| Page 1 of 2: | [1] [2] |
| Index | 11 reviews in total |
13 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Good Film With a Bad Reputation, 11 January 2003
![]()
Author:
Tartarlamb from Oregon
I've heard a lot of things about this film -- it generally gets low
reviews,
is described as "unBergmanesque", and the fact that its so difficult to
find
led me have very low expectations for the film. I expected something
between
the atypical Bergman plot of "The Serpent's Egg" and the disturbing social
violence of "From the Life of the Marionettes." I finally tracked down a
copy, poor in quality, and expected mediocrity at best when I put it
in.
After having just finished watching it, I can say I was very pleasantly
surprised with the film. A lot of the things said about it are just plain
false -- the plot is very much in keeping with Bergman's other material. A
married woman, Karin (Anderson), falls in love with a disturbed architect,
David (Gould), and the two begin an emotionally confused love affair.
Karin
is caught between her happy bourgeois life with her husband (Sydow) and
children, and her passionate, unconventional relationship with David.
Acting
in bad faith, Karen refuses to choose between her two lives, though both
David and her husband eventually push the decision on her. Like most
Bergman
films, its a psychological roller coaster and a bleak portrayal of the
coarseness of human relationships.
Bibi Anderson does a wonderful job in a very difficult role, and Max von
Sydow plays the part of the honest and good intentioned husband very well,
playing hard on the viewer's sympathies. The stiff performance of Gould
echoes that of Carradine in "The Serpent's Egg," so it must unfortunately
be
attributed to Bergman's struggle with directing in English, not on Gould
himself. If I recall, the film was made in both Swedish and English, both
versions filmed at once, which poses obvious production difficulties which
might account from the some times mechanical treatment of the script.
The film has an excellent pace to it, and moves very swiftly and smoothly,
wonderfully shot by Nykvist in a way very similar to "The Passion of
Anna."
Unlike a lot of Bergman's depressing work in the 1970s, I felt good about
the film when it was over.
I don't know why this film has such a poor reputation -- I'm very much
baffled after having seen it. My guess is the obvious mistake of having
made
it in English accounts for most of this.
Its seems a lot like Bergman's other work in this period. Very
Good.
11 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Bergman shows us the analysis of a vulnerable woman's double life, 10 February 2000
Author:
Ann-50 from New York
This underrated Ingmar Bergman film is a disappointment to some and a puzzle
to others. But if the viewer looks past the mundane story line, a middle
class marriage threatened by a moody, violent stranger, one can see just how
much richness Bergman has invested into this otherwise predictable type of
story. I found Karin, the modern heroine in this story, to be a perfect
symbol of the flip-side of Bergman's fascinating female
protagonists.
The harsh criticism that Elliott Gould received for having accepted this
role was unjustified and grossly exaggerated. Taking on a role like this is
a thankless task at best and his interpretation of the despicable David was
misunderstood. I think it was an authentic and courageous performance, an
example of an actor who decides to portray the character straight without
looking to advertise his own star persona.
Confronted by a type like David, we can understand how Karin could succumb
to his advances and not even see where she's heading in this
self-destructive relationship. We see stranger stuff than this in real
life, why not accept it being put to an audience by the greatest film
director who ever lived?
10 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Under-rated: this is one of the more potent Bergman romantic dramas I've seen..., 1 May 2005
![]()
Author:
MisterWhiplash from United States
...and I think part of the reason for that is, aside from some notable
uses of symbolism (some subtle, some not so subtle, in part due to the
photography), the story is rather simple. This gives Bergman room to
try and get us to understand these characters. In lessor hands (or
rather, hands not as proficient in the soul-searching drama as Bergman
is) this could be almost a TV melodrama. But I would disagree with some
critics- notably with Ebert- that Bergman has lost his tone with this
picture. In some ways it is more modernly set than some of his other
films (and that it is in English sets it apart from some of his
trademark Svensk Filmindustri pictures), however it doesn't hurt it
terribly so. There were times while watching the film, mostly in the
first fifty minutes, that I thought this was one of Bergman's best, by
giving his control somewhat over to the actors, who are all
sensational. While it doesn't quite live up towards the end, and feels
abruptly finished, the climax doesn't feel too compromised. The Touch
is like the Adrian Lyne film (which draws itself from a Chabrol film)
Unfaithful, only this film seems a little more steeped in reality than
outright sexuality.
Karin (Bibi Andersson, one of Bergman's key actresses) lives a rather
calm, routine life with her husband Andreas (Max von Sydow) and their
two children. After her mother dies (which I suppose sets up her
emotional indecisiveness for the film), she meets David (Elliot Gould),
and the two slowly begin an affair. But David is not the most stable of
people, and it shakes Karin up at first. Soon they fall in love, but
are separated, the sort of usual machinations with an infidelity story
begin to unfold, and yet not losing the emotions from before. The three
key actors of the film, Andersson, Von Sydow, and Gould, seem to live
in these characters, and especially Gould (for whom this would be his
only role with the director) conveys a sort of double nature that is
also within Karin. His performance is one that I would put in a list of
his best- you can tell everything he wants and fears in his face and
actions, within the careful framing, this is a man on the edge. Bergman
had once described Gould as a "difficult" actor to work with, but that
tension came out the right way on screen, at least from my perspective.
As I mentioned, in lessor hands this could become a further melodrama,
and part of the films refusal to subvert to that category is a credit
to not only Bergman, but to cinematographer Sven Nykvist. Whenever I
see a film with their collaboration (or even if it's Nykvist with,
perhaps, a lessor director), I always watch for how Nykvist moves the
camera. How seamlessly he follows these characters, and in their
darkest recesses he lights them like the light and control on their
faces is part of the writing. A lot of times (appropriately so) one may
not even feel the presence of the camera, as if Nykvist doesn't even
have a technique. But it is here where not only does he and Bergman go
with their touches of light and dark, they also go for a documentary
feel in the production.
Basically, this is an experiment for Bergman, as it is for his fans to
endure. He's experimenting with a genre done hundreds of times, he
experiments with music (unlike some of his dramas, which includes Bach
or Mozart, here it's kind of pop-sounding for the period), and he
experiments with his cast this time around. Is it as powerful and
awe-inspiring as his "trilogy" or his other great works? Probably not.
But it is unfortunately panned down as a lessor work of his, which
isn't necessarily true. The film also needs to be seen by more people
of today, as it is virtually impossible to buy on video or DVD. A-
6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
The Two Lives of a Married Woman, 30 July 2004
![]()
Author:
Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
In a small town in Sweden, Karin Vergerus (Bibi Andersson) is a middle-class
housewife, married with Dr. Andreas Vergerus (Max von Sydow) and having a
son and a daughter. She meets the disturbed German-American Jewish architect
David Kovac (Elliott Gould), who is restoring a church in her town, and has
recently become friend of her husband. David has drinking and smoking
problems and after a dinner party at the Vergerus's home, he confesses his
infatuation for Karin to her. This declaration revives her sensuality and
femininity, which were forgotten after fifteen years of stable and loyal
marriage. Karin has an affair with David, tearing apart her world: in one
side, she has the stability and safety of her boring marriage and bourgeois
life, and in the other side, she has the freedom of the relationship with
her lover. She has lots of difficulties to decide the course of her life.
This magnificent open end film is another wonderful work of Ingmar Bergman,
his first English spoken movie. Bibi Andersson, Max von Sydow and Elliott
Gould have again outstanding performances in a touching story about a
thirty-four years woman divided in two possible lives and without knowing
how to decide the way to be followed. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): `A Hora do Amor' (`The Hour of the Love')
5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
An interpretation: love as puppeteer, 11 November 1999
![]()
Author:
mkl-2 (mathias.klasen@heim7.tu-clausthal.de) from Harz Mountains, Germany
It's the story of a married woman falling in love with another man. The
married couple - Max von Sydow and Bibi Andersson - does live in fine
rapport, their personalities matching well. Both are quiet, contemplative,
and very rational persons, not liable to act spontaneous. The intruder -
Elliott Gould - on the idyll which they embody together with their
teenaged
daughter is in contrast an impetuous man, uncompromising, overbearing, and
tormented by inner contradictions and compulsions. Andersson tells him at
one point that he hates himself. The two clandestine lovers aren't
appropriate for each other. They have difficulties to accept the other's
social behaviour and stance and don't like it to lie to their
environments.
But soon they cannot live without each other anymore.
The point of the film cannot be to show how two contrary characters
complement each other, as Andersson was even more happy with von Sydow
before and because it's all told in such a detached manner. The portrait
of
a love would like to involve the spectators to convey the joy and pain of
it. Instead the question why Andersson turns away from von Sydow toward
Gould seems intentionally perplexing. The dialogues and acting of the
lovers
is cerebral and cold, as if they were reciting dazedly on a stage,
astounding themselves with their actions and feelings. As if they were
actuating on an impulse isolate from their personalities. This impulse or
drive is not eros, as especially at the beginning of their affaire sex is
more a problem than a fulfilment to these two diffident lovers. Maybe love
or the need to feel and give love is itself such a drive, an autonomous
thing asserting itself regardless of the circumstances and the characters
involved.
The central metaphor of the film is a medieval wooden statue of Mary,
recently excavated after being buried for centuries - like Gould's and
Andersson's potential to be lovers or man and woman. But with the
disinterment of the Mary there also come alive insect larvae inside her,
corroding her from within. Before they meet Gould attempted suicide and
Andersson was reduced to a wife. They flower in their new love and it
destroys their lives.
Civilization means in many ways the domestication of our impulses.
Therefore
Andersson realizes that she must not harm lastingly her family and Gould's
hidden wife/sister. This is true. But Gould is telling her that she is
lying
to herself by not eloping with him and he's right, too.
6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
A very touching movie, 26 June 2002
Author:
Mara from Canada
I guess the ones who are most apt to truly understand the depth of this movie are those who live a situation similar as Anderson's character - a housewife, dutiful to her husband and children, living a normal, stable, yet boring life. Then bursts into her life a charming, attractive, mysterious and intriguing man. Elliott Gould gives an amazing performance - different from the usual type of character he portrays, still perfect and natural. Thinking back at the movie, I cannot imagine any other actor doing playing the role the way he does. The movie is simply wonderful.
6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Elliot Gould and Bibi Andersen have an affair., 1 September 1999
Author:
patate-2 from Montréal
Obviously meant for the US market starring Gould. Hardly a notable Bergman production, but much above most comparable run of the mill Hollywood production. Is it worth seeing now? For curious viewers and Bergman fans, mostly. Ghee those actors are sexy.
3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
A fine movie to watch, 13 October 2007
![]()
Author:
cpoashworthretired from United States
My wife and I just saw Elliott Gould's private copy of "The Touch" at a film festival. We both thought it was a fantastic movie. Scenes were so realistic and true to life. I also thought that the cinematography was a work that I would rate very high. I have discussed this movie with friends and it seems that quite a few of us could relate to a few of the characters in our own lives. The movie was directed superbly in my opinion. The intensity throughout the movie was an emotional roller-coaster to me. I found that afterwards I had sweated profusely but this was a good thing. Elliott said that this movie was not available to buy or rent. I would be interested in knowing if anyone out there knows of its availability. Thanks
Touched, 8 September 2011
![]()
Author:
kosmasp
Maybe I finally found my recommendation for a first Bergman movie to
watch, if you are not aware of his output. Just because it is
considered a lesser Bergman does not mean, it is a bad movie. Actually
I thought it was a pretty decent one, to say the least.
Elliot Gould has a really tough role to portray, though it is the woman
in the lead again who has more convincing to do, with her character.
But both are really good in conveying their feelings, as weird as they
may seem to some. And while this again is not an easy movie or story,
it is one that can be followed really easy. Not many Bergman fans are
fond of it (as you can see by that rating), but that shouldn't put you
off. Try it for yourself
2 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Questions left, 13 June 2006
Author:
marc-girod from Ireland
With all the clarity of the metaphor of the wooden Mary eaten by
insects from the inside, we are left with the essential questions, put
abruptly in the very last words:
- Duty? What duty? To whom? To the husband who forbade? To the child to
be born? To the family? To the lover's sister?
- Will it be fulfilled?
- Karin is lying? Is she? If so, is it wrong? Is it on the contrary
acceptable? Should David accept it?
- Will she kill the larvae or destroy the statute?
- How to resolve the contradictions? Should one? Should one not? Should
Karin and David? Do they? Or do they try to escape?
- They seem to be failing, but at what? Are they doomed to fail?
Sure, this is an update, a postmodern one, over Mme Bovary.
| Page 1 of 2: | [1] [2] |
| Plot summary | Ratings | Awards |
| External reviews | Plot keywords | Main details |
| Your user reviews | Your vote history |