Ha ballato una sola estate

Swedish classic with Ulla Jacobsson and Folke Sundquist

A student (Folke Sundquist as Göran) from the city comes to work in the country over the summer. He quickly finds a connection and falls in love with the enchanting farm girl Kerstin (Ulla Jacobsson). Even if Uncle Persson (Edvin Adolphson) has sympathy for the young people, not all villagers see it that way. The priest (John Elfström) preaches powerfully against the depravity of youth. But the lovers enjoy their summer of happiness with its bright nights and skinny dipping together. Until a serious accident occurs...

This Swedish film (1951) by Arne Mattson hit like a bomb. Back then, nudity on the screen was still an outrageous sensation, and it was staged so beautifully and naturally and innocently. By the way, the film was produced by the traditional Nordisk Film, which is still active as a mini-major in the film business today. HON DANSADE EN SOMMAR was awarded the Golden Bear at the 1952 Berlinale. Ulla Jacobsson (1929-1982) then also appeared in German-language films. Folke Sundquist (1925-2009) was also in the Ingmar Bergman classic SMULTRONSTÄLLET, which won the Golden Bear in 1958. Berlin has certainly brought Folke Sundquist luck.

A beautiful film that touches the heart and celebrates the Swedish summer!

This charming film should be restored and reissued. Its story line is simple, perhaps a bit trite. However, the central character Kerstin presents us with a rare glimpse of the blossoming of youth, emerging from innocence to passion to tragedy in a short season. No spectacular acting here, but one senses a freshness and spontaneity rarely grasped in low budget productions. No specific message here, other than raw warmth followed by pain and despair. Too bad Ulla was not discovered and well directed later on! We missed a great actress. (We named our first daughter after her character long before she was born!)

As someone pointed out, it is a simple summer romance story, a college boy goes to a rural area (uncle's farm), where he falls in love with a girl. And to put spoke in their path are girl's guardians (boy's uncle is almost encouraging), and the various orthodox people, including the village Priest.

The web tells this movie was roundly condemned and even banned for nudity and anti-religious portrayal.

The nudity aspect is, at least on today's age, less than negligible, and anyway it isn't for the purpose what today's nudity, including exposures by 'A' rated actors, are meant to (titilation), so that aspect, if any one tries to watch it for, is going to be disappointed.

The other aspect, probably what gave rise to its allround condemnation (compounded by the nudity) was its portrayal of Church/ Clergy in negative light and making the Priest as the Villain of the story.

This on surface seems to be merited, but isn't really. Though one must note that in all the major accidents in the movie, the Priest was involved. But it would be wrong to say that he deliberately engineered them.

Here the clash was between, Freedom and Bondage. The right to live and love is freedom. Love need not necessarily be sin, as one of the protagonists mentions. The aspect of morality IMHO makes the difference - heart and flesh. The Bondage on the life is put by Religion - and in fact not really by it, but by the orthodox and pedagogical misinterpretations, which really the movie tried to depict. These misinterpretations - the pedagogical part, is due to the Priest (and in fact in real life many of them) didn't understand the underlying message and took it by word values, and the orthodoxy comes many times due to the complexity of the persons (the cousin who is slowly crossing the age) or the aunt (probably due to the child-lessness?) and as a result, not only the sermons are wrongly delivered, but also wrongly interpreted (which led to barn burning, despite the Priest never intended anything like that to happen, the 'fire and damnation' in the mind of the mentally challenged disciple led to that). The movie still provokes thoughts even in today's society, since the orthodoxy and bonds put by various widely misinterpreted religions are still there and are still making sins of virtue, victims of innocents., even condoning murders (e.g. case of Dr. Savita Halappanavar - death or murder ?) - the defense logic is always the same, as in this movie, some times harsh decisions are taken by Him, or examples made of, so that the flock don't stray - only the question remains, was that decision by Him, or his mis-ministers ?

This film was upon it´s release subject to much attention, not only in Sweden, but across most of Europe. This perhaps not due to any particular cineastic greatness but rather the rather candid nude swimming scene (perhaps the first in a non-adult feature film making it past the scissors of the censors) which sparked somewhat of an outcry amongst morality watchdogs.

In short, this film acted as sort of a springbord for a new wave of filmmaking in nothern Europe.

Not pretentious, no loud message - just a candid slice of life at just that crucial stage when things can go very sweet and warm... or just the opposite. Ulla Jacobsson's presence carries a large slice of credit for the success of this film. Much like in 'Smiles of a summer night' (which as a musical left its own imprint via 'Send in the clowns'). Unforgettable sound track with charming folk songs. Cast very appropriately portray hypocrisy, be it social or religious - without falling into trite clichés or advocating the chaotic attack against acceptable moral norms soon to spread throughout. With due respect to those who might find it offensive, the original 'shock' caused by the brief scene of skinny dipping pales in comparison with the avalanche of loud, explicit productions that surged in the decades to follow.