MovieChat Forums > Smultronstället (1959) Discussion > Just awful, what don't I get?

Just awful, what don't I get?


I was delighted to see such high ratings for this movie but suffered through it. Sadly the subtitles were white (naturally) and seemed to fade into the white portions of the movie making it difficult to read, and they spoke so fast that I had to constantly rewind the dialogue and read it 2 or 3 times.Nonetheless i thought it was awful. Maybe I'm missing something? I was kinda expecting maybe there were supposed to be dream sequences (flashbacks) of him but where were they? Or was that actually him in both roles, watching a younger version of himself? Except, they people he was watching talked to him, didn't they? And I didn't understand the crash scene, the guy in the VW started talking about his wife hating Catholics or something. Anyhoozle I suffered through this, prolly took almost 3 hours to watch, thought it was just awful and I gave it a 3 rating.

reply

There are dream sequences and reveries, in which he thinks about his past. Picking up the 3 young people causes him to think about when he was young, then the middle aged bickering couple caused him to think about his loveless marriage. As the day progresses he becomes a more sympathetic character, more open to others as he tries to come to terms with his way of interacting with others. Note how at the end of the movie his daughter in law expresses love for him; while at the beginning she seemed almost disdainful of him. She sees him more sympathetically.

But I actually like "Remains of the Day" better. I think it's a similar theme, but expressed in a more straightforward way. I found it more moving, though actually also more depressing.

reply

With due respect if you didn't realize that there were multiple dream/flashback sequences when on more than one occasion he woke up after them or snapped out of a trance, then I'd suggest you weren't really watching the film closely enough to critique it at all, nevermind call it awful.

reply

Agreed

reply

Bergman is more of an acquired taste these days, as many younger viewers (not all, mind you) find his work too intellectual & slow. I disagree—it's more that many younger viewers (again, not all) tend to have shorter attention spans, simply because there's more of a demand for fast-paced films that are easier to sell to overseas audiences. If you're raised seeing faster-paced films with shorter shots, it's only natural to expect that. Reflective, measured, literate films just don't have as big an audience as they once did.

reply

You're not missing anything. The 1st time I saw it I was falling asleep most of the time, so boring it was. Several years later I decided t give it another chance, so I watched it again fully awake, and now I know this is one of the most boring movies I've ever seen. Perhaps the only interesting thing was the quarreling couple, but that's about it.

reply

Thanks for weighing in.
I hope the peanuts and popcorn you are picking up off the floor are giving you sustenance.

reply

Well, as long as people are chiming in...

I didn't get what the fuss was all about, either - and that goes for pretty much all of Bergman's I've watched.

And in case anyone is rolling their eyes and starting to type an oh-so-clever response about how Michael Bay would probably be more up my alley, I'm actually more of a Wojciech Has, Raúl Ruiz, Werner Schroeter kind of guy, thanks. I was just sincerely at a loss as to what exactly I should have been blown away by in this.

reply