Dogme 25 – Vow of Chastity
39 points
4 hours ago
| 10 comments
| dogma25.dk
| HN
jedimastert
7 minutes ago
[-]
So this is my art degree coming out, but I feel like invoking the name of Dogma 95 and the "vow of chastity" without what appears to be any of the original people involved or blessing feels a little lame, especially when the actual rules are pretty different from the original. At least, I don't see any indication of like a real personal connection to the original.

I feel like they probably should have come up with a different name and just noted the connection in the manifesto

reply
mr_mitm
2 hours ago
[-]
Interesting that they only have one rule in common with the predecessor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogme_95
reply
flossly
56 minutes ago
[-]
And no signatures in common.

Also: how many films are still produced in line with Dogma 95?

reply
tweetle_beetle
31 minutes ago
[-]
35 in total as of last year, with the most recent released in 2004

https://web.archive.org/web/20250215082603/http://www.dogme9...

reply
tweetle_beetle
22 minutes ago
[-]
That said, I'm not sure if new certifications are still being accepted. So there may have been uncertified Dogme95-compliant films made since that was never been in the official list.
reply
jedimastert
1 hour ago
[-]
I feel like people are reading this as "this is how the under signers think all movies should be made, and we are judging movies not made this way as a moral failing", when I think a better reading would be "as directors/film makers/story tellers, this is how we think we can maximize our own creativity and joy when we make movies".
reply
RobotToaster
1 hour ago
[-]
I wonder if they would accept a CGI movie entirely set within a computer, nothing in the rules seem to prohibit it :).
reply
Hnrobert42
2 hours ago
[-]
What is happening? What is the difference between Dogma and Dogme? What is this site about?
reply
jffry
1 hour ago
[-]
"dogme" is the Danish, Norwegian, and French spelling of the word "dogma"

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dogme

reply
Hnrobert42
1 hour ago
[-]
Oooh. That explains my friend named Mathilde. Nice. Thanks.
reply
brazzy
1 hour ago
[-]
Dogme is Danish, because it's a manifesto of a founded in Denmark - and it's basically an update of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogme_95
reply
hau
2 hours ago
[-]
>The film must be shot where the narrative takes place.

This one really stands out by exculding whole genres and not really adding anything interesting to work around.

reply
irdc
1 hour ago
[-]
Which genres would that be?

One could also argue that certain genres simply won't ever work as an arthouse movie.

reply
RobotToaster
1 hour ago
[-]
> Which genres would that be?

Space opera, high fantasy and bangsian fantasy are three that come to mind.

reply
irdc
1 hour ago
[-]
I could see bangsian fantasy work if the afterlife were to be located on earth (which opens up some narrative possibilities, though they're a bit unoriginal). The other two are predicated upon portraying their locations inauthentically, which conflicts with the rules Dogme 25 strives to follow.
reply
coldtea
1 hour ago
[-]
Exluding them is for the better... we got more than enough
reply
dfxm12
1 hour ago
[-]
That's ok. The goal is not for every film to fit into this criteria.
reply
aetherspawn
1 hour ago
[-]
It kind of protects against low budget sci-fi I guess, which could be a net good thing.

Under the rules you could attempt to shoot Resident Alien, but not Star Trek.

reply
irdc
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm thinking you could shoot an awesome sci-fi thriller under these rules. Even one that includes space travel. Just don't have any of the narrative take place in space: have only one character off-planet and have them communicate via radio.
reply
jmusall
1 hour ago
[-]
I've seen good, low-budget indie sci-fi short films that would presumably meet all of the Dogma 25 rules. So I think it doesn't protect against this category of films and neither would that be a good thing anyways. It just requires creative solutions if you want to e.g. portrait space travel.
reply
brazzy
1 hour ago
[-]
I don't think it's meant as a constraint to be worked around, but as a guardrail against being inauthentic.

And it excludes a lot less than its inspiration Dogme 95, which has as one rule "Genre movies are not acceptable."

reply
pjc50
1 hour ago
[-]
> "Genre movies are not acceptable."

I find that hilarious, like proclaiming that only other people have an ethnicity or an accent. Because of course Dogme is a genre of its own.

reply
wl
48 minutes ago
[-]
Perhaps Dogme 95/Dogma 25 films are in a genre of their own, but they're not "genre movies." People make the same argument with "literary fiction"/"non-genre fiction" vs "genre fiction." The terms have meaning whether or not you want to acknowledge it.
reply
brookst
52 minutes ago
[-]
Dogme is more of a methodology than genre. Genre usually means settings and tropes, like scifi or horror or superhero.

Though I’d argue that rom-com, period pieces, and biopics also are “genre”, at least to the extent a particular movie just paints by numbers within those styles.

reply
viccis
1 hour ago
[-]
Makes sense because it's similar to one of the ones from Dogme95 which explicitly excluded genre files.
reply
maelito
2 hours ago
[-]
My eyes are bleeding reading this CSS
reply
bdcravens
1 hour ago
[-]
The same way that HN puts tags like [video] or [pdf] in titles, they should have something like [eyestab] for a site like that. I was so not ready for that visual assault.
reply
leshenka
1 hour ago
[-]
I believe red and black theme is an artistic choice. Sadly, readability suffers from this choice. Just making the text bold makes it a lot better while preserving its spirit.
reply
orangebread
1 hour ago
[-]
My brain is bleeding after reading this strange ass manifesto.
reply
artyom
2 hours ago
[-]
Can we have just good cinema back?

Not the cookie-cutter safe productions of today, which are essentially 2 hours long advertisements for popcorn and toys.

Not this snob "here's us certifying ourselves about being pure" bullshit.

Just good cinema. You know what I'm talking about.

reply
ramon156
2 hours ago
[-]
There is a lot of good cinema out there, it's just not at your fingertips. I too have become too lazy to look further than my nose's length.
reply
AlecSchueler
1 hour ago
[-]
There's even some good stuff in the big cinemas. Barbie was excellent for example.
reply
mnewme
2 hours ago
[-]
There is great cinema today, sadly a lot of great movies lack proper distribution. Go to film festivals, the quality of movies is only increasing
reply
leopld
1 hour ago
[-]
Name a movie that’s your reference of good cinema
reply
jamal-kumar
2 hours ago
[-]
Lars Von Trier is objectively good cinema
reply
falcor84
1 hour ago
[-]
I suppose that's not what you meant, but I love the idea of "Lars Von Trier" as a persona being good cinema.

At the very least, it made me understand that I need him to appear as himself in the next Death Stranding game.

reply
detritus
2 hours ago
[-]
egh, as much as I enjoyed his Dogme 95 fayre when I was young and far more self-important, I find his later 'big cinema' output turgid twaddle.

Melancholia was just about bareable but from Mandalay onwards I could barely struggle through to the end of his flicks.

Nymphomaniac made me almost literally angry at its denouement. Just.. shit.

reply
0gs
1 hour ago
[-]
i guess. he's also a misogynistic piece of shit
reply
whywhywhywhy
1 hour ago
[-]
Who would have thought an auteur would be a fully formed and flawed person where flaws may be as extreme as their talent.

It’s almost as if creativity is connected to emotions, ideology and experience or something.

reply
0gs
1 hour ago
[-]
everyone, i think. doesn't mean auteurs have to make movies glorifying their flaws without a trace of introspection for 20+ years.
reply
rs_rs_rs_rs_rs
1 hour ago
[-]
Pretentious, pompous trash.
reply
mayukh
1 hour ago
[-]
Nothing like rules for spurring creativity. Waiting for the manual next.
reply
jedimastert
1 hour ago
[-]
> Nothing like rules for spurring creativity.

I feel like it's pretty well known in creative spaces that constraints breed creativity.

reply
coldtea
1 hour ago
[-]
Creative after creative and artist after artist has said pretty much that constraints and limitations indeed spur creatitivy...
reply
smcl
1 hour ago
[-]
Deliberately imposing constraints on yourself is actually a very well-established way to spur creativity and innovation. For example this movement was inspired by something similar from back in the 1990s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogme_95
reply