Dancer in the Dark
Tags: dark, murder, dramatic, psychedelic, tragedy, romantic, sentimental

Plot synopsis:
The film is set in Washington state in 1964 and focuses on Selma Ježková (Björk), a Czech immigrant who has moved to the United States with her son, Gene Ježek (Vladica Kostic). They live a life of poverty as Selma works at a factory with her good friend Kathy (Catherine Deneuve), whom she nicknames Cvalda. She rents a trailer home on the property of town policeman Bill Houston (David Morse) and his wife Linda (Cara Seymour). She is also pursued by the shy but persistent Jeff (Peter Stormare), who also works at the factory.
Selma suffers from a degenerative eye condition and because of this is losing her vision. She has been saving up to pay for an operation which will prevent her young son from suffering the same fate. To escape the misery of her daily life, Selma accompanies Kathy to the local cinema where together they watch fabulous Hollywood musicals (or more accurately, Selma listens as Cvalda describes them to her, to the annoyance of the other theater patrons, or acts out the dance steps upon Selma's hand using her fingers).
In her day-to-day life, when things are too boring or upsetting, Selma slips into daydreams or perhaps a trance-like state where she imagines the ordinary circumstances and individuals around her have erupted into elaborate musical theater numbers. These songs use some sort of real-life noise (from factory machines buzzing to the sound of a flag rapping against a flag pole in the wind) as an underlying rhythm. Unfortunately, Selma slips into one such trance while working at the factory. Soon Jeff and Cvalda begin to realize that Selma can barely see at all. Additionally, Bill reveals to Selma that his materialistic wife Linda spends more than his salary, there is no money left from his inheritance, and he is behind in payments and the bank is going to take his house. He asks Selma for a loan, but she declines. He regrets telling Selma his secret. To comfort Bill, Selma reveals her secret blindness, hoping that together they can keep each other's secret. Bill then hides in the corner of Selma's home, knowing she can't see him, and watches as she puts some money in her kitchen tin.
The next day, after having broken her machine the night before through careless error, Selma is fired from her job. When she comes home to put her final wages away she finds the tin is empty; she goes next door to report the theft to Bill and Linda only to hear Linda discussing how Bill has brought home their safe deposit box to count their savings. Linda additionally reveals that Bill has "confessed" his affair with Selma, and that Selma must move out immediately. Knowing that Bill was broke and that the money he is counting must be hers, she confronts him and attempts to take the money back. He draws a gun on her, and in a struggle he is wounded. Linda discovers the two of them and, assuming that Selma is attempting to steal the money, runs off to tell the police at Bill's command. Bill then begs Selma to take his life, telling her that this will be the only way she will ever reclaim the money that he stole from her. Selma shoots at him several times, but due to her blindness manages to only maim Bill further. In the end, she performs a coup de grâce with the safe deposit box. In one of the scenes, Selma slips into a trance and imagines that Bill's corpse stands up and slow dances with her, urging her to run to freedom. She does, and takes the money to the Institute for the Blind to pay for her son's operation before the police can take it from her.
Selma is caught and eventually put on trial. It is here that she is pegged as a Communist sympathizer and murderess. Although she tells as much truth about the situation as she can, she refuses to reveal Bill's secret, saying that she had promised not to. Additionally, when her claim that the reason she didn't have any money was because she had been sending it to her father in Czechoslovakia is proven false, she is convicted and given the death penalty. Cvalda and Jeff eventually put the pieces of the puzzle together and get back Selma's money, using it instead to pay for a trial lawyer who can free her. Selma becomes furious and refuses the lawyer, opting to face the death penalty rather than let her son go blind, but she is deeply distraught as she awaits her death. Although a sympathetic female prison guard named Brenda tries to comfort her, the other state officials show no feelings and are eager to see her executed. Brenda encourages Selma to walk. On her way to the gallows, Selma goes to hug the other men on death row while singing to them. However, on the gallows, she becomes terrified, so that she must be strapped to a collapse board. Her hysteria when the hood is placed over her face delays the execution. Selma begins crying hysterically and Brenda cries with her, but Cvalda rushes to inform her that the operation was successful and that Gene will see. Relieved, Selma sings the final song on the gallows with no musical accompaniment, although she is hanged before she finishes. A curtain is then drawn in front of her body, while the missing part of the song shows on the screen: "They say it's the last song/They don't know us, you see/It's only the last song/If we let it be."

Review: In respect, it was a rich, rewarding odyssey, much easier to get through than, let's say, even half of "8½."  My initial respect for the unique, uncompromising style of Danish director Lars von Trier goes back to his compelling work in "Zentropa" and "Breaking the Waves," both bleak, surrealistic studies of man vs.
Joel Grey has a brief, telling moment near the film's end as a faded musical star idolized by Selma.As in his other featured works, von Trier's gritty, hand-held camera work may be dizzying to the point of distraction at first but its overall impact to the stark proceedings is unquestionable.
Von Trier's film is one of those movies that truly change the way we think about cinema and its possibilities, and for such a film, words do no justice.
The biggest star is still the director himself; von Trier demonstrates his talent in a superb fashion by both telling a simple story that will most likely break you heart and examining the ever-persistent ills of the life of the lower class of the American society.
Not one of my favourite genres (but everyone loves The Sound Of Music, right?) but Lars Von Trier makes you re-evaluate your perception with a gentle loving pastiche of the way for no reason people and things in musicals spontaneously erupt into song, made more credible in this film by implicating a reason for it: Bjork's character is going blind so she hears music in the slightest thing and she, in her mind, sees how moves should be choreographed with the music she hears, reminiscent of her own It's Oh So Quiet' music video.
She is essentially an innocent and though this is her weakness you can't help but love her all the more: a sparkling performance from a unique singer in real life.However from this don't assume that this is a light happy film as there is a dark tragic side also, and this side is full of injustice, agony- and I mean agony-, sorrow- like you'd not believe-, and an intense emotional pull as I've ever felt in a cinema before, and it's this half that propels it from being just a great film to becoming one of the greatest.
Its greatness is in telling a simple story of a woman trying to stop her own genetic sight disorder afflicting her son, by working every hour to afford the operation, working heavy machinery despite essentially being virtually blind, its greatness is its ability to inflict upon you the gift of feeling every conceivable emotion you posses and you do, you really do experience so much during this film.
'tis great to see Joel Grey dancing again (hm, in the most improbable setting!)For a 5' 4'' singer-songwriter from Iceland, Bjork is a giant impact in this quiet powerhouse of a film, "Dancer In the Dark." Lars von Trier's vision and confidence in Bjork truly paid off!.
After seeing Melancholia and Antichrist, and after reading lots of stuff about Lars von Trier and his movies, I thought I understood what kind of director he is.
When I started watching his filmography, I was expecting everything, really, because I know people who've seen a lot of his movies and they were always telling me that his films are good, but extremely tough to watch.
So when I started watching it, I found out I was unprepared.Dancer in the Dark is a movie about Selma Jezkova (Björk), a factory worker from the '60s, who is slowly going blind.
That's when Selma starts to 'dance in the dark', both literally and metaphorically.Dancer in the Dark is the third film in the so-called "Golden Heart trilogy" by Lars von Trier.
The result of the combination of Björk's phenomenal voice and incredible acting performance was astonishing.But, as I was saying before, maybe the problem with the movie is that von Trier was using this 'destroying something beautiful' to get to the viewers.
Also the way he used lighting and still cameras in the music sequences expressed the surreal daydreams of Selma.Selma, played by Bjork, is a strong willed yet kind character who is hit by a series of bad events.
She doesnt act more than emote the character.With Lars Von Trier directing and great acting, this is far and away the best film of the year.
How, and I'm pointing fingers, a person could possibly detest this film to such an extent - to be filled with such revulsion - to grade it a 1 when all around the world a hundred thousand hours of TV is flooding through your little goggle boxes eating into your days and wasting your brains - hah, but you'll happily sit and watch that.To me this was as finely crafted piece of work as you could wish for.
How many movies do you need to watch where the final credits scroll up over the image of a hugging mother and child before you'll let a single "miserable" ending pass before your eyes without instantly leaping out of your seat in outrage?Selma needs to be destroyed, she ultimately is there to be sacrificed and I think I would be right in saying that enough parents swear they would sacrifice themselves for their child - well, here's your chance.
As a fan of Lars Von Trier's earlier works, as well as Bjork's music videos, I was quite excited to see a collaboration between the two.
But with a movie like DANCER IN THE DARK, it's very easy to get the sense that those who didn't like it are simple-minded sour-pusses with artistic tunnel vision.Plus, most people who hated it don't take the time to write a comment.
This means Lars Von Trier will be encouraged to make MORE horrible films!Being forced to watch Bjork act is like being forced to listen to Anna Nicole Smith play the saxaphone.
It makes me happy that people walked in the cinema theaters to see another kind of movie, another kind of musical and it makes me sad that the rest of the people didn't even have a thought of seeing this film.
...and it makes me happy that people shed a tear, impressed by the story of lars von trier's movie and the by one of the greatest performance in history...bjork's performance.
I mean the grain was awful, It looks like it was shot with a mini dv camera, and Von trier probably should have hired a camera operator.This was easily one of my top 10 films I've seen this year..
But if, like me, you think Bjork is completely weird and her music is awful, then read the rest of this review, because this will be your fair warning about the film "Dancer in the Dark"."Dancer in the Dark" is from Danish director Lars von Trier and may be the most unwatchable film of the past few years.
Bjork plays a character who may be the most pathetic character in film history and who's foolishness leads to her fate in a depressing plot, which is both ludicrous and manipulative as it leads to an unrealistic outcome that only a sadistic screenwriter and director could force-feed to an audience.
If having a completely pathetic lead character, bad musical numbers, a ridiculously contrived and depressing plot, nausea-inducing camera work, and lacking any entertainment value whatsoever is new ground, then yes, this movie does break new ground.
Stop reading if you are afraid to have important details know to you).My conflict here is that I really fell for the character and love the movie, but at the same time I think the plot line is just borderline stupid.
So many people have written that this was a difficult film to watch and I'd have to agree, since it was one of the worst movies I have ever seen.
I know the utilitarian baldness of the words was part of the point, but that kind of thing needs a kind of careful handling von Trier is reluctant to give anything.P.S.:  I've read that the film is set in the 1950s, or at any rate some time decades ago.
These are the kind of films that give us a breathe of hope: there's still people who think of movies as art and not dollars.Since the very beginning you feel next to Selma and her beautiful intentions, you live the innocence of a heavenly woman surrounded by a world that seems to be destined for her as a strike of pain.
I found the improvisational acting throughout the film to be very painful to watch most of the time and although I am a fan of Catherine Deneuve, her performance here is mediocre at best.
Unlike other dull and boring movies that have left me dull and bored, by the time I finished watching this one I had reached the level of actively despising Bjork and von Trier and was rooting for Selma to meet her destiny sooner not later.Bad movie; atrocious musical.
It hurts to give this movie such a low rating (5 out of 10) in some ways because it does have some things going for it--the performances of Catherine Deneuve, David Morse, Joel Grey, Peter Stormare, and some lovely songs, as well.
I must say that writer/director Lars von Trier's choice to shoot a musical in his grainy, home-video-like style (which worked well in "Breaking The Waves", it actually deepened that viewing experience) simply doesn't work.
It's about a girl who is going blind but won't tell anyone even though she can barely walk on her own, a woman who is nominated to play the lead role in a theater production but has no singing or dance talent, a woman who tries to shield her son from any small hint of stress yet is quick to smack him if he skips school, a woman who has built a complete lie around her life to keep her son from knowing she's going blind, a man who will do anything for her even though she rejects him on a daily basis and shows no appreciation for him even when his life revolves around her, a man who is in severe debt but is able to get away with claiming he keeps a stack of 2056 dollars in ones, fives, and tens in his safe deposit box, and a correctional officer who is used to watching people executed but can't keep herself from developing a strong emotional attachment to the woman she has to execute.
One of the negative notes of this movie is the balance of characters: after "Breaking the Waves" Lars von Trier has been accused of misogyny and knowing that also The Dancer could be liable of the same remark, because of the very similar childish, tormented female main character, He surrounded Selma with a series of male characters who are almost all nasty and negative and He interspersed the script, especially toward the finale, with a lot of references to sorority and female bonding.
Finally two requests: don't take The Dancer as film against death penalty and the American way of life because those issues here are merely functional to the heroine's martyrdom; but above all don't ever compare Lars von Trier to C.T. Dreyer: They don't have anything in common but the fact that They're both Danes and The Dancer resembles more to Arthur Hiller's "Love Story" than to "The Passion of Joan of Arc".
Good directing, screenplay, and acting (except bjork, where she over-acted/mis-acted in several shots) but very poor and shallow plot.Basically you see this woman named Selma suffering in the whole movie and some of her friends tried to help her.
She is Selma.Both Björk and her tormenter von Trier deserves all the credit they can get for showing, there is still new ground to break in cinema.If you want to see a movie, choose something else.
I absolutely loved Bjork's performance; she pours her heart and soul into her character and makes you feel involved emotionally with Selma.
I thought Lars Von Trier as a talented and breaking-tie director with his movie "Idiot".
Dancer in the Dark confirms Lars Von Trier's status as a talented director.It is for the first time that he has worked on a musical genre film and has succeeded in infusing dramatic elements into it.His film is a boon for those film enthusiasts who would like to have tears roll down their eyes while humming a couple of nice songs.Some of this film's major themes have a direct bearing on the quintessential American dream.This has been highlighted by showing the hapless plight of an immigrant woman from Eastern Europe whose sad story reveals the victory of evil over good.A major problem of this film is its casting which is just on an above average level as some of the most talented actors like Jean Marc Barr and Catherine Deneuve have largely been ignored.They have nothing more than supporting roles to take care of.This is the reason why they appear as long lost souls.As it is a Dogma 95 film,one should not feel bored if there are irregular,unruly camera movements.They have been wisely introduced to create a sense of heightened tension in the film..
If you've seen any of Lars von Trier's work (I hadn't), and based on what you've seen you decide to watch Dancer in the Dark, DON'T!
Every time I see a Lars von Trier film, I feel like he has tried to manipulate me into feeling something.
The problem with Lars von Trier is that the way he makes his films is deliberately intended to make them feel more 'real' than the typical Hollywood production.
I think Lars von Trier is an extremely talented director and Bjork in Dancer in the Dark was fantastic and I loved the music/dancing scenes, but I still felt dirty and used at the end of the film..
I love films like this that are shot in a way that makes the characters the main focus, and not the camera itself.
I almost don't think of this film as a musical, as the musical turns aren't in fact 'real', they aren't part of the story and simply Selma's way of escaping her misfortunes.Selma is the very definition of a dreamer, but you always get the feeling that this is due to circumstance rather than a natural trait as all her dreams take place during difficult times.
Her main hate of musicals is that they eventually have to end, and because you know the end is coming when the camera lifts out of the roof, which is what is so sad about the ending of the film.After seeing the reactions to 'Dogville', I'm fairly sure that those who aren't fans of Von Trier's work will once again tell me about his 'anti-US' stance of a woman coming to America to heal her son, yet is cruelly and unjustly treated by the American justice system.
this movie is brilliantly touching, it excelled my emotions so much, i honestly couldn't stop crying for a minute, Bjork is amazing, she really makes you feel the character and the songs are simply fantastic ( check out thom yorke and bjorks version of 'ive seen it all') the ending is a killer, and i must say this one is not not for everyone, especially if you cried over things like the lion king, this film can be raw, sensitive and magic all at the same time.
as a bjork fan, this was a special treat, sad to know that she will not be making anymore movies but this has given her recognition for great acting, job truly well done..
But since the probability of this story becoming a true story is so small, and its a pure luck to meet so many cruel people at once, the film granted me no new insight, exactly what a serious tragedy like this must grant as a payment for the sorrow of watching such a depressing movie..
(I might note that people who don't like or understand this movie probably fail to make this connection with it.)Bjork's major film is a work to be proud of.
And as such I have a lot of difficulty getting emotionally involved in this film.Another point worth noting about Dancer in the Dark is that it is a very unconventional musical, as several times the emotions of the characters are illustrated by way of a song.
So regardless of whether I like this film or Von Trier himself, he has managed to create a real work of art here.Finally, one thing you have to say for Lars is that he has an uncanny knack for assembling excellent casts, and doing brilliant things with them.
If you hate Bjork's music, you won't like the dance scenes, but you'll have to hand it to her for her acting.
The music scenes are really the only thing worthy in this movie, and are basically the entire point of the movie, the rest is just dressing to justify the pathetic hell we have to watch our main characters endure.Have some time to spare and feel like sitting through hours of depressing pointless s***e?
There's a few redeeming factors in this movie, mainly Bjork's musical numbers, although they can't seem to make up for the rest of the film.
I'm glad people something in Dancer and Lars Von Trier's other work, but I can't seem to find this film to be anything other than pretentious..
"Dancer in the Dark" is a haunting film, it's incredibly simple and extremely forced, but some how, Trier ended up getting some emotion (even if in a forced way) of the viewer..
I am a follower of von Trier but this is one film I felt no great urge to see for two reasons:- 1/ I hate musicals - nothing spoils my involvement in a story more than all the characters suddenly breaking character to go into a song & dance routine.