First let me say that I love Bergman and this movie, though I JUST finished watching it so I need a little time for my feelings to settle.
I spent some of the movie wondering exactly what the title refers to and then I had a thought. Anyone else think it's really about Bergman's shame that he supported the Nazis before her knew what they were really doing?
I know he later said how much he regretted it.
The same thing I asked myself.
------------
- He moves his lips when he reads. What does that tell you about him?
I think the title has to do with the film, not making up for some personal shortcoming by Bergman earlier in his life.
Having said that, it is to be sure not obvious what the term refers to in particulars. It's a poor fit for the main characters. Perhaps it is intended to take the noun form and emphasize it's verbal quality? As in War is a shame, a shameful thing? Perhaps if we understood how much the word might have a different meaning in Swedish?
I like the "war is shameful" explanation, though.
The Swedish title "Skammen" would literally translate into "The Shame" rather than just "Shame". It's not a huge difference, but it's something.
As for what it's aimed at - I don't know. Maybe the character's true feelings over what happens and what they do. Jan in particular does some shameful things. Could be his shame, or perhaps Eva's shame over what Jan does.
Eva says somewhere that she feels that she is in someone's dream and that person would be ashamed of what he is dreaming.
shareThere is also the angle of how earlier in the film Eva seems to question Jan's approach to their situation as being too passive. Perhaps he feels shame over this, recognizing his wife's disappointment. It certainly does seem to lead to the changes in Jan's personality and approach to the world around him, which not surprisingly is problematic, as in his lsat dealings with Jacobi.
shareSpoilers ahead!
The title refers to the shameful things Jan did over the course of the film and the actual war. He killed two men, beat his wife and changed completely due to the war. These are disgraceful events on both parts (Jan and War), filled with guilt and unworthiness. It's almost like the title screams Shame on you! to Jan and those who provoked the war.
Thought it´s mainly about Jan having been found wanting as a man during the first scenes of the armed conflict & rounding up of the villagers, a whimpering weakling as he revealed himself to be. The shame over this seems to have prompted his violent & deceitful actions during the final third of the film.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
I know I'm a bit late to the party in responding to this thread, however I wanted to offer my two cents' worth.
I have always through that the title of "Shame" referred to the trilogy of characters within the film: Jan, Eva and the war itself. For Jan, it was the shame of his cowardice in the first half of the film. For Eva, it was the shame of her infidelity and the consequences it brought about in Jan (it wasn't just the war that hardened his heart - the real changes in him came after Eva's adultery was revealed). For the war...well, the war represents the very concept of shame itself as war is a game played by children who believe that violence is an honest and acceptable solution.
Undoubtedly this is a fine film, however I'm inclined to agree with the director himself that it is not one of his best works. Personally, I find both "Hour of the Wolf" and "Winter Light" to resonate much more deeply than "Shame" (from Bergman's output during the sixties at any rate). Still, it is head and shoulders above most of its contemporaries.
I think the title refers to the shame of war. Liv Ullmann makes this clear in the extras on the DVD. Today, few soldiers even get killed and battles rarely exist. Instead, innocent people -- such as in this movie, and specifically such as during the Vietnam War, when the movie was made -- are the victims, and they rarely understand why.
This is one of the great anti-war movies, and it's my personal favorite of the dozen or so Bergman movies I've seen. I was delighted that Liv Ullmann singles it out as one of the movies and performances she is proudest of.
I am not quite sure the extent to which Shame is an anti-war film in any conventional sense. Clearly opposed to war, to be clear, and rather convincingly so. But it strikes me more as an examination of alienation as an extreme state where the more usual Existentialist concerns are heightened as the social contract breaks down. The distancing effect of what Heidegger called everydayness, or Sartre's focus on bad faith in daily life, are in effect replaced by a sense of how violence can lead to an inauthentic result.
And not just violence in the general sense, but within the context of near total social breakdown, and the kinds of ethical questions that arise. For example, what to make of Johan's actions when given the chance to hold the colonel's fate in his hands? A rather involved discussion can proceed on that question alone, I think.
Shame succeeds in my view precisely because it goes beyond a simple "statement" that war is bad.