User reviews

Being a Lars Hanson fan I watched this movie more interested in hearing his voice than anything else, which was actually pretty good, not a surprise as he was classically trained. It was better than I expected, but, that doesn't mean it was a great film. Swedish cinema was in decline at that time after it's zenith in the early 1920's had meant some of it's biggest talents (Hanson, Garbo, Sjostrom)had gone to America for a time . I found the beginning very preachy, but, I feel it was designed as more of a social message to Swedish film goers of the time, I'm sure research of the social history of the time would show us that there was a decline in the birth rate in Sweden etc... But, once it got going it wasn't too bad, the length was about right it didn't outstay it's welcome. I agree with the reviewer who said it was too full of coincidences, it felt claustrophobic that everyone seemed to know everyone else, but, that is a small fault. The acting wasn't that bad, the dialogue was dodgy, but all in all not bad, I have seen much, much worse and it did tackle a subject candidly that would never have made it out of a scriptwriters mind in America or Britain at that time. Give it a whirl if you get a chance, but, don't expect too much and you'll enjoy it.

When his wife rejects motherhood in favor of a life devoted to pleasure seeking, a businessman finds himself drawn towards his secretary, who already loves him from afar.

The theme of this film is the superiority of marriage and parenthood to hedonism. A noble intention, but poorly executed. The stilted dialog sounds like a pro-and-con magazine article, which may explain the often awkward appearance of Lars Hanson, Karin Kavli, and even Ingrid Bergman. Victor Seastrom's presence lends the film some gravitas, but even his dignity is undermined by lines straight out of a seminary lecture. The plot isn't too convincing and has a twist straight out of P.C. Wren. The final closing shots make the film's point much better than the preceding hour and a half or so.

This film also has the worst musical score I've ever heard. Parts of it sound like they were played by an elementary school orchestra.

While Bergman is gradient as ever in this early movie of hers, the plot on the whole is disappointing. The murdering scene even seems ridiculous with the unsurprising coincidence and unbelievable clumsiness. What a waste for Bergman!

A really heavy melodrama, one of those unaccomplished pieces from the transition to talking movies. The moralistic tone (even for the 1930s) is not helped by some poor editing and rushed plot. So, why watch it? Well, this is one of Ingrid Berman's early films, one where she tests for the first time some of the screen qualities that years later made her one of the most iconic actresses of all time: the sweet smile, the troubled look, her capacity to show conflicting emotions in a single shot. Bergman shines among a cast that is clearly stuck in the silent era and announces a golden era for screen drama heroines, something that Selznick understood immediately. A few years later, Ingrid was on her way to Hollywood for the US version of 'Intermezzo' and the rest is history.

OK, I'm a sap for old movies. At the same time, I've never been a huge fan of Ingrid Bergman. In "Walpurgisnacht", however, I can see the beauty others mention. And I don't understand the low ratings of others. Maybe I'm not sufficiently conversant in Swedish cinema, but the tension and real human drama developed in this film were far more attainable than any of the artsy Swedish stuff so beloved by contemporary critics.