Fröken Julie

Sjoberg takes a Strindberg play and converts in into a superb movie. The dramatic conflicts faced by the characters is intense and plausible and almost painful to watch.

The theme is the repression of women and sexual expression, and the rigid class system, in Sweden around the turn of the century, many years before the liberating effects of the victory by the Social Democrats in the election of 1932. It is exemplified by the disastrous attempt by Julie, the daughter of a count, to find love with a man who is well-educated, strongly respectful of his place, very handsome and personable, but of the servant class. The cast gives fine performances all up and down the line. Sjoberg directs with the hand of a master, some scenes expressionistic, some impressionistic, close-ups as needed, long shots perfectly fitted in.

If you are not familiar with Sjoberg, note that a big part of Bergman's startup came from his collaboration with the older Sjoberg on the movie Torment, in which Sjoberg directed and Bergman wrote the script and served as assistant director.

Sjöbergs best movie. And perhaps the most beautiful Swedish film since Stillers "Herr Arnes Pengar". It's fascinating how Sjöberg captures the different time-levels without interrupting the flow. A true masterpiece and one of few Swedish films that measures up to Bergmans best work in the 50s.

A magnificent piece of cinema and a great Strindberg production. It is the second movie by Sjöberg I see after Hetz, and it seems to me that he bestows an unparalleled sensibility to scenes and to individual characters. This comes as a blessing to Miss Julie, since the Strindberg characters are a more or less neurotic and unsympathetic lot, who needs all the empathy the viewer can muster. It is the story of a dangerous liaison between the noble Miss Julie and her manservant Jean. The story takes place after the damage is done, as during the night-long midsummer festivities the two contemplate running away. Now, the times that one of the two change their mind about running away or not cannot be counted on two hands, an it is a good example of why I normally cannot stand stageplays by people like Strindberg, and certain love/hate Bergman movies like Scenes from a Marriage and Saraband. But the immaculate rendering of feelings and passion that stream towards you again is the saving grace and lifts this movie to a much higher level than any of Bergman's gut wrenching offerings. Plus, there are some brilliant narrative goodies like the extremely elegant flashbacks, which intertwine seamless with the present, or the rhythm of calm scenes with emotional ones and the punctual reoccurance of the noisy meandering midsummer night party (acts sort of a Greek choir to the two mains). Also, fantastic camera work, composition etc. Max von Sydow has an unsympathetic bit part, many years before he played for Bergman in Seventh Seal. Already looking forward to seeing it again.

Well, at the very least this film deserves more than the two lone commentaries here so far. While hardly relishing it the way the others have, it is surprising that a movie this good has gotten so little notice at this site, and for all I know maybe elsewhere. Because it sprang from a play, and a rather famous one at that, it has a certain staginess about it, no matter how deftly it has been opened up, and I am not at all sure that the principals were the right ones, good as they are. Nevertheless, there are many fine things about them and it, and it is certainly a better movie that a good eighty or ninety percent of the ones that came out during the fifties. Perhaps the clumsiness of the S and M stuff could have been softened into a little more subtlety, there is just too much of hip hop quality to it that does not seem felt, since Strindberg usually used a sledgehammer for that sort of thing, and almost had to from the narrow horizons of stage, words words words being all that he had at hand, but Sjoberg demonstrates such a fine feel for the camera that he could have turned it into something a lot more powerful. Also the limitations of budget seems a little evident, more or less working with what was in the neighborhood.

Still this movie is not without its fascinations, and the childhood stuff has real nightmarish quality. Bergman's Naked Night had some very powerful stuff along the beach with the soldiers that was more obviously powerful, but the childhood stuff here was almost its equal. If you have not seen this Miss Julie, do yourself a favor. Its quite good.

The young miss Julie (Anita Bjork) lives in a mansion with her father. She has recently broken her engagement but is attracted to one of the servants, Jean. They spend the midsummer night together, telling each other their memories and of their dreams. Realizing that an affair between a man of the people and an aristocrat is impossible, they plan to escape to Switzerland.

This film had an interesting influence abroad. Alfred Hitchcock said he had hired Björk as the female lead for "I Confess" in 1952, after seeing her in "Miss Julie". However, when Björk arrived in Hollywood with her lover Stig Dagerman and their baby, Jack Warner, head of Warner Brothers, insisted that Hitchcock find another actress.

What makes this is a great film, beyond the absolutely gorgeous cinematography, is the intrinsic idea of class division. It had been done before and has been done since, but it is a theme that seems to be eternal and always a joy to watch when properly executed.