Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 12:01 AM
Tue Nov 10
67 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Jenna Sauers
Email
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/31/09
10/30/09
Little Red Riding Hood lives in a futuristic wasteland ruled by man-eating clams, Snow White's witch works at an abattoir until she becomes obsessed with beauty pageants...you get the idea.
My favorite though? Cinderella, told from the point of view of Prince Charming, who has a foot fetish and a crush on his (male) tutor. #fairytales
10/30/09
10/31/09
10/30/09
I wish I could remember the title. Darn! #fairytales
10/30/09
I have always been an enormous fanatic of fairy tales and mythology and most of what I write in my career use these stories for a base.
Do yourself a favor and check out Monty Python's Terry Jones and his fairy tale books. I was given this book on my 8th birthday and have loved its wit and wisdom ever since. And ATTENTION TEAM CAKE! There is a story about a cake horse that comes alive! Mmmm Mr. Edible.
[www.amazon.com] #fairytales
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
As a kid I was allowed/encouraged to read the darker versions of fairy tales for myself, and even though I was and am pretty squeamish when it comes to realistic horror, I was never traumatised by a fairy tale. #fairytales
10/30/09
10/30/09
I was a fan of Rapunzel in this series too. #fairytales
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
@TiniDarling: That sounds like a pretty bad combination! #fairytales
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
@Uncommon Whore: Nope, it's real, but I still consider myself awesome. You can find it in the Oxford Book of Modern Fairy Tales. It is by Jeanne Carter. #fairytales
10/30/09
It's interesting how all the best stories - films, books, TV series - pretty much conform to the same narrative elements and structure as folk tales, and that this is universal. It's been hard-wired into us since humans first started communicating.
My favorite modern take on them is Angela Carter's The Bloody Chamber - feminist, erotic and dark.
NB. The Folio Society is currently publishing beautiful new editions of Andrew Lang's famous Victorian rainbow fairy books: [www.foliosociety.com]
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
Also, the illustrations were beautiful.
Of course now I find out that some of the interpretations include this: "The transformation of the man into a beast has often been interpreted to signify a young woman's revulsion from sexual activity." So um, yeah.
10/30/09
10/30/09
@Ms.Moneypenny: This is the version I had which is, I guess, a variation on the Norwegian(?) fairy tale. #fairytales
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
Perv. #fairytales
10/27/09
10/28/09
10/27/09
That being said, I did read a synopsis. And from that, I can conclude that either the synopsis did not do the film justice, or that it's the kind of film I wouldn't be able to appreciate even if I did manage to watch it.
I guess there is a vaguely supernatural element present, but the wife's motivations sound dodgy. One minute she's a grieving mother, then she suddenly decides to start maiming the nearest man because of some things she was reading on gynocide? Except then she stops, and helps him. Then she's crazy again and mutilates herself. Then later she attacks the husband again, then he kills her.
I recognize that I'm summarizing the events of like 90 minutes into a single paragraph, but the characters sound insane and unbelievable. Obviously I haven't seen the film, and apparently the acting is top notch, but the underlying script seems so incoherent that even with great acting, I can't imagine watching the movie and thinking anything other than "What the fuck, this is insane and random."
Or am I looking at this all wrong, and it's supposed to be the sort of very artistic film where the specifics about the plot and character are almost meaningless, and all that matters is the emotional impression you get from scene to scene?
I suppose that's it, but it still sounds lame. The nonviolent scenes don't sound amazing either. They go to a forest named Eden (Biblical allegory or something, get it?). The husband sees a deer with a stillborn young (symbolism or something, get it?).
I'm not trying to dismiss the movie out of hand having never seen it, I just want to know if someone can confirm my idea of what it must be like. Specifically, it sounds like one of those movies where 99% of its value comes from how well the scenes are shot and how solid the acting is, because on paper, as a story, it sounds utterly retarded. #antichrist
10/27/09
Revisit the definition of "fable" and then you'll see how the elements you quibble about make perfect sense in a fable context.
But I'm not sure why you'd do that, since you don't want to see the movie anyway. #antichrist
10/27/09
Thinking of it as a fable does help, so thanks for pointing that out. #antichrist
10/27/09
****SPOILER ALERT*****
In the opening scenes, Gainsbourg and Dafoe are fucking passionately, while their toddler, aged about 2, wakes up and toddles over to an open window, falling 5 floors to his death. They are stricken with grief, naturally. Being a logical, scientific man, he recovers and wants to move forward with life; but she cannot, spending weeks in hospital. She cannot get over her guilt, about sex, about his death, about herself as a failed mother, etc. He is a psychiatrist, and is convinced that he can help her recover. He persuades her to leave hospital and starts psychoanalyzing her, which she resists. He wants to find her deepest fear, and she says 'the woods', meaning their cabin which is in a wood. He takes her there and continues to force her analysis, eventually driving her nutso. Obviously there are many more aspects of the film, but that, in effect, is the plot.
In my opinion, this is actually damning of MEN, and their inability to listen or give credence to the female perspective, and their arrogant belief that they are always right and always have a solution for everything. In fact, I've yet to hear a detailed analysis of exactly WHAT about THIS film IS so misogynist, living as we do in this ocean of misogyny that we call mainstream culture. Can anybody help? #antichrist
10/27/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
Where I'm from, media tends to have a very moralistic view on drugs. Any movie, in which drugs play any sort of part, is thus labelled 'drug-romanticising', without any concern as to how they're portrayed, or that the movie might actually portray a real problem, that won't just go away if you ignore it. Routinely calling von Trier's movies misogynist just because they deal with women in terrible situations seems like an example of the same type of thinking.
-- Having said that, I am sure there could be very good arguments for why this movie is mysogynist... #antichrist