criterionforum.org

jindianajonz wrote:I saw someone on the forums recently (can't remember where) use Bergman's work as an example of a body of work that is easy to lisence- due to the fact that he made all his movies for the same company, obtaining rights en masse is much easier. If this is the case, then how did Criterion miss out on the rights to Persona?

Because in the late 1960s, United Artists bought the worldwide rights to Persona and a handful of Bergman's other late-Sixties titles - off the top of my head, Shame, Hour of the Wolf and The Passion of Anna.

If there is no pre-existing distribution agreement for a film in the US, it can be easier to license several films directly from an original studio/producer. Bergman's films were distributed in the US by many different distributors. Some of those distribution agreements may have expired, some may still hold, complicating the licensing in the US.

Bergman's films throughout the '50s and early '60s were distributed in the US by Janus Films, the progenitor of The Criterion Collection. For some reason (money? wider distribution?), Bergman's films after All These Women in 1964 (starting with Persona) were distributed by Lopert Films, an art-house distributor owned by United Artists (which was merged into MGM in 1981). MGM still apparently has the US distribution rights for those films (as evidenced by the still-available Bergman box they released).

Now that Criterion is licensing from MGM, it's possible they could get Persona and the other Bergman films MGM has, but I don't think we've seen any indication that they're doing that.

Matt wrote:MGM still apparently has the US distribution rights for those films (as evidenced by the still-available Bergman box they released).

I thought that set was OOP.

That's why I said still-available instead of still-in-print. Being out of print doesn't necessarily mean they've lost the rights. MGM, like every other major studio, has taken dozens and dozens of titles they own out of print.

jindianajonz wrote:I saw someone on the forums recently (can't remember where) use Bergman's work as an example of a body of work that is easy to lisence- due to the fact that he made all his movies for the same company, obtaining rights en masse is much easier. If this is the case, then how did Criterion miss out on the rights to Persona?

Half a dozen of his early films are for other companies than SF, notably Sawdust and Tinsel. After 1955 I think all his Swedish films made for cinema are done for SF.

MichaelB wrote:Because in the late 1960s, United Artists bought the worldwide rights to Persona and a handful of Bergman's other late-Sixties titles - off the top of my head, Shame, Hour of the Wolf and The Passion of Anna.

I wonder why PERSONA was released by Tartan in the UK then? (yet the other three are MGM in the UK, like they are in the US).

Very good read on the trilogy of novels Bergman wrote in the early 90s.

Did Ingmar Bergman enjoy This Is Cinerama (1952)? Here a screenshot from Kvinnodröm (1955).

Either that, or all POV roller coaster shots basically look the same.

How Does Ingmar Bergman's Legacy Impact Films Today? This Festival Explains All

"The festival also premiered the documentary "Trespassing Bergman," from directors Hynek Pallas and Jane Magnusson, which looks at Bergman's career through interviews with other filmmakers and actors. The film is adapted from a series broadcast on Swedish television last year, in which some of the directors in Bergman's personal VHS collection were invited to visit his home. These ranged from Michael Haneke to John Landis, but the feature version of the series abandons this unique perspective in favor of a more traditional "greatest hits" look at Bergman's work and life. However, in its most successful parts, it both deepens Bergman's myth and deconstructs it.

"The directors' interviewees express sentiments ranging from awe (Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu describes visiting Bergman's house as it were a pilgrimage to Mecca) to more realistic perspectives on his flaws (Lars Von Trier spends a lot of his screen time musing about how he likes to imagine Bergman isolated on Fårö masturbating, an idea that grows weirdly credible when Tomas Alfredson discovers a VHS copy of the 1974 softcore film "Emmanuelle" on Bergman's shelves.)"

Trying to decide which Ingmar Bergman book to purchase. I looked at previous posts and I've narrowed it down to the following...

Ingmar Bergman - Robin Wood
Ingmar Bergman: Film & Stage - Robert Emmet Long

For those who have read the two books, could you please tell me what each one focuses more on (for example: I'm looking for an analysis on his movies with a behind the scenes trivia guide while I watch his films). Any help will be much appreciated.

Thanks.

hearthesilence wrote: "The festival also premiered the documentary "Trespassing Bergman," from directors Hynek Pallas and Jane Magnusson, which looks at Bergman's career through interviews with other filmmakers and actors. The film is adapted from a series broadcast on Swedish television last year, in which some of the directors in Bergman's personal VHS collection were invited to visit his home.

I'm sorry I didn't post this before because I'm a couple issues behind, but last week's New Yorker had a fantastic profile of Liv Ullmann and the Liv and Ingmar documentary. A short and worthwhile read.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2013/12/0 ... lk_thurman" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Subscribers can read the whole thing if you've activated your digital access.

From the picture a couple posts back, even funnier than owning Crocodile Dundee is Ingmar Bergman owning a copy of the Bo Derek soft core erotic film Bolero.

Dylan wrote:From the picture a couple posts back, even funnier than owning Crocodile Dundee is Ingmar Bergman owning a copy of the Bo Derek soft core erotic film Bolero.

(Lars Von Trier spends a lot of his screen time musing about how he likes to imagine Bergman isolated on Fårö masturbating, an idea that grows weirdly credible when Tomas Alfredson discovers a VHS copy of the 1974 softcore film "Emmanuelle" on Bergman's shelves.)"

No one wants to be judged by a few random titles they own-- just looking at my TV stand right now, am I merely Destination Tokyo and Hart of Dixie Season Two? Wait. Actually, yeah, that's a pretty good summary of who I am as a person

If I am judged by my video shelf I will come up short as an artist and a person.

I do hope that nobody judges me just by seeing the collection of Nikkatsu Roman Porno films with titles such as Zoom Up: Beaver Book Girl and Eros School: Feels So Good!

Far better that they judge me instead by The Pervert's Guide to Cinema and The Pornographers.

No "White Rose Campus: And Then Everyone Gets Raped", Colin?

Sadly not yet, though I did find Nympho Diver: G-String Festival quite amusing!

That film has a plot that involves the townsfolk deciding that they need to retire and replace the older and more weatherbeaten by time single village pearl diver with a bevvy of beauties in order to both increase the revenue for the community and to inspire tourism with the promise of getting to see the town's 'unique features and traditional practices' in action!

There is a great sequence that takes place underneath the opening credits of a delegation of town Councillors trawling airports, shopping malls, schools, streets, etc. They end up with the usual group of stereotypes thrown into the situation under somewhat false pretences - the homely girl who is hardworking and naïve about the world; the promiscuous girl just looking for a good time and on the job experience; the wannabe model looking to get some sun and a tan but doesn't want to get her hands dirty; the virgin (along with a male counterpart whose mind is being boggled by the sudden influx of beautiful women to the small town and the inn in which he works!); the girl in love with a complete bastard who is leading her on without his other girl finding out, etc.

The film doesn't really develop any further than this, instead devolving into showing the required amount of sex scenes (literally throwing different combinations of partners, locations and positions together and seeing what fits!) but it does all build towards a "let's put on a show and save our town!" climax as the girls don their multi-coloured G-strings (their unique selling point) in order to lead the local fertility festival parade!

I Love It From Behind!, on the other hand, is really only as complex as its title!

I want to go back and watch Bergman's filmography, but the problem is there's so damn much of it. I'm not concerned as much about the time as the hastle and expense of tracking down all the non-R1 odds and ends. I currently have all the Criterion releases and the MGM box set, as well as The Rite and All These Women. Which other releases should I try to hunt down, and which would I not be missing out on if I skip?

Also Colin, I totally missed that last post of yours, but unfortunately (as I said in the 80's thread) I didn't find much fun in Nympho Diver.

Waiting Women (not to be confused with All These Women)! Then I recommend tracking down After the Rehearsal and Eva (screenplay only), and then Prison and the Devil's Eye

I was going to recommend From The Life of Marionettes, which, along with The Rite are the only remaining region 2 Bergmans I have, until I realized it's also on Criterion's Hulu. Though I'd second domino's recommendation of After the Rehearsal, if you've never seen it. For region 1 there's also Sony's Saraband, which is pretty essential, being his last film, his first film on video and a pretty good one at that. And there's Olive's theatrical cut of Face to Face. You might want to read or watch The Best Inentions too, a later film he wrote but did not direct, about the lives of his parents.

Thanks guys! I just stocked up on a few of those, though unfortunately After the Rehearsal is a bit more expensive than I'd like right now on Amazon, so I'm going to hold off on that. Thankfully I'll be watching these chronologically, so I have some time before I need to buy it.

Why only the screenplay for Eva rather than the movie?

I meant he didn't direct it, only wrote it, but it's a great film