criterionforum.org

My uni library has the book upon which The Best Intentions is based - it appears to be a cross between a screenplay/playscript and a novel.

Anyone read it? It looks tempting - though it'd probably pay to read The Magic Lantern first.

Dylan wrote:Has anybody seen these films written (but not directed) by Bergman?

Sunday's Children
The Last Gasp
Private Confessions
In the Presence of a Clown

I've seen "The Best Intentions," which was great, and "Faithless," which was very good.

Actually, Bergman did direct "Clown," which was a dour Swedish TV film....definitely minor Bergman. But "Private Confessions" is one of his best scripts, and Liv Ullmann's directing is as stellar as it is for the remarkable "Faithless" (Lena Endre's performance in "Faithless" is as stunning as anything Liv ever did onscreen). "Sunday's Children" is interesting if unessential; haven't seen "Last Gasp."

NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote:Anyone got any news about the english language Face to Face site?????? I've sent a couple of e-mails but no response.

The website now says English version to be launched in May 2006.

I liked In the Presence of a Clown...

How did you two see "In the Presence of a Clown?" Is "Sunday's Children" or "Private Confessions" on DVD anywhere with english subtitles?

And one more question, I read a rumor that there will be a Polish DVD of "Face to Face" coming out soon. This was from a post on IMDB, so of course this isn't reliable, but I was wondering if anybody might have any information about this.

I would get the $13 DVD at SuperHappyFun (with "Karin's Face") if I knew for sure it wouldn't be released in the next year.

I traded for a VHS copy of Clown a while back, it played on Canadian TV, I think their version of Bravo. One day soon I'll transfer it to DVD.

What are some favorite pre-1957 Bergman? Of these I've only seen "Smiles of a Summer's Night," which is okay but also my least favorite of his works. I'm already planning to purchase "Summer Interlude," "To Joy," and "Monika" eventually (they all sound great to me, especially "Summer Interlude"). How about the others ("Crisis," "Port of Call," etc.)?

I just looked over his filmography and I've seen 17 Bergman films (not counting the ones he wrote but didn't direct), which includes most of the major ones from his 1957-1982 period, and of course I would like to see them all eventually (including all of the ones he wrote).

Kind of strange that "Face to Face" isn't out yet.

Dylan wrote:How did you two see "In the Presence of a Clown?"

NY Film Festival

Dylan wrote:What are some favorite pre-1957 Bergman?

I have a personal fondness for the all the early Bergman films I've been able to see so far, like discovering unsung gems that just don't have an equivalent in American cinema. For all the melodramatic and sentimental nonsense in some of them, Bergman's vision is so clear and unique that watching them has always felt like breath of fresh air: Port of Call, Three Strange Loves, Secrets of Women, Summer Interlude...

A Lesson in Love cracks me up every time. Monika -- Harriet Andersson turning, looking directly into the camera -- simply unforgettable. To Joy -- the scene where Stig Olin has his fingernails painted by Margit Carlqvist -- an amazing Lynchian moment, twenty-seven years before David Lynch! Frost the clown recounting the story of his wife in Sawdust and Tinsel -- a heart-rending instant classic. That photo shoot in Dreams -- hilarious! And for all the obviousness of Smiles of Summer Night, it's still pretty damn funny.

Galen Young wrote:

Dylan wrote:What are some favorite pre-1957 Bergman?

I have a personal fondness for the all the early Bergman films I've been able to see so far, like discovering unsung gems that just don't have an equivalent in American cinema. For all the melodramatic and sentimental nonsense in some of them, Bergman's vision is so clear and unique that watching them has always felt like breath of fresh air: Port of Call, Three Strange Loves, Secrets of Women, Summer Interlude...

A Lesson in Love cracks me up every time. Monika -- Harriet Andersson turning, looking directly into the camera -- simply unforgettable. To Joy -- the scene where Stig Olin has his fingernails painted by Margit Carlqvist -- an amazing Lynchian moment, twenty-seven years before David Lynch! Frost the clown recounting the story of his wife in Sawdust and Tinsel -- a heart-rending instant classic. That photo shoot in Dreams -- hilarious! And for all the obviousness of Smiles of Summer Night, it's still pretty damn funny.

What's so "obvious" about it?

Dylan wrote:Monika -- Harriet Andersson turning, looking directly into the camera -- simply unforgettable.

Her turning away from the camera at one point was quite good too - nudge, nudge.

tavernier wrote:What's so "obvious" about it?

Hmmm, okay. Lets see what makes Smiles so "obvious"...

Over the course of the fifteen films Bergman made prior to Smiles, (of which I've seen only ten), and the stories, characters and themes he explored in them -- I have the impression of Smiles as being a kind of "Bergman's greatest hits" to that date: Gunnar, Harriet, Eva, Margit, Jarl, Ake, Naima -- the gangs all here, once again frolicking through another tale of gender/age/class/religious/adulterous psychological warfare over sex and love, this time for broad comedic laughs. It may well be his most accessible film ever, full of marvelous bon mots that even people unfamiliar with Bergman can enjoy. (which probably accounts for its wide popularity)

The two legal clerks at the beginning of the film telegraph the whole tale to come in their gossip about Gunner's son getting into "Daddy's flower bed" (Gunner's much younger wife). The first time we see the son and wife, they are together, and it feels fairly obvious that they belong together (it did to me, anyway). Moments later Gunner is moaning "Desiree" in a nap next to his wife, who hears this...and you know who Gunner is going to end up with by the end of the picture. All those visual sight gags -- the sexually repressed clergyman of a son clutching the "wicked" guitar... Eva putting the droopy night cap on Gunner… Bergman even manages to ring grim comic hilarity out of a game of Russian roulette! Genius!

For all the "obviousness" of Bergman's overwrought theatrical machinations -- they do not harm my complete enjoyment of Smiles one iota -- the fun is in watching the journey to its most obvious end...

Sure, sure, but this is a comedy and, in the mode in which Bergman is using it, it is by definition fairly obvious. Think of Shakespeare's comedies, nearly all of which are obvious in the same ways you describe. What makes it interesting is the way in which Bergman infuses this formula with his own mordant, Scando-pragmatic sensibility. (The patent lack of an adequate resolution for the Count and Countess Malcolm neatly foreshadowing Johann and Marianne in Scenes from a Marriage.) Interestingly, along with Ian at Notcoming.com, you are the second person in a week to impugn (however lightly) this film's utter brilliance. Actually, Ian extended it to all/most of Bergman's major 50's films, a charge that (while I semi-agree re: The Seventh Seal) is otherwise utterly mindboggling to me.

Back to early Bergman: I also have a fondness for these early films, but there are a few that are essential. In rough order of what I perceive to be their importance and worth:
• Sawdust and Tinsel
• Waiting Women / Secrets of Women
• Summer Interlude
• The Devil's Wanton / Prison
• Lesson in Love
• Three Strange Loves

These are just some of my favorites, but I think all of his early films are fascinating and usually contain at least some unexpected and brilliantly conceived element. You should also seek out Alf Sjöberg's Hets / Torment / Frenzy, which also makes a nice companion piece with Bergman's directorial debut Crisis.

leo goldsmith wrote: Interestingly, along with Ian at Notcoming.com, you are the second person in a week to impugn (however lightly) this film's utter brilliance. Actually, Ian extended it to all/most of Bergman's major 50's films, a charge that (while I semi-agree re: The Seventh Seal) is otherwise utterly mindboggling to me.

That article is the most laugh out loud funny thing I've read about Bergman in a while! "...seems something of a historical curiosity"

"Wild Strawberries...its emotional effects never really run deep." Ouch. Really?!

"...the strained, forced comic tone of Smiles of a Summer's Night never really works."
Well...it's the complete opposite in my not so humble opinion. The humor is, er, a bit obvious, but so what?!

The Seventh Seal -- if being parodied by Woody Allen and Monty Python isn't the highest form of compliment, I don't know what is. Bergman is one the extremely few filmmakers who can make a period piece flawlessly and make it not feel "period" whatsoever. Effortlessly and with complete mastery...

The Virgin Spring -- um, I can't stop giggling over the comments! It reminds me of those mystifying remarks made by Alexander Payne in this article here. (have posted this once before) Geez, whatever dude!

I more or less agree with my colleague (!) Ian's appraisal of Seventh Seal and Virgin Spring -- both of which I think are overpraised in relation to other contemporary Bergman films that may or may not have had the same English-speaking-world release -- but I don't favor Bergman's later films to his earlier ones. If anything, I feel the opposite: there's something more thrilling to me (in this case) of a young(ish) filmmaker given an unusual amount of freedom to work compulsively and prolifically on a set of very consistent themes. Of course, I adore much of his later work, but it seems unnecessary to valorize one in expense of the other. Oddly, most people I talk to like his "middle period" (the 60s).

This was posted in the Passages thread, and since I didn't want to hijack that one, I'm moving it here.

Galen Young wrote:Saturday 12 May 1962

Dagens Nyheter today tells of Bunuel's love of Bergman:
Ingmar Bergman - a tragic case

thinks the Mexican director Luis Bunuel, who in the latest issue of ABF's magazine The Window is interviewed by Bjorn Kumm. According to Bunuel, Bergman is "a man who squanders his talent on rubbish. He is a very good director, but he is taken up with questions that are not interesting. What is it he asks about in every film? God, evil, good, whether God exists -- you can't keep on with that sort of thing! I can hardly sit his films out. He can keep on selling this superficial quasi-philosophy to the decadent public. It's typical that he has gained such success in America. The Americans, these gringos, are interested in that sort of thing.

Love passionately requited. This was noticeable when a TV program on films ran the communion parody from Viridiana last winter; IB's disgusted mutter:

"...how utterly tasteless and puerile."

A couple of things: 1) I completely agree with Bunuel's assessment of Bergman's work up to that point. 2) Bergman stopped making those kinds of films at about the same time Bunuel made his comments. Maybe Bergman was becoming as sick of his films as Bunuel was.

What's the scoop on the Tartan Bergman dvd releases ?

Has anyone picked them up ?

filmfan wrote:What's the scoop on the Tartan Bergman dvd releases ?

Has anyone picked them up?

well this is a bit old, sorry i didn't notice it earlier. i have two of the Tartan R0 bergmans -- the rite and port of call. i haven't actually gotten a chance to watch port yet (although on a quick look the image does look good), but the rite is very good, and the DVD quality seems great. i'm no technical stickler like some around here, but the print looked clear and crisp and no noticeable flaws. the film itself is quite good too, although it's clearly a minor bergman. it quite explicitly deals with censorship and the pressures placed on artists by outside influences, and in that respect alone i think it's very much worth seeing. otherwise, great performances from the usual bergman regulars, and some visually impressive semi-surreal imagery (although most of the film is visually quite spartan).

Yes, the only real shortcoming of the Tartans is their lack of extra materials, not to speak of an audio commentary. But the image in all cases I have seen was very good, and at least in the case of "The seventh seal" and "Smiles of a summer night", Criterion is NOT better in this respect. Oh yes, and the subs are removable in all cases!
I'd still go for the Criterion editions because of the extras. But there are some Tartans that are the only editions of the movies in question (not just the early ones), and thus must be very strongly recommended, like "the Rite" and the much underrated "All these women". On the latter film: what do you other Bergman fans think of that oddity in the director's work?

Tommaso wrote:Yes, the only real shortcoming of the Tartans is their lack of extra materials, not to speak of an audio commentary. But the image in all cases I have seen was very good, and at least in the case of "The seventh seal" and "Smiles of a summer night", Criterion is NOT better in this respect. Oh yes, and the subs are removable in all cases!
I'd still go for the Criterion editions because of the extras. But there are some Tartans that are the only editions of the movies in question (not just the early ones), and thus must be very strongly recommended, like "the Rite" and the much underrated "All these women". On the latter film: what do you other Bergman fans think of that oddity in the director's work?

yea, i certainly wouldn't pick any of the Tartans over the available Criterions, and i'll probably wait on a few of them that are likely to be future Criterions (summer with monika, the magician). but it looks like Tartan is going to be the only place for a long time to see all the earliest Bergmans, as well as a few lesser-known later ones.

speaking of which, can anyone comment on life of the marionettes and after the rehearsal? those both look like odd later ones that would probably be good choices to get from Tartan.

I haven't seen "After the rehearsal" yet, but "Marionettes" can definitely be recommended. It is one of his most 'uncomfortable' , dark and abrasive films, deeply unsettling in places, although it never reaches the heights of "Persona". The German actors are fine, but they never come near Bibi or Liv, of course.
This was apparently a production for German TV, and it shows: there's more damage and a clearly weaker picture and sound than elsewhere on the Tartans, but I suppose this is entirely due to the source materials. Clearly not the place to start with if you're new to Bergman, but otherwise a must see. (although I assume most people would not want to watch it too often...). Some really striking scenes, and apparently Bergman was unusually satisfied with it (it's really miles ahead of "The serpent's egg", for example).

Now I only hope that Tartan will release Bergman's late productions for Swedish TV as well. And you can trustily buy "The magician" from Tartan: it really looks good.

cool, good to hear, sounds like i'll add that to my list - i love the darker, creepy bergmans like hour of the wolf. i'm definitely a big bergman fan, i even think the serpent's egg isn't ALL bad (the ending sequence of that is really chilling, for one thing). i'm sure the Tartan magician looks great, i'd just rather wait for some extras from criterion.

Well, "Marionettes" isn't creepy in the sense of "Hour of the wolf" (one of my favourite Bergmans, incidentally), but rather disturbing in its relentlessness in analysing a psychic and marriage breakdown and the ensuing murder of a prostitute. There's not a glimmer of hope here, unlike most of his films. "Cries and whispers" is uplifting compared to this.

"The serpent's egg" is not bad compared to most of the other stuff made in the late 70s (great colour visuals, for example), but the whole references to German expressionism (especially in its Mabuse-like end) did not convince me at all, quite unlike the various horror movie references in "Hour of the wolf" which I think are great. I feel that in "The serpent's egg" he unsuccesfully tried to be a little more commercial, catering to the arthouse at the same time as to a more mainstream Hollywood audience. And so it's all a little bit of a mish-mash... he himself despised it in later years.

yea, serpent's egg is definitely the weakest bergman i've seen, it's a pretty clumsy reach for the mainstream. i think bergman figured as long as he had the hollywood budget, he might as well take advantage of it and make a "big" film, and it didn't really work. even the usually dependable liv ullman is histrionic and unsatisfying in it. i still can't call it a total failure though, and i think the final encounter w/ the nazi scientist set the right tone of creepiness and that the film would've been much better if that scene's tone had been maintained consistently throughout the film. i think it worked because it was the kind of small-cast chamber piece that bergman is best at, whereas a lot of the rest of the film didn't have that kind of focus.

A new doc on Ingmar, playing New York's Film Forum in December.

From Film Forum's press release:

Bergman Island

Directed By Marie Nyreröd. 85 mins. In Swedish with English Subtitles.

Someone once claimed that the New York Film Critics Circle was founded to give Ingmar Bergman a prize every year. Indeed, Bergman's extraordinary output (more than 50 features since 1946) and his outsized influence makes him one of the leading auteurs of the 20th century. This visit with him, at home on the Swedish island of Faro, elicits his final, brilliant thinking on the masterpieces PERSONA and CRIES AND WHISPERS, and the role played in his life and art by fear, love, death, music, humiliation and, in his own words, the intensely erotic nature of film and theater.