Rêve de femmes

Ingmar Bergman making a film with characters in a daze as to what to make of their indiscretions in their affairs with men, what a surprise! Maybe there's too much sarcasm in that sentence, and perhaps for the period Bergman was working in (pre Seventh Seal) it's a little too close to a target to make. Bergman was the best at it, so it's not a knock: Dreams is another in one of his probing examinations, however in a manner that almost suggests he wasn't putting as much time and effort into the script as usual (in an interview he said he didn't consider it very highly in his oeuvre, and had some bad memories of his time with Harriet Andersson with their personal relationship, coincidentally her character has a rough break-up early in the picture). But saying that Bergman wasn't putting *as much* time and effort is suffice to say that he still makes it very intriguing, very entertaining (in that suffocating-dramatic Bergman sense where you can feel all humanity sucking out of the room and back in again with every beat in some scenes), and with a take on the sexes that allows for some probing hard to see in other movies.

We're given two women who work in the fashion photography profession, one a model (Andersson) and the other a producer/director type (Eva Dahlbeck). At the start we get right into a claustrophobic sense of unease for these girls set right by the tone of a man in the room- a fat man tapping his fingers while waiting for a shot to set up, and then once again on another one. Tension spills out in the dressing room, the engagement off between Andersson and her fiancée. Meanwhile, Dahlbeck calls her lover who can't come to the phone for long. After this Bergman starts to play a sort of trick on the viewer: what happens to these women with their respective men, is it dream or reality? Andersson's situation is that she's looking at dresses through the outside windows, and an old man (Gunnar Bjornstrand, with a nice old-man beard that isn't too shabby) offers to buy her the dress, jewelry, whatever she wants. To display the generational gap she asks for chocolate with whipped cream and- as something I thought I'd never see in a Bergman film- a rollicking trip to the amusement park to ride rollercoasters and shift through a haunted house.

This all seems to be leading to a note that suddenly becomes all the more clear, and I wondered "what gives?" if this was Bergman presenting dreams. Perhaps he means in the more fragmentary sense of "well, these women have dreams of some men, but... these aren't them". This leads to Dahlbeck's scenes which are a good, sharp contrast to Andersson's. With the latter there's some blocks where the two don't talk (she puts on a record that spins some cool jazz as the two dance a little and have a silent-movie repore with champagne), and for the former it's what some fans of the late Swedish filmmaker love more than anything: characters in personal agony over not realizing a personal connection, through lots and lots of dialog. What's impressive here isn't so much the performances per-say, which are a little cold, but how much restraint Bergman has with the camera as this situation with Dahlbeck's cold professional (she fires Andersson at one point for being late with the old man) turns into a fool-hearty tug-of-war of emotions between an equally cold wife of Dahlbeck's lover. If there is any one juicy section in Dreams, and not counting specific scenes like when Dahlbeck has her head out the window of the train (which is very beautifully executed), it's this one.

Somehow Bergman pulls out a semi-happy ending, if not without a bit of a coda as to what may happen with these still emotionally entangled souls. If only the structure somehow was worked out a little better (I'm not sure how I could criticize it more than that- even a flaw from a genius is still a genius move, if that make sense) it would be a great film. As it stands there's a lot of greatness in the film, only to feel very slightly like an excellent minor work. Still, stay tuned for little winks to the audience, like a rare Hitchcock type cameo (strange considering Bergman's opinion of the director), or a mention of the last time Bjornstrand's lonely rich old man saw a movie- 1918- which is Bergman's year of birth. 8.5/10

A delightful film about the love of two women-the owner of a model agency and her top model. On a photographic outing to another city, both have strange day affairs with married men. The film, as relentless as it is tender, is a deeply probing study into the psyche of desire. Bergman's success is derived from exquisite scenes of austere romanticism and painful irony. Rarely has sexual obsession been so accurately observed. Dreams is yet another masterpiece by Bergman, yet sadly underrated and unknown. For anyone who appreciates great storytelling, and masterful filmmaking should do themselves a favor and watch "Dreams". Note: Look for Bergman's cameo as the man with the poodle at the hotel.

Dreams begins with a photography shoot. It is the land of Dreams. We meet Doris, the model. Soon we are drawn into her world. She is engaged. Trouble is, her beau is rather straight. She has big aspirations. She wants more out of life. But she is not the only one with dreams. The photographer, Susanne, is missing her ex lover. Trouble is, he broke the relationship off because he is married. She's not about to let that stop her.

To say more would be to ruin the plot, but we soon meet other characters who also have Dreams. It seems we all do, but more often than not, we are not allowed to achieve them. And perhaps that's not always a bad thing. We seem to spend most of our lives with desires, untapped and unreachable. Bergman knows this all too well, and tortures his characters with their yearnings, desires out of step with the mechanics of day to day living. It provides excellent drama. As always Bergman keeps the struggle between man and woman as tension filled lovers foremost in the frame. There is desire but it is fraught with problems.

It's not Bergman's best film. The characters can sometimes seem selfish, but this is the point. How do we exist in the world if we cannot have what we want? It's a heartbreaking realization.

Some say Bergman is the greatest Director the world has ever seen. I'm not sure about that. Tarkovsky was a visual genius, but Bergman is certainly more intimate, his stories personal and instantly identifiable. He achieves success again with Dreams.

This is a pretty nice film from Bergman's early work. It focuses on two women. One, a photographer, is a strong woman in her business, but is hanging on to a time when she was in love. She lost that love and sort of intimidates him into meeting her in a few days. She is getting older and more lonely and doesn't see life as worth much (really---in a Bergman film?). The other, played by Harriett Andersson is a young photographic model, has a fiery temper and she has driven off her lover. As she tries to get her bearings, she window shops, and is approached by a rich old man (a widower), who buys her an expensive dress, jewels, and shoes. They go to an amusement part where she has a great time while his strength begins to fizzle. They go back to his huge house and frolic like teenagers. They both have too much to drink and she is trying to seduce him when his daughter shows up and embarrasses both of them. She is stunned at how foolish she has been. The first woman meets her former lover, now a family man, and tries to rekindle the attraction. But then a series of events take place (I won't spoil the scene). The acting is excellent and there is actually a positive message that comes out of this.

Susanne can't stop thinking of Henrik, overwhelming, it makes her feel sick, like a moth to a flame, a thoroughbred who's lame, no use to man nor beast while she's like this.

Doris found a sponsor for the day, if she wants something he's quite happy to pay, but the cost could be quite high, if she stayed with this old guy, who wants someone to take the loneliness away.

An eventful day in the lives of two quite different women, both belittled and humiliated for different reasons, looking for something that can't be conjured and is often fleeting. Eva Dahlbeck is always worth devouring wherever she performs and whatever she is in, and Harriet Andersson seldom puts a foot wrong whenever she's around either.