BBC - Mark Kermode's film blog

« Previous | Main | Next »

5 Live Interview: Willem Dafoe

Post categories:

Mark Kermode | 17:00 UK time, Thursday, 16 July 2009

Mayo and Kermode talk to Willem Dafoe about his role in Lars von Trier's Antichrist.

Go to Mark on 5 Live for more reviews and film debate.

(Please note this content is only available to UK viewers)

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions


  • Comment number 1.

    Please note my comment is only available outside the UK.

  • Comment number 2.

    I loved this interview and loved hearing Dafoe talk, despite his slight defensiveness. I was in the dentist's office while I was enjoying the podcast and Dafoe's mellow tones helped soothe my nerves, so thanks, I guess. :P

  • Comment number 3.

    It's good to be able to see Dafoe himself during this interview as when I listened to the audio-only podcast I thought he came across as a bit defensive and not particularly keen on being there. Seeing the clip now it seems maybe his tone of voice was just a bit misleading.

  • Comment number 4.

    I love the Damocles-like spectre of Body of Evidence every time Willem is interviewed in the UK. I remember him going crazy at a lads' mag interviewer who kept bringing it up, and couldn't help noticing the bristling pause at its innocuous mention in the radio show. By any chance, Mark, did you know beforehand about his aversion to that film? And was that pause as scary as it sounded?

  • Comment number 5.

    i love willem dafoe so i'm happy with this. i've obviously not seen the film, but the cannes reaction to this film, assuming the film is as good as it sounds, reminds me of the reaction to blue velvet, so i guess these people can't be trusted.

  • Comment number 6.

    Dear Mark,

    I thought I would share this with you as I know you have such a soft spot for tabloid outrage, such as I...

    My favourite section seems to be:

    'You do not need to see Lars von Trier's Antichrist to know how revolting it is.

    I haven't seen it myself, nor shall I.'

    It looks like film does still have the power to shock people... well, Christopher Hart at least.


  • Comment number 7.

    The 50's look... id say you resemble David Lynch almost exactly. But no one else agrees with me there (i mean that on terms of physical appearance obviously).

  • Comment number 8.

    that daily mail article is proper funny. whenever i read things like that i always picture the guy at the start of clerks preaching about the dangers of cigarettes.

  • Comment number 9.

    oh, also, it really bothers me when people like this start campaigning to get things banned. he's never gonna watch this film, the people reading the article are probably never gonna watch this film, so why not just let it be? the bbfc is there for everyone and that includes the people who want to see these films.

  • Comment number 10.

    'It doesn't shock or surprise me in the slightest that Europe now produces such pieces of sick, pretentious trash, fully confirming our jihadist enemies' view of us as a society in the last stages of corruption and decay.'

    Daily Mail journalist in shocking support of religious fundamentalism!

  • Comment number 11.

    I've went to see antichrist the other day and I could definitely see it's artistic merit. I thought Willem Dafoe portrayed a character that couldn't understand what "She" was going through and that all his wife wanted was to be understood rather than try and be cured, I do agree with Mark it is a film about misogyny.
    I also think the film is also asking the question what would we do if we something as tragic as the incident at the start of the film, if the feelings inside us were taken out on our physically on our exterior.

    I was very Impressed with the film, but I found it an incredibly tough watch, but do you agree with a few people who have been saying that this film should be part of study for future film students, does it have a merit to be extensively studied as part of a grade criteria?

  • Comment number 12.

    i don't think any film should be put on a film studies pedastal. when i was doing my a-level we looked at films as diverse as la haine, american pie and once were warriors (the latter being, in my eyes, the weak link of the three). i'm pretty sure someone could write a good dissertation on an airheaded blockbuster like transformers just like they could about something like citizen kane. a film doesn't need to be good for it to be studied.

  • Comment number 13.

    I'd just like to say that Simon Mayo just read out approximately HALF of the following email about Antichrist. And I have to admit that I did titter at the fox and his comment.

    Dear Detective Kimball and Patrick Bateman,

    On holiday a couple of weeks ago in Warsaw, I went with my friend Wojtek to see Antichrist (in a quite old and wonderful looking cinema)
    I was certainly impressed with the film, perhaps most by the atmospheric and slightly shocking slow-mo prologue, clearly both performances were very strong too.
    Surely it's a film that has things to say, but these themes are pushed to the back of my mind, as I can't help but think about the incredibly violent scenes near the end of the film (which were definitely shocking as they were mean to be) and wonder whether or not they are just there for shock and awe.
    But still I think it's worth seeing.


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.