Why did Eva Rosenberg sleep with Col. Jacobi. I am confused is it for the money, because she wanted a baby at any price or because Col. Jacobi had part in them being freed.
http://www.ymdb.com/user_top20_view.asp?usersid=25273
[deleted]
I think she was mad at jan at the time. also, before that, they did mention how she seemed keen on him. and add to that, she was supposed to be drunk, although she really did not act that way.
I am not really sure why she did it, I am not even sure what she did.
maybe it all has to do with the war messing up peoples minds
I think the money was part of it. Her passive husband (in a way) pimped her out (allowing her to be kissed in an inapprorpriate manner at the dinner table) - the colonel did leave the money on the bed after all, so I think the money and the situation they were in made her feel obliged to do it. But, she probably also wanted to get back at her husband for being so weak.
share WARNING, MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW!!!! DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE FILM!!!!!
I agree with deskset. It was because this powerful man had helped them, and continued to help them, and she was desperate for someone to help them, as her husband seemed unable to. In short, I think she felt a bit more respect for the Colonel , as well. AND, she wanted the money, AND she was mad at Jan. This was her desperate attempt at dealing with this situation. By giving up her body. Later, we see Jan's. He kills the Colonel and hides the money to get back at the Colonel and because he wants to keep the money. Then, he kills a young soldier just for his boots and info on how to escape. This is Jan's way of dealing, by becoming a brutal killer. The dynamics of who's in charge definitely changes after this. And therein lies a complex argument. The woman is unhappy with the man because he is a passive wimp, and she wants him to be a "man". Then, he turns macho, and she finds him despicable. It turns out his gentility was possibly what she loved about him. So complex.
This a brilliant film. So realistic, complex, and disturbing. I think it was very influential,too. I see traces of it in everything from Spielberg to Stone.
i read it as jacobi's price for freeing them was sex with eva. she does it again in the garden shed cause she feels she has to earn the money.
shareIf Bergman learned anything from Strindberg, it is that characters can have multiple motivations. This was a revelation when "Miss Julie" came out. There is no one interpretation. Eva herself probably would not have been able to explain her actions! We can discuss almost endlessly what led her to the act. Almost all of the interpretations could be right, and yet they are all insufficient. Perhaps if Jacobi had come on another day or spoken different words, Eva would not have given herself to him. Attempting to pin the one true explanation on the action is reductive.
sharei think filmscholar sums it all up pretty well
shareGreat answer, I think I may write my film paper based off of something in this vein.
shareI think filmscholar missed one crucial point...when Jan becomes brutal, she doesn't find him "despicable" at all. She wants to, maybe. But watch her face in the scene where she says she isn't going with him, and he answers indifferently, after killing a man. Her entire face lights up with love, of a subterranean, earthy kind, a love and profound respect such as she hasn't felt in ages. The old Jan would have let the boy take over his role in Eva's affections, then whimpered in the corner when he's left. The new Jan quickly sizes the boy as a possible sexual threat (it's not about boots, REALLY) and gets rid of him. Then curtly carries on with necessities. Eva's profoundly attracted to this, and goes with Jan, unquestioning, guided by faith in him. It's beautiful, in a blood-soaked way, and one of Bergman's most radical points. In an era that glorifies passive and sensitive men, such brutal actions are viewed as a necessity if the sexes are to respect each other.
share[deleted]
[deleted]