despair. But he hasn't overcome it himself. He has repressed it into the clinical/logical space of "if I cure my wife's 'hysteria' I'll be healed as well" I think that him killing her at the end can be read as the enviable consequence of men repressing their feminine emotions.
@marimayhem9381 Жыл бұрын
I love this take
@nayr_86424 жыл бұрын
Is it possible to watch this movie somewhere for free? Want to watch this so bad!
@roseogrady30882 жыл бұрын
great insight! thanks for uploading
@blakemeads92252 жыл бұрын
I think what separates Von Trier from other filmmakers who delve into very macabre and bleak subject matter is he is a truly miserable and pessimistic human being, and thus he is unencumbered by any sort of obligation to soften the blow for the audience.
@guillelopez42224 жыл бұрын
Antichrist is a book written by Nietzsche, and, as I understand, Lars von Trier read it while he was going through a deep state of depression. It's been son many years since I read that book and watched his movie (I disliked them both despite some brilliant passages), but it was clear to me at the time that Lars titled his movie Antichrist as a homage to Nietzsche and his ouvre, for there is no clear parallelism between both pieces of work. So there's no Antichrist in the movie; it's not a physical entity nor an idea, just von Trier trying to get his shit together in a full length film.
@MsJilsephonie2 жыл бұрын
you should review Dogville, seen it last night
@alisonjane70684 жыл бұрын
it's been years since i've watched this, but i remember being disgusted and bored at the same time. i've watched several of von trier's films, trying to connect with what he's saying, but i just can't, though i do find particular sequences beautiful/moving/hypnotizing. i just feel like he hates the audience.
@Barbies_Angel2 жыл бұрын
I love your interpretation!
@FrancisPollen3 жыл бұрын
This is a great review!
@shegg84534 жыл бұрын
You gave me Radiohead. Thank you.
@andywandy6574 жыл бұрын
Can you review Dogville?
@Beaversoup4 жыл бұрын
Could you do Donnie darko at some point?
@danielbasford57483 жыл бұрын
Thank you, very good review.
@NaliniKluth4 жыл бұрын
God/Jesus/Christianty is all about charity - the Devil/Satan/Antichrist is about selfishness (see below)
@elderofzion3 ай бұрын
don't laugh at the beginning it's the only good part of the movie
@jmckeev7654 жыл бұрын
hey maggie. fancy a threeway?
@kang69143 жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed his film The House That Jack Built so I rented this film Antichrist and it was HORRIBLE. I don't recommend anyone see it. The film is garbage.
@vinylcollection_3 жыл бұрын
Amazing
@TheBreadB4 жыл бұрын
Will you review Martyrs 2008?
@fluxfotos223 жыл бұрын
This film is horrible.
@danieldasilva9829 Жыл бұрын
the like count is 666...
@beastdclxvi59594 жыл бұрын
You’re a beautiful young lady! Subbed!😀
@hetrogamr844 жыл бұрын
Did you steal this review from a college University e-Book textbook?
@ABHI-yyyyyyy3 жыл бұрын
Never watch this movie 🙏🙏🙏
@gustavoadolfoguardado91014 жыл бұрын
♡♡♡♡♡
@geogeo72304 жыл бұрын
i love you
@udarpavarota3964 жыл бұрын
One of the worst movies I ever saw. A complete waste of my time.