 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 2, 2019 - 12:05 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
Through a Glass Darkly (1961) 7.5/10 (up from 6/10)
Through a Glass Darkly could have easily been an embarrassing disaster had it not been for Harriet Andersson (Karin), whose magnificent performance is the film’s centerpiece. Films dealing with mental illness often have cringeworthy, over-the-top performances, but Andersson does so well in making her character unbalanced, but also painfully aware of her deteriorating condition.
Andersson looks stunning, even when her character is in the throes of schizophrenia. She is no less a beautiful goddess than she was eight years prior at age 21 when her sensuality captivated the world in Summer with Monika (1953). Why she isn't better remembered as a 1950s sex symbol is beyond me.
Andersson's features have become more angular, but that angularity perfectly suits the character, who’s gone through the hell of mental illness and even worse, early ‘60s mental health “treatment.”
The religious themes are also well handled, but they do not resonate for this nonbeliever. However, any notion of spiritual strength fares better with the positive-leaning family dynamic revealed at the film’s conclusion.
Through a Glass Darkly's best scene is when Martin (Max Von Sydow) calmly tears into David (Gunnar Björnstrand) with knowing and pointed criticisms. David is a would-be novelist who is a selfish, emotionally-distant person with his own inner torment; Björnstrand's character has to be a Bergman surrogate.
I’ve read criticisms of the young son, Minus (Lars Passgård), but he more than held his own alongside those Bergman heavyweights.
There’s a brilliant use of Johann Sebastian Bach’s Sarabande, Cello Suite No. 2 in D Minor (performed by Erling Blöndal Bengtsson). Bergman scholar Peter Cowie notes the idea of the film’s four performers working off of one another much like a string quartet.
Through a Glass Darkly won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film of 1961. It was Bergman’s second consecutive Oscar (The Virgin Spring won for 1960).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1996 was also the year I watched my first Bergman film (The Seventh Seal).
How do you remember something like that?
I remember the 1st Bergman film I saw (The Magician) was a VHS tape rental during mid-1989 (late May/early June, I think).
How does one remember such? I'm unable to explain it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blimey ...zardoz wandering over this side ...did u take a wrong turn? Ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blimey ...zardoz wandering over this side ...did u take a wrong turn? Ha ha
Yup. My stone head has travelled through the Vortex before!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having not read it for years, but always liking its insights, I ordered a copy of John Simon's film review collection "Something to Declare" from Amazon and have been diving into it this past week. "..Declare" is a companion volume to Simon's "Reverse Angle" - "Reverse" covers his reviews of American movies of the 1970s, "Declare" non-American films (primarily European) of the same period.
Simon was one of Bergman's foremost champions - his interview/analysis book "Ingmar Bergman Directs," which covers Bergman's movies up to the end of the 1960s (focusing on a few of his best, such as The Naked Night and Persona), is a must for any Bergman student. (Vernon Young's "Cinema Borealis: Ingmar Bergman and the Swedish Ethos," published the same year, offers an interesting perspective as well.)
Simon praised Bergman's films of the 1950s and the 1960s - his reviews of Bergman's 1970s work in "Something to Declare" charts what Simon considers Bergman's decline. Even the Swedish director's most highly celebrated works of this period - Cries and Whispers, The Magic Flute, Autumn Sonata - are not considered up to the level of Bergman's best, despite their good points. Simon tries to find virtues in the fascinatingly weird - but critically savaged - 1977 The Serpent's Egg, but has to admit that Bergman is out of his depth with the political and surreal aspects of its story.
In a later book, Simon is also not bowled over by Bergman's 1980s "comeback" film, Fanny and Alexander. While I agree that Bergman pretty much peaked in the late 1960s with Persona and Shame, his later work is still worth watching (although I need to rewatch the complete Scenes From a Marriage, which I didn't "get into" when I tried it before.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why - because we're shallow and smutty? Pretty poor form that, Jim.
(Heh, Fanny!)
Bollocks! Wot a cock-up ... oi, Tall Guy?
Bit of a sticky wicket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oooh matron...!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
