The House That Jack Built (2018)

I always am a little skeptical when it comes to Mr Trier, as I have both hated and loved his films in the past. But this time I found myself enjoying this film more than enough. I think that Matt Dillon executes perfectly his role a serial killer with OCD, who likes to rationalize and over-explaining things. In my opinion this a great and funny film which, I'm afraid, many won't agree with me. Go watch it for yourselves to have your won opinion!!

Fmovies: Unfortunately, directors can get worse with age. There is nothing unoredictable about this film, just a series of random, meaningless murder scenes which attempt but fail to explain the character. I was hoping for some meaningfulness in the end, but there is a corny final scene instead. Waste of time and money.

The story follows Jack (Matt Dillon), a highly intelligent serial killer, over the course of 12 years, and depicts the murders that develop his inner madman.

Also starring - Bruno Ganz, Uma Thurman, Siobhan Fallon Hogan, Sofie Gråbøl, Riley Keough, Jeremy Davies.

This doesn't happen often: I watched the whole movie, the two and a half hours of it, and still couldn't say whether I find it good or bad, or even whether I liked it or not. Didn't find it boring, that's for sure - although I wouldn't call it exciting either, exactly.

One reason are the short but vivid scenes of extreme violence, which make one take a mental step back from the experience, and even think about not writing a review at all. Just in case that some reader would think that I condone violence or something.

The second reason is, of course, Lars von Trier himself, the co-writer and director of this joint. He doesn't seem extreme in interviews, but when it comes to work, the notorious film-maker likes to provoke and divide audiences without hesitation.

And "The House That Jack Built" might just be one of his crowning achievements in that.

Critics are divided as well. Many see the movie as empty provocation, or just tedious. Some see it as a something more. One is certain: it's not a mainstream entertainment. Not only for the overall creepiness and length, but also for how it's been put together.

You see, Von Trier has been more interested in making a point than making a movie with audience-friendly flow or tempo.

Compared to the "regular" movies, there's no clear structure - yes, Jack's story is divided between five cases but what happens during each is never easily anticipated - or for how long.

This is one of those rare movies which keep you guessing for the most time, never knowing what can happen next.

Von Trier also doesn't try to build and hold suspense, like in a "normal" movie, especially the one about serial killers.

He may have even actively worked against letting us just watch and get carried away because there's so much narration during the whole thing - in fhe form of constant dialogue between Jack and his mysterious companion played by Bruno Ganz.

Maybe because of the spotaneousness and unpredicability of the central antihero, it somehow still works. I never found myself idling and bored. Even during the end-section that left me even quite puzzled, which was clearly the authors' intent.

What makes it all so provocative and divisive, then, you may ask. It's the constant narration or dialogue between the serial killer and his companion. They argue over different things, mainly whether killing can be considered as art, and what makes murder such a bad thing anyway.

At first glance, these may seem like a stupid questions, but there's more to these arguments than wish to break taboos or something. Von Trier has deeper thoughts on the matter, and he wishes to make the audience think along.

People will interpret Von Trier's intentions differently, which is surely part of his goal. I would summarize the central thesis that if art is an act of creation and self-expression, then artful killing can be art too (which it certainly is for the serial killer Jack).

And before you rush to claim that killing is bad, let's not forget that everybody is at least indirectly or partly responsible for certain amount of death around the wo

The House That Jack Built fmovies. This is it? The movie everyone was talking about at Cannes Festival because of how brutal it is? People shocked by The House That Jack Built most be new to horror movies I guess. For me it was only a boring, annoying and pretentious movie like every Lars Von Trier films. Lars is just a hack who will never be in the same league as Michael Haneke. Keep dreaming Mr. Lars.

It felt like LVT was trying to create this edgy provocative art work that will address interesting subject: why people kill, what is going through their mind, how serial killer becomes serial killer, etc. However, LVT is no psychologist, he lacks the background on the subject and eventually it feels like art person is trying to give his person opinion why certain people think/behave this way. It is kind of interesting visually, like a weird painting, however it lacks depth. It felt pretentious but didn't provoke any thoughts for further discussion. The violence in the movie was trying to create a shock that will be thoughts provoking, unfortunately it didn't, it fell flat and even silly. Although LVT did some other very unique unforgettable movies, this one is not recommended.

I just got back from seeing the directors cut of The House that Jack Built, and man, it was quite the experience. First and foremost, if you don't have a strong stomach for violence and generally aggressive behavior then this probably isn't going to be for you, however I'm not sure how much of what I saw will be in the rated R cut. This is a nasty movie, about a nasty man. It is quite graphic in some scenes, though none of the violence ever felt out of place or just there to shock. The acting by everyone involved is top-notch, the writing and direction is absolutely fantastic, as well. This movie can be surprisingly funny, from time to time. The cinematography was very well done, although some scenes are less memorable than others due to not being as unique as they could have been. There is a review here on IMdB who states this movie had no meaning, and also says they didn't even watch the whole movie. I'd definitely suggest getting through to the end and making your own decision on that. All in all, if you're a fan of artsy movies, underground horror, true crime, or extreme cinema in general I highly suggest seeking this one out.