I think Lars Von Trier is a brilliant director - and rate "The Idiots", "Dogville" and "Melancholia" extremely highly as pieces of provocative and ingenious cinema. "Epidemic" was one of the last few films of his I'd not seen, and I think it's probably his least successful, although the idea in itself is solid. It bothered me that practically the whole supporting cast can barely get through their improvised scenes without sniggering (especially co-writer Niels) as if the whole idea of the film is so preposterous they can't believe Von Trier is seriously shooting it. Also the imprinted title of the film, constantly visible on screen presumably as a alienation device is a tiresome trick and undermines some of the imagery especially in the "film within the film" sections which are often beautiful, although extremely tediously written. The "real" documentary sections are more interesting, regular contributor Udo Kier in particular has a brilliant monologue that he delivers with expected skill, and the five day chaptered structure works, knowing that with the mirroring of fiction and reality there will be a "moment of drama" before the end "to stop the audience all walking out". As it happens that dramatic moment is quite hard to watch, and more likely to send the audience on their way, accompanied as it is by five to ten minutes of intense crying and screaming, but it is admittedly a strong ending to an otherwise intentionally meandering film. Lars famously states in this film that a film should be "a pebble in the shoe", and if it annoys and then stays with you perhaps that was his whole intention in the first place. It does make it hard to watch though.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 4 of 4
dombrewer
I think Lars Von Trier is a brilliant director - and rate "The Idiots", "Dogville" and "Melancholia" extremely highly as pieces of provocative and ingenious cinema. "Epidemic" was one of the last few films of his I'd not seen, and I think it's probably his least successful, although the idea in itself is solid. It bothered me that practically the whole supporting cast can barely get through their improvised scenes without sniggering (especially co-writer Niels) as if the whole idea of the film is so preposterous they can't believe Von Trier is seriously shooting it. Also the imprinted title of the film, constantly visible on screen presumably as a alienation device is a tiresome trick and undermines some of the imagery especially in the "film within the film" sections which are often beautiful, although extremely tediously written. The "real" documentary sections are more interesting, regular contributor Udo Kier in particular has a brilliant monologue that he delivers with expected skill, and the five day chaptered structure works, knowing that with the mirroring of fiction and reality there will be a "moment of drama" before the end "to stop the audience all walking out". As it happens that dramatic moment is quite hard to watch, and more likely to send the audience on their way, accompanied as it is by five to ten minutes of intense crying and screaming, but it is admittedly a strong ending to an otherwise intentionally meandering film. Lars famously states in this film that a film should be "a pebble in the shoe", and if it annoys and then stays with you perhaps that was his whole intention in the first place. It does make it hard to watch though.nymets138
Watch it with English subtitles here: https://m4uhd.tv/watch-movie-epidemic-1987-19389.htmlGeorge Bailey
Dark, gritty, creepy, original and felt really realistic!mightysparks
I would like to buy this film, not NOVA: Epidemic - Ebola, AIDS, Bird Flu and Typhoid!