>The film's plot orbits around a psychological conflict, using a repressive, patriarchal portrayal of Puritan society and the dark, murderous liberation of the witches.[22] The main female character, Thomasin, harbors worldly desires that differ from those of her conventionally Christian family,[23] yearning for independence,[22][24] sexuality,[25] acceptance[26][25] and power.[26][25] However, while her father and the Christian God fail to fulfill her needs, Satan instead speaks personally to her, offering her earthly satisfaction.[27] Therefore, with the demise of her family and the rejection of the Puritan society, Thomasin joins Satan and the witches, her only alternative, in order to find her long desired control over her own life.[28] Her nudity in the last scene reflects her act of casting out the bonds of her previous society.[24]
This is literally /r/WitchesvsPatriarchy
Will the Northman be as pozzed as Eggers previous films?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>According to Pattinson, the phallic imagery of the lighthouse is explicit, as Eggers described it as an erect penis in the script.[28] The film was meant to include "a very juvenile shot of a lighthouse moving like an erect penis and a match-cut to Pattinson's actual erect penis", although this cut was removed upon request by financiers.[29] Winslow displays an Oedipal fixation on his boss, Wake, given his simultaneous fear and admiration of him. Pattinson commented on the father/son dynamic in the film, stating "I was pretty conscious of how I wanted the relationship to come across. In a lot of ways, he sort of wants a daddy."[28]
>Robert Eggers is ambiguous about whether or not the characters are gay, stating: "Am I saying these characters are gay? No. I'm not saying they're not either. Forget about complexities of human sexuality or their particular inclinations. I'm more about questions than answers in this movie."[28] Sexual fantasy and masturbation are recurring themes in the film. For Dafoe, the androeroticism in the film is blatant, but it is also used to explore what it means to be a man: "They have a sense of guilt, of wrong [...] it's got existential roots [...] about masculinity and domination and submission."[28] After beating Wake into submission, Howard assumes a dominant role, calling Wake "dog" and dragging him on a leash. Commenting on this scene, Pattinson said "there's definitely a take where we were literally trying to pull each other's pants down. It literally almost looked like foreplay."[33]
>The film's mythological and artistic influences underscore its eroticism. Eggers acknowledged the visual influence of symbolist artists Sascha Schneider and Jean Delville, whose "mythic paintings in a homoerotic style," he said, "[became] perfect candidates as imagery that's going to work itself into the script."[34]
Don't think I'll support the Northman by watching it in the theaters. I'll wait for the stream
Eggers shills are trying to slide the thread
meds
it will be pozzed but pozzed in an early 2000s kinda way and I'll take anything I can get at this point
I wonder if Eggers will succeed in his lifelong quest to show a cock onscreen. he's even strung along Dafoe again, probably for that exact purpose.
Do you really think that the witches in The VVitch are meant to be the good guys? The witches who grind up babies? Any retard could see that they're clearly meant to be an evil force that the protagonist is giving herself to out of repression and fear. Anyone who views it as "YAAAS KWEEN" or "HOLLYWOOD HATES MEN" is a projecting idiot who can't see what's right in front of them. I am so sick of over-political mongs like you with a persecution complex jerking yourselves off about not "supporting" "woke media" because you can't understand what the movie is about
Thomasin joining them is portrayed positively
based and inquisition-pilled
You mean the creepy black goat whispering in her ear and her flying into the air while cackling maniacally? That was positive?
Once you show a character grinding a baby into pulp, it's safe to say that the filmmakers aren't portraying them as the good choice
Retarded. It's supposed to be a dark ending. She's giving into evil.
DUDE I CANT WRITE A THIRD ACT SO LETS JUST HAVE A DESCENT INTO MADNESS LMAO
>Character in increasingly maddening circumstances
>Goes mad
Woah...
>The witches who grind up babies?
It's called pro-choice, sweetie.
Assuming you're right, what's the point of a movie like this anyways? In what way does seeing this dark shit benefit you?
If it was a regular ol' pozzed movie it would at least have the purpose of subversion.
no it isn't lol, she's lost everything and joins up because a fucking goat offers her butter
People are attracted to this kind of stuff, sadly. Look at Metal culture. Or porn. Or anime. Especially anime. Always full of demonic stuff.
Eggers movies are anti-pozz. In fact, they are so simple and so traditional that leftists look for something that's not there and can't really interpret them.
Christians are so schizo they literally have to turn everything into them being a victim.
You are just a midwit, mate.
Co-opting memes to apply to your retarded shit to as well. Can you make your own shit?
You think Christians wrote this
Not everything needs a point. Personally, I think it's about how some women can turn to fucked up ideology and behavior when repressed and cornered but it's possible they just wanted to make a good movie.
What I do know is that the theory that it's about yas queen female liberation through witchcraft is retarded
or...
Her entire family is dead after turning on her and she was forced to brutally kill her own mother, so she just said fuck it all. If anything it was the others who were influenced by the witch. She didn't show any real intent to betray them until the very end when the decision had pretty much already been made for her.
>] The main female character, Thomasin, harbors worldly desires that differ from those of her conventionally Christian family,[23] yearning for independence,[22][24] sexuality,[25] acceptance[26][25] and power.[26][25]
She does? The whole movie is pretty much "Dont live alone in the woods, weird shit happens there". As a character she's a normal girl, never got the sense she was particularly rebellious. She starts losing it but everyone in her family does as all that shit happens. She falls at the end, which is tragic but she was never portrayed as some rebel.
Cope
Did we watch the same movie? is portrayed as a horrible moment.
Judging by the stereotypes in the trailers it's going to be a highly fetishized depiction of the norse regardless. The best Viking film in terms of authenticity will always be The Outlaw
It's just this.
>A New-England Folktale
Eggers took accounts of witches and portrayed them as real. There's no deeper meaning to this movie. It's literally about a female becoming a witch based on how people believed it could happen.
How is any of this a problem? Fucking LARPing Christfags, I swear to God you've never ever seen a church.
>just murder your whole family and be a whore
>WOW WHY DOES IT LOOK SO APPEALING
Not really pal
I mean for fuck's sake, did you miss when the beautiful, seductive witch revealed she had a grotesque malformed evil hand? Red right hand, as it were
It's based on stories from the Poetic Edda. It's not supposed to be a historical movie.
>midwit atheist trying to school Christians on their faith
How about you log off.
Horrible shit being portrayed in art isn't new. Look at old paintings like Saturn Devouring Hi Son. Even medieval paintings show crazy shit.
Which story? Didn't recognize it. It is still fetishized regardless.
Not him but I'd assume it's more so held in that spirit or at least partially that with modern philosophy added to it, rather than being based on an actual story from the Edda. In short, it's probably going to be LARPaganism 101.
How is it fetishized? It's the most historically accurate viking flick ever made which isn't much of a feat but he had the top vikang historians and archaelogists on set
>In short, it's probably going to be LARPaganism 101
That's exactly what The Northman is going to be as well.
It's Hamlet, but in 10th century with elements taken from Edda.
isn't it based on Amleth? In that case it isn't from the Edda, but from Saxo Grammaticus.
There are many changes as it's set in 10th century.
>Will the Northman be as pozzed as Eggers previous films?
I can say, 100% certainty, yes. And if it turns out I'm wrong, guess what? I'll just find every one of you motherfuckers who read this, and I'll take you out, so that no evidence ever exists I said it. So if you value your life, you better do everything in your power to make sure this thing is a hit, you better write 35 positive reviews using fake accounts, you better buy at least 100 tickets, you better start killing critics who give negative reviews. The choice is yours, live....or....
Norfman apparently takes place in the year 985
That's only the main plot.
interesting, what other parts will it borrow from the Edda?
Apparently character feats as the spear catching stuff is described in the stories.
nice, thanks user
I've found it. From The Story of Burnt Njal.
>Audulf the Easterling snatches up a spear and launches it at Gunnar. Gunnar caught the spear with his hand in the air, and hurled it back at once, and it flew through the shield and the Easterling too, and so down into the earth.
See the Útlaginn or you don't watch viking movies.
It's fetishized because of it's stereotypical modern take on the norse as all bearded shirtless screaming barbarians that middle aged women fantasize about. Berzerkers where most often depicted as antagonist set up to be killed by the heroes.
Also, Amleth is not a viking tale but propably a more medieval one
>Amleth inspired Hamlet
So which "let" will Hamlet inspire? I'm guessing Manlet.
The easterling was much closer than the one in the trailer as they were fighting in the open next to a river.
Njal's saga isn't in the Poetic Edda either though, but pretty cool nonetheless
Also, easterling was just a generic term used by icelanders for people from the east, usually from Norway
Literally all vikings had beards and long (but well trimmed hair) because that was the fashion at the time. Only slaves shaved.
Only slaves shaved their heads* and don't ignore the rest of the description.
But it's not really known. The beards from viking art are usually trimmed in a pointy fashion and not as rugged or beaded as they are often depicted.
>Will the Northman be as pozzed
It's co written by Sjón so I'd guess so.
Vikings are boring. Eggers should stop pretending and just made a movie about Aryans or PIE.
And you would no that because you've seen it you faggot? You're just as bad as the fags dickriding the movie already.
>Sjón
QRD on the guy?
>PIE
There's not much of a market there as only shut-in incels know about that and there is no historical material to work with. Vikings are immensely popular with normies so there's a target audience, Aryans could work for the Indian/Bollywold audience.
I meant on his involvement with pozz.
You're beyond parody. God warrior bullshit
I'd tell you to read Red Milk but it's so boring and cliché either way. In short, just another progressive.
>work for the Indian/Bollywold audience
>big white men invading brown Indians, killing men and breeding their women
I don't think Pajeets would be happy about this.
No Western director will ever touch that, rest assured. Plenty of Bollywood films are about Aryans, they're just not depicted in the way you describe them.
To add, he has a habit of making fun of "nationalist" dreams and I'm pretty sire he suffers from some extreme guilt because his grandpa was a nazi apperantly
We know a bit about them and their culture. The scene with the berserkers made me think of the PIE war bands.
I hate boomers so much
He's gen y i think
He's born in 62.
Hence boomer.