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.
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.