In an attempt to acquire some acculturation, I just saw Van Trier's Nymphomaniac.  I just don't get it.  I think it was kinda funny, but im sure it wasn't purposeful. For example, the whole story is told as a part narrative by the protagonist female, the "Nympho" in question, while she's staying at a man's apartment after he found her all beat up and took her inside to apply some aid.  While she's describing, for example. competing with another girl to see how many guys they can have sex with in the space of a train ride, the man helping her in the apartment says "oh, you're angling".  Which, apparently, is some kind of fishing terminology.

Typical scene.

This goes on throughout the story. She talks about having sex with strangers, he compares it to fishing.  Yes-hopefully you get why its 'laughable' more than funny.
Towards the end, I started doing other things so my time wouldnt have been totally wasted.
Im sure plenty of money will be made on this as its basically porn, and porn passed off as art or mainstream film always sells.
Overall, the whole thing, as with many "party" or "freak" movies, just reminds me of various people i've known or particular nights.  I just don't think its anything special, and, if you want-no matter what country you are in-Im pretty sure you can go out and find a prostitute and have some meaningless sex.
It's not impressive or worthy of artistic treatment as an observational phenomenon, which is how Trier treats it.  It's just blah. For example, there is a scene which consists of hundreds of penis's (penii?) being shown one after the other.  Point?
I suspect his ideaology concerns demonstrating how "Man" (note the capitol m) is a slave to his urges, biological in particular.  Not exactly news to any female over 8 years old, and not particularly true individually.
I guess i'm just too old to find it anything but porn with too much dialogue.
If your girl is watching your web history though or you otherwise are having problems finding masterbatory fodder-there it is.