If Lars Von Trier Remade….

July 23, 2009 by  
Filed under - Home, Features

Lars Von Trier once said that ‘a film should be like a stone in your shoe’, however by all accounts his latest cinematic offering Antichrist is more akin to a 16th century leg amputation.

If you have been paying attention to tube advertising, you will know that Antichrist is a visceral orgy of misery which probes themes of human depression to a startling degree. Some reviewers have hailed it as a work of genius; pretty much everyone else has questioned the mental stability of the director.

So as debate kicks-off between those who ‘get it’ and those who think there is no good reason for a crushing a man’s penis, we ask what other films could benefit from a Von Trier revamp?


Many years ago, on a rainy half-term afternoon, I reached for my trusty home copy of Die Hard only to find that my sister had taped over it with Grease.

Suffice to say that when I saw the moronic coiffure of John Travolta rather than the receding hairline of John McClane on the screen, my anguish bordered on biblical.

It is for this reason alone that several years later, I feel duty bound to consign this film to the cinematic Room 101 that is a Lars Von Trier remake. My only concern would be that the level of unbridled and idiotic enthusiasm in this film might defeat him. The man suffers bouts of depression when he loses a set of keys, so what dissecting Grease might do to him doesn’t bear thinking about.

He might find solace in the knowledge that he would get to crush John Travolta’s balls afterwards, although most would consider that a feeble punishment for a man who had committed such a haircut.


If the social services found out about the fate of the infant in Antichrist, it’s a safe bet that they would be facing an enquiry within days – except if they lived in Haringey of course.

But at the other end of the spectrum, the syrup-dripping sprogs in Poppins sicken us to a similar degree with their ridiculously rose-tinted version of the capitals youth, circa 1964.

So after nearly half a century of watching this annoying trash every Christmas, we think it’s time that our favourite Danish director cured this films grating happiness. Von Trier would hack lumps from the script, cover the nursery in black paint, and have his new titular character – Fanny Choppins – serenade us with her balled of doom, ‘Super gore-porn is sadistic, vicious and ferocious’.


At the beginning of LVT’s latest tale of woe, the couple’s baby tragically falls to its death from the window of their apartment. This would be enough to constitute a bad day for even the most upbeat duo, but for he and she, the sense of guilt proves unbearable, and they do the only thing a respectable couple can in the circumstances; retreat to a forest cabin and mutilate each other’s genitals.

It’s a real pity that Jack and Rose could not show the same level of dignity when their humping causes the Titanic to hit an iceberg in James Cameron’s blockbuster. After such an act they should have been searching for a pair rusty scissors to slice each other up, not shamelessly embarking on a frantic bid for salvation.

I know what you’re thinking – will someone not step forward to curb this exuberance? Step forward Lars Von Trier. The new script would certainly be a lot more interesting: “The water is freezing and there isn’t a talking fox in sight!”


It was reported that four people fainted during the Cannes-premier of Antichrist, a statistic that many might presume was some sort of benchmark.

Unfortunately, an even more impressive record had been established a decade earlier when 86 people fell asleep during the first showing of the Blair Witch Project. For this reason we thought that letting Von Trier exact some revenge would be appropriate.

Let’s be honest, David Blunkett could remake this film and improve it considerably. Most of us have been on more eventful strolls to the newsagents, so why this bunch of hapless students bothered to record their trip remains the biggest mystery of the original film.

After the sadistic Dane gets his pessimistic mitts on this cinematic non-event, such discussions would be merely conjecture.

If Lars takes his camera into the woods, he certainly won’t be emerging until someone gets their clitoris hacked off.


Most of us scoffed when our Harry Potter loving friend told us with a proud and ridiculously misplaced sense of vindication that this film was the darkest yet. However, after you find out that the earlier films included a talking hat and referenced the character Helga Hufflepuff, this statement becomes a little meaningless.

Next time you’re in the pub with your friend, make sure that before his dad comes to pick him up you tell him that one teenager getting upset because some teenager kissed another teenager would fail to constitute darkness on an episode of Saved by the Bell, which is why we would recruit LVT to spice things up.

Our favourite Copenhagenite would waste no time making the latest Hogwarts instalment darker than the inside of a wizard’s hat, after all half the ingredients needed to make a horrific masterpiece are already present.

There is a dark forest on set, most of the animals can talk, Hagrid’s cabin could easily be converted to a gore-porn grotto and Dumbledore has been waiting ages to do things to Harry that even LVT might find offensive.

Sean Marland

StumbleUpon It!


  1. bennerj says:

    spiffing stuff. i laughed my socks off to the poppins spiel.