Reviews

I've only just read the other comments on this beautiful film. I first saw it on its release in 1961 - and nearly spent a whole week of evenings at the cinema.I was 16 I'd become a fan of Ingrid Bergman two years before this, on seeing her in "The Inn of the Sixth Happiness, which was her best film [in my opinion!]. Also then saw and loved "Indiscreet", but was bowled over by her next film -"Goodbye Again". I wish they had kept the original French title: "Aimez-Vous Brahms?". It evokes the atmosphere and meaning of the film and you don't have to be fluent in French to understand it - so why change it? Once again, Ingrid hardly seemed to be acting - she just swept you along with her character, Paula. Some people said that the film didn't work because Ingrid was 45 at the time, supposed to be 40 and looked younger. True! Her make-up artist, John O'Gorman, had to put in a suggestion of dark circles under her eyes and lines on her neck, in order to make her seem 40! All through the film I felt so much for the character of Philip [Tony Perkins], because you could understand why he fell totally in love with Ingrid . You also wondered if Roger [Yves Montand] was out of his mind, drifting around from girl to girl, when he had the most beautiful woman in the world. This was another reason why some people thought the story didn't work. But I don't care - I'll always love it! Ingrid never acts, she just IS her characters, and she always cries "for real". That's why there has never been anyone like her and there never will be. This film should be issued on DVD [as I have already suggested for "A Walk in the Spring Rain" ]. Owning the video is all right, but it deserves to be preserved for future generations on DVD, so that they can see what a GOOD film really is!!!! Mary

This Ingrid Bergman film was so under-rated. She put her heart and soul into acting the part of her great heroine and then the film was not only slated at the box office but horrendously cut when issued for television and on video. WHY?????? We know it didn't do well at the box office, because of the circumstances of Ingrid's private life in 1949 and 1950 - sadly, Hollywood and the whole world judged this lovely lady and they shouldn't judge anyone, ever!!! Miss Bergman was a lady and a great actress. But why was the film cut for video? The cut version, with silly voice overs and maps, is not one iota as good as the full version, where we see the young Joan and her experiences of her voices and also have a fuller version of the trial - where her acting is nothing short of brilliant. I hope someone who is able to influence the issuing of the entire film on DVD reads this comment! Mary

Although your previous reviewer did a thorough job, I have to disagree that the film seems insignificant in the greater scheme of things. What is film for? It is to entertain and not to delve into the "meaning of life". This film is powerful! It packs a greater punch if you happen to be a Christian, but if you don't, it's still going to inspire you. Ingrid Bergman's strong character stamps itself on all her roles and this is no exception. She is not, at first, disturbed by the arrival of a seemingly harmless new priest. But when she discovers that his mission is to tell the nuns that their school's repairs simply cannot be afforded and that they will have to close the school, well then she starts to show her determination. Horace P. Bogardus wants the school site for a car park for his new business building, but after Bergman has finished with him [with help from prayer of course!], he ends up by giving the building itself to the nuns as a new school. It also changes Bogardus from being a selfish, angry, money-grabbing man, to being a kind, generous and loving Christian. Altogether, the film is a lesson in true selflessness and shows what it is to have a heart. In this respect it's far better than films that have tried to do the same thing - such as "Sound of Music", which is horribly treacly by comparison. The nuns in "Bells of St Mary's" are much more believable. I urge anyone who may be feeling grumpy to see this film! There's also a gem of a scene in which Ingrid Bergman teaches one of the boys how to defend himself from bullies - she buys a book on boxing and tutors him, with amazing consequences. Though supposed to be a sequel to "Going My Way", "Bells" ended up by being the more remembered of the two and stands alone. For this, most of the credit goes to Ingrid Bergman. Mary Hutchings Mary@ingrid67.freeserve.co.uk January 2003

Please, please may we have this great film on DVD!!!!!! It's one of the best films of all time and should be kept for posterity. I have numerous videos of it, in the hope that they will never wear out, but you can't beat DVD!!!!! Ingrid Bergman will be remembered for this film, which I honestly believe was her finest performance. Dilys Powell, revered English film critic, wrote that it was Ingrid's best performance. It was full of integrity and her tears were real - I can vouch for that! I've spoken to people who were on location in Snowdonia [North Wales] with Ingrid and one person told me that the first foot inspecting scene [where an old lady asked her to unbind her feet as an example to the mothers of the girl babies] required sixteen takes, because Ingrid was so moved to tears and Mark Robson didn't want the scene to be quite so overwhelming. E-mail me, this film's greatest fan, for more information. Mary

I can't believe that some people thought any part of this film was boring! It isn't an action movie. It's about the developing relationship between two mature people and it is, indeed, a comedy. There are some great lines from Ingrid, who holds one spellbound throughout - with her acting, with her beauty and with those elegant gowns. Sorry, don't even mention those other actresses in the same breath as Bergman! She is in a class of her own - and shows it in this film. She was 42 when she filmed it - and it really doesn't make any difference. She's not pretending to be a young girl with her first lover. As for any comparison with "Notorious" - no! You can't compare these two films. Both are great, both star Bergman and Grant - similarity ends there! I would like to add that the supporting roles are admirably played by all - especially the brilliant Cecil Parker [Alfred Munson], who had me in stitches. Mary Hutchings [founder, Ingrid Bergman International at Yahoo Clubs]

I am lucky enough to have a video of the uncut version of this film, in which the trial is shown in full. This is the part of the film in which we see Ingrid's best acting. It's so immensely moving! Ingrid believed in Joan and it shows. She had just come from a triumphant Broadway run in Joan of Lorraine, the play on which this movie is based. The movie is a more straightforward telling of Joan's story [the play is a play within a play] and I would say it's accurate, though some details have to be left out, due to lack of time. Sadly, Ingrid's popularity in the USA had waned when this film was released. What a tragedy! I am amazed that a so-called enlightened and free nation could turn against this honest woman, because of her love for an Italian film director and the birth [out of wedlock] of their beautiful son. I think Ingrid would have won another Oscar with "Joan of Arc", had it not been for the "scandal". It's definitely the best film version of this remarkable saint's story and a fulfilment of Ingrid's lifetime wish. Long live Ingrid Bergman - and her favourite saint! Mary Hutchings [Founder, Ingrid Bergman International, Yahoo clubs]