I don't get it

>>213366846 (OP)
what was the house supposed to represent

juvenile shlock

>>213366871
Yeah that's what I don't get. Also why is the guy an engineer instead of an architect and why is it important and how does it relate to the director projecting his own narcissism into Jack?

>>213366900
Read Dante nigga

>Lars Von Tryhard
hes a fat doom and gloom hack

>>213366846 (OP)
Dude commits murder and ends up in hell, what is there to get

It's about how construction work is all blood & sweat & gory not unlike working in a kitchen

>>213367135
I don't get the whole narrative about art, how come the director project himself in Jack and in general I don't know if I should get any deeper meaning or what. I know it's inspired by Dante's Inferno but this is the first flick I watch from Lars Von Trier so idk if I'm lacking context here.

>>213367185
it's a meta film on his entire career as an edgelord director, this movie makes no sense if it's the first Von Trier you've seen if you try to look beyond the surface level of "lol it's just dantes inferno!!". EVERY single scene bleeds back into his 30+ career as a director and he even hammers down this by inserting scenes from his old movies when he's talking about "icons", but the entire thing is tongue in cheek and poking fun at himself because he isn't as serious as people think. Go watch The Element Of Crime, Breaking The Waves, The Idiots, Dogville, Antichrist, and Melancholia, and come back to The House That Jack Built. When you watch it with that context in mind, it's one of the most self reflective movies i've ever seen, and arguably one of the best "final movies" a director has ever done.

>I want this thread searched thoroughly...
>WITH A MAGNIFYING GLASS

>>213367185
He's not projecting onto Jack but the narrator guy who literally makes fun of Jack's pseud bullshit.

>>213366846 (OP)
Von Trier asks the question "Can psycho violence be considered art?" by having Jack butchering clueless people in some very ideal scenarios which Trier probably dreamt of before, and by featuring parts of his previous works as high art. He finally punishes him for his murder instinct by sending him to hell in an artistic style that resembles Renaissance paintings.
Von Trier fails to properly answer this question because he doesn't understand that paintings and art depict death and violence in a symbolic way which does not resemble 100% the real thing but it's there as an idea.
Normal humans find gore and the real action of killing someone very unappealing, but some will stare at it out of morbid curiosity. So, in a nutshell, the answer is no.
I guess Trier's need to get a reaction out of his audience by shocking them and then be smug about it when some decide to leave the theatre early, has completely ruined his work.
>>213367097
I have read Divine Comedy, and this piece of shit movie has nothing to do with this epic

Manderlay is so fucking good. I know it's meant to be a sequel to Dogville and they changed the actor for the protagonist but I love Manderlay more than Dogville. I'm actually rewatching rn

>>213369015
you are so confident in being wrong it's almost impressive. To get filtered by Von Trier of all people is embarrassing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpUqpLh0iRw
kino deluxe

>>213366846 (OP)
Something something nihilism something something atheism something something Reddit

>>213369090
How am I wrong? Explain yourself or stfu

>>213369249
>Can psycho violence be considered art?
That is not the "question" Von Trier is asking. He isn't "asking" anything. It's a reflection on his career with Verge and Jack both being self inserts for himself because he's a funny guy. Jack will go on and on about how his edgy murders are actually art and verge instantly shuts him down as being a perverse retard. This movie has nothing to do with Gore/Death/Any of the shit you're crying about. It's Von Trier making a mockery of his OWN movies, and if you've ever seen any Von Trier whatsoever, you'd know that they aren't full of gore/death/violence like you keep harping on about.

>>213366846 (OP)
It's about choice. The choice to do good or bad, and the ways in which evil will twist things to try and excuse itself.
Von Trier presents his own pride as his biggest downfall, and parodies himself. His OCD, his depression, and his need to try and make art out of grotesqueries.
The Dante influence is symbolic. The religious core is salvation vs damnation, like most religious films. But this isn't about choosing the grace of God.
It's about being such an evil demented bastard that you spit in the face of all that is good. A Luciferian belief that things can be better under your influence, and that you can rewrite the very nature of art and beauty.
Jack wants to excuse his violence as being a secret method of artistic achievement because he's delusional and egomaniacal.
He values inversions because inverting something shows you are in control. That's why he values negatives over positive photographs. That's why he finds beauty in rot, or life in decay.
He's sort of a spiritual contrarian. A pretentious psycho who wants to get the best of reality itself.
Von Trier himself has this prideful nature as an artist. Wanting to provoke people and have them play on his own terms.
He's damning and satirizing himself, and condemning the worst parts of his conscience to hell.

>>213369306
Nah, the writing is on the wall. You can see that Trier through Jack tries to impose this question about gore being art with all these perfect murders, and then having Verge to counter him in order to keep some balance to the question and the movie's content. If Verge didnt question Jack's logic, then this movie would have been a total celebration of gore art.
That time where Jack got away with killing that old lady in a ridiculous fashion, is literally a jab to TV crime shows(Dexter comes to mind) were they let their murderer escape under some retarded circumstances in order to keep the show going. So Im pretty sure this movie is about this question.
>and if you've ever seen any Von Trier whatsoever
Oh I have seen Trier. I knew that he was a talented hack who liked to get high on fan's reactions, when I saw Europa. This movie has some very creative cinematography and plot, but that faggot had to kill his protagonist out of nowhere in the end for the lolz. That death has to be one of the most unearned deaths in films. Then I realized that he did that to piss off people and then laugh about it.

>>213369063
You're a pleasing nigger aren't you?

>>213369063
Do you get to see BDH's big fat titties in it?

>>213369556
Yes but sadly it's before she got thick

>>213369556
yes, but she wasnt fat back then

>>213369555
I'm a chameleon nigger ngl

>>213369556
I can't remember. I'm about 50 in minutes in rn

>>213366846 (OP)
>dood titty skin wallet is le…deep
Reddit pseud movie

>>213369507
>He's damning and satirizing himself
If he had the balls to actually satirize himself, then he should have hired an actor that looked like him. But no, he is not only a coward, but he runs high on his own farts in this movie

is it 8 minutes to or 5 minutes to?

Melancholia 2011 was the superior Von Trier

>>213369522
I don't think he wanted to piss people off, I think the whole movie is a troll's remorse and he tries to say that it doesn't really matter that violence is fake and fictional, at a certain point it becomes unjustifiable.

>>213369658
But the goal was to tell a story as well. One with original characters and situations.
You think the film would be less self-aggrandizing if he made the protagonist a lookalike?

>>213366846 (OP)
Dillon is kino

>>213369900
>I don't think he wanted to piss people off
He wanted to piss people like he always do.
>Trolls remorse
I guess, sending jack to hell, is Trier's way to say " I guess now I'll fuck off. Ta-da faggots!"
>>213369904
>One with original characters and situations
Then why he had actual parts of his previous work in this movie? Is it an original story or a self criticism movie? You niggas are contradicting yourselves

>>213369958
Showing clips from other movies makes your film not original? Its quite literally both, and can be both. Those two ideas aren't mutually exclusive.

>>213369904
>You think the film would be less self-aggrandizing if he made the protagonist a lookalike?
Yes, because I would respect the fact that he is shitting on himself for once, and see the whole thing from a different angle. Unfortunately, Trier hides behind Dillon who plays Jack and has a disastrous conversation about gore being art with Verge.

>muh meta narrative
I don't know why you art school degenerates always fall over each other to find some hidden meaning in a film that tries to pass itself off as more than it is

>>213370025
But he is shitting on himself.
Your inability to comprehend it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
And your inability to understand a discussion doesn't make it disastrous.

>>213369995
Its half assed. Its about him, yet its not about him. It also looks pretentious
>>213370052
>Your inability to comprehend it doesn't mean it doesn't happen
Your inability to stop sucking his dick doesnt let you see his cowardice and the hybris in this movie. He pussied out, and ultimately failed to comprehend what art means.
In my opinion, he should have taken inspiration from "Being John Malkovich" movie when he was making "The House that Jack built", and 100% apply himself to it.
In the end of his career, The House that Jack built really solidified him as a "pseud degenerate who used art as a facade to shock people because he enjoyed farming reactions" movie maker in my eyes.
Its a shame, because he actually showed some genuine talent in his early works, but he let all go to waste thanks to his arrogant self indulgence and vices.

>>213370233
It's called subtlety. It's more interesting when you can add layers to a theme rather than directly spell it out to the audience.
Would you have preferred 2001 A Space Odyssey if Kubrick came out and spoke about the ambition of man rather than show it through science fiction?
The film isn't about what art is.
It's about what art isn't.
Art isn't a buzzword you can slap on your worst desires and vices as a get out of jail free card.
And to reflect himself in the story, he filtered it through an amalgamation of his worst qualities. A serial killer that sniffs his own farts, which is not only a funny concept, but one that can highlight the discrepancies he's trying to show.
Your complaint is that it's half-assed and self indulgent, and your solution is just to be surface level and employ basic self-fellation.
>Von Trier is too pompous! He should have had a direct copy of himself criticize himself instead of an entertaining proxy!
By that logic, why didn't Charlie Kaufman call it Being Charlie Kaufman?
Sounds like he pussied out by making it about John Malkovich.

>>213370385
>It's called subtlety
In a movie where Jack cuts a tit and casually slaps it on the windshield of a police car
>Would you have preferred 2001 A Space Odyssey if Kubrick came out and spoke about the ambition of man rather than show it through science fiction?
Kubric never made this movie about himself. Trier did. You are deflecting
>Your complaint is that it's half-assed and self indulgent, and your solution is just to be surface level and employ basic self-fellation
Surface level? I never said that. The pro violence arguments, despite being wrong in my opinion, are well developed. The anti-violent arguments are not on the other hand. Verge saying "Arr my boy Jack, violence bad, you are on your way to hell, you are the Antichrist" and then sending him to hell, is just not enough for me. I wanted better counter arguments from Verge, but the movie leans too much towards Jack's violence that makes Verge sound like an extra, which he is not.
>direct copy of himself criticize himself
Yes, thats what I wanted. I wanted from him to take full responsibility for his work as controversial director. I wanted to stop giggling like a bitch from behind the scenes like he always did, and step in to the spot light for once, to fully absolve himself from his degeneracy and pompousness. This would have been 2x more entertaining because it would have been more controversial

>>213366846 (OP)
One of the worst movies I've ever seen, and I have no clue why people hype it up so much.

>>213366846 (OP)
IT'S ABOUT OCD AND INTRUSIVE THOUGHTS YOU DUMB FUCKS

>>213370025
>I would respect the fact that he is shitting on himself for once
He has been self deprecating his entire career though.