The first film in the Von Trier trilogy "Dogville" was a self-righteous parable about evil poor people, the demonizing of impoverished Americans from a man who has never been in America. This is a man displaying his ignorance in "Dogville," a man who proudly admitted "I've never been in America, but this is my perception". Apparently, this "artist" never thought to research poor people before spitting at us, and he never thought that there are many poor people all over the world. Regardless, though, I was understandably skeptical about the second film "Manderlay," but surprisingly, it's a much better film. I despised this, but I also liked it. It's not one of those so bad it's good films, but it's a film that makes you cringe, and look away embarrassed, but still you end up finding its pleasing in many ways.

What makes "Manderlay" different from "Dogville" is that it actually has some points, and in its grotesque aspects, it really is compelling. But we'll get to that. In this sequel, Grace has now come across a slavery plantation still in service, and strays from her gang to close it down, and by doing so also attempts to form a democracy and bring order to the slaves.
In place of Nicole Kidman and James Caan (as Grace's mob boss father), there's now the lovely Bryce Dallas Howard, and Willem Dafoe (his performance is better than Caan's stilted appearance in the former). Howard's approach toward this role brings about a whole new Je-ne-sais-quoi with Grace. Whether intentional or not, Grace's character seems much different. Howard gives a great performance, but she seems much more shrill.

Which is basically Von Trier's intent, because Grace is a truly despicable character with zero morals. But, in "Manderlay," Grace's character instead of being a woman who comes across evil people while running from her own evil familiars, is now a self-righteous naive fighter for blacks while seeking her own self-absorbed hypocritical goals. And, as much as I hate to admit it, Von Trier does raise some good points within the films timeframe about race, society, government, and our often short-sighted goals that are never really met with a sense of logic or realization. Von Trier more prominently, though, confronts the ideas of government and freedom. Does freedom breed complacency? Does freedom breed laziness? Does freedom help us perpetrate our own inhibitions and taboos? Is freedom all one big delusion, illusion, or forced concept? Is government really a necessary evil, or just evil? Can we really ever be given freedom lest havoc become the supreme law? There are better performances this time out by Howard as the shrewd Grace, Danny Glover as Manderlay's patriarch, and from Dafoe who seems more comfortable in his role as Grace's father.

Meanwhile, "Manderlay" confronts a part of history we've exploited but seen little of, and dares to ponder upon the concept of slavery and adapting to it. Von Trier, always a militant and ardent liberal expressing sheer antipathy for America, also tackles at liberals putting them under the microscope through Graces character who changes her form with this utterly transparent "savior" seeking to bring order to these people whom haven't really asked. She expresses and represents the blind, often ignorant liberalism in much of upper class America; the people who want to help others in foreign countries, exploit them to make themselves feel better, but have never actually stepped foot on their soil and stood beside them to experience their own daily turmoil's. Here's a woman who knows as much about black people as she does aliens, yet still feels as if she knows them and feels the need to organize them in her own self-righteous indignations and realizes she has no clue. Here's this woman so "enlightened" and "just" who still refers to the people of Manderlay as niggers freely. And nigger is brandied about with an almost nonchalant approach as to express how progression can also mean staying the same.

Von Trier is one of the most overrated filmmakers in Hollywood, and "Dogville" was without a doubt one of the worst films of 2004. It was pretentious, one hour too long, hypocritical, and insanely ridiculous with a plot that bordered on misogynistic and a completely mis-informed moral of the story that Von Trier had no idea about. Poor people are evil. Well, Von Trier, you couldn't be more wrong. Filmed again in the same minimalist style with the nuance of an off off Broadway play, "Manderlay" is still far from a step up from "Dogville" and its self-righteous message. Some would view his backstage motif as a man seeking to focus on the acting and story instead of grand landscapes, but really it's Trier's
pompous posturing coming to play. Does Von Trier, who has never been in this country, have the gall to suggest with this film that black people should have stayed in slavery? Does he really think black people left to their own devices have the potential to be a destructive race? And, of course, there's still a gruesome montage in the closing credits set to Bowie's "Young Americans" that's clearly Von Trier shoving his message down our throat. We get it, Lars. Why not come to America and put your money where your mouth is?

Why shouldn't we be taken to task about racism when we still hold such a concept on a pedestal? Who are we to try and change a society to our ways when they didn't ask for it? Those are the questions Von Trier raises, and confronts. Regardless
of my reservations and distaste for Von Trier, "Manderlay" is a superior entry to "Dogville." It's still an ugly creature but it's also a compelling, insightful sequel that raises many interesting points.

[   Link to Us   |   FAQ   |   Top^   ]
All written reviews material and content are a copyright of Felix Vasquez Jr. and Cinema Crazed.
Content borrowed without written permission will not be permitted.

¤ ¤ ¤