JinRoz For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Derrick Gibbons An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

LeonLouisRicci Captivating, Mesmerizing, Hypnotic, Saturating Visuals Highlight this Debut Film from Director Von Trier. It's a Slow-Burn, Slow-Walk through an Ex-Cop's Hypnosis Projection to Solve a Serial Child-Murder Spree. The Lotto Girls Murder Case.Drawing from the Fringes of Cinema's Auteurs, LVT Crafts a Modern Dystonia Film-Noir that Slogs through the Earth's Elements (Water-Earth-Air-Fire) as the Sights Unfold and are Overlaid on the Viewer's Perception of Things and it's all Murky, Muddy, Smoky, and Smoldering with Rain, Ashes, and Ambiguity.Nothing is Clear. After All, it's a Hypnotic State as Fisher (Michael Elphick), the Detective, Voice Overs Occasionally to Relay what the Experience Uncovers and it's all Very Unpleasant.The Movie is Stunningly Framed, with an Enormous Amount of Attention to Detail, and the Cinematography and Lighting are Breathtaking. It Truly is Artistic. The Narrative is not that Engaging and the Dialog only Occasionally Ignites. The Crime Story Itself seems Anti-Climatic when it is Resolved.Overall, it is Experimental Movie-Making from a Rookie Director and Divides Audiences to Extremes. Worth a Watch for the Avant-garde and Cult Movie Fans.Mainstream Audience Acceptance will Not be Forthcoming. But for those that Prefer Their Film Going Experience to be on the Edge. Look No Further than the Filmography of Lars Von Trier's.

aklcraigc 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.

Murtaza Ali The Element of Crime, also known as Forbrydelsens element, is a 1984 crime film directed by Danish filmmaker Lars von Trier that also marked his international debut. The Element of Crime is the first installment in von Trier's highly acclaimed Europe Trilogy—the other two being Epidemic (1987) and Europa (1991). Renowned for his exceedingly unconventional and visually stimulating style that often reminds one of Andrei Tarkovsky, Lars von Trier is unarguably the most influential filmmaker to have emerged out of Denmark since Dreyer.The Element of Crime presents the story of a European police detective whose morbid obsession for the criminal investigatory methods of his mentor makes him question the veracity of his own existence as he slowly gets engulfed in a miasma of delirium and paranoia. The Element of Crime is cryptic, bizarre, hypnotic, ambiguous, contradicting and at times absurd, and perhaps that's what makes it so brilliant, unique and engaging at all levels. The movie's experimental camera-work is highly reminiscent of Welles' Citizen Kane (1941). Von Trier films the movie in an orange monochrome, occasionally punctuated by shafts of green and blue—a facet that inexplicably reminds of Tarkovsky's use of the sepia tone in Stalker (1979). In fact, it would be safe to concede that von Trier's mise en scene seems to be a well thought-out variation of the Russian master's mise en scene in Stalker.The Element of Crime despite being rife with analogies, symbolism and allegories serves to be a consummate cinematic experience for the intelligent viewer. The Element of Crime is a psychological thriller, part character-study, part police procedural with surrealistic overtones that's intellectually and technically superior to most movies of its kind. The Element of Crime catapults the viewer in a Kafkaesque world of breathtaking visuals, bizarre juxtapositions and endless absurdities. The Element of Crime is a difficult movie to watch and is surely not meant for those who are looking for a popcorn flick to spend a cozy evening in a dormant state of mind. It's a movie that the less keen viewer may like to skip, but it definitely serves to be a rewarding experience for those who understand and value thought-provoking cinema.A more detailed review of the movie can be read at:http://www.apotpourriofvestiges.com/

deliogul I have to say that when we consider the setting, it is one of the best films I've ever seen. The black side of the Europe with all those shades of red and orange is very impressive. On the other hand, thanks to the classic Von Trier understanding, it is longer than it could be and it is boring than normal films. He would do the same thing while filming the "Dogville", which contains a great idea and innovative scenes but still being a long and boring movie.Also, I must recommend you to see other two movies of the trilogy. They are all successful in filming. Of course, if you have enough patience to handle the boring minutes in them. I can say that Von Trier was "this" close to create a masterpiece in his early period but in a sense wasted it in order to create a personal cinematic style.