User reviews

Lets be clear, I am not especially a fan of Von Trier's work, either I am an artistic cinephile. But lately I am looking a bit further then the mainstream movies, which can be as well very good. That's why I was interested in seeing Nymphomaniac, in the same way that I saw Shame with Fassbender. These movies are not comparable due to the different objective, but treat the same problem experienced by a man or a woman. It is difficult to review the first part of a movie, which exists of 2 parts making 4 hours together. Even then, it is the censored version, NOT due to the sex scenes, but rather for the length of 5:30 hours, which is not THAT standard in theaters. I am sure I will go for the second part and I am as well sure that it will of the same level or better. Therefor the rate of 8/10. It is for sure not porno, even not erotic. Not be mistaken in that. There is no excitement possible. All sex scenes are more or less mechanical, short duration and treated as if it was a documentary. In fact, the movie is like a documentary, where a father type figure Seligman ( Skarsgard ) is the interviewer of the nymphomaniac Joe ( Gainsbourg ) in a way that she can tell her history from when she was 8 years old and onwards. The discussions between Joe and Seligman are metaphors between her sexual behavior and for example fly-fishing, music, etc … and they are sometimes quiet comic. So a laugh is possible. But don't be mistaken, this is a drama. We see how Joe's sexual life conditions her from child onwards, as well as all involved "partners". She is someone who does not feel anything and will do everything to satisfy herself independent of the pain that she will cause around her. A good example is the Miss H chapter, where an astonishing Thurman enters the screen. The situation caused could be like a Veaudeville one, but here it develops as a dramatic absurd situation. Different moods are created, sometimes you feel pity for Joe, then unbelief like with the train adventure, very dramatical situations like Miss H or the with her father causes sadness and anger, even a tip of the love issue … a different movie to see. If I have to mention a negative topic, then it is the cold atmosphere in the movie with only the Seligman metaphors and the sex life of Joe, not more. But don't misunderstand this, it is quiet a lot to handle. And even more, if you have 15 partners a day I suppose there is not that much time for other things to do then having a walk in the park like she does. Stacy Martin is the star of this part, as well as the discussions by Starsgard. Finally, I am certainly going for the second part of this movie. It is a very tricky subject to bring it on the big screen and Von Trier has had the guts to do it. The result is fine, a drama, a documentary about an illness ( as far it is an illness and when it is considered as one ), not a porno or sex movie like we understand it, showing us how it conditions a complete life and sometimes with a comic hint. Of course there is nudity and sex scenes in the movie, a warning for those who have problems with that ...

Nymph()maniac, if I've to describe in a single sentence, is director Lars von Trier trying to sell his bland & banal softcore as a work of art. Divided into 2 volumes, Nymph()maniac is the final chapter in what is now being labeled as Depression Trilogy (preceded by Antichrist & Melancholia) and tells the story of a self-diagnosed nymphomaniac named Joe recounting her life's sexual experiences to Seligman; the man who found her badly-beaten up in some deserted alley plus who later tries to connect & analyse her stories with whatever he has read about.

Volume 1 is further divided into 5 chapters, each picking its name from the things present in Seligman's room and tells the sexual escapades Joe has been on since infancy to her present age. Lars von Trier loves shocking his audience & here he relies on one after another repeated sexual encounters of Joe that are explicit, as expected, for shock value but are also hollow & devoid of feelings completely. And thanks to its lethargic pace, the movie feels far more longer than what its runtime suggests as the story is boring despite being full of strong sexual contents.

Still, not everything about it sucks though. The performances by its ensemble cast might just be the reason why I was able to sit through this story from start to finish. Stacy Martin is a real discovery here who delivers a seductive, enticing & sensational debut performance as young version of Joe. But the one who impressed me most is Uma Thurman who truly stole the show in her short appearance. Also, amongst the 5 chapters, the 4th chapter 'Delirium' is the only one where an effort to connect with the audience is actually felt.

On an overall scale, the 1st volume of Nymph()maniac boasts few moments that manages to work in its favour but for the most part, it's an insipid journey that leaves you more frustrated than satisfied, thanks to its lazy direction, lifeless script, sluggish pace, dull photography, monotonous sex scenes, terrible editing, fragmented use of music & unnecessary stuffing of pretentious philosophical bullshit. And I've a strong feeling that Volume 2 will be no different.

Full review at: cinemaclown.wordpress.com

This movie was a different experience for me. It was a pure drama in a poetic way. The girl telling the story and accusing herself in every condition and the man justifying her actions. It was a like a good conversation. The rest of the conversation will be in Vol. II which I will be seeing soon. Overall, a good watch and would ask others also to try this movie.

All the one star reviews on this website that are calling the film a "porn documentary" are obviously written by a group of religious nuts offended by intellectualism and sexuality. Ignore them.

Von Trier has crafted what may be his magnum opus. He goes further into his often explored themes of suffering, femininity and the breaking of social norms. Indeed, this may be one of the most intense inquisitions into the female mind ever put to film. And it has a refreshingly feminist, sex positive tonal undercurrent. The drama really gets going in the second volume which I enjoyed much more than the first. Incredible acting from all involved but Jamie Bell, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Uma Thurman especially. For anyone cultured there is nothing outrageous or controversial here, just a solid thought provoking film from a master of the art form.

One story, apparently divided into 2 as the whole thing is just shy of 4 hours long. Seligman, played by Stellan Skarsgard, finds a badly beaten woman - Joe, played by Charlotte Gainsbourg, and takes her home where she recounts in 8 segments across the 2 parts how sex has completely taken over upon every aspect of her life.

Whilst there is a lot of explicit sex / images covering different aspects of sex and how they have have featured in and shaped Joe's life, this is not remotely an art house porn movie. Instead it is never less than engrossing, beautifully filmed and a generally quite sad insight into an addiction. Certainly there are some quite shocking scenes, some of which are perhaps rather hard to fully understand, but the controversial, often brilliant and sometimes crass Von Trier does a great job here and the drama and the set pieces are all convincingly played out - the scene where the young boy leaves his cot is terrific. My only minor concern is with the characters generally - the actors, especially Gainsbough give their all here to be sure, but they're all the same and frankly all seem stoned.

An extended edition featuring even more explicit material running at 5 and a half hours exists - not sure I could take that. I was impressed by the film(s) but it's not a lot of laughs.

Nymphomaniac (2013) [Director's Cut]

"Nymphomaniac" is the final part of Lars von Trier's "Trilogy of Depression", after the "Antichrist" (2009), which was to me inexplicably dull and unjustified morbid, and "Melancholy" (2011), which I have not yet come to see. Originally, "Nymphomaniac" was conceived as a single film but, due to its inhumane length, in the theatrical release, it was divided into two two-hour films. I am watching the director's cut, which lasts five and a half hours.

The first film begins with a scene in which an older man encounters a beaten woman lying on the street. After she refuses an ambulance and the police, he takes her to his apartment and places her in bed. Then he sits down next to her and she tells him her whole life, the life of a nymphomaniac. Occasionally he interrupts her with interesting comments on various topics, such as philosophy, nature, music, literature, mathematics and even fishing, but all these digressions are directly or metaphorically related to the main subject of the film and represent life philosophies that will lead you to thinking and self-analysis, especially if in some of them you recognize yourself.

The film is full of explicit pornography, but this time it is not there just to shock and cause controversy, but it greatly enhances the artistic power of film and contributes to the credibility and the dramatic nature of the story. The sex scenes are not simulated, they are genuine pornography, but they were shot by porn actors and subsequently edited together with the bodies of the main actors. The film is fantastically shot and directed, and drama and pornographic scenes alternate in perfect harmony. The atmosphere is hypnotically dark and depressing, additionally empowered with an interesting selection of music, which ranges from industrial metal band Rammstein, through rock classics, to Bach's organ compositions. Although the movie is very slow and long, my attention has not been weakened for a moment.

In all three films of the "Trilogy of Depression", Charlotte Gainsbourg plays the main role, but as the first part of the "Nymphomaniac" takes us through her childhood and girlhood, in the main role we see Stacy Martin, who, although not particularly beautiful, is extremely cute and sexual, and in every way a sight for sore eyes in comparison with Charlotte. Charlotte's rescuer is played by Stellan Skarsgård, who appears in a total of seven von Trier's films. There is also Christian Slater in the role of Nymphomaniac's father, as well as Uma Thurman, who gave perhaps the best performance in her career. Stacy, Charlotte, and Stellan topped their roles, but in her relatively short scene, Uma Thurman completely overshadowed them. Her scene is totally over the top, but still somehow realistic and believable. This somewhat relates to the film in its entirety, but Uma's scene is one of the most powerful I've ever seen. Ruthlessly awkward, strongly emotional and definitely unforgettable. Uma deserved an Oscar big as the Statue of Liberty.

There's still three hours of the second movie left for me to make a final judgment, but for now, this is a pure ten.

Seligman: "Well, I divide humanity into two groups: the people who cut the nails on the left hand first, and the people who cut the nails of the right hand first. My theory is that the people who cut the nails of the left hand first they're more light-hearted. They have a tendency to enjoy life more, because they go straight for the easiest task, and save the difficulties for later. So, what do you do?" Joe: "Always the left hand first. I don't think there's a choice. Go for the pleasure first, always. And then when you've done the left hand, only the right hand remains. That's the easiest one left." Seligman: "I never thought of it like that. Well, you're never too old. Never too old to learn."

10/10

The 1-star reviews for this film are in excess but I'd say it's unwarranted. While it wasn't the most gripping movie ever, it was compelling, funny and interesting. Unlike movies like "Shame" that blame promiscuity for unhappiness, this movie's character takes more pride in her sexual activity. While not thrilled in her life-she admits, in a way that feels genuine, that sex is still a vehicle-she is painfully aware of her shortcomings and her need for sex. That Seligman intersperses tangential and also irrelevant tidbits and facts is grounding and provided a call back to reality when it was needed at times. The chemistry and simultaneous tension between the two was tangible, and it made the film a decent experience.

I thought this movie was absolutely superb.

I am quite surprised by the number of very, very negative comments written about this movie when I came on here directly after having seen the two-parter at the cinema. I think perhaps that these people should not have seen this movie. I do think that people should be acutely aware of their own taste, standards and limits when watching movies and those who saw this as 'pornography' were mistaken. Their judgment appears to stem from a prudish incapability to see past the graphical sexual scenes. The film has a very solid plot, by which I mean, it is a film that begins with its end and details the pathways in which the protagonist ended up in that situation and the path of her normatively perverse sexuality.

I agree that there are definitely scenes in the movie which were hard to stomach - but come on, this is Lars Von Trier - what the hell were you expecting? But the scenes all had a point and purpose.

If you are of a delicate nature then this film is not for you. If you are a prude then this film is not for you. If you are uncomfortable with dark subject matter then this film is not for you. But for everyone else (provided that you are of the legally required age of eighteen), this movie is a witty, funny, imaginative, clever and unique exploration in the the proclivities of the human psyche and in years to come, I will look back on this movie fondly and reflect on its progressiveness in exploring subject matter that we are often to bashful to face and yet perhaps should. From me, it comes highly recommended.

I see that many people criticize this movie and label it as pornographic and plain boring, so I thought I'd share my two cents.

First of all, it's not a comedy nor an action movie. It's not fast-paced and doesn't have lots of explosions and cool CGI. I guess that doesn't fit the profile of a good movie for the majority of the population.

Now let's talk about what it is. It's a drama. The previously described movies are so much easier to watch whether they're good or bad. Drama doesn't work like that. Good drama makes you think and feel. Bad drama is a pain.

So, the problem we're reduced to is whether this is good or bad drama. For me, i.e., in my opinion, a good drama must be intelligent. It's not a matter of pace, twists or suspense, otherwise it would be another genre (thriller, western, police, crime, etc). An intelligent drama is written/designed to control our feelings and shape our thoughts. Of course, much like everything else, it depends a lot on the receiving end. Some people don't like chocolate. Does that make chocolate bad? No, it makes it bad for those people. It's still great for those who appreciate it. The quality of a drama depends on how much you're willing to let it change you. If you just hold on to your preconceived notions, then it's not going to work.

So, what makes this an intelligent drama? Well, the story starts with a curious situation that brings together two characters from very different worlds: One whose life revolves around sex and one who completely ignores it. The first one tells the story of her life and we get to see it from the perspectives of both characters. Why is this important? Because it makes you think in different ways, which is something our society lacks. People are so driven by their own views and opinions that can't put themselves on each other's shoes. On top of that, they divide the world into two. There's only right or wrong, heroes or abominations and it's not that simple.

The pace of this film is very slow, but that's needed. You need the time to think. Whenever one of the so labeled "pornographic" scenes comes up, you can think about the implications. "Is it that wrong what she's doing? Why does she do it?". Whoever sais "Who cares? It's just a movie. That's sex. It's porn." is simply lazy. The end will seem really disappointing until you really think about it. You mind find it great if you just turn from your fixed point of view. Besides, I think being slow and dull is exactly what this movie is supposed to be. Life is slow. Her life was slow and she had trouble feeling. She did something about it. She searched for a way to feel and found it in sex.

Now, I'll grant you that the story isn't that compelling and not many people can relate. But it's not complete garbage. It was a nice ride (pun intended). It teaches a lot if you're willing to listen. If you're looking for excitement too, this is not where you'll find it.

To sum it up, this is a smarter movie than people give credit for, but you need to open your mind.

''Nymphomaniac'' is a film made with huge technical, intellectual and artistic precision and that's the element that differentiates it from Porn films: is not an exercise of pleasure but a vehicle to analyze the role and influence of obsession in human relationships. To watch this film spectators must have knowledge of Von Trier's work and go to the cinema without prejudices about what cinema is and what is not. By the way, I find very interesting sociologically that those IMDb users from the United States who have wrote up a review on the film all of them have been so negative. This is the main difference between European and the American (US) public: Hollywood has always been obvious. It gives to the public all the answers. To have a good time when they come back from work. Are films as a leisure, not films to think about.

The most important thing about Nymphomaniac(part one) is that it introduces a totally fresh way of looking at things in cinema in a time when most artists suffer from the disease of repetition;extremely funny and at the same time poetic, it also comes as something out of the blue that catches us unprepared and that's the beauty of it.For example, when people try to praise the meanings of the movie, it feels banal because the film introduces new ways of seeing and feeling, so it's really great art, and I wouldn't say the same for many other movies of Trier.Genuine as very few things we've met the last years, Nymphomaniac is enjoyable in many ways.That's all for the time.You true believers wait patiently;here comes part two!

this film has only one flaw - its not long enough... its funny and brilliant, its dark and thrilling and its poetic at the same time. Whoever have watched any film by Trier won't be disappointed. Of course don't read previous reviews - this film is not about sex. Its about loneliness between sensations, about being alone among people who suffer from lack of attachment. Its about life that struggles with death by facing death , to the ultimate boundary of pleasure. Just watch it, listen to BACH music and observe the feast for eye and ear and a challenge for heart... Maybe my words seem exaggerated but i have finished watching this film just an hour ago and my impressions are strong. But i believe it will endure and i will take my feelings from this movie with me and carry them through my daydreams...

OK-OK, you got me. The movie is a tid bit trashy; sleazy; disgusting some may even say. It certainly isn't anything somebody is going to find showing on 'TBN' or DAYSTAR' some afternoon. Those would be 'Christian Networks for those playing at home. Because this is not meant to be a Saturday afternoon family friendly film that ya watch with the kids. I love the people who complain about all the sex scenes, a la 'blow job' & fingers inserted somewhere etc...All these people complain about all the sex when they sat down to watch a movie called 'Nymphomaniac.' Well, I will tell you what; that is why the majority of the people out there would watch the movie. The sex!! And if the sex was omitted, then most people would not want to see the movie. How can you make a movie Nymphomaniac' without sex?! And why would you want to watch it if sex is going to turn you off? I don't care how hardcore it is? And this is so far from actual porn in today's sense of the term!!

I was amazed to see that there was not a clear 10 rating for this movie . This will be the first . From my point of view, after watching many movies directed by Lars Von Trier, this might be the best one . It is several levels above other movies which will take dozens of prizes and acclamation . The first layer which attracts people is sex , but this is only the fly (see first chapter in the movie) which will try to catch u to see the rest. Sex is only a means to open the box full with human feelings like solitude, emptiness, self hatred, egoism all seasoned with a lot of irony and links to music , poets and manners like eating pastry with a fork . I like to believe all this details are close to Lars Von Trier and like Tarkovky's library they represent a part of his life and feelings

In the end, I consider a piece of work (book , music , movie) a masterpiece when the author puts his feeling inside , when he "writes it with blood". I think here LVT gives us his soul and that makes the difference between a good movie and a 1 in a thousand movies .

Lars Von Trier's Depression trilogy started off with Antichrist, then Melancholia and now it comes full circle with this 4 hour, 2 part sex epic Nymphomaniac. Greeted with a whiff of silence and expatiated sounds and then blasting it off with Rammstein's Fuhre Mich Lar's Von Trier's Nymphomaniac is exactly how it goes. Unlike Antichrist, Nymphomaniac is an ode to sex addiction, a poetry in motion that explores the verges of sensuality, vulgarity and intense libido of a woman from her early days to her prime. An anthology of sexually graphic stories that also does the job of mesmerizing you in its characters and its narrative.

The story starts with a beaten and injured Joe, found by Seligman, who takes her to his apartment and Joe starts narrating her life and her sexcapades to him through till end. While its obviously provocative and titillating, sex is not the core of the story, you are left to think throughout the duration of the movie. Its natural if you get titillated but Seligman as evidently doesn't and helps you find the a meaning as well as a justification for what happens. While Joe goes onto narrate her explicitly detailed adventures, Seligman, from time to time, gives you tidbits of info. From nymph and fishing to polyphony and Bach. Its relevance you ask? That's how the narration progresses and its rather fascinating how it unravels through out the movies 4+ hours. Obviously these characters are not set in a contemporary reality and might not always work if you question its plausibility. These are characters straight from a writer's head and as Lars plays the roles of both writer and director, nobody could have done it better.

Volume 1 follows a young Joe through her peaks of insatiable craving for sex and ends with the Cantus Firmus depicting her 3 lovers (which makes the polyphony). Volume 2 pursues a much older Joe and goes a bit deep into her addiction and how she tries to reclaim back her life. It paints her with a wide brush. Lars even pays some homages along the way. If you've seen Antichrist you'll spot the conspicuous scene within seconds. Its unmistakable explicitness aside, Nymphomaniac packs a lot of memorable sequences as well, a scene in particular which comes to mind Joe's father's hospital scene as pictured in the chapter Delirium and another one would be Joe's speech during a sex addict support group. The words she utters would be cringe worthy but nonetheless brilliant. Humor is also sprinkled generously, from Seligman and Joe's conversation to a chapter called Mrs H.

Playing Joe and Seligman are Charlotte Gainsbourg and Stellan Skarsgård and they kinda, silently through their performances, try to outmatch each other. You have to give in to Skarsgard for keeping a straight face up until the climax (no puns intended). And Gainsbourg's is just as amazing, her voice, spellbinding, making you listen to every word she says. Apart from these two the stand out cast member would be undoubtedly Stacy Martin, that sexy petite girl who almost flawlessly pulled a 'young Joe'. I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up in roles, more demanding. Shia LaBeouf plays Jerome, Joe's love interest and he does a decent job. A slew of AAA actors garnish the 4 hour long movie, from Uma Thurman, Christian Slater to Willem Dafoe and Jamie Bell. As its known Lars' movies are known to be a visual extravaganza and here its not different. there is a specific goldish brown hue that's predominant but there are also deviations when you go from chapter to chapter. Also known is his taste in music and brilliant sound design.

Touching everything from bondage to pedophilia, Nymphomaniac is undoubtedly sexually explicit and a perverts paradise and not at all an easy watch showing full frontal nudity and actual penetration which they claim to be done with body doubles. It literally goes to commercial cinema's extremes but at the same time encompassing themes like love, abuse and addiction. As opposed to Blue is The Warmest Color I would never call this sensual and it can get shocking at times. What I loved is Trier's exploration into taboo territory. Few directors would have the balls to sign in AAA stars to act in a semi-pornographic movie. If you think writing this off as porn would be a good idea, then you are direly wrong. It has extensive sexual content but its far from actual pornography and I believe that if those content is put to use for a good narrative then it makes for a profound sexual drama and is thus justified. And if you want anything hardcore you are better off with porn.

This is Lars Von Trier and he never shies away from what he wants to show. Initially even I felt it a bit shocking because I was not used to see this much sexual content in mainstream cinema but by the end of it all it wasn't the shocking imagery that got stuck in my mind but instead, the four hour journey that felt anything but shocking. Being the finale of his Depression trilogy, I'd say Nymphomaniac delivered.

This is the best movie I've seen from Lars Von Trier. Brilliantly constructed, well directed, with lot of imagination and using many techniques (although I'm not a specialist). I include in my review the volume II as well. After watching the first one, yesterday, didn't have patience for see the second part. The idea of a Sheherezada tail, nowadays, makes the background. I loved the way the chapters telling Joe's life are separated by the intermezzos: her dialogs with Seligman, his erudition, her intelligence shadowed only by the all pervasive guilt feeling... I found the explicit key of the movie in the second part... in one of their dialogs. I try to remember it, it might not be 100% accurate: "Do you know what is characterizing our age? - Hypocrisy! People who tell beautiful lies are acclaimed and accepted, they form the majority; the few ones who tell the truth, often uncomfortable, are rejected!" Von Trier plays with two opposite characters: a nymphomaniac (probably more a being desperate to understand life meaning and get out of the beaten track than anything else), who never finds happiness in her search, so she goes further and further, and a 60 years old virgin who lives alone and finds his happiness in books. He plays as well with religion, with the concepts of purity and sin, with plenty of symbols amassed cleverly together. He shows us, in fact, our obsession with sex, with human bodies, with chair, making fun of the ones who will refuse his movie, scandalized. In our world which sells mainly with the help of sex, rejecting this movie is a huge hypocrisy. The only disappointment for me was the end of the second part... I don't see why he chose it, but probably will find later on the answer.

A man named Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård) finds a fainted wounded woman in an alley and he brings her home. She tells that her name is Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and that she is nymphomaniac.

Joe tells her life and sexual experiences with hundreds of men since she was a young teenager (Stacy Martin) while Seligman tells about his hobbies, such as fly fishing, reading about especially about Fibonacci numbers or listening to organ music.

"Nymphomaniac: Vol. I" is an erotic drama by Lars von Trier with the dirty story of a woman obsessed by sex and her lovers. The storyline is the same of "Anita" (1973) and the detailed plot also discloses the relationship with her father and her mother. Based on the hype in this movie, I was expecting a boring art movie with explicit sex to shock the audiences. Actually, it is a dramatic story divided into chapters with touches of humor. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Ninfomaníaca: Volume 1" ("Nymphomaniac: Volume I")

Lars Von Trier has made a lot of publicity and excessive advertisement of an adult documentary movie called Nymphomaniac. His intention was to make a porno movie and a movie with pornographic sex shots. He shot a very long movie .First it was approximately 4 hours of porno,but then he cut the movie and changed it completely into Drama!!. That is funny and so strange,but this is true.

Nymphomaniac is an adult boring movie documentary which focuses on a horny girl who adores sex. The name of the girl is Joe. She explicitly tells her sexual fantasies and imaginations to an old man called Seligman and how she became addicted to sex and nymphomania. Honestly when I saw the movie I felt so bored and kept looking at my watch and could not wait to leave the cinema because of this bad if not worst movie!.

As you would expect from the controversial Lars von Trier and a film called Nymphomaniac, you know in advance that we are not getting a shy, conservative affair and von Trier does not disappoint. The infamous director manages to craft a two-part film which fans of art-house cinema will be salivating from the mouth over. In a ubiquitous British town, Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård) finds Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) unconscious in an alley way. Seligman takes Joe back to his home where Joe tells him she is a bad person and tells him her story from her childhood, to young adulthood (Stacy Martin), to present day, reflecting on her sexual experiences and major relationships, while the intelligential Seligman and Older Joe philosophising and interpreting her actions. Von Trier does not hold back from showing various sexual activity and Joe's descent into sexual violence, as she looks for more extreme ways to get a thrill as her behaviour and needs take a physical, mental and social toll on Joe. Nymphomaniac is unflinching with its sex scenes, Joe getting hit hard during her sadomasochist sessions and showing of male and female genitalia of all shapes and sizes, including wince inducting moments when showing the harm on Joe's private parts go through. Throughout the film we see Joe's sexual journey, from her fascination as a child to her pleasure herself and seek fulfilment. There are many different aspects of Joe's sexuality during Nymphomaniac, using sex as an escape when her father (Christian Salter) and the indifferent on face when she competes with her friend to seduce as many men as possible during a train journey. Von Trier explores many of the destructive aspects of being a sex addict, destroying friendships, being unable to form any relationships with partners and family, struggle to have emotional attachments and the impact that Joe's actions has on others. Joe is a character who rejects the idea of love and romance and leads to the question, does Joe reject it because of her upbringing, her addiction makes her unable to love or because is it because of her inability to loves makes her a sex addict? The discussions between Older Joe and Seligman are a framing device and allow von Trier to explore the philosophical parts of the story. But this is when von Trier spells out his views and meanings of the film. Both Older Joe and Seligman are used discuss to complex mathematical theorems, religious iconography, the meaning of words and morality. But to be fair, some of the elements do require specific knowledge so some explanation was needed. Nymphomaniac's cast features von Trier regulars, established talent like Jamie Bell and Uma Thurman and new actors with Stacy Martin, Sophie Kennedy Clark and Mia Goth. The performances range from good to excellent and the new young actresses do show real talent, as they give fantastic performances. The let down in the cast is Shia LaBeouf. It is easy to mock LaBeouf because of his recent off screen antics, but his performance was hampered when you can play guess the accent. My own personal guesses were Scottish, Irish, New Zealander and South African and other people's guesses ranged from Cockney, Australian and Scandinavian. Von Trier and his cinematographer Manuel Alberto Claro were able to combine both a grim, kitchen sink realistic aesthetic, while also making sure von Trier adds artistic flourishes, as he uses graphics, text and cross cutting to various images. Despite some of the heavy themes and imagery, von Trier made sure moments dark humour and wit to help lighten the mood and prevent Nymphomaniac from being too depressing as an experience. Nymphomaniac is an interesting, thoughtful film that is more than about controversy and titillation. Filled with a mostly excellent cast, Nymphomaniac should please fans of von Trier and art-house cinema.