I'll start things off. I liked Bergman's stuff back when I first started seeing some of his stuff but then it got a point where I got tired of seeing the same cast in a bunch of his films. He also uses a formula for a lot of his films and once you start picking up on it, it can get really boring as you're waiting to get from point A to point B.

I watched this movie last year and I didn't really care for it then and after watching it today, it's the most un-horror movie I've watched this month so far and I watched Fred 2: Return of the Living Fred last night, so that's saying something.

It's not so much this film but I'm bored with most of his stuff at this point even though I still occasionally watch something new and sometimes enjoy it.

I enjoyed watching this movie, but more for the visuals than anything else. I cannot say that I was too engrossed in the story. At all.

I did like some of the minor characters who would pop up from time to time. The Bela Lugosi look alike was especially interesting. I wanted to know their story much more than that of the leads. More of them might have gotten me more firmly in this movie's camp.

I would say it's a good movie to watch once, but I doubt I will be revisiting.

Well, now, THAT was something different. I haven't seen many of Ingmar Bergman's films, but I've liked all of the ones that I HAVE seen. This one's no different; I liked it, and I actually think that, for the most part, I understand it. It reminded me quite a bit of Persona, at least structurally. I do wonder whether the boy on the rocks was supposed to be the painter's son, and he was keeping it hidden from his wife that he had killed him by "sending" him the 50 kroner as a birthday gift, or whether it was another boy entirely. I find that I have to be in a particular mood to want to watch Bergman, but, luckily, I was in that mood today. The feel of this film just had to have influenced Lars von Trier when he was making Antichrist--it just had to.

Nice catch. I agree.

who knew that Bergman could actually attempt and succeed in making a horror movie - this was very impressive

Don't forget Virgin Spring and Seventh Seal.

What's the saying...if you can't say something nice, say nothing at all...right?

My rating: * out of *****

^ Based on the past daily films, I just knew what brianluvdvd's thought were going to be.

Overall, I liked this film, but here's my problem with the few Bergman films I've seen, and this one is no exception. When I watch Bergman films, I tend to be unbelievably aware of technique, and there's no question Bergman is a great craftsman. But the result is that I'm watching a scene and instead of really paying attention to meaning or story, I'm admiring the balance of the shot or the use of shadows. Or I'm thinking about the technique of the actors, like how still they must have to be while reading their lines to keep the shots composed the way they are. Because of all this, I feel like I appreciate Bergman from a distance, but I know this is one I probably should revisit at some point.

I am a little predictable, am I not?

You make a great point mentioning technique, film-making, etc. This is a movie that is more interesting watching from a technical standpoint than actual entertainment. I can definitely see that. This would have been a movie to pay attention to because I have to write a paper on it but not to watch and enjoy whilst eating freshly made brownies for my horror movie challenge.

By the way...I rate films that I see based on my feelings of them and not on technical expertise, great acting, etc. Basically I rate them like I rate everything at Netflix...1 star means you hated it on up to 5 stars means you loved it. It may be a film that I respect technically or think the acting is outstanding...but if I would rather hang kittens than watch it again, it remains in the one star realm no matter how well it is made.