MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Von Triers Does Art Porno

Just when you thought the bad sex movie posing as art was killed off by the suprisingly superior Shortbus, Lars Von Trier invests in a dirty movie that looks like a 70s skin flick. But he got distribution in the U.S… on DVD… by porn distributor Wicked Pictures. Oy.
The film is called All About Anna and it even has its own MySpace page.
The nice thing is that there is both a very earnest explanation of the film and a Dogma 95 Manifesto specifically for films like this, called “The Puzzy Power Manifesto“. It includes such tidbits as: “It is not enough for four unknown actors to enter stage right, drop their pants and simply get down” and “The films must be based on woman

Be Sociable, Share!

20 Responses to “Von Triers Does Art Porno”

  1. T.H.Ung says:

    Directed by a woman, produced by one, written by two. Exec producer by three guys, lensed by one, edited by one, scored by one. I’m not impressed by the romance novel manifesto, the truth every pornographer knows is that woman like gay male porno. Think about it.

  2. jeffmcm says:

    Von Trier has been involved in this field for at least eight years as producer, not just investor.
    So I’m confused, is Shortbus “bad” or “superior”?

  3. T.H.Ung says:

    English is not jeffmcm’s first language.

  4. jeffmcm says:

    That’s an odd comment coming from you, TH.
    This statement, “Just when you thought the bad sex movie posing as art was killed off by the suprisingly superior Shortbus,” contains a contradictory idea. I had already assumed that Shortbus was a ‘bad sex movie posing as art’ but this is the first time DP has alluded to having seen it and formed an opinion about it, which I am intrigued by.

  5. Josh Massey says:

    How exactly is that “obscured,” by the way?

  6. kojled says:

    von trier just shot his new comedy ‘the boss of it all’ using new software which decides how the camera will pan and what will be in frame. this technique is called ‘automavision’. if you use it you do not need a camera operator. (i’m not kidding – he really used this technique)
    anyway, i was thinking that if von trier used automavision to shoot porn it would be called ‘auto-eroticavision’, or maybe ‘auto-eroti-cam’ — you get the idea.
    this makes sense. that way, if the camera operator has nothing to do, his hands will be free to pursue other activities. who could argue with that?

  7. I could argue with that if the automavision decided to focus on a hairy nutsuck slamming around…but that’s just me.

  8. Nicol D says:

    I know sometimes its hard to get a consensus on things around here, but can we all agree that the Dogma manifesto is pretentious bullshit that constricts, not liberates, the artform of cinema and is more about the ego and taste of those who adhere to it, then anything worthwhile to film itself as a medium.
    Sorry for the longwinded sentence, but damn, Dogma sucks. I was glad when Egoyan even bashed it a few years back.

  9. jeffmcm says:

    I am happy to agree with you there, Nicol. It isn’t even constricting, it’s more of a scam pulled on young filmmakers and naive critics, like a get-rich-quick scheme for film art.

  10. Nicol D says:

    “…like a get-rich-quick scheme for film art.”
    Well said.

  11. Josh Martin says:

    “I’m not impressed by the romance novel manifesto, the truth every pornographer knows is that woman like gay male porno. Think about it.”

    The first Puzzy Power film (Pink Prison) actually had one or two guy/guy scenes along with the standard heterosexual couplings. It might be worth noting here that the film bombed (along with all the other Puzzy Power productions to date) and von Trier sold off the company a year or two back.

  12. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Other than several excellent films, the best thing to come out of Dogme is simply the fact that countries like Denmark actually have film industries now, and they can be seen around the world.
    Von Trier is actually gonna be making a horror movie! A movie that hypothesises that Satan in fact created the world, and not God. Goodo. Controversy is fun.

  13. T.H.Ung says:

    Celebration and The King is Alive are great Dogme films, know any others?

  14. palmtree says:

    I really like The Five Obstructions but I’m not sure if it counts.

  15. T.H.Ung says:

    someone on the web is calling Five Obstructions a metafilm, I know what metadata is, hmmm. Oh hell, there goes my 6 hours of sleep.

  16. jeffmcm says:

    That would be a film about a film, TH, just as metadata is data about your data. Another one would be American Movie, to some degree, about Coven. Or in more conventional form, Hearts of Darkness about Apocalypse Now.

  17. T.H.Ung says:

    think outside your block, mc. von Trier gave Leth rules, or obstructions, by which Leth would have to remake his own 1976 short film, The Perfect Human, five times. Metadata is the glue that links everything. there goes my 5 hours of sleep.

  18. jeffmcm says:

    Yes, I saw The Five Obstructions. I don’t know what you mean by ‘glue’ except if you’re being poetic. ‘Meta’ means ‘about’ or ‘above’. Metaphysics is the study of things beyond physics. A meta-narrative is an overarching narrative about everything. A metafilm is therefore a movie that seeks to say grand overarching things about films or filmmaking in general.

  19. I thought THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS was kind of the death knell for the whole DOGME 95 movement, which had already been sort of picked apart by the people who created the manifesto. It’s all just a petty attempt to play into the ole Godard line of “we create the rules and then shatter them,” or whatever it was.
    THE IDIOTS and THE CELEBRATION were awesome. I love von Trier! MANDERLAY was rather weak though.

  20. Eric says:

    Regarding the meta prefix, you’ll probably find it more commonly used to describe any work of art that acknowledges itself and its artiface. Think “Adaptation” and Dave Eggers.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon