CogansTrader
Joined Jun 2007
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews2
CogansTrader's rating
At the close of Cannes 2011; Lars Von Trier's reputation as one of the most gifted yet controversial film makers around was firmly intact hitting new levels of outrageousness; however, it wasn't the first time he has managed to get the crowd at arguably the world's most prestigious film festival talking. In 1998 The Idiots aka Dogme #2 made its debut causing mass controversy; mass criticism; and mass discussion.
Naturally for a film which caused such a stir it's an unusual watch. It's a strange sensation to be made to feel uncomfortable yet totally engrossed in a film and stranger still, feeling guilty for enjoying it. The term "guilty pleasure" is usually used to hide embarrassment e.g. captain of the school sports team loves a chick flick; yet here the term really is applicable.
Credit to the cast who participated largely unaware of what the script would demand of them. We are introduced to Karen (Bodil Jørgensen, playing the films and our conscience) who is then caught up in an anti- middle class gang who spend their time in public 'spassing' out; in other words, pretending to be disabled (PC alarm bells ringing from the off then) in order to release their inner "idiots". Rule three of Dogme 95; a hand-held camera, works particularly well; from the off we are thrown right into the heart of the group, we might as well be made to feel as if we are documenting it.
The film certainly makes an interesting comment on how social behaviour can restrict us and, for lack of a better word, the "licence" given to those struggling with mental illnesses to behave more outlandishly. The character's main release is to pose as those without social confinements in public; however the gang eventually do away with only doing it in view of the public eye; is it a hobby or an addiction? Certainly different members of the group enter into it with different motifs and levels of seriousness.
The Dogme 95 movement on the whole polarised audiences so to say that The Idiots; one of the most famous of all Dogme films, will not be to everyone's tastes is an understatement. The actual subject matter will be off putting to some; a topic such as this being played for laughs in certain parts makes for uncomfortable viewing; even more so due to the fact that it is funny. The film also asks the question of how disabled citizens are treated by society; nearly fifteen years on and it isn't hard to imagine people still being perturbed at the thought of allowing mentally disabled yet completely harmless people to walk around their garden.
Throughout the film Von Trier gives us uncomfortable laughs; mocks the middle class attitude to the disabled; and manages to throw in a shockingly graphic orgy. All of this building up to a real emotional sucker punch of a climax. It isn't until the closing scenes that the film stops trying to provoke the audience's brain and instead aims straight for the heart. If nothing else, The Idiots will get you talking; as if Von Trier would have it any other way.
8/10
Naturally for a film which caused such a stir it's an unusual watch. It's a strange sensation to be made to feel uncomfortable yet totally engrossed in a film and stranger still, feeling guilty for enjoying it. The term "guilty pleasure" is usually used to hide embarrassment e.g. captain of the school sports team loves a chick flick; yet here the term really is applicable.
Credit to the cast who participated largely unaware of what the script would demand of them. We are introduced to Karen (Bodil Jørgensen, playing the films and our conscience) who is then caught up in an anti- middle class gang who spend their time in public 'spassing' out; in other words, pretending to be disabled (PC alarm bells ringing from the off then) in order to release their inner "idiots". Rule three of Dogme 95; a hand-held camera, works particularly well; from the off we are thrown right into the heart of the group, we might as well be made to feel as if we are documenting it.
The film certainly makes an interesting comment on how social behaviour can restrict us and, for lack of a better word, the "licence" given to those struggling with mental illnesses to behave more outlandishly. The character's main release is to pose as those without social confinements in public; however the gang eventually do away with only doing it in view of the public eye; is it a hobby or an addiction? Certainly different members of the group enter into it with different motifs and levels of seriousness.
The Dogme 95 movement on the whole polarised audiences so to say that The Idiots; one of the most famous of all Dogme films, will not be to everyone's tastes is an understatement. The actual subject matter will be off putting to some; a topic such as this being played for laughs in certain parts makes for uncomfortable viewing; even more so due to the fact that it is funny. The film also asks the question of how disabled citizens are treated by society; nearly fifteen years on and it isn't hard to imagine people still being perturbed at the thought of allowing mentally disabled yet completely harmless people to walk around their garden.
Throughout the film Von Trier gives us uncomfortable laughs; mocks the middle class attitude to the disabled; and manages to throw in a shockingly graphic orgy. All of this building up to a real emotional sucker punch of a climax. It isn't until the closing scenes that the film stops trying to provoke the audience's brain and instead aims straight for the heart. If nothing else, The Idiots will get you talking; as if Von Trier would have it any other way.
8/10
Michael Fassbender's crash landing on the top of the A List in 2011 came as a surprise to casual film goers, but the man has long been on the road to becoming an overnight success. From getting the best line that wasn't roared in a Scottish accent in 300 to giving stunning performances in the likes of Hunger; the only surprise is that it took so long for him to go from that guy to leading man. Of course a probably welcome CV boost from Quentin Tarantino never hurt anyone and was proof to all that it is what you do with your lines, not how many you have that counts. He ended 2011 with movie star status assured; he starts 2012 with his reputation as one of the best actors currently working further enhanced.
Shame, his re teaming with the aforementioned Hunger director Steve McQueen is not, it must be said, easy viewing. Fassbender plays Brandon; a successful New Yorker who struggles through the days craving his next sexual encounter. Addiction has long been a staple in cinematic drama; the craving for something which leads to a downfall and possible redemption has been covered over and over. However, the film world has always relied on the dirty world of drugs to demonstrate this. Shame isn't just a film about addiction; its a fascinating examination of how fragile the human mind is and how terrifying a prospect it is that our own human urges can turn against us.
The plot is set in motion following the arrival of his estranged sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan, herself impressing). The relationship is underplayed, albeit deliberately, but the audience is still left wanting further explanation as to how these two came to be; although fans of Freud will have a field day speculating what it is that Brandon is really ashamed of. Others are sure to come up with there own suitably depressing the siblings childhoods.
Despite this, McQueen brings his story to life with style. Its slow paced and torturous; just as Brandon lives his life. He isn't attracted to women; he doesn't have it in him to feel an emotional connection to someone; he is someone who struggles to do the most mundane activities without a relentless craving for his next physical encounter interfering. High enough plaudits there aren't for how Fassbender convinces as a man on a seemingly unstoppable self destruction.
Despite the painful subject matter handled head on, Shame makes for a highly rewarding watch. This is daring film making that deserves to be seen and will stay with you for days afterwards. The actor/director duo (who already have another film lined up together) have created a frighteningly convincing and devastating character study. Seek it out if you can stomach it; just don't take Grandma.
8/10
Shame, his re teaming with the aforementioned Hunger director Steve McQueen is not, it must be said, easy viewing. Fassbender plays Brandon; a successful New Yorker who struggles through the days craving his next sexual encounter. Addiction has long been a staple in cinematic drama; the craving for something which leads to a downfall and possible redemption has been covered over and over. However, the film world has always relied on the dirty world of drugs to demonstrate this. Shame isn't just a film about addiction; its a fascinating examination of how fragile the human mind is and how terrifying a prospect it is that our own human urges can turn against us.
The plot is set in motion following the arrival of his estranged sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan, herself impressing). The relationship is underplayed, albeit deliberately, but the audience is still left wanting further explanation as to how these two came to be; although fans of Freud will have a field day speculating what it is that Brandon is really ashamed of. Others are sure to come up with there own suitably depressing the siblings childhoods.
Despite this, McQueen brings his story to life with style. Its slow paced and torturous; just as Brandon lives his life. He isn't attracted to women; he doesn't have it in him to feel an emotional connection to someone; he is someone who struggles to do the most mundane activities without a relentless craving for his next physical encounter interfering. High enough plaudits there aren't for how Fassbender convinces as a man on a seemingly unstoppable self destruction.
Despite the painful subject matter handled head on, Shame makes for a highly rewarding watch. This is daring film making that deserves to be seen and will stay with you for days afterwards. The actor/director duo (who already have another film lined up together) have created a frighteningly convincing and devastating character study. Seek it out if you can stomach it; just don't take Grandma.
8/10