The Serpent's Egg
|
List Price: Our Price: $2.49 You Save: $17.49 (88%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $1.42 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Serpent's Egg
Movie Review: Mediocre
Summary: 3 Stars
When Ingmar Bergman was in self-imposed exile from Sweden, in the late 1970s, over a flap where he was accused by the Swedish government of tax evasion, he made several films abroad. One of them was The Serpent's Egg (Das Schlangenei-Örmens ägg), an English language film (his second- The Touch was the first) made in 1978, in West Berlin studios, for legendary film producer Dino de Laurentiis, who was reeling from the financial disaster that was his 1976 remake of King Kong. This film did nothing to change the producer's fortunes, as it is easily the worst Bergman film I've yet seen. This is a reputation that most other critics agree with, as well. That said, it is not realy a bad film- merely a muddled and poorly edited one, and by Hollywood's dim standards, especially considering this is a horror film, it is quite complex and superior to films in that genre that had mass appeal, such as the Hollywood fare of the day, like the remake of Invasion Of The Body Snatchers and Coma.
But, diehard Bergmaniacs who have never seen it will be as repulsed as those to whom this film is an anomolous monstrosity. It is jagged, non-fractal, and often a totally disorganized mess. Yet, despite all that, it does come together quickly and cohesively in the last twenty minutes to provide a chilling and well acted end. If only the opening hundred minutes were even half as good this film might rank as a horror classic along the lines of Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. Yet, as poor as the bulk of the film is, what is even more astonishing is that Bergman, himself, is listed on IMDB as having written the screenplay. It seems hard to believe, as this is easily his worst screenplay- far worse than noble failures like Cries And Whispers, although the look of the film is unmistakably a Bergman film- from the musical score to the lighting and photography by Sven Nykvist.
But, there are many problems besides the script.... All in all, The Serpent's Egg is to the Bergman canon what a film like Mr. Arkadin, that bizarrely brilliant abortion of a film, is to the Orson Welles oeuvre. That's to view it at its best. At its worst it is a bad sub-Kafkan work of art attempting to deal with the craziness that threads about the edges of individuals and societies. What is truly odd is that it narratively is 180° from the way most bad films unfold. Instead of fraying apart from a promising beginning, it is a mess that only near its conclusion seems to find its focus. The last twenty minutes are truly excellent, and Bergman at his best. Interestingly, it is also the only time the film really gets really `personal' with its until then undeveloped lead character. Until then, it is off the rack and unspun. Bergman fans should watch this film, though, for in failures one can see the architecture that great artists use successfully in their great works, but which the greatness hides. Here, a faltering Bergman has the curtain pulled back, and we see him not as The Wizard Of Oz, merely as odd.
Shiver.
Movie Review: Not Bergman's best, but not a bad film overall
Summary: 3 Stars
This movie has a notorious reputation for being Bergman's 'worst film.' His collaborators have stated that he was overwhelmed by the demands of supervising a large crew; additionally, Bergman had never made a film on anything approaching a typical Hollywood budget. THE SERPENT'S EGG was supposed to be Bergman's break-through to the mainstream film market. Indeed, even though the film flopped in America, it made decent money in Europe, and became Bergman's largest grossing film of all time.
It's true, from the outset, that you can sense this isn't a typical Bergman movie. The emotional intimacy present in his previous films is gone. Bergman, who visualized things microscopically, was being asked to visualize macroscopically. The expansive vision of this film seems antithetical to the introspective Berman. His talent was most evident when he worked in small, manageable environments, focusing on individual actors. Here, he is trying to recall a time and place that demands meticulous attention to detail: Weimar Berlin. Bergman was in over his head.
There are certain elements of the film that were almost certainly a bow to the financial realities of working with producer Dino de Laurentiis (whose production company ultimately went broke in the 80's). For instance, the film stars David Carridine, who was a hot commodity at the time, but seems lost in this film; he is unable to respond to Bergman's direction and equally unable to respond to the script's visceral material. It's worth noting that longtime Bergman collaborator Liv Ullman seems at a bit of a loss, too. She turns in a very lukewarm performance, rising to the occasion only once in the whole film.
Despite all of this, THE SERPENT'S EGG is a good movie. But they key to finding the film's merits is the understanding that you have to look at the film NOT as a typical Berman movie, but rather, as Bergman trying to create a piece of German Expressionist cinema. Many aspects of the production, including the sets and the cinematography, echo the work of directors like Fritz Lang, F.W. Murnau, and G.W. Pabst, who comprise the backbone of 1920's German film. THE SERPENT'S EGG is not so much an homage as it is a re-imaginging of the German Expressionist milieu.
The film coalesces in the last 20 minutes, and it is a bit of a slog to that point. But it is ultimately worth it. The numerous red herrings that Bergman throws in seem sloppy because they ultimately do not contribute to the film's coherence; they seem to work against the main storyline rather than add to it. The film seems overlong and lumbering at times, and it is hard to say if that is an intentional aesthetic element or just Bergman's uneven performance as director. The end, however, is as chilling as any you'll find in film noir, containing a twist that echoes both Kafka and Musil.
Movie Review: Not a typical Bergman, but still a good film...
Summary: 3 Stars
I'd put this film in Bergman's "Catalogue of Dreams/Nightmares" alongside "HOUR OF THE WOLF", "FROM THE LIFE OF THE MARIONETTES", and (to a lesser degree) "THE PASSION OF ANNA". In this catalogue, narrative is less important than dream logic (Lynch fans will understand exactly what I mean) in that events don't so much happen from A to B, nor make absolute, logical sense (and advance the narrative in a traditional Hollywood sense), but they unfold, requiring the viewer to take in discontinuous images and a story which might not always make sense and find the meaning therein.This film is notorious for its many problems so rather than discuss those, let's get to the point. No, this is not a Bergman classic nor does it fit with his other films dealing with the deterioration of spirituality/the mind. But then on the other hand, this film DOES deal with the oncoming deterioration of Germany pre-NSDAP, the general feeling in the air at the time. As another viewer pointed out, part of the problem WITH this film is that Bergman chose to put in too much context (Germany pre-NSDAP), which actually attaches the film to a historical context it doesn't need. As well, you can pretty much surmise that Bergman didn't know how to end this movie and so went with an idea, even though the ending used doesn't really feel like a part of the total experience.
As you'd expect, the acting is top notch. But more than that, this film is a masterpiece of cinematography. Sven is considered one of the world's best cinematographers and if you view this (or any other Bergman title) along with THE SACRIFICE, you'll know why. The scene where Bill (er, different film) walks through the "red crowd" where the band performs in blackface and he stuffs the money in the bartendar's mouth is straight out of THE SHINING as filtered through a Swede (that's a compliment, btw). The film is not without it's problems of course (hence the 3 stars) but for the fans of german expressionism, horror films, nazi-themed movies, or Bergman, it's definately one to own.
(BTW, this is the best transfer of this film you are likely to EVER GET! Halos are minimal and the blacks are fairly rich. This is one gorgeous picture.)
Movie Review: The awful truth!
Summary: 3 Stars
By unexplainable reasons, this film at least to my view was the most discrete film among the impressive cinematography of this Swedish master. The plot definitively doesn't fit according we usually expect from him. The main role featured by David Carradine is simply inconsistent. And if you consider the linearity of the script you will be negatively frustrated with the final result.
Because after having watched all the films of this notable director (one of my favorite ones),maybe this is the only default along the succesful career of Ingmar Bergman.
Movie Review: Bergman Doesn't Quite Lay An "Egg"
Summary: 2 Stars
Ingmar Bergman is perhaps my favorite director, if not, he surely is in the top ten. Film after film I feel Bergman has displayed the human condition in the most realistic and poetic ways any other filmaker has ever attempted. "Wild Strawberries", "Cries & Whispers", "The Seventh Seal", he is a director of extraordinary talent. Knowing my high reguard for Bergman, imagine then how hard it is for me to tell you this is not really a memorable Bergman film.
The film starts with a black&white image of people walking with no sound, it then goes to the credits which are played over a 1920s jazz score and then back to the black&white image. For some reason I was thinking of Woody Allen.
The biggest problem I have with "The Serpent's Egg" is this feeling I had of not really knowing these characters. And I don't think Bergman does either. David Carradine plays Abel Rosenberg a drunk and an introvert. He and his brother Max were in the circus part of a trapeze act along with Max's wife Manuela (Liv Ullman). Max commits suicide leaving Manuela to feel guilty thinking Abel is now her responsabilty.
The problem is Abel. He is the central figure of the story, the character we should see ourselves in. The one we should be rooting for. The one who's suppose to witness this madness of 1920s Berlin. But, Abel seems crazy. From the moment we see him to the last frame we never quite know what kind of person he is. Bergman made him too secretive. We question his actions because we don't know who he is. He actually seems to fit right in with the "strange" characters he seeks to get away from.
Some may suggest the problem was probably Bergman was working with English and perhaps felt out of his element. I don't buy that. A great story is great in any language. The problem is the quality of the script and the character development. The film is too abstract. It clear what Bergman's intentions are. He wants to make a social comment on what lead to the Nazis, but I just don't don't he makes the most effective case to display it.
The film does have it's good points though. It is after all an Ingmar Bergman film. Notice the choice of colors. They are mostly bland gray and browns. This creates an important look the film was going for. It gives the movie a sense of desperation. Compare that to a scene in a nightclub which is bright and colorful. People are dancing on the inside enjoying life while the world is crumbling on the outside.
In a special feature on the DVD Ullman says while making the film Bergman was very unhappy and thought the film was terrible. She says Bergman felt he abandoned his style because he was overblown by the production cost and the large cast. Maybe she's right, I don't know. What I do know is, I really didn't enjoy this film.
As I wachted the movie I started to wonder, does anyone think this movie had an influence on Woody Allen when he made "Shadows & Fog"?
Bottom-line: Off putting Ingmar Bergman film that just quite doesn't deliver. There's an emotional impact that's missing. We have no clear sense of who these characters are.