Watch: Philosopher Slavoj Žižek Explains Why Lars Von Trier's 'Melancholia' Is "Profoundly Optimistic"

13 Comments

• | Reply

• Pat | August 1, 2012 8:15 AMReply

  Optimistic, pessimistic doesn't really matter Melancholia was one of the worst movies I have ever had the displeasure of viewing. Von Trier's characters acted in ways that were completely unbelievable. The only redeeming element of the movie were some beautiful visuals that only slightly distract the viewer from the hollow characters.
  
  Skip Melancholia and see Another Earth instead.

• ... | July 31, 2012 9:39 AMReply

  Actually, I think the real reason for the heroine's lack of despair (it's hardly optimism) is that people suffering from depression are much better able to handle terrible circumstances. Beautiful film though.

• StephenM | August 1, 2012 11:10 PM

  But that kind of praise of depression and the depressive worldview is a terrible thing to advocate. I've been depressed, and the only way you can "deal with suffering" is by not caring either way. It's a terrible way to live, and it leaves you unproductive and un-compassionate towards those around you. It's a fundamentally narcissistic attitude, and I say that without intending to downplay the difficulty of the condition. But the reason depressed people go to therapists and take medication is because it's a BAD thing. The movie's ridiculous idea that it's better than being healthy when the world's going to end is stupid, and the movie is fundamentally narcissistic and solipsistic in its attitudes. If you want a movie that illustrates a truly spiritual and moral understanding of a possible end of the world, watch Andrei Tarkovsky's The Sacrifice--a far more beautiful, profound, life-affirming film, where it is the ability to care and feel and love others that is the greatest response to apocalypse, and those who become wrapped up in themselves and their own problems are criticized.

• Arch | August 1, 2012 8:35 AM

  "taking scenes out of context to illustrate his theories"... Which basically is what postmodern film theory gurus have been doing for the last decades.

• zatopek | July 31, 2012 12:23 PM

  Yes, and that's what Von Trier has said also, but Zizek uses the film as a kind of metaphorical example of Heideggerian being-toward-death. One should keep the finitude of everything in sight when making ethical decisions etc. If you think we can live forever, then that can become sort of nihilistic or egotistical attitude where you just do what you like without care for the consequences.
  
  I'm not saying that that's the right way to see the film. Zizek uses movies this way, many times taking scenes out of context to illustrate his theories.

• tyrannosaurus max | July 31, 2012 3:49 AMReply

  haters gonna hate.
  Slavoj gonna keep doin' his thing.
  More power to him.

• Stevo the Magnificent | July 31, 2012 12:04 AMReply

  Zizek is a disgusting little troll of a leftie nut-job, this is a guy who actually DEFENDED the killings of the French Revolution as an exercise in democracy... no wonder Hitler had such a low opinion of Slavs!

• Mober the magnificent | March 24, 2013 7:27 AM

  You need to read some more history my friend, that view ón the context of that revolution is hardly controversial, and it was one of the catalysts for the American revolution, please get of the internet and open a book

• Helm | July 30, 2012 8:24 PMReply

  Slavoj Zizek is nothing but an intellectual scam artist, don't give him any publicity.

• Naommon | July 30, 2012 6:13 PMReply

  100% agree,. Detachement, acceptance, peace of mind, Lovelife!
  Best movie ever!

• Whoa, Watch The Excess Saliva, Dude | July 30, 2012 6:11 PMReply

  God, this guy is worse that standing near the guy who writes for Bleeding Cool. Gotta get an umbrella or a windbreaker for when he talks.

• David | August 3, 2012 12:35 AM

  Way to limit interesting things/people/ideas in your life!

• Wes | July 30, 2012 6:09 PMReply

  This guy is nonsense.