Bergman. Bergman’s case is incredibly strong. I have him graded out with 6 masterpieces (in 4 separate decades) which is tied for the most of any director all-time, has north of 20 archiveable films and had a clearly, unique auteur voice (if you’re easily parodied like Bergman -think Wes Anderson SNL skit- or in this case Woody Allen doing his Bergman impression in many films) it’s a sign you have your own cinematic universe and style. He’s both an amazing visual director (The Silence is a superb film with very little dialogue, Cries and Whispers is breathtaking with its use of color) and one of the greatest (if not the greatest) screenwriters of all-time (The Seventh Seal, Wild Strawberries and Winter Light, are all 50 of the best screenplays of all-time).
Best film: Persona it’s stronger visually than The Seventh Seal. Bergman already had multiple masterpieces under his belt in 1966 when he made Persona and took wall-art and his photographic achievements to a new stratosphere. The film’s wild narrative can be seen influencing everyone from Bunuel (Obscure Object of Desire) to Lynch (Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive). Sven Nykvist’s work is probably the most beautifully photographed black and white film ever made along with Raging Bull.
Total archiveable films: 21
top 100 films: 3 (Persona, The Seventh Seal, Cries and Whispers)
top 500 films: 9 (Persona, The Seventh Seal, Cries and Whispers, Fanny and Alexander, Wild Strawberries, Winter Light, The Virgin Spring The Silence, Scenes From a Marriage)
top 100 films of the decade: 10 (The Seventh Seal, Wild Strawberries, Persona, Winter Light, The Virgin Spring, The Silence, Hour of the Wolf, Cries and Whispers, Scenes From a Marriage, Fanny and Alexander)
most overrated: Hour of the Wolf is #442 on TSPDT and it doesn’t crack my top 500. For TSPDT it is Bergman’s 7th and I have it is his 10th best but we’re splitting hairs here which ultimately means I don’t think much here from Bergman is overrated if this is my choice for this slot.
most underrated: It’s still Winter Light. I’ve got it at #254 all-time and TSPDT has it at #518 so the consensus underrated this one by hundreds of spots. Maybe the critics’ praise for Paul Schrader’s First Reformed will help shed some light on this Bergman work. Striking to look at (check out this image below- unreal) and it has some of the most first-rate, and darkest/harshest, dialogue back and forths in screen history. The scene where Björnstrand eviscerates Ingrid Thulin is tough to watch.
gem I want to spotlight: Shame. It’s hard to keep track of all the brilliant collaborations (especially in the artistically fertile period of the 1960’s where Bergman has five top 100 films of the decade) with Bergman, his muse Liv Ullman, Max von Sydow, Gunnar Bjornstrand and dp Sven Nykvist but this one has the distinction of being Bergman’s only one set in the future and/or about the war. 33 minutes in there is the dazzling shot of Bergman’s trademark mise-en-scene blocking using faces as structures- von Sydow is lying flat on the ground and Ullmann’s face is cut in half just above. It’s gorgeous. There’s wonderful war-ravaged set pieces almost like a Rossellini post WW2- neorealism film. The silent, elliptically edited finale in the boat as they wade through dead bodies is brilliant as well. It’s an excellent addition to the Bergman canon.
stylistic innovations/traits: Framing, dialogue (the framing of dialogue and actors- specifically faces), religious filmmaker (certainly among the most thematically serious of auteurs). Like many of the greats who started out and are perhaps known for their work in black and white his work in color is astonishing (Fellini, Kurosawa are among the others who come to mind with Juliet of the Spirits and Ran). Specifically, both Cries and Whispers and Fanny and Alexander are among the 25-30 most beautiful color films ever made. His villain in Fanny and Alexander is also one of the most readily apparent or first to come to mind when I think of the history of cinema. Theology and intellectualism—meditations on God, death and doubt.
top 10
- Persona
- The Seventh Seal
- Cries and Whispers
- Fanny and Alexander
- Wild Strawberries
- Winter Light
- The Virgin Spring
- The Silence
- Scenes From a Marriage
- Hour of the Wolf
By year and grades
| 1951- Summer Interlude | R |
| 1953- Sawdust and Tinsel | HR |
| 1953- Summer With Monika | R |
| 1955- Smiles of a Summer Night | HR |
| 1957- The Seventh Seal | MP |
| 1957- Wild Strawberries | MP |
| 1958- The Magician | R |
| 1960 – The Virgin Spring | MS |
| 1961- Through a Glass Darkly | R |
| 1963- The Silence | MS |
| 1963- Winter’s Light | MS/MP |
| 1966- Persona | MP |
| 1968- Hour of the Wolf | HR |
| 1968- Shame | R/HR |
| 1969- The Passion of Anna | R |
| 1972- Cries and Whispers | MP |
| 1973- Scenes From a Marriage | MS |
| 1976- Face to Face | R |
| 1978- Autumn Sonata | HR |
| 1982- Fanny and Alexander | MP |
| 2003- Saraband | R |
*MP is Masterpiece- top 1-3 quality of the year film
MS is Must-see- top 5-6 quality of the year film
HR is Highly Recommend- top 10 quality of the year film
R is Recommend- outside the top 10 of the year quality film but still in the archives
Hey looking to get into Bergman where should I Start?
@Randy- thanks for the comment. I’d start with The Seventh Seal. It is where I started. I think Persona is slightly superior but it’s more challenging. Maybe Winter Light after that and pair it with Paul Schrader’s (writer of Taxi Driver) First Reformed. Bergman’s film was a major influence on Schrader’s film.
I would like to know what they are “most beautiful color films ever made”.Just to see them and how I really love your site a top 10 would be great
@Aldo– I’m missing 5 or 10 that belong right along side these but here’s a few off the top of my head that would make my very short list:
• Blue
• Raise the red lantern
• Juliet of the Spirits
• Pierrot le fou
• Suspiria
• Ran
• Fanny and Alexander
• Cries and whispers
• Vertigo
• Red shoes
• Red desert
• The cook the thief his wife and her lover
Is the question most beautiful films that are colour or most beautiful use of colour in film? You appear to have answered the latter (not that there isn’t crossover).
@Matt Harris and @Aldo— sorry, good catch Matt. Yes, my short list here from memory is specifically about the best use of color.
just “most beautiful films that are in color” would include some of those but certainly would include other films like Days of Heaven, 2001, Lawrence of Arabia, Tree of Life, In the Mood For Love, Barry Lyndon, The Conformist,
Hey. I’ve read that Bergman made “Arthouse movies”. This term is extremely hard to define.
‘Accessible’ ‘regular movie-goer’ favorites like In the Mood For Love, , Cinema Paradiso, Ikiru, Battle of Algiers and even A Clockwork Orange and The godfather 1 and 2 etc are referred to as Art house sometimes.
More ‘challenging’ works like Mirror, Andrei Rublev, Barry Lyndon are also referred to as arthouse.
What does this broad term mean to you? Aren’t all movies art?
@Azman– there’s a lot here. First off, I wouldn’t describe any of those movies as “accessible regular movie-goer favorites”– In the Mood For Love? Clockwork Orange? Really? I don’t care really- genre definitions go on forever without accomplishing much but I would disagree this description.
i think arthouse just typically means not for the masses– this definition is around– “An art film is typically a serious, independent film, aimed at a niche market rather than a mass” … many theaters that don’t run the big blockbuster movies are referred to as arthouse theaters as they play independent, foreign films, etc.
Maybe not In the mood for love, but Kubrick was always one of the best in the 20th century. People would look forward to going to his movies. In fact 2001 a space odyssey was the top grossing movie of 1968 (so a large mass were intrigued by it) and A clockwork Orange was top 5 for 1971.
Thinking about it, I wouldn’t really define any of those movies as regular movie goer movies either except for Cinema Paradiso and the Godfather 1 and 2. Maybe in the 50s and 60s and 70s, Ikiru, ACO and Algiers were movies for the masses, but not anymore.
Anyways, thanks for clearing things up for me. I understand it more now. I wasn’t aware that arthouse was a ‘genre’ that could be defined. I thought all movies are supposed to be art? Fury Road (for the masses) is also artistic just as another ‘arthouse’ sci fi masterpiece (2001 and ACO).
The word art house is extremely misleading and can scare away people from a certain few movies. A lot of art house movies are very accessible and really good movies that can be enjoyed by everyone (Cinema Paradiso, Battle of Algiers, Godfather etc).
I agree with you, genre definitions are extremely stupid.
My ranking:
1. Persona
2. The Seventh Seal
3. Scenes from a Marriage
4. Cries and Whispers
5. Wild Strawberries
6. The Silence
7. Fanny and Alexander
8. Winter Light
9. Autumn Sonata
10. Through a Glass Darkly
11. Shame
12. The Passion of Anna
13. The Virgin Spring
14. Summer Interlude
15. Hour of the Wolf.
Which version of Fanny and Alexander do you recommend? The 5 hour version or 3 hour version ?
@Pouria- I’ve never seen the 5 hour version. Sorry. I should do it next time.
Since this is Bergman’s theme, I wanted to buy the Criterion set of Bergman, but I see that you have 21 archivable movies and the set contains 39, I wonder if you have seen all of them, if so, are they archivable?
@Aldo- I haven’t seen 39. I’ve seen the 21 in the archives and maybe 5 or so that didn’t make it in the archives upon first viewing. But they have been scattered viewings (and rewatches) over the last 20 years. Only in the last 3 years or so have I make a real effort to go one by one (in order when I can) and watch all the available films for an auteur (did this with Ozu in 2018 among others, Scorsese in 2019, Kurosawa now)— it has been extremely rewarding. I have not done this with Bergman yet.
So if Bergman’s the finest screenwriter, then who else is in the top 10? Furthermore what, in your opinion, are the 5-10 best screenplays written thus far?
I’m not sure about this, but I think they answer this question here http://thecinemaarchives.com/2019/05/17/the-39th-best-director-of-all-time-billy-wilder/ i wouldn’t say Bergman is the best, i’d say it’s Tarantino or Wilder, but being a screenwriter isn’t an important part of directing
@finn i like how you say ‘thus far’. people dont always remember this artform was only created in 1878 so it is relevantly new. i mean obviously cinema is foremost a visual artform but there are some great writers. the coens are the greatest in my opinion, because they seem to have creative insight into human behaivor, particularly breakdowns people have. billy wilder is a great writer, and it is cliche to say him but he truly is. francis coppola and paul schrader of course. some great scripts would be bringing up baby, seventh seal, godfather, apartment, carrie. i don’t want to get into a whole row but i don’t believe tarantino to be much of a writer like he is hyped up to be, but inglorious basterds is a good script. blue velvet is one of my favorite movies and it has underrated script. another would be citizen kane, and badlands. breathless is great. final script for you to consider is planet of the apes 1968. it was written by the guy who did the twilight zone show, rod sterling. it is just a brilliant satire. it is not as great as a similar film that came out the same year, 2001 (what is) but it has a better script i believe. 2001 is basically a silent film, and the dialogue is like what whistles, noises and songs were to chaplins silent films, along with the most awe inspiring music.
I must say that i am somewhat disappointed, I found out that The Silence and Winter light are a trilogy
with Through a Glass Darkly, but you got through a glass darkly as a simple “R”, I haven’t actually seen it, but are you sure it’s a simple “R” isn’t it higher? i would like to see it, but i have many movies to see before going through an “R”
I saw Through a Glass Darkly (when I was trying to see all of the international Oscar winners), and I agree with Drake, it’s not a masterpiece, well photographically it is, as Ebert said if you pause anywhere in this film you’ll have a very good photograph, for me each picture of Through is a photograph by Henri Cartier Bresson (maybe I’m exaggerating a little, but it’s like that). But it’s a very heavy film, about schizophrenia, it has a more realistic style in relation to other Bergmans, but it’s a good movie, it reminded me a bit of Autumn Sonata, both are about family, with people full of family hurts
Hi @Lucas Henriques. Which Bergman movie do you compare it to? I’d say most of his movies are thematically heavy? what rating would you give it?
I am not an expert on Bergman, I would compare this film a little bit with Ordet, Autumn Sonata and Fists in the Pocket, I know that of those I mentioned only Autumn Sonata is from Bergman, as I said I am not an expert on Bergman at all. I would grade it 8/10. I would recommend you to see another Bergman: Virgin Spring (I thought it was much better), but you’ve probably seen it.
8/10 not bad, I’ve already seen the movie you mention, i think i’ll watch the movie, thanks
I think the simple “R” for Through A Glass Darkly is fair. It’s a film with great qualities, especially the performance of Harriet Andersson as the schizophrenic girl, but it’s weaker than either Winter Light or The Silence.
Bergman believed so too. He was trying for something like the film equivalent of a string quartet, and he didn’t feel he achieved the perfect ensemble he hoped for. In “Images,” He wrote that Björnstrand’s ideas and his own ideas about Björnstrand’s character were not in harmony, to the film’s detriment; that Von Sydow was very good with what he was given, but he wasn’t given enough; and that the young actor playing the son was simply not up to the complexity of the character. He also found his own writing at times false and pat, for example, in the final scene between the father and son. I don’t always agree with Bergman’s assessments of his own films, but I think he’s correct on this one.
But it does have one of the greatest portrayals of mental illness ever committed to film (from the same actress who, a decade later in Cries and Whispers, would give us one of the greatest portrayals of physical illness).
I think Bergman is generally underrated for his editing. Would you agree? In Persona’s (one of the movies for which I am most eager to see you write a page) formally radical “cinema” montages at the beginning and later on, there is brilliant quick-cut work. Other sections of the film use dissolves to a near-Coppola level of brilliance. Cries and Whispers opens on a rhythmic quick-cut montage as well, and the red fade scene transitions are a wonderful choice.
@Graham- great point and two brilliant examples- Bergman is probably understandably overlooked because he is so brilliant in other aspects as well (even Cries and Whispers you would typically think about décor and color first)
So I watched Stalker last night… amazing. And tonight I watched Persona… amazing. I’m just about to watch The Seventh Seal for the second time in just a couple of weeks because I don’t think I quite gave it the right amount of attention given that I had just invested myself into Breaking the Waves, The Searchers and then Rashomon before starting Bergman’s film, thus I was starting to drift a little bit. Probably wouldn’t be doing this so quickly if it was a film of the length and pacing of say, Stalker. Even then, I regardless thought extremely highly of The Seventh Seal and after two of his films I’ve come to see Bergman as a burgeoning favorite director. I know what you’re probably thinking, good idea to do exactly the same thing with watching a film right after another but I think I am more prepared this time around.
I’m with you on Ullmann being superior to Andersson in Persona as well. Andersson is very strong at displaying emotion―Lynch copies her quite well in Mulholland Drive and Watts even improves on her (quite significantly even considering how good Andersson is)―in the film and I do think she often steals scenes from Ullmann but the latter plays the quiet type unbelievably well. Reminded me of Ryan Gosling in Drive (and he goes even deeper in Only God Forgives) though these are of course entirely different films.
Deviating slightly but about Only God Forgives, upon viewing it in April I was not one of those who hated it and thought it was the worst film ever (probably majority of those who watched it) but I didn’t really like it per se. It was in the middle of my transitional period between watching movies passively and watching films actively which contributed to my attitude towards it at the time Furthermore, I went into it thinking Drive 2 (which I found to some extent later that day in The Place Beyond the Pines as part of a Gosling tetrafecta with those two, The Nice Guys and Blue Valentine) and…….. it was not that. It was very different from any movie I had ever seen up to that point with its almost complete silence and emphasis on visuals over almost anything else. Now, it has come on Amazon Prime for free so I plan to watch it again now more appreciative of the finer aspects of film, having a few months later (July I believe) viewed The Neon Demon and thought it absolutely brilliant; You have it at an R/HR and I may well go as far as MS. I will also have zero illusions of it being a second Drive which will assist in any revisit.
@Zane- thanks for sharing– interesting on Neon Demon– I saw it in theater but yet to see it again since. I think Cinephile thought it was MS-worthy as well (if I’m remembering correctly) and he’s pointed me to a few films that I’ve changed my grade on (notably Son of Saul)
Great things, happy to hear that.
Although i think you should have started with Ivan’s childhood.
I would like to comment here, but i have not seen it for a long time, apart i’m waiting for the Bergman exhibition in my cinema, hoping to see his movies in the theater.
@Zane – I hope you don’t mind my hopping in the Persona discussion. Of all the Gosling films above, I’ve only watched Drive and A Place Beyond the Pines once a piece, and I’m looking into studying them again so I’m a little reluctant to talk about them yet. Though I generally think very highly of Drive and I thought that Pines was not bad.
So, I think there are a lot of intriguing things you can say about Persona other than the performances, but that’s a great topic on its own right. They’re so closely intertwined. Simply because they work like a canvas for one another. There is no way the artistic heights of Persona are achieved without the astonishing silent work by Ullmann and the film is not effective enough and doesn’t resonate well with viewer without Andersson being our vehicle through nearly everything that happens, particularly in the first part. Ullmann -as she would do consistently and brilliantly throughout her career- says everything with her eyes. She communicates every feeling she wants us to see, and then holds back barely enough, so she can convey the mystery. She’s nearly like a ghost, she feels very omnipresent and you can sense her being there throughout the film. Her eyes portray understanding and compassion, only to reveal it’s a disguise, then they become seductive in the dream sequence (or was it a dream?), they convey horror at times, cruelty and coldness during the motherhood monologue. It’s a quietly incredible performance. Andersson goes a completely different way. She’s our vehicle, our eyes and ears through Bergman’s world. She emotes openly and freely, becomes vulnerable. This the character we relate to for the most part, which I think makes her the backbone of Persona. She is a match for Ullmann in the famous mirror scene, how she relinquishes to her influence, and in the repeated monologue as well. She becomes ice cold and harsh in a way that really gives a different layer to her character (her starting character anyway – my theory is generally that these two women portray the same person in reality, but that’s a different story). The scene however that’s truly all hers is the monologue where she describes her encounter with the two youngsters. I’ve talked before about how I admire this scene, and I believe it’s one of the most sensual moments in cinema and it is entirely reliant on her ability to convey it. She is sensational there. Both of the performances are essential. If I have to pick one, I’m going ever so slightly with Andersson, but I think there are points to be made about both actresses’ work, and the degree to which Ullmann internalises everything is hard to deny. Oh well. After talking so much about this, I feel like watching Persona again.
@Georg Of course you’re welcome! This is a public site. And I loved everything you said and agree with it wholeheartedly, amazing breakdown of the two performances.
@Zane – haha, thank you. Good luck on your film quest by the way
Here is a very nice video psychologically analyzing the style of Persona:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBpTa7PUSAI