Before things get too negative, one thing should be made clear: some of the best arthouse movies of all time can also be considered among the very best movies of all time. Avoiding art films or movies that can be called experimental/avant-garde is doing yourself a disservice, since it means missing out on groundbreaking films likeLa Dolce Vita,Come and See,In the Mood for Love, andThe Conformist, to name just a few.
But something being arthouse doesn’t necessarily mean something will be good. It might be interesting or unconventional, sure, but if a film is those things while also being insufferable or overly vague, then things can get frustrating. Some may find value in the following movies, or at least aspects of them, but they areexceptionally difficult – and sometimes clunky – arthouse films that might well irritate more than they enlighten.
10’The Serpent’s Egg' (1977)
Directed by Ingmar Bergman
Ingmar Bergmanwas beenbehind some incredible pieces of cinema, butThe Serpent’s Eggain’t one of them by a long shot. The acclaimed Swedish filmmaker didn’t have the best of runs throughout all of the 1970s, but he thankfully bounced back in the 1980s withFanny and Alexander, which is perhaps even better a film than most of his classics from the 1950s and 1960s.
Anyway, it’s easier to talk about those films than it is to talk aboutThe Serpent’s Eggbecausethis one is so damn boring, even with it starring both David Carradine and Liv Ullmann. It’s an intentionally miserable experience with very little commitment to being mysterious or thrilling, which is a problem when you’re trying to make a mystery/thriller film.
The Serpent’s Egg
9’Naked Lunch' (1991)
Directed by David Cronenberg
To his credit,David Cronenbergisn’t just a body horror guy, even if his horror movies about bodies gettingtwisted and torn apart in various creative/nauseating waystend to be among his best-known. He’s provocative and willing to challenge sensibilities in other ways, too, as demonstrated by something likeNaked Lunch, which is absolutely incomprehensible and a slog, though some seem to like it for that reason.
Sure,Naked Lunchis creative and different, but it’s also soul-crushingly one-note and eventually annoying in how obtuse and aimless it wants to be.Naked Lunchcrosses a line into insufferability at a point, and if that’s the point… eh, whatever. It’s still annoying. Cronenberg, as part of that aforementioned boldness, is more hit-and-miss than some people like to admit, andNaked Lunchis a miss.
Naked Lunch
8’La Chinoise' (1967)
Directed by Jean-Luc Godard
If you’re after divisive arthouse directors, perhaps none are as simultaneously beloved and criticized as much asJean-Luc Godard, to the point where two films of his are worth shouting out for present purposes. The first of those (and, technically, the “better” of the two) isLa Chinoise, which is a screechy, annoying, and endlessly repetitive film about young people who hold political beliefs that could be considered radical.
You might well be on their side, but even if you are, actually watching the nothingburger of a movie that isLa Chinoiseis painful. It feels bad and one-note on purpose, and with Godard, it’s hard to know.He put out both some ofthe best arthouse films of all timeand some of the most grating, andLa Chinoiseregrettably fits more into the latter camp than the former.
7’One from the Heart' (1982)
Directed by Francis Ford Coppola
One from the Heartwas indeed a film from the heart, but good intentions only took it so far.Francis Ford Coppolahad complete control hereand seemed convinced he could do anything, but a musical of this kind was too much even for him, and the whole thing collapsed under its own weight in a similar manner toMegalopolis40-ish years later.
This 1982 film feels more like a swing-and-a-miss as far as arthouse movies go, whileMegalopolisis aswing-and-a-miss as far as epic movies go.One from the Heartis visually boldand nothing else really feels the way it does, but it’s also soawkwardly executed and monotonous overall. Sure, relationships in real life can fall apart and be uncomfortable, but this film’s the wrong kind of messy and uncomfortable.
One From the Heart
Directed by Jim Jarmusch
There aren’t many zombie movies out there that could also be called arthouse films, so perhaps for that,The Dead Don’t Diehas some sort of value. It is, for better or worse,Jim Jarmuschputting his spin on various zombie movie conventions, but there’s only really one or two jokes here told again and again, and the remarkable cast ends up being mostly wasted.
When it’s not trying to be funny,The Dead Don’t Diealsotries to be nihilistic and bleak, which gives the whole film a messy and inevitably unsatisfying feel. Perhaps it wants to waste your time, and it wouldn’t be the first arthouse film to try and provoke a negative response from those who view it,but if the joke’s going to be on the viewers, then at least make that joke funny.
The Dead Don’t Die
5’Pola X' (1999)
Directed by Leos Carax
It’s hard to describe just what happens inPola Xand what it’s trying to do, which isn’t automatically a bad thing, but things are off here. It’s perhaps the only real misstepas far asLeos Carax’s filmography is concerned, though, to be fair, not even his better-known (and overall better) movies are for everyone.
Liking what he was going for in films likeMauvais SangandHoly Motors, though, doesn’t guarantee one will appreciate whatever the hell is going on inPola X. It’s a particularly feel-bad and gross sort of movie, wallowing in misery without much by way of artistry or creativity. It’snot dynamic, alive, or boundary-pushing; it’s just a plodding and overlong slog of a movie, exceeding 130 minutes in length and having very little reason to have a runtime even just half of that.
4’Images of Liberation' (1982)
Directed by Lars von Trier
In defense ofImages of Liberation,Lars von Trierdid direct it before he really came into his own as a filmmaker, and it’s an overall minor work of his, especially considering it only clocks in at about 50-ish minutes. It’s a very abstract movie that takes place shortly after the conclusion of World War II, and concerns the changed dynamic between two people on opposing sides of the conflict.
Well, technically, that’s whatImages of Liberationis about. It’s kind of hard to actually feel or comprehend that, and the above synopsis was reworked from whatthe summary on Letterboxdclaims the movie is (purportedly) about. There might be some value here for anyone interested in seeingan early cinematic effort from Lars von Trier, butthere’s otherwise little reason to check this one out.
3’Wavelength' (1967)
Directed by Michael Snow
No joke:Wavelengthis about nothing in a much bigger way thanSeinfeldever was. The whole movie is just one shot of a room, and sometimes, there are things heard and very little by way of movement inside said room. It’s avant-garde in a truly unapologetic way, and it’s about as tedious as you might expect/fear, too.
Wavelengthis less than an hour long,but it feels considerably longerbecause of how static it is. It feels as though the kind of movie that was made because the filmmaker behind it,Michael Snow,figured he could, though henever stopped to think aboutwhether he should. It is exactly what it is, and what it is is boring as hell. Art films can be – and often are – so much better than this.
2’Vinyl' (1965)
Directed by Andy Warhol
Yet this feels like the kind of situation where something is allegedly an adaptation, since watchingVinylwithout any context or synopsis leaves you entirely in the dark. No, scratch that. Even if you read that this is supposed to be a take onA Clockwork Orange, it’s still completely unclear after sitting through the whole insufferable thing. It’snoisy, chaotic, and devoid of both style and substance. It is an anti-art film, and if that was what Warhol wanted, then like, no… it still sucks.
1’Nouvelle Vague' (1990)
PerhapsNouvelle Vaguewas an attempt on Jean-Luc Godard’s part to make something even more infuriating, obtuse, and incomprehensible than the aforementionedLa Chinoise. It being bad on purpose is the only way one could justify its sheer existence. If Godard wanted to make the most nonsensical thing possible so he could laugh at people bending over backwards trying to analyze it, then good for him? Maybe?
If there was something more toNouvelle Vague, it’s not communicated in any successful way, though, and it just feels like the cinematic equivalent of sniffing one’s own farts.It is as pretentious, annoying, and boring as art films could possibly get, and spending an hour and a half trying to get through it will feel as though it ages you by weeks, or possibly even years. It’s a time-suck of a movie and it also just sucks.Godard, you were just the worst sometimes. RIP and all, but you really could be the worst.
