MovieChat Forums > Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2014) Discussion > I did it!! 5 1/2 hours!!

I did it!! 5 1/2 hours!!

posted 10 years ago by indysoul
6 replies | jump to latest

Decided on the director's cut and went for it.
I must say I loved the language and back and forth between the two main characters. It was really well directed overall. And for being 5 1/2 hours there were only a few scenes where it dragged.
I will say I was really shocked at how graphic it was, straight up xxx in some scenes. The bj on the train, the abortion, the 3 way with the african dudes, and baby faced Jamie Bell!

I think Vol 1 is much superior. Vol 2 felt a little too long and had strange plot developments including that god awful final minute! Also didn't get why the ear girl ended up betraying her and then pissed on her!
Still a very well directed exploration of something considered taboo and done with brutal realism. Gotta tip the hat to someone attempting a 5 hour plus movie and the brave cast including the actress who played young joe. It says this was her first acting job!

Vol 1 - 8/10

Vol 2 - brought down to a 6/10 because of the ending.

Kind of wondering what is cut out for the standard version now!

There's a hole in the world. Feels like we ought to have known. - Spike

[–] crulie 10 years ago

I waited purposely for the directors cut, as I had heard it would be 1 1/2 hour longer, and thus probaly better and more brutal.
And it was amazing.

About the ending.
I think the girl (cant remember her name) did those things to Joe, perhabs because she had gotten told what Joe had done in her past, and maybe discovered how she had used her.
And agreed, the last minute...urgh.

[–] smcbee27 9 years ago

I believe you are right. She felt betrayed and humiliated by Joe's truth.

[–] m-slovak79 10 years ago

I must say I loved the language and back and forth between the two main characters.

Yeah, i think the dialog between the two main characters helps to carry the overall movie.

but i thought both movies where equally as good as it just feels like one long 5.5hour movie pretty much. i like both versions of the movie though be it the regular or directors cut. but i figure, for the most part, when i re-watch these movies ill likely stick to the director's cut even though 5.5hours is petty damn time consuming vs roughly 4 hours for the theatrical version which is still within reason.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The only movies of 2014 i gave a 7/10 or higher to are...

1.Men, Women & Children - 7.5-8/10
2.Nymphomaniac Vol 1 - 7/10
-.Nymphomaniac Vol 2
4.Locke
5.Edge of Tomorrow
6.The Rover

p.s. i have seen 79 2014 released movies. i have seen all of those movies twice so far so i know they hold up on a re-watch with nearly all of them being very recent re-watches.

Kind of wondering what is cut out for the standard version now!

you can look it up on Google... "nymphomaniac director's cut vs theatrical". the first couple of links should link you to movie-censorship's website and show the details basically.

but off the top of my head... i recall an abortion scene and the sex scenes tend to be more graphic as the theatrical is borderline porn (maybe porn in some cases) but the director's cut is undeniably porn at times.

----------
My Top 100-ish Movies of All-Time! = http://goo.gl/EYFYdz
----------

[–] peter-alexandris 10 years ago

Is the directors cut really 5 and 1/2 hrs long?

[–] smcbee27 9 years ago

Spoiler Warning needed, please.

[–] batigoal9-1 9 years ago

Just finished the DC version too, liked the film but not as much as other Trier firms. I'd give it a 7.5.