<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>cinema &amp;mdash; johannes k.</title>
    <link>https://johannesk.writeas.com/tag:cinema</link>
    <description>...</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 22:11:14 +0000</pubDate>
    
    <item>
      <title>melancholia</title>
      <link>https://johannesk.writeas.com/melancholia?pk_campaign=rss-feed</link>
      <description>&lt;![CDATA[i can&#39;t remember why i didn&#39;t like melancholia the first time... &#xA;&#xA;maybe the problem is, or one of them, that it&#39;s better if you see the beginning of the film after the end, not because then it &#39;makes sense&#39; but you look at it with entirely different eyes. you are ready to see it. how much better would it be if you begin with part one justine, 8 minutes in? but yes, you also see part one with different eyes the second time.&#xA;&#xA;but this is my second and third time, but the first time i didn&#39;t really see it at all. perhaps it was because after, or during, the miserable experience of seeing lars von trier&#39;s previous film, i decided i couldn&#39;t take him seriously anymore. i have rarely been more profoundly disappointed by a creative work, maybe tacita dean&#39;s installation in the turbine hall... but i looked at that and looked and looked. &#xA;&#xA;what do i think of melancholia now? well i don&#39;t think &#39;like&#39; is a word i could use in relation to it, but is it a good film with an astounding performance by kirsten dunst and an idea the size of a planet (ha!) at its centre. yes!&#xA;&#xA;is it a masterpiece, on par with dogville and dancer in the dark?&#xA;quite possibly.&#xA;it depends on you and perhaps on whether you are able to see it.&#xA;&#xA;cinema]]&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i can&#39;t remember why i didn&#39;t like <em><a href="https://reframe.sussex.ac.uk/sequence1/1-1-melancholia-or-the-romantic-anti-sublime/" rel="nofollow">melancholia</a></em> the first time...</p>

<p>maybe the problem is, or one of them, that it&#39;s better if you see the beginning of the film after the end, not because then it &#39;makes sense&#39; but you look at it with entirely different eyes. you are <em>ready</em> to see it. how much better would it be if you begin with <em>part one justine</em>, 8 minutes in? but yes, you also see part one with different eyes the second time.</p>

<p>but this is my second and third time, but the first time i didn&#39;t really see it at all. perhaps it was because after, or during, the miserable experience of seeing lars von trier&#39;s previous film, i decided i couldn&#39;t take him seriously anymore. i have rarely been more profoundly disappointed by a creative work, maybe tacita dean&#39;s installation in the turbine hall... but i looked at that and looked and <em>looked</em>.</p>

<p>what do i think of melancholia now? well i don&#39;t think &#39;like&#39; is a word i could use in relation to it, but is it a good film with an astounding performance by kirsten dunst and an idea the size of a planet (ha!) at its centre. yes!</p>

<p>is it a masterpiece, on par with <em>dogville</em> and <em>dancer in the dark</em>?
quite possibly.
it depends on <a href="https://occupiedterritories.tumblr.com/post/13114178124/depression-melancholia-and-me-lars-von-triers" rel="nofollow">you</a> and perhaps on whether you are able to <em>see</em> it.</p>

<p><a href="https://johannesk.writeas.com/tag:cinema" class="hashtag" rel="nofollow"><span>#</span><span class="p-category">cinema</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
      <guid>https://johannesk.writeas.com/melancholia</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2020 04:36:49 +0000</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>