Björk - Dancer in the Dark

Morning lads. I have heard of this movie (Dancer in the Dark) a while back when I was with Generic Publication and last night, I managed to watch it. It started off as a little slow (nothing new when it comes to art film). But after about 10 minutes in, I was glued in. It has been a while since I watch anything this powerful.

What I love about it was...

• 1 The movie started off as a pretty light drama, gradually intensify. Unlike most mainstream Hollywood films, the visual and cinematography creates the film without the help of soundtracks and fancy graphics. It's kinda like a film stripped bare. Of course the performance from Björk was fantastic.

• 2 It shows the horror or human nature without showing much violence. It also touches the everyday issue we all face. A mother's love, strength, desperation and loyalty - all these characteristics were portrayed in the most interesting way. I'm not surprised if this movie make you cry in the end.

• 3 The ending was unexpected. Guess this is life... not everything got an ending we all hope for.

Critical Response of the Media. (clipped from Wikipedia)

Reaction to Dancer in the Dark was extremely mixed. For example, on The Movie Show, Margaret Pomeranz gave it 5 stars while David Stratton gave it 0—the only time this has happened. Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian said it was "one of the worst films, one of the worst artworks and perhaps one of the worst things in the history of the world." The response is reflected in the film's official website, which posts both positive and negative reviews on its main page. The diverse reviews result in an overall "Fresh" rating; 68 % grade on the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes.

The film was praised for its stylistic innovations. Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times stated: "It smashes down the walls of habit that surround so many movies. It returns to the wellsprings. It is a bold, reckless gesture." and Edward Guthmann from the San Francisco Chronicle wrote "It's great to see a movie so courageous and affecting, so committed to its own differentness."

However, criticism was directed at its storyline: Jonathan Foreman of the New York Post described the film as "meretricious fakery" and called it "so unrelenting in its manipulative sentimentality that, if it had been made by an American and shot in a more conventional manner, it would be seen as a bad joke."