The idea of the film is great. Mixing the creation of a movie and his viewing. It's done in a very ambitious way, incredibly sophisticated and elegant when we know the budget who was assigned to the movie.A lot of scenes are incredible, specially the one who shows the contamination of the priest, adding a reflection on the condition of the black man. Obviously the last scene is one of the most incredible things I've seen on a screen, but we can doubt the mental health of Von Trier and his crew. However maybe it's the reason he's so good...I didn't like a few things. I think there is too much time about the creation of the movie, a few ridiculous and unappropriated moments as the story of the American letters of Niels

The plot: a director and a screenwriter lose the screenplay they've been working on due to hard disk corruption and start working on another project called "Epidemic". The film follows their misadventures but in the meantime a real epidemic is starting to develop around them, but goes by unnoticed. Oh and also fragments of the film-in-a-film "Epidemic" are shown in-between. Oh and Lars Von Trier (the director) and Niels Vorsel (the screenwriter) are the protagonists playing, ahem, the director and the screenwriter. Lovely.And if by reading this the first thought that came to your mind is "black comedy", then go to the top of the class cause you're absolutely right. The best thing about this film is how it ridicules film-making and yet somehow is a good example of artistic pompousness. But then again we know that Von Trier is a cynical little bugger. Udo Kier's cameo recalling WW2 is brilliant. Be warned though, definitely an acquired taste.

Look, I know a substantial proportion of the American population get a little hot under the collar when funny-talking foreigners start criticising the American government and way of life, but hey - when you're the only country in the world inclined to and capable of dictation of world policy, you gotta take it on the chin. While Von Trier even makes me wince sometimes (the end credits to Dogville for instance), it's his point of view and is worthy of thought. He isn't here to lick your derrière clean for you - if you can't take a little criticism of the homeland, I'd steer clear of any imported movies for a while. Anyhoo, when truly disrespectful films like Titanic break records and reap awards with nary a raised eyebrow, it's double standards to expect non-US films to walk the line you'd like. Von Trier is a genius film-maker... you may not agree with his politics, but you cannot doubt his talent.

* SPOILER WARNING * Director Lars Von Trier, who stars as himself in this mock documentary meta-horror black comedy drama (!), comments early on that "a film should be a pebble in your shoe". With this, he may have accomplished just that. It´s an annoying mess of a movie, which tries to make sense in the last scene, but by then you have been subjected to tons of extraneous footage, bad dubbing, clues and a pretentious movie-within-a-movie, also called Epidemic. Von Trier and cowriter Niels Vørsel tries to finish their script and convince film institute executive Claes Kastholm to finance their movie about a mysterious plague spreading through Europe, but the epidemic seems to have started in real life as well. Or something. The chilling giallo-inspired climactic hypnosis sequence (with real life hypnotist Svend Ali Hamann) is effective, but Von Trier´s ad hoc filmmaking style will test the viewer´s patience. He does, however, make an interesting visit to the hospital, as a sort of premonition to his later hits "The Kingdom 1 + 2". Udo Kier appears briefly as himself. A box office disaster; well two, actually, if you count the vastly ignored re-release in 1997. *½