“The House That Jack Built” is Lars von Trier’s 2018 psychological horror film, and it is a deliberate provocation from start to finish. The film follows Jack, a failed architect and serial killer, as he narrates his crimes to Verge — whom he calls Roman poet Virgil — over a 12-year span in Washington state. It is structured as a series of flashback vignettes, each one a building block in Jack’s self-described life’s work as an artist of murder.
Trailer, via Zentropa Productions.
Jack’s Murders, And How They Are Told
Jack is a meticulous man. He purchases an industrial freezer from a pizzeria, stores a victim’s body inside it, and drives away with her corpse trailing blood behind his van. The rain washes the trail away, and Jack takes that as divine intervention. He later kills two young boys and their mother on a hunting trip, fashioning one corpse into a smiling sculpture. He abuses his girlfriend Jacqueline and cuts off her breasts, pinning one to a policeman’s car and fashioning the other into a wallet.
The film uses Dante’s Inferno as its metatext, and Jack’s crimes become stations in a journey through hell. The fourth incident draws on archive footage from von Trier’s earlier works — a list that includes:
- Willem Dafoe
- Charlotte Gainsbourg
- Nicole Kidman
- Kirsten Dunst
- Many others
in a scene recreating The Barque of Dante by Eugène Delacroix. Verge, played by Bruno Ganz, is the audience’s conduit into Jack’s mind, and their conversations are the film’s emotional core.
Matt Dillon’s Performance Carries The Weight
Matt Dillon gives a career-best performance as Jack, and it is the reason the film holds together. He plays the architect with a cold intelligence and a kind of exhausted charm, making Jack’s monologues feel less like confession and more like argument. The film is structured as a commentary on morality, and Dillon’s delivery keeps the viewer engaged even when the content itself becomes unbearable.
The supporting cast is strong, though their roles are smaller. Uma Thurman, Siobhan Fallon Hogan, Riley Keough and Jeremy Davies all appear, and each brings a distinct quality to the film’s more fleeting scenes. But the film belongs to Dillon, who carries the weight of von Trier’s unrelenting vision.
Where The Film Falls Short
The problem is the vision itself. Von Trier announced in February 2017 that the film celebrated “the idea that life is evil and soulless.” That stance is a hard sell, and the film never quite earns its right to be so cruel. The murders are described in detail, and the framing of them as art fails to elevate the material. The film’s commentary on morality is thin, and the provocations feel more like posturing than insight.
The film is also long. At 152 minutes, it drags in stretches, especially in the middle sections where the vignettes blend together. The pacing is uneven, and the film’s structure, which jumps between Jack’s past and his present, can become hard to follow.
Peter Sarsgaard said he wanted to play Jack but was forced to turn down the lead role due to the film’s nature. That explains why Matt Dillon got the part, and it also suggests that even actors who want to work with von Trier have limits. The film’s nature is extreme, and it is not for everyone.
What Works, And What Does Not
The film has a few moments that justify its existence. Dillon’s performance is one, and the use of Dante’s Inferno as a structure is another. The fourth incident, with its archive footage from von Trier’s earlier works, is a clever nod to his own history, and the recreation of The Barque of Dante by Eugène Delacroix adds a visual texture that would otherwise be missing. The film’s art direction is strong, and the locations — the freezer, the hunting trip, the factory building — are all well realized.
But the film’s flaws are structural. It is a film about a killer’s crimes, and it never finds a way to make those crimes feel meaningful. The murders are described in detail, and the film’s argument about the nature of evil is underdeveloped. It is a film that wants to be shocking, and it is a film that wants to be profound, but it cannot be both.
“If you feel like screaming… you definitely should.”
That is the film’s tagline, and it is accurate. The film is designed to unsettle, but it does not offer a payoff for that discomfort. It is a film about a killer’s crimes, and it never finds a way to make those crimes feel meaningful.
The Verdict
“The House That Jack Built” is a technically proficient film that fails to justify its own cruelty. Matt Dillon’s performance is strong, and the film’s use of Dante’s Inferno is clever, but the core argument — that Jack’s crimes are art — is never convincing. The film is a demanding watch, and it is not for everyone.
It is a film that wants to be shocking, and it is a film that wants to be profound, but it cannot be both. The viewer is left with a sense of discomfort, but no resolution.
The film’s polarized reviews are accurate. The House That Jack Built received mixed reviews, with positive feedback for Dillon’s performance and the film’s artistic direction, but criticism for what some saw as empty provocation.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.
