17
votes
Dagmar Overbye took in unwanted children and killed them in horrific ways – the director of The Girl With the Needle explains why he brought the story of ‘The Angel Maker’ to the big screen
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- 'It's easy to call what she did evil': inside Denmark's Oscars entry, about a serial child murderer
- Authors
- Philip Oltermann
- Published
- Jan 6 2025
- Word count
- 1484 words
But. This movie director wants to say something about society instead.
Am I alone in feeling like there is a lost balance in depiction of real monsters? They're not monsters: it's society around them. They're not singularly terrible, they had tragic upbringings. It wasn't them, it's the history as recorded by Victors. I like giving stories some nuance, some slightly more elaborate back story, some reflection for the viewer etc. But I'm struggling to come up with anywhere near as many recent samples of when people are just choosing to be terrible sometimes.
Zone of Interest. Squid Game game masters. Who else?
What this imbalance leaves me with is a feeling that we're all equally likely to be potential monsters. While it's somewhat useful as a cautionary, it's also depressing because if none of us are any good really, then there's a diffusion of responsibility, and we're not encouraged to become saints either.
Maybe I am in dire need of more media depicting people who are just really especially good. A moral fibre deficiency. Recommendations welcome.
Ted Lasso is a great watch if you haven't seen it yet, and I don't even like soccer.
Regarding the imbalance you mention: I grew up in a simmering warzone. I've seen real monsters. I've also seen truly good people. I think people who have not seen how bad things can really get have a hard time coming to grips with the fact that there are genuinely bad, evil, malicious people out there who just are the way they are from their very core. That being said, I don't think about this much, outside of conversations like this one. I think consuming media about serial killers, rapists, murderers, and the like is much more harmful to our mental health than is commonly perceived. That stuff will live rent-free in your head for a long time if you aren't careful.
Thank you for your perspective. I find that to be true for myself: in my real life I've met very few ...? no one who is truly plain evil : there are stuck people and frustrated people, desperate and very selfish and violent people, but nothing like as mad as in media. I'm not saying this is true for everyone or for the majority, but for me, the world becomes a little bit more dangerous and a little bit less kind when I fill my day with true crime genre tv. And in this case the creator specifically made it not even true.
:) I think the sports aspect is the only thing stoping me from watching Ted Lasso. Your endorsement as a non football fan is nudging me towards giving it a go. Thank you
Going back to my warzone experiences, the most important takeaway I have is that while yes, real monsters do exist, the people doing good to the best of their ability genuinely, honestly outnumber them. By a lot. I am still here because of their actions, and I in turn was then able to help others. To quote Gandalf, there are forces at work other than the will of evil in this world, and that is a comforting thought.
Regarding Ted Lasso, I 100% put it off for years, despite all of my friends telling me I'd love it, just because I'm so meh about soccer. The very first episode didn't really hook me, either, as I saw it as just another setup for a sports show, but very quickly the humanity shined through. So much of the story is about how being a good, caring person makes a real difference. Well worth it.
It's not a football show. It's a show about people with a backdrop of football.
The show is incredibly human and one of the few that pull off showing that people can be good to each other.
It singlehandedly made me realise that there aren't enough shows that are just happy. And on the flipside, perhaps because of it, I can't watch Succession. It's just awful people doing awful things.
Ted Lasso is the complete opposite. Super funny to boot.
To an extend I started to dislike watching Dexter. While the series dives into his motives and how he became that way I feel people are more on the fence about the tension whether he gets caught or not.
The recent spinoffs just try to cash in into this vigilante murderer with questionable morals.
I also felt conflicted about Dexter. Understanding someone isn't necessarily to excuse everything they've done, and there is value to it....I just feel like it's become very much the norm and I don't know what that implies.
In a sense I feel this absolution that these characters get through their gruesome acts leaves no margin for being morally grey. I guess it means that the polarization is also getting a foothold in cinema and TV.
I don't think you're wrong about this observation, but I think you miss the point that people make when telling these kinds of stories.
Many people want to understand WHY someone gets to be the way they are. I think most people want to understand explicitly because they are not a monster. Also, when there are external "reasons" for why someone is the way they are, it makes it easier to palate the unpalatable. It's much easier to stomach "this person is a monster because they had this and that happen to them" vs "this person is a monster just because." That second explanation makes it seem like any person could be this way, including the audience - something many people are not comfortable considering.
I can get that. It also frustrates me because some people are just evil, period. There's no tragic backstory or Freudian excuse, no single inciting event that changed the trajectory of their life, no failure with parenting or the adults around them, or at least as far as the adults' abilities could go. It's rare, but some people are just naturally monsters who genuinely don't care about others or even thrive on causing harm and devastation.
I remember multiple accounts on reddit from people with genuinely psychopathic children in their family, the kind who would hurt a younger child and babies with zero remorse. Several of those stories included the parents doing everything they could to try to get their child to be less awful—therapy, sending them to special schools, etc.—but there's only so much they could actually do. It got me thinking about how someday that child would hurt or kill someone, and so many people would blame the parents for "failing", but they had done the best they could and suffered for it. The vast majority of people just aren't equipped to deal with that sort of child.
As uncomfortable as that second explanation is, it's important for us to acknowledge that it is true. Otherwise we can be blindsided, or blame truly innocent people who are also victims of that person.
"While it's somewhat useful as a cautionary, it's also depressing because if none of us are any good really, then there's a diffusion of responsibility, and we're not encouraged to become saints either."
Just cause you have the potential of evil doesn't mean you are evil. What you do is what is important. I don't think showing that we can be evil diffuses responsibility. It just means that as an individual we need to realize that to be able to avoid ti and as a society we need to do better not to create monsters.
How so? If anything, it gives more agency to become “saints”. If anyone could be a devil or a saint, then it’s up to you to choose goodness. If being evil or good was just an immutable part of your character, then it is what it is.