Who's stupid now, huh? (The Idiots (DVD))

Member Name: peel.rebekah

Product:	The Idiots (DVD)
Date:	01/07/01 (146 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Thought provoking.

Disadvantages: A deep knuckle cut to the senses.

Uncomfortable film ahoy! But as I sit and think about uncomfortable films, I'm awash with violence, swearing and dodgy realism: I'm thinking back to Funny Games, Man Bites Dog, Henry - Portrait of a Serial Killer; and The Idiots has no place in this genre whatsoever - It has no allegiance to psychopaths, it doesn't suffer from a gorish sickness - but it does have that voyeuristic edge that makes you itch in your pants with nervous skin - you shouldn't be seeing this.

Billed as a comedy and a numbered Dogme film (number two, in fact), Von Trier documents the lives and loves of a bunch of...Idiots, in a film that saw him nominated (yet again) for the Golden Palm award, Cannes Film Festival 1998, as well as a nomination at the European Film Award.

*The Film.

The film opens with a scared little rabbit of a woman, Karen, dining alone in a restaurant; her attention is soon focused on two appearingly handicapped gentlemen and their carer. The men are becoming a little wayward, one wandering the restaurant and unsettling the other customers, the other beginning to rock and sob in an uncontrollable manner. She is approached by one, who takes her hand and is reluctant to let it go: The kind Karen opens her heart a little and sympathises with this 'idiot'; when the restaurant manager asks the handicapped couple and their warder to leave, Karen gently rises and escorts them.

So determined is this 'idiot', Stoffer, that Karen should become embroiled in this tale, he holds tight to her hand as the others board a taxi, forcing Karen to accompany them.

As the Taxi pulls away, the three rattle with laughter - Karen is bemused. She quickly realises that this was a daring charade, played out for a free meal, by a team of pranksters who take time and enjoyment out of portraying 'idiots'.

So begins the tale of this band of merry men and women that indulge themselves by becoming their 'other
' - that revel in the joy of unsettling the society that judges them, by inconspicuously judging them back.

Stoffer appears to be the orchestration behind the game (we see this first via post interviews constructed by Von Trier, and later by his anxiety at finding loyalty and proof within his disciples), and he is often the one to direct the idiots to their next social encounter.

Karen softly questions the morals of the situation, but is quickly drowned out by a tirade of philosophical thought from the other members. Keen to remain a mouse in this scenario, Karen takes the guise of a career:

The team make an outing to a local swimming pool; the players frantically wave their arms with spasms, contort their faces with dumbness and generally act the part. Stoffer (playing a fool) insists that Karen takes him into the females showering chambers; here he stands, naked, while Karen washes him, ogling at the other women with his moronic face, and sporting a rather large erection.

We can see Karen's deep embarrassment and ill ease, yet she continues the act.

At one point, regardless of many issues, Karen assumes the 'fun', love and understandings in this twisted family unit: She takes it as her own, and proceeds to play the idiot herself. Where as the others may have their myriad of reasons for partaking, we eventually learn that this is a catharsis reaction for Karen.

The story unfolds in many ways: Stoffer taking affront to the controlling society (including his uncle, whose large country house the team all squat), Axel's slow realisation that all of this is encroaching on his REAL existence (wife, child and career), a love story between two of the younger players (the girl of which is later reclaimed by her father, and denounced as a REAL 'idiot', perhaps), the doctor who deems this as a research, and an artist who plays his part to further his whimsical insight.

And finally: St
offer realises that the other's need may not be as great as his own, and so he demands a definitive game of spin the bottle: The truth is out, and many members decline to proceed with Stoffer's wishes; the only one who will, is Karen, and so the finale is her chance to affirm her allegiance to being idiot.

*The Direction.

The Idiots is loyal to the doctrine of Dogme '95: No extra lighting (Von Trier has claimed that extra lighting was added later, against his wishes, and he desired that the film be recalled as it no longer fitted Dogme - but this seems unlikely, and I, for one, didn't notice it), no special effects, no extra music; the filming is obviously done in linear manner that we see (even with the post interviews scattered in between the storyline); the director never detracts from the 'reality' at hand.

The biggest problem with The Idiots is whether this is suitable material for a film: I feel that this subject matter is TOO suitable for a Dogme film, yet maybe not suitable for one from such an esteemed and high profile director. Call me squeamish, yet I feel the 'acting' requested by Von Trier a little too close to the bone:

I won't add a sub category of acting, as I feel that all members were under direct direction from Lars, hence they were the players depicted, and gave their performances in relation to Von Trier's needs: This leads to a disturbing sentiment in me: In one scene, the idiots are holding a birthday party for Stoffer, and when asked what party game he would like to play, he declares "everybody f***ing"...and so they do. REALLY. UTTERLY. No editing and no black spots.

What does one make of that? So, it's OK in the name of art? Can we except that the voyeurism has taken us to THIS place, where real actors perform real sexual acts for the sake of a cinematic doctrine? I ain't sure, all I know is that it makes me uncomfortable in my art house,
high brow seat, and makes me questions my rights to be viewing this.

Trier's hand held camera (boom often coming into shot) provides that intimate dimension of actuality. I'm just not too sure I want to be this intimate.

The 'fools' on stage must have been full time fools; I guess this was a 'fun' movie to make as well as a hard one (no pun intended). Lars demands the moon, insists on smelling everyone's armpits personally. I can't knock him for the excellent job he's done, but what the hell goes on in that little mind of his?

*Other Stuff (and how are we supposed to take this?)

Oh, goodness, I don't know.

How are we supposed to embrace a parody on a subject that even the best among us usually avert our eyes from? What does it say about society that an art house movie has chosen to portray this sick idea simply to poke fun at its viewers?

There is one scene in the film that bewilders our previous conception of it: At one point a group of REAL handicapped are introduced to the team: See them squirm in realisation that their acting is NOTHING to the reality; hear them sharply intake their breath as they are confronted by their 'others'. Watch them behave with the 'sweet' understandings that many of the unsuspecting public have showered upon them in the past.

All this reminded of the Down Syndrome actor in The Seventh Day: Now he was/is/will always be a great actor BECAUSE of his physical disabilities, and yet saying that, would he not be just as good without? And his PURE acting, his utter realism, far outweighs the hidden messages within The Idiots.

Eurggh. It's all too much. The film turns itself inside out to parade the truths within.

I truely value Von Trier's heartfelt attempt (not attempt, 'cos he actually realises his aims, but you know what I mean), to harangue us with all these questions. I just can't say t
hat I understand the answers.

At the beginning of the film I saw the allusions to being idiot as pure escapism; a safe, warm place to hide from your emotions and the reality of normalness. Then I realised that some of the actors were REALLY reveling in this, taking pride in their depiction and NEEDING what the film was trying to say. Then I was sickened by the idea that this could actually take place; that people could find redemption while hiding behind the unfortunate. Then I began to morally question myself. Then I was just flumoxed at how far this film went.

The apperception of The Idiots is unclear, muddy and full of small brown squirling worms: I DON'T KNOW what to make of the film. I laughed, I squirmed, I thought a lot.

Hmnn. Make up your own minds.

Summary: