Ingmar Bergman

Thoughts about this guy's movies? I Personally really like them

The Virgin Spring is an obvious choice to receive love, but it's always stuck out to me. Something about the odd, grimy approach to subject matter film usually didn't touch in such a way. Not in fucking 1960.
Also, his stabs at horror are amazingly effective, likely because he approaches them character-first. Nothing hokey about his filmmaking, even when the subject matter practically demands it. Hour of the Wolf is killer.
So yes, I'm fond of Bergman. Though, admittedly, you might not find a great deal more. This board is like /lit/ - people talk about movies (books), but they usually haven't watched (read) them. "Blah blah, it's great/horrible, I swear I didn't just glance at the IMDb, let's talk about Star Wars please."

Which Star Wars film he directed?

He's alright, but not as 2deep4u as people pretend he is. He's just a bit edgy and people like edgy shit.

I love Bergman movies. Shit’s tight!

>implying
Bergman is entry level mate, keep lurking

You're right, he is. But that doesn't stop anyone here from pretending they've seen his work when they haven't. Probably including you.

>Not in fucking 1960.

No, it handled it quite regularly then. Ever heard of Peyton Place? You will need to watch about a thousand films made before 1960 before you have an opinion worth hearing.

lol k

The way, not the subject itself. I'd call Bergman's approach almost accidentally psychedelic. Peyton Place is pretty vanilla.

>almost accidentally psychedelic

Why?

And I think openly using incestuous rape as melodramatic entertainment with no further pretentions is far bolder than using rape-revenge to sell your art movie.

I didn't say it was worse than The Virgin Spring, I said it was more vanilla. Because it is. And rape-revenge or not, there's not much quite like tVS, before or after, because it was either too intimidated by the approach or (in the case of what came after) more excited about reveling in the violence of revenge than the subject matter itself (i.e. Last House on the Left, I Spit on Your Grave, the list is almost endless at this point).
However, you're absolutely right about its boldness in Peyton Place.

As for the "why" (sorry, totally missed this) - It's the way everything was plotted. On paper, it's so simple; Gang rapes girl, seeks refuge (unknowingly) in the house of her father, he reks them. But when handled by Bergman, the whole thing comes across like a fever dream. I've seen a billion 60's and pre-60's films, but tVS always stood out as oppressively black. Everything was just swimming in shadow throughout that movie, and the extremely gradual pace, from the crime to realization on the part of both parties, makes it feel almost otherworldly to me. Like suspense that's sustained at a low frequency throughout. But I was also VERY young when I first saw it, so this could have tainted my perception over the years, even with repeat viewings.

>"rape-revenge to sell your art movie"
>in the 60s
Hah.

Wild Strawberries is simultaneously really melancholic and absolutely delightful. Definitely my favorite from him so far.

Only person here who's seen Ingmar Bergman movies.

That's exactly what he did, though. Art movies were a branch of the exploitation film industry then. Arguably, they still are. The only reason Americans ever found out who Bergman was was Kroger Babb, an exploitation distributor, buying Summer with Monika for its sexual frankness. Americans stopped watching art films approximately when American movies started to be able to show tits.

Have you ever had a fever dream? Have you done psychdelics?

I don't know what vanilla means in this context. Also, the subject matter is just sadistic masturbation, like most of Bergman.

In regards to "Have you ever..."
Check and check. Yes. But I was using the older (more 'literary'? I dunno) definition - "denoting or having an intense, vivid color or a swirling abstract pattern." Of course, the film is in black and white, but this still rings true for me. It borders on so sludgy and haunting that it begins to swirl in a way I feel is best described as "psychedelic." At least this is how such things have always been for me (fun fact: I was terribly sick quite often as a child, and would have absurd, near-traumatizing dreams frequently because of it, so my experiences with fever dreams run very deep).

>'psychdelics'

I prefer Through A Glass Darkly tbqh

I never find Bergman haunting because I know he doesn't give a shit about his characters. You should rewatch it, I think your age and personal experience may have enhanced it for you at the time. That's not invalid, but I don't get the intensity from it that you are.

What would you call them?

Finally a fellow kinofriend
Did you see hannekes kafka kino?

I liked The Seventh Seal and Wild Strawberries but disliked Persona and Fanny & Alexander.