[douglasdickel]

Se Lars Von Trier isolasse a segunda parte de 'Melancholia' e a desenvolvesse para o tamanho de um filme completo, faria frente a 'Antichrist'. A primeira parte é um misto de 'Festten' com 'Rachel's wedding'.

"Kirsten Dunst is entirely flat and lifeless. She is bland and boring in the extreme. Making this worse again is that the film never leaves the house and its grounds once it arrives there and none of the characters are ever given anything to do. At all. This is an entirely, one hundred percent passive picture in which people spend over two hours either being awful to each other or sitting around waiting for the inevitable. There is zero narrative drive. There is zero dramatic tension. There are zero character arcs. Von Trier tells you in minute one that the planet is going to be destroyed, then he simply makes you wait around for it to happen. (...) Do not be misled by the film's trailer. Those gorgeous images? All but one are contained in a brief prologue that fills the film's opening minutes. After that it's nothing but people sitting around the house saying not much of anything about anything and doing so in a very tedious, unnatural fashion. Von Trier is capable of so very much better than this." (Todd Brown)

"Lars von Trier rodou dois filmes em um só, com histórias bem diversas com os mesmos personagens, o que provoca uma certa desarmonia ao filme como um todo. Enquanto a primeira parte lembra Festa de Família e é um pouco cansativa, a segunda é impactante." (Francisco Russo)

"As she grows increasingly disinterested in the festivities, the first half of “Melancholia” (titled “Justine” at its start) plays like Von Trier’s version of “Rachel Getting Married,” another family drama about one sour grape dragging down the celebratory mood." (Eric Kohn)

“I may have made a film I don’t like. This film is perilously close to the aesthetic of American mainstream films.” (Lars Von Trier)