Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2014)

That was an excellent one.

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Ho-hum!... Well - Here we go again!.... Nymphomaniac, like "Shame" and "Looking For Mister Goodbar", is yet another sordid, unsavoury, and totally sneering look at the consequences that are apparently supposed to result from excessive promiscuity.When it comes to sheer heavy-handedness - This shamelessly preachy, little picture self-righteously tells the viewer that having lots of sex with many partners is a hateful thing (so don't you dare love it).This is the sort of movie that neither stimulates the mind nor arouses the libido. Nope. It absolutely numbs both. If you are expecting Nymphomaniac to live up to its title as being an intensely pleasant and wildly erotic experience, you are definitely in for a major disappointment.Incompetently directed by Lars Von Trier (who must be an utterly despicable prig) - Nymphomaniac amounted to being nothing but a dreary, little soap opera (with lots of graphic sex thrown in for good measure) that took 4 frickin' hours to get its shallow, sex-hating point across..... Sheesh! Like - Hey! Give me a break, already!

I found it more authentic then all the BS dramas the big H serves. For all the critics saying this is just porn, you clearly didn't understand the message, maybe you're not familiar with the struggle or plain ignorance. !Spoiler alert! It talks about the people who are daily rejected by society, the ones that do not fit in the narrow box of normality that we are given. It's not Hollywood drama, it's real life drama, but you are so brain washed you don't get the difference. Maybe watch it again, this time without checking your iPhone every other minute. Watch it everyday, until you realize why it's not a porn, and then write hateful reviews if you still think it's bad.

Lars von Trier's second film about the life story of a female nymphomaniac goes down increasingly dark alleyways compared to VOL. I, but at the same time I found it the lesser movie. This film just doesn't have the drive or vitality that made the first film so interesting, and there are some odd plot decisions - especially towards the climax - that don't ring true.There are still some oddly gripping moments here, but they're more disturbing than ever. Jamie Bell is a real surprise, playing a completely different character to that than you'd expect and doing very well with it too. I'm surprised that I found Charlotte Gainsbourg less sympathetic than the actress playing the younger version of her character. By the time Willem Dafoe enters the frame, the movie seems to have lost its way and become a bizarre, slow-paced thriller instead. And don't get me started on the Mia Goth stuff.As before, this is a beautifully shot movie with a lot of fragility and artiness contained within its shots. But Lars von Trier can only keep the audience's interest for so long, and by now his tale is beginning to drag, leaving a film that is only so-so rather than profound. And that 'twist' ending is ludicrous more than anything else.

First off I have given a high score as I don't think you can really rate a film like this; and many have given this a low score as they don't like the subject matter. This is not a film you can watch without having seen Volume one.It's a film about the extremes of sex, if you haven't an open mind on this subject then don't watch this film. There is a lot of graphic sex in this film, presumably to capture the authenticity of the material. Compared to volume one, the sex is much darker and delves into extreme BDSM. There are some very violent sex scenes, which nearly everyone would find deeply disturbing. However, more disturbing is the subject matter, much of which is not really explained, and pushes the story into strange unlit depths.As a film it is slow, arty, and with considerable metaphors. Intellectual more than passionate. Nicely shot too it has to be said; along with considerable acting and direction. Personally, I find if you don't engage with the principal character, it is hard to really enjoy the film. Although it would be possible to claim that Siligman is the viewpoint character the viewer is meant to empathize with (which too a degree does work). Compared to Volume one, this is definitely the better film. More condensed pace and covers the material with less "pauses". Does the film challenge and make you think? Definitely, but it is not an easy experience, even more so than the first film. Plot wise the film does reach a rounded conclusion, but I am not sure the ending will be to everyone's taste either.I liked that the film did not pull any punches and explored adult themes deeply, if not shockingly at times. However I would only recommend this for individuals that have a broad understanding of sexuality, prepared to be subjected to some pretty violent X rated scenes, and are fans of very arty, intellectual theater. As I said at the beginning, his is not the sort of film you can judge, you have to see it and make up your own mind.