 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Reviewing something like Bergman's Persons is akin to trying to do good job on Beethoven's 9th... job better left to the professionals. One can describe his feelings and a few trivia items, and perhaps that is where it should be left, as words are often powerless to describe the magnitude of emotions a work like that generates.So... the trivia. My affair with Persona is a long one, but it has been mostly difficult. Many years ago, when we were discovering Bergman's films for the first time, Persona evaded us. The quality was simply awful, and none of its white-on-white subtitles could be read.
Years later we managed to get hold on a tape with "readable" subs. The image quality was still sub-par, so that experience gave us good idea, but still fell short. Watching Sven's cinematography through Sokurov's filter is not my idea of identifying with a film.
I therefore had high expectations for this set. Since Criterion doesn't have it, I sent my money for the MGM "restored" set of five Bergman's films.
Last night it was Persona's turn.
First thing first - the quality of image restoration is simply superb. You feel it right away and it soothes the wounded soul - how nice to know that finally we can watch Bergman's films in their natural beauty, just like it was shown almost forty years ago.
Another interesting discovery. This is the first film I encounter with the choice of language - Swedish or English.
I am a hard core foreign film with subs person, so I naturally hesitated. American "dubbing" leaves such horrible taste in your mouth that I pressed the English button with great reluctance. My hope was that they would not do their usuall horrible job on something of this importance.
It turned out to be a pleasant surprise. I don't know who's voice is used for Alma, but I would say it is a very good dubbing, perhaps just a tad over the top.
To be on safe side, we also kept the subs on, and the two texts did not always agree with each other, as I habitually kept glancing at the subs, even as I could hear the voice clearly... years of hard habit, I guess.
In one spot, where Alma sez Paul, the titles actually read Peter. I am not kidding you. It produced a quick friendly laughter.
The film draws you towards the black and white screen with the first sharp images, and just doesn't let go. Sven is simply at his best in this work, and you can't take your eyes from the screen - as every new shot is a revelation in itself.
My wife feels the film is somewhat dated and overdone to some degree. I can hear what she is saying, but to me this is like hearing Audrey is wearing green dress... OK... but does it in any way reduce my enjoyment from that seeing her? From seeing this film?
Not one bit.
The erotic scene still remains easily the most erotic one in the movies, and both actresses do superb job.
So again, as in case of great symphony, I will simply leave you here, and invite you to visit this small house somewhere on the Swedish shore.
And - thank you, MGM! Job well done! And there are four more films in that set!
Follow Ups:
Victor,Good to hear some comments on one of my favourite Bergmans- though this is a movie that has such an intense atmosphere for me I only like to see it every few years. And a good dose of Bergman lasts and lasts. The only Bergman I like more often is the very quiet "Wild Strawberries".
I love the idea of confusing Peter and Paul- gives a bit of the "Passion" to "Persona"!
Interesting too is the subject of subtitles and dubbing. I find subtitles very distracting, but prefer them by far to dubbing. I can't imagine "Seven Samurai" with some American voice for Mifune- the quick, staccato rhythm and odd cheers/cries of the Japanese to me heightens the urgency and exotic atmosphere. One movie that worked well enough for me dubbed is my favourite submarine movie- "Das Boot". This was a surprise as the German is perfectly clear in the original, but the dubbed version is well acted and quite natural for dubbed. Since there is no dialogue in other languages- except the singing of "Tipperary"- there is never the ackwardness silliness that occurs in "Hunt for Red October" in which the Russians are all either Scottish (Connery) or Americans (Neill)- then the "real" American arrive to confuse everyone! As I've gotten older I seem to have less and less tolerance for actors who appear as different nationalities or speaking English with those goofball accents (re: W. Ryder in "B.S.'s Dracula").
I've never seen a dubbed Bergman and I think I would miss the strange singing sound of the Swedish. Think of "Seventh Seal" with Kevin Costner as von Sydow.
Cheers,
Bambi B
PS: Say, Victor, go ahead and ask me what time it is! That would create another opportunity to look at my new watch. -And, I will need to look at it at least 400 times per day for the next 10 years to amortize it!
What did you get?Sounds like we both come from the "I hate American dubbing" school, and as I said, this was my first positive experience. I want to find out who dubbed Alma, as the actress did good job. Truly.
The Hunt for Red October... well, it was laughing all along hearing Sean do Russian. He opened up with the phrase that could only be written buy a Berkeley born Hollywood scriprwrite, who stumbled upon the Russian dictionary and thought just linking a couple of words would mean he spoke Russian. That sentence: "Holodryga... i surovo!" makes no sense at all, but hey, it worked!
It's been easily fifteen years since I saw the Wild Strawberries, so it is now on the short list.
So - what time it is?
Victor,I almost always hate dubbing. Once I notice a movie is dubbed it's all over as I become preoccupied with the fact the characters' mouths are movng out of synchronisiation with the dialogue. Often too, a dubbed voice doesn't correspond with the appearance of the character and the vocal expression doesn't match. The incongruities between the visual and audible are just too jarring.
"Red October": I've thought to start a thread here for awhile on submarine movies as I'm amazed how often they appear. This is a genre that I've noticed has been used consistently for decades and seems to be especially revealing of the period- from the gung ho WWII- "run Silent Run Deep" to the cat and mouse world of undersea warfare "Crimson Tide" to science fiction "20,000 Leagues", "Abyss", "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea". "K-19" and U571"- the list goes on and on. "Das Boot" is a speically interesting movie as it spent more time humanizing the U-Boat experience than most movied that concentrate on war action.
There is something intense about the isolation of a submarine and of course the environment is dangerous like that of outer space. Also, like aircraft dogfighting the logistical side is 3 dimensional.
"Red October" had a good story idea and was on the verge of being actually a very good movie, but had to be made popular and palatable with name brand stars, but there was so much that was goofy and the casting was a main mistake. The main plot hole was of course, why the Connery character wrote in advance to the apparatchik uncle that he was defecting! No one, no one would have that stupid to give the Soviet Navy 4 or 5 days to catch him. The explanation that the letter would force full commitment is just not plausible as Connery could have piloted the boat to the US- as was their order anyway. Of course, then the story would have been without tension.
As for Connery doing Russian, I couldn't understand absolutely one word he said! The mixture of actors and accents on the Red October just made my head spin and was very distracting. Still, it was this close to being a really good one- pity.
The time: After fussing about for so long I decided the Lacroix was beautiful but a bit too "antique" looking- a bit too elaborate and textured. I have a problem with watches in that the ones that look wonderful in the case or photos as designs don't always look right on the wrist. I end up liking the more plain designs more. So, the nice chap at the corner drug store let me try for a day a very lightly used (1 year old) Vacheron power reserve and this turned out to be the perfect thing. I looked for a photo to make a link to, but I can't find one that has this exact dial which has all numbers instead of the hours and markers combination that seem to be the typical one. The closest I can come is:
http://www.prestigetime.com/item.php?item_id=2854
-the photo of which does not do this one justice.
This was much more expensive than I'd planned, but as I've thought to eventually sell my old Daytona, it's works out about even and the Vacheron just glows with quality- a lifetime purchase. The Lacroix is nicely made too, but the Vacheron- like the Lange 1- just jumped onto my wrist. As opposed to the super expensive Lange the VC was too attractive to pass up. By the way, the original owner of this one wore it very little- 4 or 5 times he said and it was kept on an automatic winder. [Do you use these? A sensible idea.] He brought it back to part exchange on the big chronograph that I lusted after from afar earlier but impossibly cost about the same as a new S class Mercedes.
But still even with a good "deal", for the next couple of years, I'm going to need to walk up to people in the street and ask for $2 to tell them the time! "Psst.. Hey buddy! Tell ya da time for two bucks. Hey, come on, what's da matter? Too important to know what time it is? OK.. Hey you!..."
Finally though, the torture of shopping is over!
Cheers,
Bam
I know that model, it is beautiful, so wear and enjoy! It is a bit too small for me, at 36mm, but it is a beauty!I am sure you know folks go crazy over Daytonas, but they leave me cold, but this Vacheron is indeed a keeper, and will most likely become a valuable piece you will pass onto next generation... in another hundred years.
Yes, I keep all my automatics on winders, I have four different winders, three of them with four-positions each. Otherwise the oil might pool on the bottom... so the pro's say.
Anyway, it is time for you to look again!
Best of luck!
Your comments on subtitles and dubbing generates a new thought: why are actors no longer taught speech and dialects? Or rather, why are they taught speech and dialects so poorly today? Twenty or twenty-five years ago, you could not get out of a major acting school without a good grounding in speech formation and projection, both for film and stage, and at least a smattering of dialect formation.Today, we are asked to accept actors in roles that our ears tell us are all wrong for them!
We used to laugh over line deliveries like "Yondah lies da castle uf muh faddah"! Kevin Costner's "Robin Hood" is just the most stunningly obvious example of this.
Gee LP,It's interesting that there was a period - really up through the 50-60s in which the use of Americans for other nationalities was taken as read and accents were either minimal or not attempted. Mostly Americans were being everything else- even Asian (Charlie Chan) or playing foreigners of all kinds. This changed eventually and, for example, Streep in "Sophie's Choice" caused a new demand for accurate, realistic performances.
But, even though the makers- and the public became more sophisticated became simultaneously so profit driven and immensely expensive that producers would not fund something without at least one name brand US box office star. This made the use of inapproriate actors go full circle ot the early carefree era. Profit pressure on movies forced the Big Names into all kinds of roles: Ryder in "Dracula", Witherspoon in "Importance of Being Ernest", Depp in "Pirates" the and etc. Your example of Costner as Robin Hood is among the best of the stomach turners. But, today the standard is somewhat higher and with extensive coaching Witherspoon and Depp did reasonable accents- though Depp's varied considerably from rural Somerset to way downtown of Sloane Street.
And, there's an even more confused situation at work. If the foreigner is famous enough- he becomes American and there are Hopkins (Silence), Micheal Gambon, Thomapson, Bohnam-Carter (Mighty Apgrodite) and Tim Roth in American parts.
We can laugh over the this return to silliness of not using "real" foreigners, as it it is sometimes strikingly odd, but I see this as a sad lowering of standards for actors. There are enough good actors of every nationality that the banality of forced accents just shouldn't have to be.
Cheers,
Bambi B
Actually there was a time when they shot twice the same film with actors of the country they come from...
On foreign actors... yes, many are easily and naturally absorbed. Prochnow is one such example, Arnold was another - both successful and actually good.You might also recall that in the early eighties there was a small wave of Russian actors who made a few roles - notables like Baryshnikov, of course, but also some less known ones, that brought some zest to several films - Moscow on Hudson, 2010, etc.
That wave is long gone, unfortunately, as some of them were good.
And there are others, like Valeria Golino, with her incredibly unforgettable voice among her incredibly forgettable performances.
Bambi B,I enjoyed your post very much! The part about foreign actors becoming so successful that we think of them as "American" reminds me of perhaps the most famous example: Cary Grant. In her essay "The Man from Dream City", Pauline Kael recalls the conversation between Grant and the producer of the film version of "My Fair Lady". Seems the producer wanted Grant to play Higgins and Grant laughed, saying, "My dear sir, I talk like Eliza did in the beginning of the play!"
Grant did also not want to take the part away from Sexy Rexy...
Saying "Persona" is dated in a 60's way is like pointing out that "War and Peace" is set during the Napoleonic Wars...both are great works that reveal much, much more than the times they were created in.There are sections of the film that are dated, shots and editing techniques that make me smile when I see them.
But then, there is the great, great scene. The memory of sunshine and the beach and sex...
Whew! Thanks, Victor, for your comments on one of my favorite Bergman films! (After the release of "The Wild Bunch" someone told Sam Peckinpah that he was now the best filmmaker in the world. He laughed and said, "No, there's still that damned Swede.") I'm pleased to read that it is finally available in a good transfer.
I think you took the "dated" comment way too strongly - and I tried to make is as soft as I could... it is a very faint sense, nothing that gets in your eye. The atmosphere, really.You are right - we are so lucky to have this wonderful DVD.
I am also wondering if others had their experiences with dubbed releases.
I'm sorry, Victor, that I took the "dated" comment so seriously. When one studies elements of a culture such as literature or film or music or art, and these elements are occasionally called "dated" because they do not have the flash and surprise of the New and the Now...well, one gets...cranky.Actually, one of the reasons I enjoyed your post on "Persona" so much is the quest for the "well-subtitled" print. I first saw "Persona" in a downtown NY art house theatre in a lousy high-contrast print. You couldn't read the titles! The next time I saw it was on late night public television in the mid-80s. Again, a high contrast television print with no shades of gray. What film fans do for their love! Not until a couple of years ago did I see a print that had subtitles I could really read! I'm happy that I missed "Persona" dubbed in the late 60s or early 70s. I really enjoy hearing the characters in a work speak in their own voice. It adds to my pleasure in a foreign work. Hearing dubbed voices in English takes away from a film, unless its a cheap, grindhouse kind of movie, like Mexican wrestler vampire pictures!
So let me assure you, to read your notes on the new MGM DVD release of "Persona", and its subtitles was a great pleasure!
I usually too prefer to hear the actors' voices, but here the effect was quite good. In the USSR all foreign movies wer dubbed, but the difference is they had the whole industry doing it professionally, with best actors involved, so the results were quite good.
Now that I am in these small country house by the shore, looking to the waves breaking in....Thank you Victor.
PS: Dated in the theatrical way, maybe?
The movie has some 60's aroma about it, there is no denying, but it is very slight and to me was not distracting, but then I do love that film quite a bit, so I am biased.There is also that hard to avoid impression that Kubrick was influenced in his 2001 by the boy scenes in Persona... as were many other directors.
I would probably agree this is not the Bergman's best work, but man, his standards are so incredibly high this is hardly a negative.
As we are now in the stage of revisiting Bergman the future viewings will obviously beput against this one. I am still to order the Trilogy set from the Criterion.
BTW - you were right, Le Boucher is a very weak film, so we turned it off - it was getting late. We will finish it tonight, but it seems to hold no promise.
My copy is still on its way ( America is still far, but I am hopefull untill the end of this week to get it )
I will, of course comment.
Tonight it will be Mystic River.
Try to get Dino Rissi! I am still under his spell.
I tried already... with no success. I will look on ebay.
Get it! You will let the sunshine of your youth come in. It just has the lightness of being.
It is a time machine.
AND played! And how!!!
If yoi can not find it in your language, I already thought to send you it in Italian, anyhow you must have this pictures in front of you. Let me know.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]