--- title: "Antichrist" year: 2009 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/antichrist" fi1m_id: "antichrist" imdb_id: "tt0870984" tmdb_id: 17609 wikidata_id: "Q574998" fi1m_score: 55 critics_score: 52 critics_reviews: 18 published: "2026-09-15" updated: "2026-09-18T08:38:32.147081+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Antichrist (2009) Directed by Lars von Trier · 1h 44m · MPA NR · Drama, Horror, Thriller ## Identity Antichrist - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/antichrist - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** antichrist - **IMDb ID:** tt0870984 - **TMDB ID:** 17609 - **Wikidata ID:** Q574998 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870984/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/17609, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q574998 **Fi1m score: 55** · Critics 52 from 18 reviews *In a sentence:* Two grieving people, one sinister forest and a director who will not leave well alone > Lars von Trier’s grief horror has the acting and the atmosphere to disturb us, but too little to say about the pain it exploits. Charlotte Gainsbourg gives it a seriousness the writing cannot sustain. ## Synopsis A couple struggle with grief, finding their responses to loss increasingly bound up with sex, fear and hostility. Willem Dafoe plays He and Charlotte Gainsbourg plays She, the unnamed man and woman at the centre of Lars von Trier’s horror drama. Therapy offers one way of approaching their suffering, while the surrounding forest takes on a threatening presence. Their relationship becomes the focus of a story about desire, despair and the fear of nature. The film contains explicit sex and graphic violence, and carries an 18 certificate. ## Review Lars von Trier’s *Antichrist* is frightening in stretches and painfully well acted, but its ideas about grief and women do not withstand the attention it demands. The writer-director wants bereavement, sexual need and fear of nature to belong to the same nightmare, and there are moments when the connection feels horribly plausible. He gives us two people with so little comfort to offer one another that intimacy itself becomes alarming. The difficulty comes when their suffering has to carry his broader claims about men and women. Charlotte Gainsbourg, credited as She, gives the grief an awkward physical urgency that makes the discussion around it feel inadequate. We were moved by her anguish in the early scenes, because she makes the effort of enduring it seem exhausting. There is nothing tidy about the way pain and sexual need occupy the same person, and her performance makes that uncomfortable to watch. Whenever von Trier leaves her enough space, she gives us someone whose distress matters beyond its usefulness to a horror film. Willem Dafoe’s He gives Gainsbourg a convincing partner in this increasingly hostile intimacy. The therapy scenes are compelling because the attempt to discuss and explain distress looks painfully inadequate beside her performance. Dafoe plays the exchanges seriously enough to keep us listening even when the writing begins to sound like a lecture. For a while, the film finds something frightening in the ordinary difficulty of trying to help someone while assuming we understand them. Anthony Dod Mantle’s tracking shots through the forest supply a more immediate fear. Moving into that space feels like a bad decision, and the images make nature seem capable of hostility without needing much explanation. Karl Júlíusson’s production design strengthens that Gothic atmosphere, making the setting feel inhospitable even before we consider what it might symbolise. The less controlled handheld camerawork is harder to defend: it unsettles our view, but sometimes breaks the concentration that the forest imagery has earned. Anders Refn’s editing makes the changes of mood abrasive, with too little room for one response to settle before another is demanded. That can be effective in a nightmare, but here it also makes some of the escalation feel arbitrary. Kristian Eidnes Andersen’s music is effective at maintaining unease, though it cannot make the shifts between anguish and absurdity feel less forced. The film keeps increasing the discomfort when what we need is a better reason to stay with these people. The larger problem is von Trier’s writing, particularly its treatment of female sexuality as something to fear. Gainsbourg supplies enough human detail to complicate that suspicion, but the film repeatedly pushes towards the bluntness her acting resists. We do not object to horror being ugly, or to a film taking an unpleasant view of its characters; the trouble is how little thought accompanies the provocation. Graphic violence can express despair, but here it increasingly distracts from the believable grief that made us care about the couple. As psychological horror, *Antichrist* is most effective when it stays close to the couple and lets their difficulty with each other become frightening. At 104 minutes, it is not an endurance test simply because of its length, and the 18 certificate is worth taking seriously for the explicit sex and graphic violence. Those drawn to confrontational horror will find passages worth arguing over, especially in Gainsbourg’s performance. Do not choose it for someone else without a fairly frank conversation first. *Fi1m score 55, published 15 September 2026.* ## What the critics say The consensus on Antichrist is mixed, leaning negative, with critics sharply divided over the value of its provocations. Praise clusters around Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafoe’s committed performances, which several reviews value even when rejecting the film around them. The forest imagery and atmospheric cinematography also draw approval across the divide. Supporters find a troubling, unusually personal treatment of grief and depression, with horror imagery that gives those feelings force. The disagreement centres on whether the graphic violence develops these concerns or overwhelms a thin, incoherent story. Several detractors find the film boring rather than shocking; others object principally to its treatment of women. Time Out sees sympathy for the female character, while The Skinny finds outright hatred of women. The spread is wide: what admirers accept as honest psychological exposure, hostile reviews regard as self-indulgence or a calculated attempt to provoke outrage. ## Straight answers **Is Antichrist worth watching?** *Antichrist* is worth watching only for those who want confrontational horror and can tolerate explicit sex and graphic violence, and we scored it 55. Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafoe act it with real seriousness, and the forest scenes are frightening, but Lars von Trier's ideas about grief and women do not hold up under the attention the film demands. **How long is Antichrist, and what is it rated?** *Antichrist* runs 1h 44m and is rated NR by the MPA in the US. It is a drama and horror film. **Where can I watch Antichrist in the US?** *Antichrist* is streaming on MUBI and Apple TV in the US. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service. **How violent or frightening is Antichrist, and is it suitable for children?** *Antichrist* is not suitable for children and carries an 18 certificate for explicit sex and graphic violence. It is frightening in stretches, particularly in the forest, and the violence becomes hard to watch in a way that distracts from the grief at its centre. The squeamish should stay away, and nobody should choose it for someone else without a frank conversation first. **How does Antichrist compare to Don't Look Now?** *Antichrist* and [*Don't Look Now*](https://film.one/film/dont-look-now) are both horror films about bereaved couples, and the earlier film is the better of the two. Roeg's dread comes from people worth caring about, while von Trier's provocation increasingly overwhelms the believable grief Gainsbourg and Dafoe supply. Choose *Don't Look Now* for a deeply felt frightening film; choose *Antichrist* only if you want something uglier to argue over. **What should I watch after Antichrist?** After *Antichrist*, try [*Don't Look Now*](https://film.one/film/dont-look-now) (1973, Fi1m 90): Grief and desire disturb every image, with dread that needs little explanation. Then [*The Babadook*](https://film.one/film/the-babadook) (2014, Fi1m 86): A more coherent account of bereavement making a shared home frightening; and [*The Piano Teacher*](https://film.one/film/the-piano-teacher) (2001, Fi1m 82): Desire and cruelty examined through behaviour, with an equally unsettling central performance. ### Reviews we read (21) - **Financial Times**, Nigel Andrews (80/100, inferred): Antichrist is a fairground ride through the brain of a genius, both nightmarish and apocalyptic, extraordinarily beautiful in its tracking imagery through the sinister forest. No one escapes chastisement in this distrustful, depression-amplified vision of humankind. [Read](https://www.ft.com/content/c5d21ac4-76dc-11de-b23c-00144feabdc0) - **Time Out**, Dave Calhoun (4/5): The critic describes a troubling but refreshing sense of an artist uncloaked in this primal scream of a film about grief and gender war. They single out the honest provocations and sympathy for the female character for praise, while noting the wildly shifting reactions it provokes. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/antichrist) - **Empire**, Kim Newman (75/100, inferred): The critic views it as von Trier's horror film, an anthology of horror-art references with committed acting and moments of beauty and terror, though it deliberately splits audiences. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/antichrist-review/) - **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (65/100, inferred): Ebert highlights the courage and conviction of Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg in their extreme roles, treating the film partly as a document of their performances. He sees it as a provocative exploration of evil, grief turning to despair, and human cruelty, with the actors elevating von Trier's vision. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/antichrist-2009) - **Little White Lies**, Jonathan Crocker (4/3/3): The critic finds the film a powerful, daring and fractured work of audacious on-screen catharsis that confirms von Trier as the mad master-imp of world cinema. They single out the outrageous abandon with which the director expresses his psychological traumas for praise, while noting the graphic violence that overwhelms any thematic message. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/antichrist) - **The New Yorker**, Anthony Lane (55/100, inferred): Lane acknowledges the film's shocking provocation and silliness but finds it makes sense as a study of the link between loss and lust, praising Gainsbourg's dramatic dominance and certain striking images. He notes von Trier's terror of female power and the extremity of the violence while valuing some credible emotional intensity. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/10/26/trouble-in-eden) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (40/100, inferred): The film is a smirking contraption engineered to provoke liberal outrage about violence, misogyny and censorship. Von Trier is a talented mischief-maker who bodyslams his way back into the limelight with this nasty, clever hoax disguised as a film. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/jul/24/antichrist-lars-von-trier-review) - **The Independent**, Anthony Quinn (35/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a baffling, nightmarish provocation that assaults the viewer but ultimately proves boring and incoherent despite strong technical elements and committed performances. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/antichrist-18-1758688.html) - **Screen Daily** (30/100, inferred): The critic calls it a baroque horror essay that is too loopy and coarse for art-house audiences and genre buffs alike. They single out the intense but misleading Gothic trimmings around the gender-war theme and the turn to torture-porn tactics for complaint. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/-antichrist/5001291.article) - **The New York Times**, A.O. Scott (30/100, inferred): Scott calls the film ponderous, conceptually thin, and dull rather than genuinely scandalous or upsetting, despite its graphic sex and violence. He singles out Charlotte Gainsbourg's raw, anguished performance in the first half as its strongest element amid an otherwise dubious exercise. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/movies/23antichrist.html) - **Total Film**, Jamie Graham (1/5): The critic suspects the film is either a sincere personal work or a prank designed to outrage, delivering exactly the extreme reaction von Trier seeks but awarding the lowest rating. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/antichrist-review/) - **Evening Standard** (10/100, inferred): The critic dismisses the film as a pretentious, boring abomination driven by the director's self-indulgent fantasies and contempt, lacking any redeeming artistic value. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/antichrist-is-shockingly-bad-7415626.html) - **Slant Magazine**, Ed Gonzalez: The film is offensive yet too transparent to shock, interesting only briefly as an act of confession. Von Trier transplants sexist myths into a modern context without wrestling with them, instead arrogantly defending his own sins. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/antichrist/) - **The Hollywood Reporter**: The critic calls it the least artistically successful von Trier film, with grandiose ideas overwhelming the modest story and commercial prospects slim. It works better visually but falls apart when trying to tell a story with real people. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/antichrist-film-review-93174/) - **Eye for Film**, Chris (75/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a powerful psychological horror that lingers through its manipulation of trauma and sexuality rather than gore. Von Trier's approach to grief, nature as a symbol of fear, and extreme imagery is singled out as a challenging but valuable experience for horror aficionados. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/antichrist-film-review-by-chris) - **/Film**, Brendon Connelly (75/100, inferred): The critic calls the film essential and conceptually stunning for its raw exploration of grief, depression, and misogyny allegations through explicit folklore-horror imagery, while criticizing technical issues like poor handheld camerawork and editing that disrupt immersion. The personal and confrontational nature is singled out for praise. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/504509/antichrist-movie-review/) - **The Wrap**, Eric Kohn (75/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a supremely audacious and graphically extreme nightmare that begins as an elegant grief drama before descending into twisted horror and abstraction. While acknowledging its misogyny and capacity to shock, the review ultimately praises its calculated design and sheer audacity. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/nutty-nightmare-lars-von-trier-3136/) - **The Playlist**, Rodrigo Perez (65/100, inferred): The review describes the film as an exorcism of von Trier's inner turmoil following depression, praising its craft, impressionistic sequences, and arresting violence while noting its provocative and dubious symbolic elements. The opening, closing, and therapy scenes are highlighted as elevating amid the brutality. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/cannes-09-review-lars-von-triers-20090519/) - **Digital Spy**, Mayer Nissim (40/100, inferred): Dafoe and Gainsbourg deliver powerful, believable performances that keep the film watchable, but the story is shallow and fails to say anything meaningful about grief or the human condition despite its provocative elements. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a164906/antichrist/) - **The Skinny**, Gail Tolley (★★): The film pulses with outright hatred and disgust for women rather than mere misogynistic undertones, with an inconsistent tone that veers into comedy and graphic genital mutilation that disrupts coherence. Atmospheric cinematography provides the only real merit. [Read](https://www.theskinny.co.uk/film/new-releases/antichrist) - **Den of Geek**, Rupert de (3 out of 5): The critic sees the film as neither masterpiece nor mere grot-shocker but a deliberate hoax and prank by von Trier. It is visually striking and daring in places but ultimately shallow and mocking of the audience. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/antichrist-review/) ## Details - **Director:** Lars von Trier - **Director:** Lars von Trier - **Writer:** Lars von Trier - **Cinematography:** Anthony Dod Mantle - **Editor:** Anders Refn - **Music:** Kristian Eidnes Andersen - **Production design:** Karl Júlíusson - **Costume design:** Frauke Firl - **Producer:** Meta Louise Foldager - **Cast:** Willem Dafoe as He; Charlotte Gainsbourg as She; Storm Acheche Sahlstrøm as Nic - **Runtime:** 1h 44m - **Certificate (MPA):** NR - **Release (the US):** 23 October 2009 - **Genres:** Drama, Horror, Thriller - **Budget:** $11 million - **Box office:** $7 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr7xQl2kvd0 ## Where to watch in the US - MUBI: streaming, hd - Apple TV: add-on, hd *Checked 2026-09-15.* Also available in: AR, AU, BR, CA, CL, CO, DK, FI, GB, IE, IN, IT, MX, NO, PA, SE, TR, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - European Film Award for Best Actress 2009: European Film Award for Best Actress (nominated) - European Film Award for Best Cinematographer 2009: European Film Award for Best Cinematographer (won) - European Film Award for Best Director 2009: European Film Award for Best Director (nominated) - Nordic Council Film Prize 2009: Nordic Council Film Prize (won) ## If you liked this - *Possession* (1981): Another couple’s collapse, with performances that make the horror feel painfully personal. - *Don't Look Now* (1973), Fi1m 90: Grief and desire disturb every image, with dread that needs little explanation. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/dont-look-now.md) - *The Babadook* (2014), Fi1m 86: A more coherent account of bereavement making a shared home frightening. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-babadook.md) - *Onibaba* (1964): Sexual jealousy and a hostile landscape, handled with far greater dramatic economy. - *The Piano Teacher* (2001), Fi1m 82: Desire and cruelty examined through behaviour, with an equally unsettling central performance. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-piano-teacher.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/antichrist