Really Surprised!

I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Good concept, poorly executed.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Contrary, perhaps, to the majority of the public, I decided to see this film because of the name of its director, Lars von Trier. If I liked "Antichrist", I don't know yet very well what to think about this film. The script is the story of a woman who calls herself a nymphomaniac, but whose pursuit of pleasure seems to have taken her too far, to the point that she also wants to believe that she's a lousy human being. When she is found fainted after a beating, she decides to tell her life to the nice man who helped her. From there, the film unfolds into two intercommunicating ways: the dissolute life of this girl, Joe, and the exchange of comments between her and the good Samaritan, Seligman, who insists on not seeing her alleged perversity.The film is absolutely loaded with explicit sex, with genitals close ups and penetration scenes. Von Trier remains faithful to the rule of showing everything that is spoken. So this movie requires you to be, at least, able not to be scandalized by that. On the other hand, sex scenes are so cruel and insensitive that you probably will not take any pleasure in watching it. This is not a porn movie made for us to get excited, but the idea is to get the opposite effect: like Joe, we don't feel anything. Emotionally violent, the film raises constant moral and ethical issues regarding religion, psychology, relationships, etc.Charlotte Gainsbourg has done well enough in this film, although its not the best performance of her career, and the same can be said about Stellan Skarsgård. Their performances seemed too warm and very monotone, and their dialogues range from obscenity to the monotony of the most sterile philosophical discussions. In contrast, Joe and Seligman could not be on more opposing poles: She's a girl who lives to feed her sexual addiction, in a way that we would find dirty and reprehensible; Seligman is absolutely pure and innocent, inasmuch as he does nothing wrong, he is a virgin and lives in a world of books, theories and classical music. Uma Thurman seems to be in the middle. She is the most violent and intense actress in the film, in that she plays the betrayed woman, a person just like any of us, who saw her life being destroyed by a lolita. And so, the emotive and explosive way as she behaves comes closer to us than any other character.I liked the actors and the way they worked, I think it suits the movie and the characters they gave them. I liked the way the theme was presented, with the sinner making a confession in a repentant way to a man who seems to be above mortals. But the movie is damaged by the absence of art, by the monotony of the dialogues, by the perversion of sex and the omnipresence of pointless sex scenes all over.

A man, Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård), finds a woman, Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg), beaten and bruised in a snowy alleyway. He takes her to his grotty little apartment where she recounts her life story in which she cannot keep her knickers on for more than a few minutes.'Am I boring you?' asks sex addict Joe in the middle of Lars Von Trier's Nymph()maniac: Vol. I.Why yes… yes, you are, you tedious little bint, and so is everyone else in this pseudo-intellectual art-house porn flick aimed at chin-stroking perverts who want to be seen as cultured while getting their kicks.As you might have guessed, I loathed every single frame of this incredibly boring piece of pretentious X-rated garbage, and all those that made it possible. I hope that none of you ever work again. It's not that I'm averse to the odd spot of cinematic filth, only when it's as pompous and painfully prolonged as this film, which, together with Vol. 2, clocks in at well over four hours.I wonder how many people who paid to see this first volume actually bothered to go and see the next instalment. I'm guessing not many.

This movie, while very long, deeply delves into the attributes and development of sexual mania. It explores in a very thought-provoking way the characteristics of nymphomania. In its explorations, it elucidates many facets of obsessive behavior. This movie shows the negative self-perception of the manic, the compulsive behavior in regards to obtaining sexual satisfaction, the life-consuming nature of the obsessive behavior, the vast and rapid changes in the actions and emotions necessary for satisfaction of the obsession, and several more. This is probably the most carefully crafted documentary film I have seen regarding mania. The subtext is often palpable, and the story will often leave you wondering what will come next. There is a little bit more graphic nudity and sexual entente than some may appreciate, but it is a film for adults and everything ties together to create a necessary backdrop for the mood and revelations of the film.

So many people think that this movie just show sex, no more. And i admit maybe they were right, but,This movie really change my perspective, and so many thing. Yes you should give your spare time maybe 5-6 hours to watch it until the vol.2. The sexual thing that i first(in a whole my life) i think it was taboo thing, or topic that wasn't worth to talking about, but you know, we life with it. Desire of sexuality, to many other things, not only human to human. Human born with lust and desire, if you don't have that so what is difference with you and stone (sory for bit sharp because i just can't stand with people who give this movie rate only one star)Sometimers this movie haunts me, and i swore that maybe in this years 2017 I can't see this movie twice or more because it make my thought full and sick. Sometimes i feel guilty, but i swore everyone who boring with high rate movie and love the up normal movie should watch this.When i was kid, i am afraid of ghost, and up until now those feeling is disappear, and this is the really new indescribable feeling of awfulness