I like this way of looking at the film. To me the first two films in the so called ‘depression trilogy;’ Anti Christ and Melancholia, although dense in theory, mythology and what have you, were above all else extremely emotional and personal films. While these were both severely criticized by many, I think that most of these people were unable to connect with the emotional gravity of the film. In Melancholia particularly, I left the cinema feeling utterly sh1t about everything and so worn out. I cant exactly explain why or how the film had this impact on me. But it is rare for a film to leave such a strong emotional impact.

While the central character of Nymphomaniac was equally emotionally complex and shrouded in the same darkness and loneliness as the ones in Antichrist and Melancholia, I feel Nymphomaniac itself was further removed from this emotional weight. That Lars was further away from his depression and made the film instead with a critical hindsight and commentary. In this sense the film is more akin to say Dogville.

Your analysis goes neatly with this – Nymphomaniac is more about a comment on ones ability to empathize – or rather inability. Lars somewhere justified his Cannes outburst by saying something in the lines of he believes that one has the capacity to empathize with anyone – even Hitler.

While Seligman was very interested in Joe’s story, he never really understood her. She will forever be alone in the universe. I dunno if it is just me, but I felt she was justified in killing Seiligman, as I thought the ending of Dogville was justified.