Anna ten Bensel To express simply is to express nothing at all. Lars Von Trier is an absolute genius and Jorgen Leth certainly has what it takes to know how to fight pressure from Trier himself. It's absolutely amazing to watch to renown filmmakers challenge one another. As a young filmmaker and art advocate, to see Von Trier push Leth the way he does in this film is a sight to be seen. Leaving Leth exposed, the audience is able to capture what has never be captured or communicated before on film - Leth's depression. After reading Bjork's statement on Dancer in the Dark and what a mind blowing experience it was, as an audience member, I am now able to see how Trier can push you down and pull you back up. This challenge provided the perfect jumping off point for artists pushing each other to do greater things. Truly a must-see film for those contemporary film fanatics.

HuffingStardust Slow to start, but beautifully done...the last obstruction makes all the difference. You have to get to the end before you can say anything about the film. It's well worth the subtitles. I suggest watching the film in segments, obstruction by obstruction because it is slow. It does all culminate, however, in quite a lovely way, by the end of the film. Also, you get to see the original film from 1967 at the end. The way the films are obstructed each time creates such new and different, but also exciting, interesting and valuable films that it's fascinating to watch. This is definitely an artsy film, and you will have to read subtitles unless you speak Dutch? I think it's dutch. Anyway, for film buffs it's a great time. If you're just an idiot with no attention span however, you will cry out of boredom at this film.

Framescourer The film has two points of interest: the discussions between the two men as to what might constitute the limitations (the obstructions) - as good a way as any of discussing the content of the elusive original - and the behaviour of both men in the pursuit & rendition of the exercise.As a document that presents the perversity of the 'boardroom' pragmatism of film-making and its melodramatic content this is quite hard to beat. The five versions are satisfyingly varied, although we are not shown any in full as far as I can make out. Their relative value is of little importance; von Trier's final 'twist' obstruction doesn't really come off in fact although it may be seen to be the most likely to succeed. In this way we are also shown something of the pot luck of producing a good film.Above all though I came away trying to contain an imagination fomented on either side, both by the possibilities of the content of all six films (again, some more than others) and also by the auteur role; the possibilities and responsibilities faced when pointing a camera. And I'd always rather leave the theatre blinded with a brain bloated than a brain dead. 8/10

tuco73 I have a lot of respect for Von Trier's work and find most of his movies clever and stimulating. Having said that I wonder why Lars as a person seems to be so arrogant and un-sympathetic and as a director so self indulgent... The strongest message I could get from this movie was "Ooh, I'm so bloody cool!". It's a pity because a style exercise in cinema could have been a great new idea, something comparable - in literary terms - to what Queneau did, or to Italo Calvino's famous "Se una Notte d'Inverno un Viaggiatore". But it soon becomes a rather boring and self centered exercise. Those are the risks of becoming famous and celebrated... you loose the plot! What a waste of talent.