Critics’ reviews

The Idiots (1998)

9 reviews from 9 publications. Critics’ score 49: 2 positive, 1 mixed, 4 negative.

Back to our review of The Idiots

49
Positive
2
Mixed
1
Negative
4

The reviews lean negative on The Idiots, though even some sceptical critics find its Dogme 95 methods unsettling and its satire of social behaviour intriguing. Praise centres on the raw filming style and the discomfort created by the commune’s performances, with sympathetic reviews seeing a useful challenge to ideas about normality and outsiders. Radio Times makes the strongest case for its naturalistic acting and emotional engagement, finding a liberating message beneath the disturbing material.

The divide is wide over whether that discomfort achieves anything. Most critics find the provocation short on insight, with reservations clustering around a thin central message, emotional manipulation and scenes that become tiresome rather than revealing. Time Out remains interested in the experiment despite finding it emotionally and intellectually unfulfilled; The AV Club offers the sharpest rejection, judging both the premise and execution misguided and finding boredom where outrage might have been.

Radio Times
★★★★ · Jason Caro
80

This controversial Dogme 95 comedy-drama creates a uniquely unsettling experience through its rejection of artifice and naturalistic performances. The disturbing content is balanced by emotionally engaging situations and an ultimately liberating message.

Read the full review →
Time Out
25 April 2020 · GA
70*

The Dogma 95 experiment is consistently intriguing and involving in its satirical look at performance and how society treats outsiders, though it never quite delivers emotionally or intellectually and is marred by visible crew distractions.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
· Xan Brooks
65*

The film is a fascinating folly with glimmers of genius, its guerrilla Dogma 95 style fitting its theme of social deviance and 'spassing'. It troubles with a banal inner-child message and an overly tidy ending that undercuts the preceding chaos.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
14 May 1999 · Peter Bradshaw
40*

The film is a bizarre black comedy about a commune pretending to have disabilities to shock bourgeois society, made under Dogme 95 rules. It has some grotesque laughs but feels tiresome, puerile and lacking in coherence or real insight.

Read the full review →
The Independent
5 May 1999 · Adam Mars-Jones
35*

Mars-Jones criticizes the Dogme 95 manifesto as a gimmick and finds The Idiots a less successful demonstration than Festen, arguing it fails to force truth from its characters and ends with manipulation. He suggests von Trier abandon the rules for proper filmmaking, while noting his earlier success with Breaking the Waves.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
28 April 2000 · A. O. Scott
30*

The film uses Dogma techniques to produce discomfort in the audience, which it presents as a political act, but has little else on its mind beyond squirming provocation through public 'spassing' antics.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
29 March 2002 · Nathan Rabin
20*

The critic finds the film's premise horribly misguided and its execution even worse, resulting in a work that primarily inspires boredom rather than outrage or engagement.

Read the full review →
Variety
20 May 1998 · festival review · David Rooney

The film is a disturbing, provocative work from a true original, exploring normalcy through a commune's embrace of their 'inner idiot.' It features moments of dramatic intensity but its obscure thesis and raw approach limit it to the arthouse market.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
19 January 2001 · Angus Wolfe Murray

The film has no recognisable storyline and its emotional potential is undermined by a rigid attitude toward manipulation. The handheld Dogme 95 style creates immediacy that ultimately pushes viewers away rather than drawing them in.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate