7/10
Psychology, Not Sex
8 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I rarely write IMDb movie reviews but I felt compelled to do so with Lars Von Trier's Nymphomaniac Part I after seeing the countless reviews and message board posts proclaiming this film to be "porn". This film is graphic but it is not porn. I would say that anyone who has ever suffered emotionally, struggled with apathy and/or resigned themselves to risky behaviors as a result of their emotional struggles will find a deeper understanding of this film, elevating it far beyond pornography. This is a review examining the story and psychology of the film, rather than a focal point on graphic sex. To focus only on its graphic nature would be to miss the point of the film entirely.

Nymphomaniac Parts I and II comprise the third act of Von Trier's "Depression Trilogy". The other two films being Melancholia and Antichrist. This "trilogy" came about as a result of his own experience with a major depressive episode and the psychological insights he gained of the depressed psyche. Nymphomania (or excessive sexual drive) is a legitimate psychological disorder that is recognized by the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) of the World Health Organization. Sufferers are often apathetic, their behaviors reckless and impetuous with little regard for consequences. The film begins with the protagonist Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg), beaten and abandoned in a rainy alley where she is found and subsequently taken in by Seligman (Stellan Skarsgard) after refusing medical help. Seligman is a kind man who offers her food, clean clothes and a place to rest. They begin a conversation and Joe begins to tell Seligman her story, beginning with her childhood. Their dialogue is interspersed with flashback scenes of a young Joe (Stacy Martin), following her from childhood to young adulthood.

I'll cut to the chase. Much has been made of the nudity and graphic sex in this film. Is it necessary? Yes, I believe it to be. Joe's mix of self hatred and indifference are conveyed in her many emotionless encounters with various men. The encounters are straightforward and at times, mechanical. One can easily deduce that these are not encounters of passion but rather, compulsiveness. This is not a film that aims to portray Joe as a victim, nor the men as predators (and vice versa). That would be far below Von Trier's abilities as a writer/director and too simple of a concept for a character as tumultuous as Joe. Rather, I feel he aims to bring us into the life and psyche of Joe, illustrate the desperation, compulsivity and dispassionate nature that began dominating Joe's life from a very early age. Compulsive hypersexual behaviors actually have very little to do with the sex itself, so some of the usual dynamics of sexual relations between two people (joy, jealousy, euphoria, power struggles, etc.) do not come into play here. At least, not for Joe anyway.

Despite such a bleak interpretation of sex in this woman's life, the material is handled with care. Some scenes are extremely graphic and shocking in its content and intent but the way in which it's handled contains a certain level of sensitivity. Joe is reckless and callous but Von Trier doesn't shame her in his interpretation. That's not to say that things do not get intense later on in Part II.

I found the film to be beautifully shot, the dialogue well written, almost poetic at times. Gainsbourg and Skarsgard are mesmerizing in their scenes together and Stacy Martin gives a solid and subtle performance as the young Joe. I was not pleased with the casting of Shia LaBeouf as Joe's first sexual encounter and Christian Slater as Joe's father. Neither of them were very good at affecting a British accent, nor did they transform at all in their prospective roles. I merely saw them both doing what they normally do, just dialed down a little bit so as not to disrupt the flow of the film. Unfortunately, any scene involving either one of them completely took me out of the film. Despite this, I still found myself very affected by the film overall. By the time I had neared the end, the final scene that held so much promise of hope and emotional connection for Joe was rendered heartbreaking with her exclamation that she couldn't "feel anything". I found this moment to be especially wrenching. After watching Joe naively explore her compulsions, one could feel a slight amount of tension building and more than once, I wondered, "the other shoe has to fall at some point". With Joe's pain filled cries of "I can't feel anything" (her first display of intense emotion), one senses that this is the point at which things take a sad and dark turn and a perfect point to end Part I before embarking on the consequences and even darker and more disturbing elements contained in Part II.

There are those that will continue to tout this film as "pornography". I suppose the best analogy I have for those who just can't see past the graphic sex would be to compare Joe's sexual compulsions with the compulsions of a drug addict, one difference being that drug addiction is a widely seen, accepted, understood, discussed and examined issue. Hypersexual disorders and behaviors are not, unfortunately. However, being able to identify with certain behaviors at the exclusion of others would be a rather narrow minded approach. How many of you have had a bad day, been fired, been broken up with and decided to go out and get rip roaring drunk, incredibly high or rebound with a stranger in order to deal with the disappointment? You know better, you know it isn't the best idea, you know there will be consequences but you do it anyway. Now imagine the same scenario except there's no inner monologue, no weighing of options. You do it because you seemingly have no choice.
84 out of 131 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed