One detects the influence of many directors on the young Von Trier, many have already been mentioned (Tarkovsky, Hitchcock, Bergman, etc), but Tarkovsky looms the largest. The opening scene is a direct quote of 'Andrei Rublev', from there on in we are treated to ever increasing levels of Tarkovsky-esq rain, dripping faucets, people standing in water, until it becomes almost comical. The story is ostensibly your generic 'washed up cop pursuing a murder' mixed in with some hypnosis and color filters. The main character is apparently following a crime detection method outlined in a book (entitled 'Element of Crime', of course). This involves somehow 'becoming' the killer by recreating his steps, rather predictably, the line becomes blurred between cop and killer and then nothing seems to happen. The movie starts with good energy and atmosphere, but then fails to capitalize on the setup, scenes just seem to serve the purpose of allowing Lars to insert yet more Tarkovsky/noir references until it all starts to feel a little pointless. The movie then ambiguously grinds to a halt with no obvious conclusion (at least not one which was clear to me). One can't fault Von Trier's imagination, scenes often startle with their originality and composition, but it just starts to feel played out by the middle of the movie, the story is simply not strong enough to support the visuals. As a first movie, it's pretty damn good, but it just doesn't quite come off. Zentropa is a much better movie.

Lars Von Trier's feature début is a stylish, extremely bizarre and intriguing tapestry about an ex-cop (Michael Elphick) who obsessively pursues a serial killer. Playing with different film genres and supported by a fantastic production design, "The Element of Crime" was very different from what I expected, but not in a bad way. This is the first film in Lars' 'Europe trilogy', followed by "Epidemic" (1987) and "Zentropa" (1991). Influenced by Fritz Lang, Terry Gilliam and many others, the film also has a voice of its own (Von Trier's raging verve); I'd call it "The Silence of the Lambs" meets "Delicatessen", so you can have an idea of how bizarre it is. If that sounds interesting to you, you should check it; even if you're not into the likes of "Dogville" or "Breaking the Waves", you may still appreciate it. Interesting for Von Trier fans and admirers of puzzles alike. 8/10.

Beginning a trilogy of films dealing specifically with the decline of post-war Europe, this extraordinary, heavily referential, psychological thriller would be the first cinematic outing from acclaimed Danish filmmaker Lars von Trier. Like all of the director's early works, the story is convoluted, and works best as an example of cinematic dream-logic, unfolding in an undisclosed European state, where day and night no longer exist, rain seems to be falling almost constantly and the only colour we see is a thick yellow sepia that is only occasionally pierced by jarring shafts of neon light. The story then builds on ideas of faith, redemption, love and mental anguish, familiar in symbolic rigour to the works of Ingmar Bergman - but with a fragmented composition and style more akin to the framing of Andrei Tarkovsky, or the industrial surrealism of David Lynch.From the opening images of a donkey basking in the hot sands of a Cairo desert (a metaphor for the central character and a reference in it's self to the Tarkovsky classic Andrei Rublev), to the waterlogged depiction of Europe, filled with burnt-out cars, decaying animal carcasses & lost children, The Element of Crime creates a world so murky, so damaged and so lost within the abyss, that it expressionistically conveys the sense of detachment and pain felt by the central protagonist, Fisher. Fisher is a washed up former detective, who after living in Cairo for a number of years, returns to his native Europe to help his mentor Osborn with a murder investigation. In the first scene - which takes place two months after the events of the main story - an unseen Fisher sits in a psychiatrist's office conversing with the doctor who promises to help him find the root to his problems. Here, von Trier is able to utilise one of his favourite narrative devises, hypnosis... as he blends together the character's psyche with the action in the film. From this point on, the entire film takes place from Fisher's point-of-view, his voice-over only rarely broken by the psychiatrist, who pops up to keep the story on track.In the lead role, the great Michael Elphick acquits himself admirably, though his role in the film (like all of the actors) is little more than a marionette to von Trier's demented puppet master (although, to be fair, with his rugged appearance and monotonous delivery of lines, he does successfully ease himself into the role of the gumshoe perfectly, brining to mind some of the genre's best-loved anti-heroes... for example, Philip Marlow from the Singing Detective fantasy sequences or Lemmy Caution from Godard's similarly dystopic masterpiece Alphaville). However, what is amazing about The Element of Crime far beyond acting, is von Trier's way of breaking down the genre - not content with producing a carbon copy of classic thrillers run through with art-house dramatics, he sets about subverting and destroying both design and ideology - like a schoolboy scribbling graffiti in a textbook, the result is jarring, criminally audacious and completely astounding. Here, white linen suits replace hats and trench coats, reflections are used in both mirrors and clouded puddles to heighten the idea of fragmented personalities and schizophrenia, just as the use of sepia printing suggests the murkiness to Fisher's subconscious. The neon lights that breaks the composition of the frame, usually from a police light or a flickering television set, act as beacons to the hidden depths of Fisher's mind - whenever some moment of remembrance occurs, a light will often be present to signify to the audience the usual emotion connected with the colour (blue - recollection, green - sickness, red - anger etc) - just as the use of double exposures and heavy sound-design build the flash-backs, dreamscapes and memories within memories.The other actors in the film are used like puppets to an even greater extent. Whereas Fisher is here for our benefit, they are there for his. Osborn for example, who is played with ailing charm by the great British actor Esmonde Knight (fans of Michael Powell will be familiar), gives the information that will lead both plot and dénouement, whilst the casting of Me-Me Lia as Kim again subverts the usual preconceptions of the femme-fatale by being a teasing, manipulative prostitute - with dark Asian looks that undercut the genre's usual 'wasp-ish' stereotypes. Her character presents both complications and a love interest/sidekick for Fisher, as well as other more meaningful purposes as the film moves towards the ambiguous climax - suggesting a state of abandonment and complete mental breakdown, as the shocking twists begin to pile up. Surpassing both A Clockwork Orange and 1984 in it's subversive attack and artistic vision, The Element of Crime presents to us a definitively dark and unrelenting image of Europe, in which chaos has overthrown order, analytical approaches to police work have been replaced by Gestapo bully tactics, and the chance of a changing season is nothing but a mere pipe dream.This is a staggering and inventive mish-mash of ideas and stylistic references that present us with an alluring potion of haunting images, heart-stopping bursts of violence, elaborate philosophies, unashamed pretension and a plot that writhes right the way through to its unflinching climax... which, coming from one of contemporary cinema's most important auteurs, should not be missed. Those familiar with his later works, such as Breaking the Waves, The Idiots and Dogville, may be surprised by von Trier's bold grasp of staggering cinematic technique and intelligent understanding of the conventions of post-war film-noir... something even more apparent in his later masterpiece, Europa.

Some called it the kick in the pants cinema needed, the savior of cinema and work of genius. Others find Lars von Trier's debut feature unbearably pretentious and consider this a beautiful but utterly empty work of art. Whatever your opinion will be after seeing this film, you're almost guaranteed to have strong feelings about it afterwards and will almost force you to reconsider the possibilities of the medium of film once again.Shot in English, ELEMENT OF CRIME was the first film in the Europe-trilogy, followed by EPIDEMIC (1987) and ZENTROPA (1991) and is best described as a futuristic neo-noir crime thriller. Von Trier never intended this film to be part of a trilogy. He only came up with that concept right before filming on ZENTROPA started. Actually, the three films are all very different and the only thing they have in common is a vaguely defined theme of "Europe" (practically all the films made in Europe deal with the subject in some way) and that they all start with the letter E. It's a practical joke to give his films some extra cachet, just as he's doing with his America-trilogies now. Set in the near future, the film gives an apocalyptic view of a decayed and demonic Europe, stunningly photographed in yellow and sepia colours with a vision of constant darkness (no ray of light whatsoever in the film), abandoned buildings and almost constant rain. Police detective Fisher is called in to solve a series of murders of small girls. In the process he gradually comes to realize that he must follow in the footsteps of the assumed murderer, finally completing the murderous pattern himself.Von Trier's passion about Europe is almost exclusively a deep and long-going fascination with Germany, the catalyst of modern history, that has been the defining factor in Europe's faith for most of the twentieth century. This film, as ZENTROPA and to a lesser extent EPIDEMIC, paint the apocalyptic picture of a world, resemblant of post-war Germany, with not just the physical damage involved, but with people who were emotionally battered as well. It's one thing to lose your belongings, even your relatives, but they didn't just lose everything they had, they lost morally as well. Von Trier presents to us a sort of neitherworld where morals are discarded and people are merely trying to survive.Not an easy film, to be sure. It was rewarded with a technical prize at Cannes in 1984, but was denied the grand jury prize, mainly because of Dirk Bogarde, who headed the jury, and reportedly was appalled by the film. He thought von Trier wanted to put an end to cinema and destroy the medium of film altogether. He threatened to pull out of the jury, if the film got any prizes. Apparently, they somehow managed to give the film this award for technical achievements. Relatively harmless and who would notice anyway? In interviews Von Trier blatantly claims that his film was historically by far the most important that year and this claim can arguably be protracted for a considerable longer period of time.Could this film be recommended for your enjoyment or regular entertainment value? No, it can't. But most movies can't. Historically however, this film is important, if there ever was one. This one of the few examples of a film that poses real questions about the way we judge film. Perhaps it's best enjoyed, and I don't want to sound pretentious myself here, by the more experienced moviegoer and for me the film worked best the second or third time I saw it. Upon it's first release in Denmark, half the people - even ardent cinema lovers - were running for the exits within the first half hour.To the horror of many and delight of some, it's already a staple for students at many film academies, and understandably so. The film is an innovative panache of cinematic styles and expressions, gorgeous sets, the yellow lighting (they used very powerful natrium lights) and stuffed with references and allusions to earlier cinema, like Andrei Tarkovsky and BLADE RUNNER. Any reference to Tarkovsky will probably have the other half still watching running for the exits as well, but cinematic literacy is easily misunderstood.Not my favorite or the most enjoyable in any sense, so one star off because of the silly detective story and the sometimes over-pretentiousness, otherwise a stunning work of visual art. I think everyone with an interest in cinema should see this film.Camera Obscura --- 9/10