movies

Well along in my N'x/Bergman festival now. In this one, there is a harrowing death that lasts half the film (Harriet Andersson in constant pain), and a scene of Ingrid Thulin cutting her privates with a sharp piece of glass, and then smearing the blood from that on her face in front of her husband - I think to turn him off. She's very cold to her other sister, played by Liv Ullman, who looks like a million in this by the way. But my god, what a mess of a "film." You can safely avoid this one - go for Wild Strawberries or Smiles of A Summer Night instead.

I'm about 3/4 of the way through my chronological Bergman festival - and it's not looking good for the "late" Bergman. The best thing about The Passion of Anna is seeing Bergmans actors in color! What blue eyes they all have... This movie, like all his 1964-1970 movies available on N'x, seem like the experimental work of a film student. Plots are beside the point, and logic has no place at all. Pointless. In this movie, Anna (Liv Ullman) is crazy, and Andreas (Max von Sydow) is a recluse who lives with her for as long as he can stand it. It's not clear, but she may have been the one mutilating animals on the island they live on, but another man gets blamed for it and hangs himself. What these films have in common is they were all written by Bergman after his stay in a psychiatric hospital. Bergman himself, in one of his interviews from this period, said he was pleased but he didn't understand how other people got his films when he himself barely understood them. I wholeheartedly agree with him. So far, his great films for me are: Wild Strawberries, Smiles of a Summer Night, Port of Call (all 5 stars), and To Joy, and Torment (4 stars), all of which are pre-1958. I also 4-starred The Virgin Spring (1960), and Autumn Sonata (1978, with Ingrid Bergman as a cold mother). Bergman has 25 films on N'x, but per imdb he actually made 68 films!

You want to see the best of David Mamet? This is the best of David Mamet. Nobody delivers Mamet dialogue like Joe Mantegna, and Lindsay Crouse is simply perfect. This is a movie of con artistry - that's all you really need to know. It's the gem of Mamet's career.

2.5 stars. It was interesting as a history lesson - I hadn't really known that the French had taken over Algeria for 130 years. I mean, according to this film, the French thought of Algeria as another French province: in the film many French people are there living their normal French lives, dancing, drinking, holding horse races, all in the French part of the city, with the Muslims off in the Muslim part of the city. I guess the French kind of thought of themselves as the new Romans. After the revolt starts, the French soldiers broadcast to the rebelling Algerians "France is your motherland." The action of the film is centered on the actions of the revolutionary "cells" - people who carry out hits on the French policeman and the placing of bombs, and the countering force of the French army. Other than that history lesson, the movie itself is not that good - pretty low budget with serviceable writing and acting, and overly long at 2 hours - it could easily have been done in half that time.

2.5 stars. Bergman's horror movie is not bad for a horror movie. A man and his pregnant wife are alone on an island, except for all the odd people who live in the castle, and invite them up all the time. One of them is a dead ringer for Bela Lugosi, and another is like the hot girl from "The Shining" who turns into an old hag just after Jack starts to make out with her. Another is a kid who bites the man like a vampire, and so he kills the kid and tosses him into the sea. The best scene is of one of the ghouls walking up a wall and then across a ceiling. Chilling. Disturbing. Gave me a bit of a headache.

I gave this thing an hour and 50 minutes. But even then there was still the better part of an hour to go. I just couldn't do it. I had almost turned it off just before George C. Scott came on - his presence led me to watch for another 40 minutes. James Stewart is set up as almost too good of a guy: he loves to fish, he loves books - he's a lawyer, he's kind to an old drunk lawyer, he has a good relationship with his feisty assistant, Eve Arden, he listens to jazz, he's good pals with the local jazz musician, he plays jazz. Arrgh. Enough! In the case, he's defending a soldier for killing a man who allegedly raped his hot tramp wife (lucscious Lee Remick), the defense being that this soldier was simply compelled to do it. Verrry slowww. I had a headache by the time I was 3/4 through it. And that jazz music soundtrack just sucked.

Having watched every episode for the first 3 years, Season 3 is the worst so far. The stories are just too convoluted for a one hour show. Season 1 is the season to watch - the shows were original, surprising, and not formulaic.

1.5 stars. I've been on a personal Bergman festival for the last few weeks. Having watched over a dozen of Bergman's films that preceded this 1967 one, many of which I gave 4 or 5 stars to (Torment 1946, Port of Call '48, Smiles of a Summer Night '55, Wild Strawberries '57), it was surprising to see this one with a very, very, student-film quality to it, so much so I think this is one that Saturday Night Live or anyone else would parody if they wanted to parody goofy student filming. Bergman, in his private life, was transitioning from Bibi Andersson to Liv Ullman (the 2 actresses who share the lead in this film) at the time, so I guess he just wanted them both in one film. Maybe it was porn for him. Speaking of which, the only reason I give this 2 stars instead of 1, is the erotic monologue by Bibi, almost like a Penthouse letter, that comes in at about 30 minutes into the film, regarding her and stranger sunbathing on a secluded beach when 2 boys start watching them. Otherwise, this is a very disjointed film about a nurse caring for a self-imposed mute in a beautiful beach house provided by the mute's psychiatrist. The mute, Liv, was a famous actress, and possibly went mute because she got pissed off by getting pregnant, perhaps. (It's all very unclear. Bibi herself in a 2002 interview in the special features pretty much admits she still doesn't understand what this film was about.) Ingmar wrote this when he himself was in the hospital, doped up on drugs, and just after he had met Bibi's young friend Liv, whom he told he would put in his next picture. So if you want to see an extremely goofy film starring Ingmar Bergman's girlfriends, this is it. -8/26/09

I haven't even seen this film and I'm gonna go ahead and give it a 1-star, just based on the reviews. A lot of them read like 2-star reviews ("the acting was horrible, and the story was weird) but the reviewer goes ahead and gives it 3 or 4 stars, because it's Bergman. Bergman made a lot of great films ("Smiles," "Strawberries," "Port of Call") but that shouldn't elevate sh*t to sh*nola.

Seeing the huge number of 5-star reviews here (it is now Aug 21, 2009, and there are "10,095 ratings") for this amateurish and uninteresting flick, I'm convinced N'x has been invaded by paid or otherwise compensated reviewers. Amateurishness per se isn't bad - I loved Cloverfield for example - but this thing just sucks. I walked out after 45 minutes. When I came home and read the N'x reviews, I was surprised and heartened to read that more than a couple of reviews mentioned people walking out on this thing. As a sci-fi lover, I'm disappointed once more (kind of like a Cubs fan). But I do have hope on the horizon: Cameron's 'Avatar' coming in December looks like the real thing.