Nymphomaniac
Year: 2013
Directed by: Lars von Trier
Starring: Charlotte Gainsbourg, Shia LaBeouf, Stacy Martin, Stellan Skarsgard & Christian Slater
Runtime: 241 mins (Theatrical) 325 mins (Directors Cut)
BBFC: 18
Published: 17/06/21
Directed by: Lars von Trier
Starring: Charlotte Gainsbourg, Shia LaBeouf, Stacy Martin, Stellan Skarsgard & Christian Slater
Runtime: 241 mins (Theatrical) 325 mins (Directors Cut)
BBFC: 18
Published: 17/06/21
Lars von Trier’s unofficially titled Depression Trilogy is certainly a peculiar set of films with each tackling depression from a radically different angle. Antichrist sets the stage with gruesome mutilation, total nihilism, and a desire to be as ambiguous as possible; where Melancholia is considerably more straightforward and approachable from a mainstream perspective, whilst still retaining that distinct von Trier art-house vibe. Nymphomaniac then brings those two approaches together for a film that has Antichrist’s vulgarity and nihilism combined with Melancholia’s more direct approach and mainstream sensibilities. The result is an extremely unique film that not only attempts to tackle the philosophical, moral, and ethical questions surrounding particular types of depression, but also pushes the boundaries of what censors will allow to be shown, all wrapped up in a package that makes it sound unappealing to almost everyone.
One evening Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård) finds Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) in the alleyway next to his apartment. She has been beaten up though refuses to go to the hospital. Fearing for her safety Seligman takes Joe up to his apartment to get her cleaned up and rested. It is here when questioned about how she came to end up in such a predicament where Joe begins to retell the story of her life as a sex addict, starting from her conscious discovery of her genitals as an infant, moving through her adolescent and early adult life (played by Stacy Martin) as she explores her sexual desires, and eventually as a mature woman who has begun to wonder whether it was all worth it from the toll it has taken on her physical and mental state.
One evening Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård) finds Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) in the alleyway next to his apartment. She has been beaten up though refuses to go to the hospital. Fearing for her safety Seligman takes Joe up to his apartment to get her cleaned up and rested. It is here when questioned about how she came to end up in such a predicament where Joe begins to retell the story of her life as a sex addict, starting from her conscious discovery of her genitals as an infant, moving through her adolescent and early adult life (played by Stacy Martin) as she explores her sexual desires, and eventually as a mature woman who has begun to wonder whether it was all worth it from the toll it has taken on her physical and mental state.
In my reviews of Antichrist and Melancholia I outlined the entire plot, but in the case of Nymphomaniac I would end up creating a review so unfathomably long that it would more closely resemble a book than a review. Nymphomaniac has an extremely intimidating runtime of 325 minutes, that’s five and a half hours! The film is split into two volumes to make it slightly more digestible, and there is also a version that cuts out some of the most explicit material that runs for a still very lengthy 241 minutes (four hours), but the film is designed in such a way that it is intended to be viewed in a single session, and it’s all the better for it even if the sheer length of it means you’ll need to set aside an entire day to do so.
This gargantuan film therefore allows Joe’s story to breathe and be fleshed out (with all the gory details) in ways that would only be thought possible in a TV series. The story being told happens in relatively real time too, it begins in the middle of the night and ends with the sun rising between five and six hours later. Nymphomaniac doesn’t gloss over anything, if something has the ability to be spoken in depth about then it absolutely will do that. The whole story is narrated by Joe to Seligman, and the conversation they have regularly spills out in the philosophy, ethical complications, or moral ambiguities of Joe’s actions. Joe sees herself as a terrible person because of the things she has done in the name of her addiction to sex. Her insatiable appetite for orgasms has made her do, at least in her opinion, unforgivable things. But Seligman acts as a voice of reason, detached from the emotions and physical sensations that sex brings because he is asexual. He has never had sex, he never found any gratification from masturbation, and he doesn’t find himself ever desiring to change that. He is a fountain of knowledge from spending the majority of his life reading and studying the various aspects of life he finds fascinating, particularly regarding human behaviour, and the discussions the two characters have on some matters go far deeper than you would expect a film to go.
This gargantuan film therefore allows Joe’s story to breathe and be fleshed out (with all the gory details) in ways that would only be thought possible in a TV series. The story being told happens in relatively real time too, it begins in the middle of the night and ends with the sun rising between five and six hours later. Nymphomaniac doesn’t gloss over anything, if something has the ability to be spoken in depth about then it absolutely will do that. The whole story is narrated by Joe to Seligman, and the conversation they have regularly spills out in the philosophy, ethical complications, or moral ambiguities of Joe’s actions. Joe sees herself as a terrible person because of the things she has done in the name of her addiction to sex. Her insatiable appetite for orgasms has made her do, at least in her opinion, unforgivable things. But Seligman acts as a voice of reason, detached from the emotions and physical sensations that sex brings because he is asexual. He has never had sex, he never found any gratification from masturbation, and he doesn’t find himself ever desiring to change that. He is a fountain of knowledge from spending the majority of his life reading and studying the various aspects of life he finds fascinating, particularly regarding human behaviour, and the discussions the two characters have on some matters go far deeper than you would expect a film to go.
The opening to Nymphomaniac is quite strange and isn’t particularly indicative of what the rest of the film will be. In fact, for the first few minutes all you’re shown is a tour of the alleyway where Seligman finds Joe, and it’s set up almost like a horror film. It’s moodily lit, there’s sounds of water dripping and metal scraping against metal as a vent slowly spins. A breeze flies through occasionally bringing a gusting sound with it. You’d be forgiven for thinking Nymphomaniac is going to start off with a monster emerging from the alleyway and killing someone, and then this extremely loud rock music starts to play as we are shown Seligman finding Joe and it seems very out of place. It’s strange and weirdly enough that’s about a normal as it gets for a while. The first chapter or so of the film sees Joe & Seligman compare discovering one’s sexuality to fly fishing, and whilst at times it can appear poetic, I feel like the comparisons made often stretch the boundaries of understanding on both topics to the point where it seems like nobody actually understands what they are talking about. But once the story starts to get into the swing of things in chapter two onwards, the conversations become much more relevant to what’s actually happening in Joe’s story.
The film has some questionable things to say on many topics. I can understand that von Trier was trying to make at least one of the characters hold a controversial opinion at any one time, but the fact that these kinds of conversations are taking place at times is absurd in itself. Once such conversation revolves around the correct way to address a black man, a Joe uses the term ‘negro’ and Seligman condemns her for it. Her reasoning behind it is poorly justified and essentially stems from it being ok to refer to black as negro in other languages, which only reinforces racist behaviour people of colour are combating in modern society. There’s Joe’s also very questionable defence of paedophiles, or at least paedophiles that don’t act on their urges to rape children. She considers them heroes deserving of accolades, where again Seligman has the rational point of view of just because they don’t act upon their urges doesn’t make it ok for them to have them.
There are also intense debates on the ethics and moral issues surrounding religion and abortion. These conversations are actually quite good because although at least one of the characters will hold an extreme view, it allows for some genuinely insightful conversation on the topics that is usually not afforded that kind of scrutiny in film.
The abortion scene is perhaps one of the film’s most controversial moments as audiences are made to watch (through their fingers and with crossed legs) as Joe performs a self-administered abortion. It’s extremely graphic as we get to see her use a coat hanger to pull a foetus out from her body; just how visceral this scene is, is enough to leave you stunned in silence for several minutes. But in the lead up to the scene and in the aftermath of it both Seligman and Joe debate the morality of her actions. We see Joe go through all the necessary avenues to have the baby aborted to ensure its life isn’t miserable and unwanted, but she is denied because she’s deemed emotionally unstable, so she performs it herself. It’s ultimately only down to the viewer to pick sides in the debates, but scenes like this and the ones concerning religion try to paint as full a picture as possible with two extremely opposing viewpoints on the matter.
The film has some questionable things to say on many topics. I can understand that von Trier was trying to make at least one of the characters hold a controversial opinion at any one time, but the fact that these kinds of conversations are taking place at times is absurd in itself. Once such conversation revolves around the correct way to address a black man, a Joe uses the term ‘negro’ and Seligman condemns her for it. Her reasoning behind it is poorly justified and essentially stems from it being ok to refer to black as negro in other languages, which only reinforces racist behaviour people of colour are combating in modern society. There’s Joe’s also very questionable defence of paedophiles, or at least paedophiles that don’t act on their urges to rape children. She considers them heroes deserving of accolades, where again Seligman has the rational point of view of just because they don’t act upon their urges doesn’t make it ok for them to have them.
There are also intense debates on the ethics and moral issues surrounding religion and abortion. These conversations are actually quite good because although at least one of the characters will hold an extreme view, it allows for some genuinely insightful conversation on the topics that is usually not afforded that kind of scrutiny in film.
The abortion scene is perhaps one of the film’s most controversial moments as audiences are made to watch (through their fingers and with crossed legs) as Joe performs a self-administered abortion. It’s extremely graphic as we get to see her use a coat hanger to pull a foetus out from her body; just how visceral this scene is, is enough to leave you stunned in silence for several minutes. But in the lead up to the scene and in the aftermath of it both Seligman and Joe debate the morality of her actions. We see Joe go through all the necessary avenues to have the baby aborted to ensure its life isn’t miserable and unwanted, but she is denied because she’s deemed emotionally unstable, so she performs it herself. It’s ultimately only down to the viewer to pick sides in the debates, but scenes like this and the ones concerning religion try to paint as full a picture as possible with two extremely opposing viewpoints on the matter.
Nymphomaniac has some quite big names in it, which I find somewhat surprising given the subject material and the intentionally divisive nature of the film. Shia LaBeouf plays Jerome, Joe’s long term love interest who pops up at several points in her life. LaBeouf is pretty crap in the role to be perfectly honest, but most of it stems from the terrible accent he’s trying to do. It falls somewhere between Australian and English, given that Joe has an English accent, and the early years of the film are clearly meant to take place in England I can only assume he’s supposed to be English too, but it doesn’t sound anything like English. In fact accent confusion doesn’t stop with LaBeouf, it also affects Christian Slater who plays Joe’s dad, and a few of Joe’s lovers.
Willem Dafoe pops up toward the end of the film as a business associate of Joe’s and he is fantastic for the short time he is in the film; and Jamie Bell plays Joe’s BDSM dominant for a short time and he’s very convincing in the role. But the real star of the show for standout performances goes to Uma Therman as Mrs. H, a woman whose husband leaves her to start a long-term relationship with Joe (despite Joe not wanting that at all). Therman’s performance is incredible and extremely memorable despite only being in one scene. She’s equally deranged and destroyed from what her husband has done and the fact that she brings the children along to help her guilt and shame Joe makes it so much more entertaining.
The actual craft of the film is superb though. Trying to pace a five-and-a-half-hour film is no easy feat and yet von Trier does it very well. Whilst there are definitely highs and lows in quality, the pacing is consistent and helps the time fly by before you know it. Something that would have proved difficult would have been knowing when to end the first volume and start the second, but von Trier manages to find a moment that hits all the right emotions, and leaves you on the precipice of climax wanting more. The ending is quite underwhelming though. The final chapter, titled ‘The Gun’ feels extremely out of place in comparison to the rest of the story and it feels as though von Trier didn’t know how to tie the film up properly. It sees Joe enter a life of crime as a debt collector, then she grooms a sixteen-year-old to live and work for her before entering a sexual relationship with them once they reach the age of eighteen. The justification for her doing this is never really provided, and I feel it only serves to try and make audiences not like Joe without doing it in a way that feels natural. The actual ending of the film is awful too as Joe tells Seligman that she’s going to give abstinence a real shot again and hopes that it’ll get her on the straight and narrow. Seligman seems to take this as ‘have sex with me’, so he tries to rape her, and then she kills him. It doesn’t make sense because he’s asexual, so why is he trying to have sex with her? It comes out of nowhere too, and a huge anti-climax. But besides a bad ending Nymphomaniac is very enjoyable.
It’s gorgeous too with some great cinematography and editing. The sex scenes toe this line between arousing and realistic. It’s not like pornography as it isn’t hyper stylized or even designed to be arousing; instead, it portrays sexual intercourse how it looks (mostly because it is real sex) and whilst that can bring with it a level of arousal, it doesn’t serve that sole purpose. The closest thing I can think of is Trainspotting and how that portrayed heroin use. Sometimes it looked great fun both other times it looked like the worst thing ever. Nymphomaniac is a film about addiction after all, Joe is having sex to subdue her cravings and her ever present depression, and the longer the film goes on the more desperate for an orgasm Joe becomes and the more uncomfortable the sex scenes tend to become.
Nymphomaniac is not something a lot of people will enjoy. Despite the subject being approached in a manner that mainstream audiences will be able to follow and potentially even enjoy, the way von Trier pushes controversial or graphic content wherever he possibly can is bound to ruffle a few feathers. Nymphomaniac is very long, it’s crammed to burst with graphic, real sexual content, and it tackles some uncomfortable topics; but even though it’s not always successful in some of these areas the film certainly needs to be commended on the audacity to even attempt what it does, especially when it pulls it off as well as it does sometimes.
If you are going to check out Nymphomaniac then I can certainly say you’ll never experience anything else quite like it, but whether that’s a good or bad thing I’m still on the fence about.
Willem Dafoe pops up toward the end of the film as a business associate of Joe’s and he is fantastic for the short time he is in the film; and Jamie Bell plays Joe’s BDSM dominant for a short time and he’s very convincing in the role. But the real star of the show for standout performances goes to Uma Therman as Mrs. H, a woman whose husband leaves her to start a long-term relationship with Joe (despite Joe not wanting that at all). Therman’s performance is incredible and extremely memorable despite only being in one scene. She’s equally deranged and destroyed from what her husband has done and the fact that she brings the children along to help her guilt and shame Joe makes it so much more entertaining.
The actual craft of the film is superb though. Trying to pace a five-and-a-half-hour film is no easy feat and yet von Trier does it very well. Whilst there are definitely highs and lows in quality, the pacing is consistent and helps the time fly by before you know it. Something that would have proved difficult would have been knowing when to end the first volume and start the second, but von Trier manages to find a moment that hits all the right emotions, and leaves you on the precipice of climax wanting more. The ending is quite underwhelming though. The final chapter, titled ‘The Gun’ feels extremely out of place in comparison to the rest of the story and it feels as though von Trier didn’t know how to tie the film up properly. It sees Joe enter a life of crime as a debt collector, then she grooms a sixteen-year-old to live and work for her before entering a sexual relationship with them once they reach the age of eighteen. The justification for her doing this is never really provided, and I feel it only serves to try and make audiences not like Joe without doing it in a way that feels natural. The actual ending of the film is awful too as Joe tells Seligman that she’s going to give abstinence a real shot again and hopes that it’ll get her on the straight and narrow. Seligman seems to take this as ‘have sex with me’, so he tries to rape her, and then she kills him. It doesn’t make sense because he’s asexual, so why is he trying to have sex with her? It comes out of nowhere too, and a huge anti-climax. But besides a bad ending Nymphomaniac is very enjoyable.
It’s gorgeous too with some great cinematography and editing. The sex scenes toe this line between arousing and realistic. It’s not like pornography as it isn’t hyper stylized or even designed to be arousing; instead, it portrays sexual intercourse how it looks (mostly because it is real sex) and whilst that can bring with it a level of arousal, it doesn’t serve that sole purpose. The closest thing I can think of is Trainspotting and how that portrayed heroin use. Sometimes it looked great fun both other times it looked like the worst thing ever. Nymphomaniac is a film about addiction after all, Joe is having sex to subdue her cravings and her ever present depression, and the longer the film goes on the more desperate for an orgasm Joe becomes and the more uncomfortable the sex scenes tend to become.
Nymphomaniac is not something a lot of people will enjoy. Despite the subject being approached in a manner that mainstream audiences will be able to follow and potentially even enjoy, the way von Trier pushes controversial or graphic content wherever he possibly can is bound to ruffle a few feathers. Nymphomaniac is very long, it’s crammed to burst with graphic, real sexual content, and it tackles some uncomfortable topics; but even though it’s not always successful in some of these areas the film certainly needs to be commended on the audacity to even attempt what it does, especially when it pulls it off as well as it does sometimes.
If you are going to check out Nymphomaniac then I can certainly say you’ll never experience anything else quite like it, but whether that’s a good or bad thing I’m still on the fence about.