Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2013) Poster

Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2013)

  • Rate: 7.1/10 total 10,038 votes 
  • Genre: Drama | Mystery
  • Release Date: 25 December 2013 (Denmark)
  • Runtime: 123 min
Our Score
968 user reviews.

User Score (vote now)
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars

You're here : » » Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2013)...

Warning: simplexml_load_file(http://gdata.youtube.com/feeds/base/videos?q=Nymphomaniac+Vol+II+2013+trailer&client=ytapi-youtube-search&alt=rss&v=2&max-results=7): failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.0 410 Gone in /home/easymovy/public_html/wp-content/themes/streamplex/functions.php on line 50

Warning: simplexml_load_file(): I/O warning : failed to load external entity "http://gdata.youtube.com/feeds/base/videos?q=Nymphomaniac+Vol+II+2013+trailer&client=ytapi-youtube-search&alt=rss&v=2&max-results=7" in /home/easymovy/public_html/wp-content/themes/streamplex/functions.php on line 50

Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2013)


Nymphomaniac Vol II 2013tt2382009.jpg poster

  • IMDb page: Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2013)
  • Rate: 7.1/10 total 10,038 votes 
  • Genre: Drama | Mystery
  • Release Date: 25 December 2013 (Denmark)
  • Runtime: 123 min
  • Gross: $74,978 (USA) (4 April 2014)
  • Director: Lars von Trier
  • Stars: Charlotte Gainsbourg, Stellan Skarsgård, Willem Dafoe | See full cast and crew »
  • Soundtrack: Requiem in D Minor
  • Sound Mix: Dolby Digital
  • Plot Keyword: Sadomasochism | Religious Icon | Sex Scene | Story Within A Story | Fire

Writing Credits By:

    (in alphabetical order)

  • Lars von Trier 

Known Trivia

    Plot: The continuation of Joe's sexually dictated life delves into the darker aspects of her adult life and what led to her being in Seligman's care. Full summary »  »

    Story: Joe continues to tell to Seligman the story of her life. Joe lives with Jerôme and their son Marcel and out of the blue, she loses sexual sensation in intercourse. Joe seeks kinky sex, perversions and sadomasochism expecting to retrieve her sex drive. Jerôme leaves home with Marcel and gives his son to a foster house for adoption. Then Joe is sent to therapy by her gynecologist but she does not admit that she is addicted to sex. Meanwhile Seligman tells Joe that he is virgin and helps her to understand her actions. Joe believes that Seligman is her friend, but is he? Written byClaudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    FullCast & Crew

    Produced By:

    • Bettina Brokemper known as co-producer
    • Marie Cecilie Gade known as producer
    • Peter Garde known as executive producer
    • Bert Hamelinck known as co-producer
    • Marianne Jul Hansen known as line producer
    • Peter Aalbæk Jensen known as executive producer
    • Peter Aalbæk Jensen known as producer
    • Maj-Britt Paulmann known as line producer
    • Marianne Slot known as co-producer
    • Sascha Verhey known as line producer
    • Louise Vesth known as producer

    FullCast & Crew:

    • Charlotte Gainsbourg known as Joe
    • Stellan Skarsgård known as Seligman
    • Stacy Martin known as Young Joe
    • Shia LaBeouf known as Jerôme
    • Jamie Bell known as K
    • Willem Dafoe known as L
    • Mia Goth known as P
    • Jean-Marc Barr known as Debtor Gentleman
    • Michael Pas known as Old Jerôme
    • Morgan Hartley known as B, 12 Years
    • Andrea Thompson known as Joe's Girlfriend, 12 Years
    • Tine Burn known as Joe's Girlfriend, 12 Years
    • Tabea Tarbiat known as Verina Messalima
    • Janine Romanowski known as The Whore of Babylon
    • Lawrence Sheldon known as Man 1 in Car
    • Ivan Pecnik known as Man 2 in Car
    • Jonathan Sawdon known as Man 3 in Car
    • Christopher Craig known as Man 4 in Car
    • Jacob Levin-Christensen known as Marcel, 3 Years
    • Kookie known as N, Black Man (as Kookie Ryan)
    • Shanti Roney known as Interpreter
    • Papou known as Black Man 2
    • Nicole Sandweg known as Madame
    • Lien Van de Kelder known as Clerk in Horse Shop
    • Laura Christensen known as Babysitter
    • Sarah Soetaert known as Boss
    • Sami Loris known as Doctor 2
    • Caroline Goodall known as Psychologist
    • Kate Ashfield known as Therapist
    • Tania Carlin known as Renee
    • Christine Urspruch known as Little My
    • Daniela Lebang known as Brunhelda
    • Omar Shargawi known as Thug 1
    • Marcus Jakovljevic known as Thug 2
    • Conny Dachs known as Debtor Gets Whipped
    • Severin von Hoensbroech known as Debtor in Greenhouse
    • Maja Arsovic known as Joe, 7 Years (credit only)
    • Ananya Berg known as Joe – 10 Years (credit only)
    • Sophie Kennedy Clark known as B (credit only)
    • Udo Kier known as The Waiter (credit only)
    • Connie Nielsen known as Joe's Mother (credit only)
    • Christian Slater known as Joe's Father (credit only)
    • Uma Thurman known as Mrs. H (credit only)
    • Peter Gilbert Cotton known as Doctor 1 (uncredited)




    Production Companies:

    • Zentropa Entertainments


    • Concorde Filmverleih (2014) (Germany) (theatrical)
    • Les Films du Losange (2014) (France) (theatrical)
    • Magnolia Pictures (2014) (USA) (theatrical)
    • Parkway Management (2014) (Hong Kong) (theatrical)
    • Transmission Films (2014) (Australia) (theatrical)
    • Vertigo Média Kft. (2014) (Hungary) (theatrical)
    • Wild Bunch Benelux (2014) (Netherlands) (theatrical)
    • Golem Distribución (2014) (Spain) (all media)
    • Leopardo Filmes (2014) (Portugal) (all media)
    • Magnolia Home Entertainment (2014) (USA) (DVD)



    Other Stuff

    Special Effects:

    • BUF (visual effects)

    Visual Effects by:

    • Christian Esbo Agergaard known as digital compositor
    • Xavier Allard known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Pierre Buffin known as visual effects art director: BUF
    • Maxime Delorme known as visual effects producer: BUF
    • Guillaume Dureux known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Florent Falipou known as research & development: BUF
    • Yoel Godo known as visual effects supervisor: BUF
    • Rami Hage known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Peter Hjorth known as visual effects supervisor
    • Anders Jensen known as in-house vfx producer (Ghost VFX )
    • Quentin Juillard known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Natasha Leroux known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Nicolas Maillard known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Rémy Normand known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Alexis Perrin known as visual effects pre-production: BUF
    • Jeremy Robert known as visual effects artist: BUF
    • Dimitri Uradovskiy known as visual effects artist: BUF



    Filmography links and data courtesy of The Internet Movie Database

    Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2013) Related Movie

    Furry Vengeance (2010) Movie Poster
    The Tourist (2010) Movie Poster
    Women Without Men (2009) Movie Poster
    My Name Is Khan (2010) Movie Poster
    Stop-Loss (2008) Movie Poster

    Posted on April 8, 2014 by Harry in Movies | Tags: , .


    1. rossstrong from Durhaam
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      Nymphomaniac 2 Now I liked the 1st film but this one? I couldn't getaway with I think this one makes you realize that the character has noemotion or remorse for what she does and then the writer tries to shockus by comparing Paedophiles to Nymphomaniacs and in my eyes trying tojustify the 1st of the two is unthinkable stating that 95% of them willlive with it without anyone ever knowing and not acting out theirfantasies! (No these people are monsters) I think he has gone on forfull on controversy by trying to defend it, but apart form that thefilm is not as strong as the 1st part with a pretty poor ending whichlets it down.

    2. The_Sun_Said from London
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      I don't normally write reviews but watching this film yesterday made meso angry that I needed to vent my frustration. Just to clarify – thisrefers to both parts as they are essentially 1 very long film. Also,this is not a review, rather a list of things I hate about Nymphomaniac(***SPOILERS EVERYWHERE***): 1) Seeing/hearing everything 4 times isjust too painfully tedious. First we see it happening, then Joe'sboring narration tells us what happened, then Seligman repeats itstarting with "so you say xyz happened" and finally he analyses it inhis dull digressions using random boring references to history,religion, fishing, whatever. This was definitely the worst thing in thefilm. 2) Poor acting. There are a lot of good actors out there. Don'tuse fashion models. 3) Joe is boring and stays boring throughout – thecharacter doesn't develop at all. There was no point in the film whereI actually cared what happens to Joe next. I would not want to meet herin real life and I don't think she is interesting enough to deserve 4hours of anyone's time. 4) Abysmal script. Random, ugly andunbelievable from the beginning till the end. The father bit was goodand made some sense. But literally everything else was shocking. Thisdebt collector thing just came out of nowhere and didn't make anysense. Same with P. A bunch of random things Lars just put here andthere. The scenes were also painfully predictable. Example – the onewith the man who left his family. Did anyone really think he was notgoing to come back with his cases and then his wife would turn up withthe kids, and then the other lover would to turn up, too? 5) Lars (whospeaks through Seligman) tries to explain and justify his racist/Nazicomments several times. No place for that in a film. And yet blackpeople can't even speak English in Nymphomaniac – fantastic! 6) Toomany cocks, giant nipples, hairy asses and the use of the C word. 7)Boring and unfunny humour. A couple of people at the cinema laughed butI am not sure whether it was sincere or sarcastic. 8) Lars makes a lotof references to his other films. I find that vain. 9) Length – I wouldnot want to watch a 4-hour film even if it's amazing. Let alone this…There are a lot more but I am exhausted now. This is an exhaustingfilm. Thank you.

    3. FrostyChud from France
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      NYMPHOMANIAC is the most exciting, intelligent film I have seen in along time. The moment I saw Seligmann shuffle out of his apartment toRammstein, I knew I was in the hands of a filmmaker I could trust. Thisscene was the first of many at which I found myself exulting inside.GO, LARS, GO! NYMPHOMANIAC is von Trier's F-14 and he takes it onbombing run after bombing run, destroying a different pious hypocrisyeach time. The film is full of all sorts of audacious touches that noother filmmakers working today have the guts or brains to include intheir boring, sentimental, ideological films.

      NYMPHOMANIAC is also very funny.

      What I liked best about NYMPHOMANIAC was its total refusal of theconsolations of ideology. Sexuality is presented truthfully, which isto say, as something which simply cannot be integrated into the smoothsocial order without one or the other being damaged. No one in themovie has a "healthy" sexuality. In a certain sense, the nymphomaniacherself is the closest thing to a healthy person in that she refuses toadhere to any of the hypocritical moral orders represented by the othercharacters, from conformism to abstinence to impotentcognitive-behavioral therapy to S&M to crime and so on. She is a stainno matter where she goes and in this sense she incarnates the truth,which also has the status of a permanent stain.

      At the same time that von Trier does everything right, he getseverything wrong, but in the best possible way. NYMPHOMANIAC remindedme of the book that OJ Simpson wrote in which he describes how he wouldhave killed Nicole and Ron "if he had done it". What OJ wrote is aconfession in scare quotes, one in which every detail is present exceptthe most important one, namely, the actual acknowledgment of guilt.NYMPHOMANIAC has the same structure, although instead of being thestory of a murder, it is the story of a psychoanalysis.

      A troubled person on a bed is encouraged to speak to a learned, wise,benevolently neutral man who is sitting next to the bed. She isencouraged to tell her whole story. He will refuse judgment and simplylisten.

      Over the course of a psychoanalysis, patterns and unlikely coincidencesslowly take shape and are spotted by the analysand, who eventuallycomes to recognize them at their true value, namely as the traces of anemergent repressed discourse. Lars von Trier has brilliantly condensedand rendered this process by making Joe's story full of improbablecoincidences. How much of this really happened and how much of it is adelusion? Could she really have run into Jerome so many times? Couldshe really have had a vision of the Whore of Babylon as a pubescentgirl? Etc.

      The sex life of Joe starts and ends with the exact same scenario:3+5=8. This circularity is also characteristic of the psychoanalyticprocess. An analysis reaches its conclusion when the analysandrecognizes that she has done nothing but repeat, again and again, herown contingent, sexualized unconscious interpretation of a traumaticencounter. By superimposing this sum on the screen, von Trier condensesand renders visible the fundamentally signifying, even meaninglesskernel of the compulsion to repeat trauma that Freud called the deathdrive. Joe's analysis comes to an end when she is able to witness howinsubstantial and senseless her compulsion is. All tied up, right?

      And then Seligmann tries to have sex with Joe! At this momenteverything crumbles. The moment he whips it out, Seligmann invalidatesthe nascent story that has begun to emerge from between the lines ofher official story. The fragile consistency of this new liberatinginterpretation of Joe's story is entirely dependent on Joe's confidencein Seligmann's ability to see clearly where she can only dimly intuit.His actions prove to her retroactively that he heard nothing but hersymptomatic demand to be used, and in so doing he symbolically annulsher true desire.

      Such an ending is a logical necessity in that Seligmann's "asexuality"is completely hypocritical, as is Joe's decision to renounce hersexuality. Here we see why a psychoanalyst must go through analysishimself: if he does not, he can only validate the patient'sresistances. Since Seligmann has not integrated his own sexual drives,he is incapable of leading Joe to such an integration. All he can do islead Joe to his own failed neurotic solution: a refusal of sexuality.But Joe incarnates the intractable stain of truth, which is also thestain of sexuality, and as such she necessarily explodes Seligmann'shypocrisy.

      It all holds together. Where von Trier gets it all wrong is in hisimplicit condemnation of psychoanalysis. Here von Trier is properlyperverse. His entire movie is a truthful "confession" and then, likeOJ, he winks and tells us that it was all hypothetical. This last actof resistance invalidates everything that came before it, convenientlyrendering the exercise sterile and allowing Joe/von Trier to continueignoring the truth and enjoying their symptoms. In Joe's case, thesymptom is nymphomania. In von Trier's case, the symptom is hisgratuitous melancholia, his nihilism. Were he to take the quotationmarks off of his confession, he would risk facing the consequences ofhis act, namely freedom with all of its attendant complications andmiseries.

      Lars walks us right up to the edge and then fails to take the lastdecisive step. I do not think that this failure takes anything awayfrom the film. On the contrary, this final gesture transforms the filmfrom a poignant depiction of psychological suffering into ameta-depiction of the attachment to this suffering. This is even anecessity, inasmuch as psychological suffering itself always has, byits very nature, such a double structure.

    4. KateLiza777 from United States
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      Lars Von Trier makes another boring movie with explicit sex and a veryweak script and bad acting.Why did he make such a rubbish movie?.Why IsThe European Cinema relying on some porn and becoming a Trash Cinema?.I agree that there has to be sex in a movie about a nymphomaniac womaneven if I found that they are more like cheap senseless porn. Take forexample Basic Instinct movie,it is erotic but it is sointeresting.Unlike it, this film is utterly boring and most of you willregard it as a rubbish movie. The ending is so bad and the scenes arehastily carried out.Lars Von Trier seems like an amateur director andproducer in this trash movie.

    5. CarlosEspagna from Spain
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      Somebody tell me why did Lars Von Trier Classifies Cheap Porno As Art?.This movie is not satisfactory and pleasing.Fans who love to see nakedpeople and fantasize about seeing a woman masturbating and showing hervagina and porno fans who love to see a man licking pussy could likeit.But what is the theme of the film and why is it too strange and hardto understand?.If Lars Likes porno then that is fine let him show usthe uncut movie and let us see an X-rated porno movie perhaps we willbe able to understand why she is having porno sex and not enjoyingit.Do nymphomaniacs have every kind of dirty porno sex and don't enjoythem?. I think it would be better for Lars Von Trier to think twicebefore producing and directing a cheap porno movie like this!. Whoknows perhaps he might win the award for the Best Porno Movie if hedecided to produce and direct porno movies!.

    6. DianaIsAnAmericanLady from United States
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      Another major disappointment movie by Danish Director Lars VonTrier.The Dialogue continues between the nymphomaniac whore Joe andSeligman (the old man).The boredom and explicit X-rated sex is randomlyused once again.Lars Von Trier was not concentrating much when he madethis trash European adult movie.He relied much on nudity,explicitrepetitive pornography ( a man giving oral sex to Joe ….This scene isrepeated three times and juxtaposed by the irrelevant image of atiger).It is so obscure and unjustifiable.When you see this movie youwill notice how Lars Von Trier was so hasty in making this movie andthe result a disappointing boring movie which truly deserves to benominated for the Worst Movie Award .

    7. The Movie Vlog (jcb5781@gmail.com) from Canada
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      The second half of Von Trier's latest is not as solid as the first.And, the blasphemous theme is lost in some sort of unsteady rebellionagainst societal / cultural oppression of women. This aspect isunsteady because if feels like there is also a certain level ofsadistic eroticism where the woman is firmly position as the object ofcruelty.

      All together, it's a really smart, honest and daring look at sexualaddiction and dysfunction… then there is this off the rails third actwhich is completely unnecessary and ridiculous.

      While it meanders a little after Volume 1, and the plot makes somebaffling leaps, it is still electrifying and well worth viewing,particularly when viewed right after part one.

    8. mlupetin from los angeles
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      After going bananas for NYMPHOMANIAC VOLUME I, I am saddened to reportthat Lars Von Trier's Volume II does not hold up at all. The film justplods along with more of the same but worst of all, the clichés thatwere never present in Volume I appear with a vengeance in NYMPHOMANIACVOLUME II–sex addiction therapy, S&M and abandoned children. CharlotteGainsbourg, who is in essence the narrator of Volume I, takes centerstage here. Although she has a wonderful presence and voice, playing avacant cold character is very different from being vacant and cold.Here Gainsbourg brings nothing to the material and Von Trier all butabandons her. And how refreshing it would be to not have a series ofS&M scenes! What has pleasure from pain got to do with "nymphomania."Nothing. Though I do admire the brutality of the scenes featuring JamieBell which are never titillating or hot in any way. In fact, these arethe dullest S&M scenes since Breillet's ROMANCE but with none of thewit. But worst of all, NYMPHOMANIAC VOLUME II actually has a finalscene in which there is a diatribe basically explaining the film and anending that is obvious and trite. Sadly, Volume II makes me totallyre-assess my reaction to Volume I.

    9. geneva notagain from london
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      Now we come to the second half, the light and brisk tone turned intodarkness and intense.The volume II completed itself to a wholeencyclopedia of sex, basically it encompass some most hitted genre ofpornography, the heartrending yet anticipatory breakup with Shia andher son, the grotesquely sadistic sexual experience(Jamie Bell is aseductive rising star I think he looks extremely authoritative even ina gray sweatshirt), the lesbian trans-generational sex…but I have tosay the second half chose the WORST ending. I almost felt Lars'sineptitude of finishing this overly ambitious and kaleidoscopic ofnymphomania.

      IMO the second half succumb to the exotic provocation and contrivedcompletion, and thus lost the integrated genuinity and spontaneity inthe film. The group therapy tirade is simply hard for the audience tobuy, and to make things even worse, the objective outsider—theasexual erudite first expressly exalted Joe's curious tale to afeminist level, that's like obliterating the whole soul in the film andlater tried to break his cherry . It simply does not end well, thesecond volume substantiates all the criticism, being pretentious andfar-stretched. The beauty of loneliness and individual choice and morepolitical-oriented feminism falters at the last 20 mins of the film. Itcould have stroked audience with Joe's poetic simplicity in her life,every change and decision has something to do with sex and if Lars letthe audience themselves to retrospect the feminism.

      From a non-essentialist perspective, Joe's life choice shouldn't beanalyzed in a gender context, although the social convention andstereotypes makes the assumption that woman leading a licentious lifewould be recognized as schizophrenia and sinful yet male womanizerwould be shouldering much less pressure. I think it doesn't matter ifthe lead role happened to be a woman or man, it's all their own tragicbut willful choice. Eccentuating the historical differences betweengenders is no longer the task of feminism, especially not in an oldschooled preaching way. Joe's sexual adventure shouldn't be comparingto men's to make it justified, the very categorization itself in anunnecessary context would be fallen into the scope of socialstereotype, thought nothing condemnable, there's more I expected fromthe proclaimed-to-be-feminist movie.

    10. Gordon-11 from Earth
      08 Apr 2014, 5:00 am

      This film tells the story of a woman who turns into dark sexualbehaviour after discovering that just sex is not enough to satisfy hernymphomaniac urges.

      In "Nymphomaniac: Vol. II", there is a lot of graphic sex. Thesadomasochism is quite shocking and raw. There are many occasions whenI was very surprised by how far the actors and actresses would go. Howshe descends into a pitiful state is sad. The second half of the filmtakes a turn into exploring another side of Joe's sexuality. Actually,"Nymphomaniac: Vol. II" explores almost all common sexual minoritybehaviours – it is almost an eye opener – and in some cases eye closer.

      "Nymphomaniac: Vol. II" is a bit too extreme for my taste.

    Leave a Reply

    CAPTCHA : *