MD: OK – I loved this film, too, but why was it Wow for you? I have written a review in the movie review section, I believe, stating what I think. I am always interested in hearing others reaction to this amazing Bergman film. Along with Fanny & Alexander, it is my own personal favourite Bergman – the film I keep thinking about again and again.
I love this film too. One thing for me i never know where a Bergman film is going. But they always are soothing and easy to slip into. Even when disterbing.
Wow indeed!
I have only seen Seventh Seal, Sawdust and Tinsel, and Wild Strawberries from Bergman so far (soon to add Fanny and Alexander), but I definitely liked Wild Strawberries most. It was beautifully filmed and the imagery, specifically in the dream sequences, was quite vivid. I loved the flashbacks, and how the movie played between past and present so well. I found the professors struggles with regret, and search for redemption rather touching. Overall it was quite a special movie for me. It had a very serene feel to it, and flowed so well. Anyways, thats what I made of it.
Wild Strawberries is incredibly close to my heart. So much so that lesser filmmakers (read: 99% other filmmakers) can use imagery from the film (e.g, Crimes and Misdemeanors) and easily earn my trust. A beautiful, beautiful film.
This is definitely my favorite Bergman. It was the first one I ever exposed myself to and it means the most to me because it opened the door to the rest of this man’s amazing body of work. There is just so much greatness contained in this film, there is no way to break it down and explain it properly and even come close to doing it justice. I could watch this daily forever.
After that, I am perfectly addicted to Fanny & Alexander. After reading every possible biography/autobio about Bergman, seeing so much of his life reflected on the screen is amazing to me. That, plus the fact that it was intended to be his final farewell to film…its the greatest ‘goodbye’ in film history. Absolutely flawless regardless of which version you choose to watch (for me the super-version is the best).
Finally watched this and it is an unquestionably great film. It strikes me how much energy his films have. ‘Ingmar Bergman’ is sometimes used almost as shorthand for deep, philosophical (read depressing) cinema, but these characters are alive and witty, never boring. I still rate the Seventh Seal as my favorite of his but this is definitely a film I’ll return to again for sheer enjoyment not just thoughtful contemplation.
A wonderful film in almost every way. The surrealistic dream sequence. The comic moments on the road to Lund. But there was always a flaw in the script, or if not in the script, then a miscasting of Victor Sjostrom as Borg. He’s far to sweet a man, too full of goodness, to be the cold and selfish man that the script wants him to be.
But a wonderful film.
I borrowed out Persona this evening, maybe I’ll start another thread for it.
Amazing, haven’t seen much Bergman but this film is amazing.
Bergman is a firm believer in secular salvation. By secular salvation I mean that heaven is possible here on earth without any regard to religion or even spirituality. The scene involving the wild strawberries and milk is nothing short of the wine and the water used in the sacrament of the mass. Both are sacred mysteries; one pagan and one religious, both represent life at once momentary and one eternal. I prefer the momentary pleasure. The joy of that scene transcends any promise of salvation in an after life.
I’m always amazed by how much I still have to learn about film. I did see some of this movie and was moved by it more than I wanted to admit. The final closeup of Sjostrom with the radiant joy and nostalgia on his face as he sees his parents as they were is ecstatically beautiful. I’ve always shied away from Bergman I guess because I didn’t find his films as “sexy” as Godard’s or Fassbinder’s. Not that sex is all I look for — far from it. But there’s an ambiance I failed to appreciate, a kind of secular spirituality that’s more about transcendence than immanence.
A soap opera masquerading as art and saved by a beautiful face.
I just bought Autumn Sonata and Cries and Whispers, both were on sale. Persona was awesome, but it didn’t top WS.
I just saw this last night and I’m still reeling from it. I was planning on watching Seventh Seal tonight but I need some time to digest this film more. I’ve stated in another thread that it made me feel I was watching it in its own time, as if I was seeing it first-run, in 1957. Powerful and beautiful, with so much to unpack. I know I’ll be returning to it again soon. At the moment it’s a little hard to talk about precisely why this film has affected me so much, but it’s stuck deep in my head, and I like it being there.
Thanks to whomever it was that suggested Wild Strawberries as a way into Bergman.
Justin, would love to hear your thoughts on Bergman’s Scenes from a Marriage ( in a thread of its own, if there is one…)
@MMOORE: I did want to respond to your comment about Sjostrom being miscast as Borg. This is coming off of having just seen the film, but I have to severely disagree.
To me, we are introduced to Borg at a the end of his life, at a time when he is beginning to regret the cold and selfish person he has been (and still remains, through most of the film). We are supposed to feel sympathy for him even though we understand other character’s resentments of him.
We want him to find redemption, or at least strive to seek it since that act alone is a kind of atonement.
After Fanny & Alexander this is probably my favorite Bergman. Or perhaps it’s my favorite, and F&A is my second-fave. As with most Bergman I’ve seen, it is so beautiful, so gently tragic, so meditative. This may be an odd thing to praise, but I love that Bergman never resorts to the sort of gratuitous violence that seems to almost inevitably occur in other films, and his work is no less profound or impactful for it.
While this film pales in comparison to Fanny and Alexander, it was the very first Bergman film I saw, and it blew me away, with its imagery and themes. A great and wholly original road movie (who would have ever thought up such an original concept of the road movie other than Bergman?) Its themes of self-discovery and humanity’s existence play out beautifully, and I appreciated the fact that, after Virgin Spring, it left me with a sense of optimism rather than despair.
I never included Wild Strawberries in my list of favorite Bergman films, until last night I realized this was only because it was the one I hadn’t seen for the longest. It was incredible. I guess what I’m trying to say is if you don’t love this film rewatch it, and that every Bergman film should be tied for first and it is impossible to pick a favorite.
Drew, I had the same experience watching Wild Strawberries on the Criterion DVD. It’s a simply remarkable film. And MMoore, as to Sjostrom being miscast, I think that’s way off the mark. Bergman himself said that Sjostrom took the script and made it his own. Since Bergman was only 39 when he made it a Sjostrom was 78, he brought to it his life experience of an old man facing exactly the same crises that Borg is experiencing. Few films bring us so insightfully into stark black and white reality of life in one’s later years. That is, you’re either alive or you’re dead, and Borg at the very end, chooses to accept life as it is and live.
I really enjoyed watching this movie and loved the way that Bergman showed us who Borg was. By the time we meet Borg, he is an old man and contemplating his death. The man that we meet is so so different from the man that has impacted so many lives, and its easy to be sympathetic. I like that the flashbacks are of others, we aren’t seeing the way Borg acted, we are seeing the way he made people feel. This one will stick with me for a while.
I strongly disliked this film. I thought it was pretty clumsy storytelling.
Any body who comes from a family they love but do not fully understand should see this film—none of the other masters can top Bergman’s ending in this film in its total perfection—to see this ending is to fall in love with a movie and to know what we mean by fully realized—literally everything that comes before the ending falls into place in the final frames—a movie to break your heart and then put it all back together in its denouement as the French would say.
What a wonderful performance by Sjostrom and imbeccable direction by Bergman. Whatever sentimentality the film has, it earns the payoff at the end and leaves me in tears. The whole film strikes within me such a strange feeling as I watch it: a mixture of loss, nostalgia, and love. I’m gladdened by Bergman’s expressionistic dream sequences and flashbacks, which he later disavowed in favor of stark realism.
Which Bergman do you guys prefer: early “Seventh Seal” expressionistic Bergman or “Silence of God” trilogy Bergman or later realistic Bergman?
I watched this film this morning on my porch and this time around the track I realized something very interesting about it.
While characters bring up Borg’s coldness, his sterility, we never actually see him being anything less than charming and pleasant. Even the catalyst for the rift between his daughter-in-law and him is dialogue that she quotes back to him, something most directors would have had us witness. Same with the insistence on prayer and sin that Isak holds onto as a young man, we hear Sara speak of it but we never witness it. It is as if the film has already forgiven him for his coldness, the narrative is just about him forgiving himself and becoming able to move on.
>>and the imagery, specifically in the dream sequences, was quite vivid<<
I agree & yet, oddly, the first image that comes to mind whenever I think of this film is of Sjostrom sitting in his study at his desk. The compostion and the lighting are so perfect.
The first time I watched this I wasn’t entirely convinced because Sjostrom’s performance didn’t convince me (and to be honest I was far too inexperienced with film) but on the rewatch two years later, about a month ago, I absolutely loved it.
About my complaint I used to have about Victor Sjostrom’s character; I now realise I got the wrong end of the stick entirely. The character is not meant to be cold – he is in many regards a warm and caring character (heck, he cared about his wife enough to remember the details about her cheating on him, in detail, 40 YEARS after it happened) who is loved by all the other characters by the end of the film. The characters making accusations that he is cold are wrong and because he worries so much about what others think of him he takes the accusations to heart – the film is NOT about him coming to terms with his coldness but instead him learning to balance out other’s incorrect views of him with a realisation of who he actually was and is.
I have to disagree with you, William, I think the character isn’t cold during the film but in the past had been, as seen in his reception to his mother and you can see bits of it poking out when he discusses his son’s debt and their shared nature. If he hadn’t been than I don’t think there would be such a unanimous opinion of his personality, especially when you take into account that several of these voices are coming from his own mind. I think the film is less about him coming to terms with his coldness and more forgiving himself for sabotaging so many of his relationships.
I know this topic has been dormant for a while, but I just finished a second closer watch of Wild Strawberries, and some of the comments above seem like interesting questions. In particular, I’m interested in the issues that Borg spends the movie dealing with. His daughter in law gives us the first hint at what’s “wrong” with Borg, that he’s supposedly selfish and “ruthless,” but as the viewer, we never really get to see those traits. Marianne’s complaints seem to be the misinformed by-product of Borg’s aloofness, and his refusal to forgive his son’s debt.
In fact, Borg’s dream sequences seem to suggest that he’s TOO generous and forgiving, so much so that he comes across as self-important and emotionally impotent. This, I feel, is the subtext of the most powerful flashbacks: Borg’s cousin Sara claiming that he’s sweet and loving but unexciting; his wife anticipating his patronizing tolerance of her infidelity. This is certainly a personal flaw that’s caused him frustration and heartache, and led him into a painful marriage, but it isn’t the same thing as selfishness and ruthlessness, is it?
How do you square Marianne’s perception of Isak with Sara’s and his wife’s perception, and with Isak’s perception of himself?
Mister Dob
Wow.