Medea

Watching this makes me lament Trier. It's good work. It's more than that, in fact. Beautiful pictures are not uncommon in film. In fact, they are getting so banal, say a postcard-perfect sunset, that we (both viewers and makers) often actively seek ugliness, some imperfection that conveys flawed - human - intimacy. Trier has flitted between the two notions (his Dogme entirely devoted to the latter), mixing and matching in a variety of projects down to his recent Melancholia.

But there are really few makers who can consistently furnish the sunsets, and link between them, that reveal something of planets in their orbits. Tarkovsky is king of that close vision from faraway. Watching this makes me lament Trier, because he could have been our current Tarkovsky, much more than either Tarr or Kusturica, who both flirted with carrying the mantle of that cosmogonic art.

This one lacks that orbital vision in different narrative planes (we only have one thread), and is mostly, rapturously devoted to tone poetry of elemental intimacy. It was very early in Trier's career anyway, but it's still a better and more visual third film than most directors ever managed. It's beautiful, but not in the clean sense of a David Lean epic. I prefer it this way.

That is partly because he's working from a barebones story that is ancient myth as interpreted by Euripides (and written into a script by Carl Dreyer): Medea has fled to Corinth promised marriage by the Argonaut Jason, who reneges on that promise when offered the hand of the daughter of the local king. Medea together with her two children is banished from the city.

It is a simple story of injustice. You are going to anticipate every turn, including (probably) the most tragic finale. It is the conventional Medea of myth, betrayed mother, woman, vengeful enchantress of cthonic witchcraft.

But the visual bell boom of this Rublev stretches far and wide, as he rings into being a gauzy world of untime, last fires, and first voyages out to cloudy sea. If only he hadn't lost himself in anger and cynical pessimism.. Tarr has followed suit. I think about the only thing that can keep an intelligent mind sane, is finding rhyme and music in unreason.

Brilliant expose' and depiction of the classical Greek play. I never had any feeling of sympathy for the character of Medea. I always found her murderous rage against her husband reprehensible. No hatred or anger can justify murdering one's own children. But for the first time, I felt a sadness and compassion towards Medea. Lar Triers treatment and subsequent rendition of Medea's plight made me think of her more than just as a "woman scorned" and I finally understood what moved her to this sacrilegious act of infanticide. Jason was her entire life and the one that she should have killed. So in his absence, she slew his progeny. She wanted to wipe any trace of him from the earth and from her heart. So she destroyed everything at once including herself. There would never be any chance of returning after this unforgivable act.

This is the definitive Medea. Lars Triers deserves praise for bringing this tragedy into focus. For making Medea human instead of a monster he deserves our gratitude.

It is a masterpiece, it is a perfect adaptation of the Greek tragedy Medea from Euripides, a version where the Gods willing and intervations are absent. Medea is the tragic character that after helping Jason in the Voyage of the Argonauts (myth says that she has even sacrificed her own brother for Jason's success), she gets from him only betrayal, as he arranges to marry the King's of Corinth daughter. The king decides to exile Medea, as she is a danger for his daughter happiness, but Medea asks from him just a day… before she goes outside the borders. That day Medea gets her revenge….. That day we see how Jason is demystified, driven by his lust for a young princess becomes a tragic character. Jason is a man driven by women's strength and willing, he reached the levels of heroism because of a woman, he seeks to get more strength with the help of another woman, who guides him with her sexual power. We see the tragic abandoned woman, taking revenge sacrificing her own children in the name of proving that she still has the power to drive his husband emotions. Is it that also true in our societies? How many times children are the mean for adults' revenge?

Medea's story shown through an epic atmosphere. It is a film perfectly directed. Trier used so nicely light and nature in order to transfer to us the whole atmosphere of tragedy. A tragedy that is created by humans and not Gods…. A story that can be met in our civilized neighbourhood, a story that has for sure heard in the news. As about the actors… a fabulous cast makes this film a work of art. I am glad that I 've found it in the store, I am glad I watched it.

Fascinating film which was filled with wonderful experimental cinematic effects. I'd love to have a 4K version of it. What spoilt for me it was that Lars Von Trier doesn't know that there is NO TIDE in the Mediterranean!

Lars von Trier´s adaptation of the ancient Greek play (HIS tribute to Carl Th. Dreyer, who originally wrote the manuscript but never got around to filming it) is absolutely stunning.

The actors´ performances (above all Kirsten Olesen, incidentally one of Denmark´s top actresses makes you gasp), the wide landscapes and carefully selected sparse dialogue, but especially Lars von Trier´s direction makes this film a shocking look into the disturbed mind of a woman who has been scorned and left. Medea´s revenge is horrible but never unbelievable. She does what every sane person would do, when deprived of all that she loves. The film burns itself into your mind and leaves you with a lasting impression of what human misery can be like.

A veritable piece of art, belonging up there with most of von Trier´s works - and above all up there with ALL of Dreyer´s works!