MovieChat Forums > För att inte tala om alla dessa kvinnor (1964) Discussion > Misunderstood?

Misunderstood?

posted 14 years ago by engammleryss
5 replies | jump to latest

It seems like a lot of people outside of Sweden misunderstand this film. I for one think it's a brilliant satire which does a great job of mocking various views of Bergman popularly held by critics in Sweden at the time. Note that the film is certainly not supposed to be taken very seriously. It's like a farce and a satirical response to all those who have random opinions of him without knowing him.

The original title, which translates to "Not to mention all these women", I believe was taken from a newspaper article trashing Bergman for various things, and the film can be seen as a response to all those people in Sweden and abroad who had, in his opinion, largely unfounded opinions on him. Like any successful person in Sweden at that time he was basically trashed for making a lot of money and being successful - things traditionally not looked upon with respect in Swedish society.

So you have the character played by Jarl Kulle, a weasel of a guy who acts extremely self-important but at the same time very protective about anything regarding "the great master". He likes to think that he knows all about him. He can be seen as a metaphor for both critics and fans of Bergman. Both groups like to analyze his works - critics do so in an arrogant, pompous way while fans raise him to the skies - but neither can claim to really know what they're talking about. Critics criticize his wealth and supposed affairs with his actresses but likely, just like the character in the film, they as just envious and "would do the same", even if they would of course never admit it.

Then we have the "great master" (an obvious metaphor for Bergman himself), a man who is never shown on-screen, all we know about him comes from third-party sources. Just like a lot of people like to have opinions on Bergman without knowing him or ever having met him. Basically, just like the real Bergman, he just wants to be left alone.

Then, of course, we have all these women who Bergman supposedly had relations with. It's presented in such a hilarious way - them being basically like women in "the great master's" personal harem.

Additionally I would say that this film would be impossible to fully appreciate without understanding Swedish as subtitles could never properly convey the dialogue. Of course this is true for all films, but particularly so in this case as the dialogue and the way it's presented is instrumental in understanding the humor of the film. Even for Bergman standards the dialogue is surprisingly good here.

Somewhat of a rant perhaps, but just wanted to try to point some things out regarding this film that might not have been clear for non-Swedish people.

[–] topnotchtosh 14 years ago

I've already seen a few Bergman films and have just started watching this. The films I've seen previously are Cries and Whispers, Summer with Monika, Dreams, Persona, Scenes froma Marriage and Winter Light, so you can imagine I was quite baffled by what I've seen of All These Women (the first 20 minutes or so). I thank you therefore for this enlightening message, and would appreciate further insights into the movie from a Swedish perspective.

[–] alexfinat 14 years ago

I would like to thank you for this post. It helped me to understanding better this movie, and to keep watching Bergman's films.

(Sorry for my rusty english, im from Chile)

Thanks!

[–] Kammurabi 12 years ago

I agree this one is a bit misunderstood.
It was also an opportunity for Bergman to play around with some of the silent film style that he loved. Music, slapstick, 1910s-20s style. One of the things critics tried but could not legitimately say about Bergman was that he was behind times and he had to have fun throwing that in as well. A playground movie and very meta.
It was obviously a film he made because he wanted to make it and not because we demanded it. ..not the first film like that in Bergman's career by the way.

This is not among my Bergman favorites but I can appreciate it for what it is.

.

[–] jimi99 11 years ago

I agree that it's misunderstood, especially if you look at it in the context of his filmography. He had just completed the "Silence of God" trilogy, one of the deepest, most serious works in the history of cinema. So, cut the man some slack and allow him his lark, his goof, his chance to riff on fans and critics and the illusion of the exalted artist (himself), before returning to his true work with his next film, the universally praised "Persona."

I also think he was a little influenced by "8 1/2" which had come out the year before, appreciating Fellini's playfulness as well as his insight into the creative process and, of course, "all these women." Bergman will always be thought of as a somewhat austere and oft despairing artist, but thankfully we have several films that belie that, like "Smiles of a Summer Night," "The Magician," and this little oddball gem.

"SEDAGIVE?"

[–] flemos-adriana 10 years ago

You're totally right, but for me the thing is that regardless of you wonderful text about his situation in Sweden, the movie can be understood by itself because it relates to themes like: authorship, author image, the authority of the author, critics and public, which are very expandable and discussable in a lot of ways :) for me it was a very enchanting movie.