Lars von Trier angered me so. I don't remember ever being so upset by a piece of art. He might see this a sign of victory, what with art being there to provoke and all, but no. Just no.

I went to see Antichrist on Monday after the recommendation from a friend, who’d declared it very good, if ultra-violent. Well, the violence was not an issue (in fact, I would not call the film violent as much as repulsive and graphic); it was the ultimate pointlessness and arrogance that bothered me. I have wide tastes in cinema and do not need a film to be happy or easy in order to like it; I don’t ask for morals, clear stories or happy endings. I only ask for a film to have a certain consistency of value, and this one didn’t.

Sadly, it is not just another bad film by a talentless guy, since Mr. von Trier is clearly gifted: the opening scene is perfect, horrific in content but beautifully done. He’s also very good at casting and directing his crew: Charlotte Gainsbourg in particular was amazing. But then he goes and gets lost in his own ramblings; the screenwriting probably went all “OMG this symbolism here is so awesome. I’m genius!”. What he needs urgently is a bullshit police: someone who’s willing to say: “You know, Lars, that idea of the [three beggars/talking fox/bridge imagery] is pure crap”. And for Lars to listen.

Meanwhile, I won’t be seeing any more of his films.

EDIT: So of course I had to go to IMDb and spend an hour reading the comments, where a couple of people said it much better than me:

"[...] von Trier can be quite justly accused on this particular occasion of doing something he was quite wrongly accused of doing on a couple of previous ones - of trying to compensate a certain shallowness of the half-baked message by the extremities of the way in which it is presented. "

"Dafoe and Gainsbourg certainly offer up a remarkable inventory of technical acting for von Trier to play with. If the whole film had the pure, causal acting that characterises the opening scene of the first chapter (behind the hearse), by the end I would have crawled out begging for my mother. As it is, von Trier's script is a choppily edited stream of consciousness(es) in which the sexual occult meets the essence of Catholicism."

[Cross-posted to GoodReads]
[Also, I'm trying -again- to write a review of each book I finish]

Rating: 4/5.

“A Suitable boy” is a novel of breadth more than depth. Mr. Seth embarks in an ambitious journey on Indian political, cultural, religious and caste conflicts at the aftermath of Independence and Partition.

 The novel starts rather weakly, with the first hundred pages full of clichés and simplistic, too often-repeated character description (Savita is so beautiful! Maan so reckless! Yeah, we got it). But to Mr. Seth’s credit, the story builds strength and evolves into many subtle manifestations of the country’s beautiful, troubled complexity. The author is understandably not able to provide evolution for many characters or to tie some loose ends, but the end result is entertaining, at times thought provoking, and overall a satisfying read.

Other reviewers complained about how cute and almost perfect every character was, but I disagree: one thing that I found very well done was the description of characters' motivation. Many characters' actions (especially on the political theme) that at first sight seemed mean or evil, were, if not justifiable, at least understandable given each person's history and beliefs. Mr. Seth did a great job of presenting all characters as people instead of good vs bad guys.

 Still, if asked to recommend one book about India after Independence, I’d choose Arundhati Roy’s The God of small things, for its more beautiful prose and subtler imagery.

*SPOILER ALERT*
( * * * Spoiler alert! * * * )( * * * Spoiler alert! * * * )

You ask, 'How do I bring love into my life?' My answer is that I focus day after day principally on what I care most about in this world—on what I most respect and admire. That is what I give my time and attention to.

Every day, it’s important to ask and answer these questions: 'What’s good in my life?” and “What needs to be done?'

If we feel unhappy or unfulfilled, the most urgent question is, “What needs to be done?” Or one might say, “What’s missing in my life—and what can I do about it?” The sin is to suffer passively. We must never forget that we have the capacity to act.