--- title: "The Idiots" year: 1998 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/the-idiots" fi1m_id: "the-idiots" imdb_id: "tt0154421" tmdb_id: 452 wikidata_id: "Q775356" fi1m_score: 54 critics_score: 49 critics_reviews: 13 published: "2026-09-13" updated: "2026-09-18T08:38:20.674938+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." --- # The Idiots (1998) Directed by Lars von Trier · 1h 50m · MPA R · Comedy, Drama ## Identity The Idiots - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/the-idiots - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** the-idiots - **IMDb ID:** tt0154421 - **TMDB ID:** 452 - **Wikidata ID:** Q775356 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0154421/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/452, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q775356 **Fi1m score: 54** · Critics 49 from 13 reviews *In a sentence:* A commune discovers how to make strangers uncomfortable, then spends 110 minutes checking that it still works > Lars von Trier’s *The Idiots* finds some tenderness inside an ugly group experiment, chiefly through Bodil Jørgensen. But the public provocations repeat themselves, and the film asks for more patience than its ideas earn. ## Synopsis A group living communally test social conventions by pretending to have intellectual disabilities in public. Their behaviour makes encounters with people outside the group into part of an experiment in rejecting ordinary expectations. Karen (Bodil Jørgensen) is among those caught up in the experiment, alongside Stoffer (Jens Albinus), Susanne (Anne Louise Hassing) and Jeppe (Nikolaj Lie Kaas). Written and directed by Lars von Trier, *The Idiots* follows the group’s role-playing and the relationships that develop around it, as the participants try to find freedom by abandoning accepted ways of behaving. ## Review Lars von Trier’s *The Idiots* asks what happens when a group treats pretending to have intellectual disabilities as a route out of respectable behaviour. It is an ugly starting point, which need not make it a bad film: people can do objectionable things on screen and still be worth our attention. Here, though, the public antics soon grow repetitive. Bodil Jørgensen’s performance gives us a reason to stay, but not enough to make the whole undertaking worthwhile. The commune takes its role-playing into public, making other people’s discomfort part of the entertainment. There is something worth examining in the uncertainty such behaviour causes: how do strangers respond to someone who will not follow familiar social rules? Von Trier’s screenplay gets some satirical value from that question, then leaves its participants too much room to congratulate themselves for asking it. Their adopted behaviour cannot tell us much about living with a disability, and the film is less searching about that limitation than it needs to be. Jørgensen, as Karen, is the strongest reason to take the film seriously. Her performance allows for vulnerability without making every feeling look like a demonstration of the group’s beliefs. The tender exchanges within the commune give us a sense that these people can care about one another, which is more persuasive than their advertised desire for freedom. Jørgensen makes that possibility credible, and her naturalism gives us something to attend to besides the question of what von Trier will try next. Von Trier also takes the cinematography credit, and the rough images make sense for people who claim to reject respectable appearances. The actors are not protected by a polished visual treatment, which helps their performances feel exposed. Yet the Dogme 95 approach is no guarantee that what we are watching is honest. After a while, the technical roughness becomes another thing demanding our patience, especially when the behaviour being filmed has stopped yielding anything new. Molly Malene Stensgaard’s editing does not solve that repetition, and the 110-minute running time feels generous to a fairly narrow set of situations. We were bored by the public impersonations: once the group has made strangers uneasy, the film keeps returning to the same result. The loose group atmosphere survives, but these episodes need more forward movement. There is room to cut without sacrificing either the premise or the relationships that make it intermittently engaging. The difficulty for this kind of social comedy is deciding who deserves the embarrassment. Here the group’s targets can seem less objectionable than the people intent on disrupting them, and the film does not make enough of that possibility. Questioning conventional behaviour is worthwhile, but we need some reason to believe these particular rebels have looked closely at their own. Anyone unsettled by the premise should know that the film spends a long time practising it. *Fi1m score 54, published 13 September 2026.* ## What the critics say The reviews split almost down the middle, and the split is not gentle: most critics take a side on The Idiots and hold it firmly. Where praise gathers, it gathers around the raw, stripped-back Dogme 95 style and around Karen, the newcomer whose story pulls the film from provocation towards personal tragedy. Several critics single out the closing scenes as the strongest passage, and Eye for Film praises Bodil Jørgensen’s performance even while faulting the film around her. The Playlist rates it near the top of von Trier’s confrontational work. The reservations are about whether the premise earns anything. The Guardian finds it tiresome and puerile; The Independent judges it a weaker demonstration of the manifesto than Festen; The AV Club reports boredom rather than outrage, blaming pacing and running time. RogerEbert.com is the harshest, treating it as proof that Dogme’s rules guarantee nothing. The spread runs from the tens to the nineties, which is about as wide as it gets. ## Straight answers **Is The Idiots worth watching?** *The Idiots* is a mixed film we cannot quite recommend, and we scored it 54. Bodil Jørgensen's performance as Karen gives the commune's ugly experiment some tenderness, but the public provocations repeat themselves across 110 minutes and the film asks for more patience than its ideas earn. It suits committed Lars von Trier followers rather than anyone curious about him. **How long is The Idiots, and what is it rated?** *The Idiots* runs 1h 50m and is rated R by the MPA in the US. It is a comedy and drama film. **Where can I watch The Idiots in the US?** *The Idiots* 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 The Idiots, and is it suitable for children?** *The Idiots* is an adult film in premise rather than in violence: a commune pretends to have intellectual disabilities in public to unsettle strangers. It has no UK certificate and carries an R in the US, which puts it out of reach for children, and anyone troubled by the premise should know the film spends a long time practising it. **How does The Idiots compare to The Celebration?** *The Idiots* is the weaker of the two, and [*The Celebration*](https://film.one/film/the-celebration) is the one to choose. Both are rough-shot Danish films about groups behaving badly, but Thomas Vinterberg's family birthday drama is funny, frightening and worth its discomfort, where von Trier's commune keeps returning to the same result. Only Bodil Jørgensen gives *The Idiots* a comparable pull. **What should I watch after The Idiots?** After *The Idiots*, try [*The Celebration*](https://film.one/film/the-celebration) (1998, Fi1m 85): A family gathering turns vicious, with stripped-back filming keeping the performances uncomfortably close. Then [*The Exterminating Angel*](https://film.one/film/the-exterminating-angel) (1962, Fi1m 87): A trapped dinner party makes social convention look both ridiculous and frightening; and [*A Woman Under the Influence*](https://film.one/film/a-woman-under-the-influence) (1974, Fi1m 86): For the painful intimacy of watching behaviour judged by those closest to it. ### Reviews we read (13) - **Radio Times**, Jason Caro (4/5): This Dogme 95 comedy-drama creates a uniquely unsettling experience by rejecting film-making artifice as a group of dropouts pretend to be mentally disabled. It balances uncomfortable content with naturalistic performances and an ultimately liberating message. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-mur27d/the-idiots/) - **Film Comment**, R. Emmet Sweeney (70/100, inferred): The critic relays Knausgaard’s account of how The Idiots influenced his writing with its raw, unadorned style. He notes the film’s Dogme 95 roots and its shift from performance to personal tragedy as a key strength. [Read](https://www.filmcomment.com/notebook-karl-ove-knausgaard-on-the-idiots/) - **Los Angeles Times**, Kevin Thomas (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the film rewards patient viewers, praising how it builds focus on Karen's personal revelation and the group's experiment fostering authentic emotions and bonding. He singles out the tender moments amid the provocative premise. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-jun-23-ca-43891-story.html) - **Variety**, David Rooney (70/100, inferred): The review calls the film a disturbing and provocative work that proves von Trier a true original, highlighting its raw, stripped-back Dogma style and the powerfully played final scene. It notes the eccentric thesis may limit it to arthouse audiences. [Read](https://variety.com/1998/film/reviews/the-idiots-1117477538/) - **Sight and Sound**, Xan Brooks (50/100, inferred): The film is a fascinating but muddled experiment in Dogma 95 amateurism that pushes boundaries with its social deviance theme. The critic praises its glimmers of genius and guerrilla style but faults the sentimental inner-child message and overly tidy ending. [Read](http://old.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/106) - **Time Out**, GA (50/100, inferred): Von Trier's Dogma 95 film explores performance and social satire through a group pretending to be disabled, proving consistently intriguing despite not fully delivering emotionally or intellectually. It singles out the funny satirical look at how society treats outsiders for praise while noting irritating technical distractions. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/the-idiots) - **The Independent**, Adam Mars-Jones (40/100, inferred): The critic finds The Idiots a less satisfactory demonstration of the Dogme manifesto than Festen. He questions whether the film's role-playing commune and anti-authoritarian stance truly force truth from its characters and settings as intended. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/film-letter-to-lars-von-trier-1091780.html) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (30/100, inferred): The critic finds the film tiresome and puerile, questioning if von Trier achieved real insights into pretending to be disabled or if it lacks coherence. He concludes it's close but no cigar. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian/0,,49900,00.html) - **The New York Times**, A. O. Scott (30/100, inferred): The critic views the film as having little substance beyond provoking audience discomfort through its Dogma techniques, likening it to a semi-pornographic commercial. He singles out the group's pointless public antics for complaint while acknowledging the formal rigor of the approach. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/28/movies/film-review-colloquies-on-the-finer-points-of-drooling.html) - **The AV Club**, Nathan Rabin (20/100, inferred): The critic finds the premise horribly misguided and the film even worse in practice, as it primarily inspires boredom rather than outrage or fury due to poor pacing, tonal incongruities, and a bloated running time. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/the-idiots-1798194754) - **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (10/100, inferred): The critic calls the film astoundingly bad and evidence that even a restrictive manifesto like Dogma 95 can produce poor results. He singles out the premise of a group living as deliberate idiots, including scenes of boorish behavior, self-criticism, and an orgy with hard-core footage. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/festivals/the-year-nobody-deserved-to-win) - **The Playlist**, The Playlist Staff (A-): The critic finds it one of von Trier’s most provocative and divisive pictures, near the top of his confrontational game despite its uncomfortable premise and content. They single out the brutally funny and excruciatingly uncomfortable results when the pretense invades personal lives, particularly with newcomer Karen. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/the-films-of-lars-von-trier-a-retrospective-20111112/2/) - **Eye for Film**, Angus Wolfe Murray (35/100, inferred): The review finds no recognisable storyline and criticises the Dogme 95 style for pushing viewers away rather than drawing them in. It singles out Bodil Jorgensen's performance as Karen for praise amid the film's emotional potential being undermined by manipulation and falsehood. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/idioterne-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) ## Details - **Director:** Lars von Trier - **Director:** Lars von Trier - **Screenplay:** Lars von Trier - **Cinematography:** Lars von Trier - **Editor:** Molly Malene Stensgaard - **Producer:** Vibeke Windeløv, Dag Alveberg, Svend Abrahamsen - **Cast:** Bodil Jørgensen as Karen; Jens Albinus as Stoffer; Anne Louise Hassing as Susanne; Troels Lyby as Henrik; Nikolaj Lie Kaas as Jeppe; Louise Mieritz as Josephine; Henrik Prip as Ped; Luis Mesonero as Miguel - **Runtime:** 1h 50m - **Certificate (MPA):** R - **Release (the US):** 28 April 2000 - **Genres:** Comedy, Drama - **Budget:** $2 million - **Box office:** $7,200 - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbF80Gu80-4 ## Where to watch in the US - MUBI: streaming, uhd - Apple TV: add-on, uhd *Checked 2026-09-13.* Also available in: AR, AT, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, DE, DK, GB, IE, IN, MX, PA, TR, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - European Film Award for Best Screenwriter 1998: European Film Award for Best Screenwriter (nominated) ## If you liked this - *The Celebration* (1998), Fi1m 85: A family gathering turns vicious, with stripped-back filming keeping the performances uncomfortably close. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-celebration.md) - *The Exterminating Angel* (1962), Fi1m 87: A trapped dinner party makes social convention look both ridiculous and frightening. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-exterminating-angel.md) - *A Woman Under the Influence* (1974), Fi1m 86: For the painful intimacy of watching behaviour judged by those closest to it. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/a-woman-under-the-influence.md) - *Toni Erdmann* (2016), Fi1m 86: Public embarrassment becomes a father’s difficult, sometimes funny way of reaching his daughter. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/toni-erdmann.md) - *Dogtooth* (2009): An isolated household enforces peculiar rules, with cruelty lurking inside its daily routines. --- © 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/the-idiots