Now is the time, nearly one month away from the Academy Awards, when the general public does a crash course in nominated films. Additional show times are added at the local movie theater, glossy magazine cover stories are digested and discussed. Virtually everyone becomes a critic. It’s natural, of course, to formulate an opinion, especially on something that costs money and invades our senses. But in order to properly celebrate it’s important to take a look back at the people and films that have influenced those nominated.
In an arena where there are so many great trailblazers to recognize – Jean Luc Godard and Francois Truffaut for the French New Wave movement; Roberto Rossellini, Vittorio De Sica, and Frederico Fellini for Italian Neorealism – it would take forever to draw the lines of impact between each generation and advancement of filmmakers.
There is one director, however, who should be singled out. He stands alone on a pedestal assembled by criticism, idolization, and experiment. He is unassociated with any blanket terminology of filmmaking, purely due to the fact that he’s beyond description. His name is Ingmar Bergman and he is the ultimate influencer.
Bergman, a Swedish director, remains heavily studied in film schools across the world. “Wild Strawberries,” for instance, is introduced to all sophomore Film and Television students at NYU’s Tisch School of the Arts. In this particular classroom, Bergman’s philosophical themes are deliberated and dissected. Through the course, it becomes understood Bergman is simplistic in all areas of his films save for one – the subconscious.
And this is where today’s filmmakers follow his example.
It’s the underlying plot – the subtext and closeted story – that has become a staple in modern cinema. A character’s internal grappling of doubt, mortality, obsession, sexuality, and loneliness gives certain fullness to a film; it’s an additional layer of depth for an audience to examine and contemplate.
This fundamental suppression, which can be found in each of this year’s nominated films, was introduced and mastered by Bergman.
Plagues of the past and today are both cerebral and primal. And more often than not, the inner irritants are tormented and left without remedy. Bergman was the first to tackle these unattainable demons on celluloid in such a way that didn’t depend on dialogue. Instead, his presentation and exploration was through a stylistic approach.
Take Bergman’s critically acclaimed, “Persona.”
Short cuts of what appear to be unrelated b-roll footage – a nail being hammered through the palm of a hand, a tarantula spider, a bespectacled boy in a hospital bed – are all assembled together before the real narration begins. It’s jarring and, if not in the right frame of mind, its unusualness may prevent the viewer from continuing. But it all comes back full circle. The uneasiness felt during the opening is supposed to be a reflection of the main character’s struggles throughout the film.
It’s examples like that Bergman’s multi-layering and broken associations that have allowed unusual storytelling of today to be accepted. Without Bergman, there certainly wouldn’t have been “The Revenant.” While “The Revenant” may be a more coherent story than any of Bergman’s, it’s similar in its heavy dependence on the actor’s believability. This is a man with few exchanges but a basic internal need that is propelling, not only him, but the story.
Bergman also accepted and advocated the muse. He empowered the women in his films, allowing them to be the subjects of glamour and complication, while the men were notoriously weak connivers and one-dimensional. Bergman’s muse was actress Liv Ullmann. In this way, he certainly influenced David O. Russell who has collaborated with Jennifer Lawrence on three different occasions and, judging by each of their successes, will continue to utilize.
But disregard the subliminal plots, the female inspirations, and what’s left is the very reason why so many of today’s filmmakers love Bergman. Personalization. In a TIME magazine article, written by Richard Corliss, Bergman is beautifully compared to “a surgeon who operated on himself. He cut into his own fears, analyzed his failings, perhaps sought forgiveness through art.”
Bergman inserted so much of himself into each of his films. It’s the connection that mirror image that translates on screen and allows the audience to experience something much more than a movie. In a way, it’s similar to reading someone’s diary. It’s personal therefore it’s complex. And when it’s complex, there are more ways to understand, more reasons to sympathize.
Best Picture may not go to a film that resembles “Wild Strawberries” or “Persona,” but it’s without a doubt that this year’s Best Picture winner will have been, in some way, influenced by the great, Ingmar Bergman.
Ashley Peter writes the Reel Remarks column in the Two River Times. She is a writer and Two River area native who works in the film and television industry.
