User reviews

This film's title is taken from the Bible: "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." (1 Cor 13:12).

The film is a major work of cinema and a major work of Bergman. If one looks at the body of Bergman's films he was probably approaching his peak of artistry, which he would achieve in his next work "Winter light", a film that Bergman himself called perfect. The reason most viewers do not grasp the importance of the magnificent "Man-God trilogy" or "the Silence trilogy" or "the Dark/Faith trilogy" (three films: "Through a glass darkly", "Winter light", and "the Silence") is that the trilogy deals with the theological question of God's existence. It is essentially a thinking person's film. If you can reflect on what you see, these three films are a treasure—a treasure that influenced major directors several decades later, specifically Kieslowski who made "Three Colors: Blue" also almost entirely based on 1 Corinthians Chapter 13, Tarkovsky who seems to have borrowed some ideas like the sudden baptismal rain from this film that he employs in "Solyaris" and "Stalker" and finally the exciting new talent from Russia Andrei Zvyagintsev (director of "The Return", also taking a leaf from the Bergmanesque son–father relationship). All these films seem to have been influenced by this seminal work of Bergman.

To those viewers, who are not spiritually inclined, the film could be reduced to the obvious action of Harriet Anderson's character Karin insisting on wearing goggles as she steps out of her home to live the rest of her life in a hospital. It could easily be interpreted as a study of mental illness, a film that gives credence to the theory that god does not exist. The film can equally be interpreted as a film on mad people who feel they are in communion with god, who at other times are slaves to dark forces (voices).

On the other hand one can argue the intensity of the light is a metaphor for a sign that God exists—the basic question that troubled Bergman, the son of a priest, in real life. Even the young Minus kneels down to pray to God as the rain (baptismal?) falls suddenly. A keen viewer will note that there is no sign of rain on island or of rain drenching men in an open boat soon after the event. Only Karin's hair is wet. All three films seek an answer that God exists from a silent, "inscrutable" (to quote a word from this film) God to whom millions pray. "Through a glass darkly" opens with a shot of the almost still, dark waters of the sea mirroring the sky. The film ends with several references of light. For the cynical, Bergman was disillusioned and felt that God was a "spider" (the intriguing image for the DVD covers of the three films), a reference to Karin's outburst towards the end of the film. If Bergman, was truly disillusioned, would he have added the final epilogue where the father tells his son "God exists in love, in every sort of love, maybe God is love." These last words make the son say my father has "talked to me" the penultimate words of the film—a seemingly spiritual response even Jesus on the cross wanted ("Father, father, why hast thou forgotten me?") before he died.

It would be ridiculous to see this work merely as a film seeking answers to God's existence. Like "Three colors: Blue", this is a film on love. There is the undiluted love of an atheist husband (shades of Bergman?) for his ailing wife (note the film is dedicated to Kabi, Bergman's wife at a point when divorce was looming large). There is love of a father for his daughter, son and son-in-law triggered by a failed suicide attempt (only recalled in the film). There is love between siblings.

The film is also about marriage. Visually, the film emphasizes the wedding ring in the scenes involving husband (the camera captures the wedding ring on the finger several times) and wife (she puts it on after she washes her face). The son asks with an innocent cockiness of the father who has recently divorced his second wife Marianne (never shown on screen) if "he has lost all stability, spiritually"? Structurally Bergman doffs his cap to Shakespeare by adding a one act play within the film on the lines of "Hamlet" to drive home a point to the father and his illusion of love for his perfect work of art at the expense of depriving love for his near and dear.

In more ways than one, this is a thinking person's film. After viewing the film several times, one is in awe of this filmmaker so prolific, so perfect and so sensitive. What he has written for cinema can be compared to the output of great writers like Tolstoy and Shakespeare. He was truly a genius. I do agree with Bergman when he avers that the three films in the trilogy are not connected and are stand alone films. The only common link among the three films is Bergman's personal quest for a response from a silent God that his father believed in and in whom Bergman was brought up to believe in. These are not films of an atheist but works from a genius "flirting with God" to quote from the film itself.

Many years after he made the film, Bergman was uncomfortable with the final scene. The doubting Thomas in Bergman had resurfaced. Yet he never reworked on the film. The film has much to offer for a student of cinema: it is made of fine photography, art direction, acting, scriptwriting, editing and sound (Bach plus the horn of the lighthouse). Undoubtedly one of Bergman's finest works, it anticipates the perfect "Winter light," the next film that Bergman wrote and directed.

Well, we don't see darkly through a glass, and Bergman explains in his "Introductions" that during the ancient times, there were no glass, the mirrors were made of metal, bronze, for instance and while looking through the metal mirror, the face and the background appear darker than in reality. Does it mean that when we look inside ourselves like in the mirror, we appear darker and more sinister than we are? Or the other way around?

"Through a Glass Darkly" is a typically great Bergman's film - four people arrive to an isolated island to spend a few days together, a young woman, her husband, father, and brother. They seem to love one another and are perfectly happy and comfortable in the beginning. It does not last long - not in the Bergman's world. Harriet Anderson was amazing as Karin, a mentally sick young woman, who was just released from the hospital but I believe three other actors playing Father (Gunnar Bjornstrand), Husband (Max von Sydow), and Brother (Lars Passgård) were as good as she was. The Father was especially interesting - he was a reason Karin became ill on the first place and his diary sent her to the total mental breakdown. As with "Persona" and "Autumn Sonata", Bergman is asking again how far is an Artist willing to go for his Art? Here, Father, the writer wants to be a cool and remote observer of his daughter's mental tragedy as a study for his future work. There is a hope, though, in the end. Not for Karin - it is too late for her - but for her confused young brother who is also fighting for his sanity and desperately needs his father's love and understanding. His last words - "Daddy talked to me" - give this bleak and tragic story the hope that his life could be different. Or maybe not...

This was the first Bergman movie I ever watched. Consequently, it holds sort of a special place in my catalogue of movie memories.

I enjoyed the depiction of the numerous relationships between people or objects which were kept apart by walls or a "dark glass." The artist and the fullness of what he/she is attempting to depict, mankind and God, and more particularly in the film, between Minus and women, Minus and David, etc..

The most gripping, however, were the relationship between David and Karin, and between Karin and "God." I'm not going to get into detail for the sake of those who haven't seen the film. But Bjornstrand's line about the "magic circle" we draw around ourselves instantly vaulted close to the top of my list of movie lines which have impacted me.

Lastly, I appreciated how the von Sydow character, Martin, acted as a representation of what love is not, i.e. his desire to always do the right thing, rather than the honest thing.

A character study set on a secluded island off the coast of Sweden, `Through A Glass, Darkly' is Ingmar Bergman's pensive chronicle of a young woman's descent into the maelstrom of schizophrenia. The story centers on Karin (Harriet Andersson), who has reached a pivotal juncture in her life; having just been released from a mental hospital, she must now face the uncertainties inherent in the nature of her illness. It is a crucial period in her life; she occupies a middle ground between two worlds, and the question now is, will she ultimately emerge in the light, or succumb to the darkness of the voices that beckon her from within. Through Bergman's eyes we observe the effects of her situation on the three people closest to her, her husband, Martin (Max von Sydow), her father, David (Gunnar Bjornstrand) and her brother, Minus (Lars Passgard). The movie explores their relationships to Karin (and to one another), and how differently each one them strives to cope with and understand her elusive affliction. An absorbing, evocative and sometimes tense drama, the film is impeccably delivered by Bergman, and the performances are all exemplary, especially Harriet Andersson, who brings the tortured soul of Karin to life with nuance and a depth and grasp of the character that is remarkable. Von Sydow is also perfect as the troubled Martin, and aptly conveys the quandary of his situation, which he approaches with a reserved, committed gentleness. Bjornstrand maintains a stoic presence throughout as the novelist/father attempting to resolve an inner conflict borne of guilt and doubtful motives, and Passgard gives a notable performance, as well; his angst and confusion are deeply felt and well played. The first of Bergman's 'Faith' trilogy (followed by `Winter Light' and `The Silence'), `Through A Glass, Darkly' is one of his finest works, an intricate exploration of the fragility of the human psyche and the complexities of life. An Oscar winner for Best Foreign Film of 1961, it firmly establishes Bergman as one of Cinema's greatest directors. It is an emotional and engrossing film that should not be missed. I rate this one 10/10.

Between 1957-1963, Ingmar Bergman directed seven films. In my mind, there has never been such an amazingly creative period for a director as the six years between Wild Strawberries and The Silence. Through a Glass Darkly stands out to me as not only the masterpiece of this era, but of Bergman's entire career. This film has such a distinct atmosphere, which conveys not only isolation and melancholy, but also dark, austere beauty. Every little piece of this film fits together like a glorious completed puzzle. The Bach playing over the opening credits. The cinematography, with long, meditative shots in glowing black and white. The performances turned in by Harriet Andersson, Gunner Bjornstrand, and Bergman regular Max von Sydow. Overall, I sense that Bergman's vision is so obviously being displayed on the screen, as if his soul is being laid bare. As a singular piece of art, it is just staggering to behold. I think that everyone has albums or films that they connect with certain periods in their life, that transcend the mundane and just touch you in a profound way. Through a Glass Darkly is one for me. A must see.

How do you write a review about a film which is so perfect for you as this one is for me? This is probably the only film that I can't think of having any flaws, even minor ones. And it's so compelling and touching. Really, you should see a movie for so many reasons. Here you can see how a film can have probably one of the best cinematography EVER without using any CGI and computers, just with manipulating the light, and perfect camera work.You can enjoy a compelling story about God and the numerous aspects in relationships between people, which works both on a grand scale and in every specific case between the characters. It's really depressing at times but it always feels so real and convincing. You feel that this story is actually happening before your eyes, at least I did . You will get a flawless acting from all 4 actors in the movie, especially Harriet Andersson. Her part is so extremely difficult but she pulls it off superbly. See it, if you like the old days of moviemaking, when the smart plot, decent acting and innovative camera work and cinematography were still more important than the special effects and the media hype.

10+/10

Harriet Anderson's performance is beyond brilliance. She has a very difficult role, but there seems not the hint of acting on her part. It is a role where the character seems to be acting and is having a very rough time. Her performance is transparent and haunting. I saw this film most recently a few years ago (and have seen many movies since then), but i still recall vividly three of her scenes. The photography is magical and while not as praised as Wild Strawberries, Persona or Winter Light ( and a few other Bergman classics), its power and its passion reach inside your soul and dares you to resist living the story and the characters of the film. Also, Max von Sydow is brilliant as usual--he is certainly the most underrated actor of all time--theater, television or cinema. I highly recommend this film and then your viewing t he 1971 Passion of Anna, also with Max v.S. and a performance by Liv Ullmann that rivals Harriet's in Thtorug a Glass Darkly. The theme of Darkly is the human predicament in a world of suffering and illness. How does man survive if he actually "lives" his/her life, rather than just sports through life without any experience of art and the spiritual (good or bad). This film is part of a loose trilogy that includes the magnificent Winter Light and The Silence, though each can be viewed separately with no loss of discovery and enjoyment. When I was in college at UCLA from 1968-75 (under and grad school), Bergman was the rage with many people. He seems to be lost in the mists of time. But if go back and watch his films from the late 50's to the 70's, you will see cinema at its boldest and its greatest. Buy the films or rent them (Netflix has a good collection.). Darkly will shake your world and cause ripples of thought and feelings that move for a long, long time inside your mind, and if your fortunate your soul.. See this film.

Karin, who has till lately been in a mental institution, her husband, who was her therapist, her brother, who has his own problems, and her father, a novelist, meet in an island after a long time, and tensions break out.

"Through a Glass Darkly" is a very interesting film, where Bergman continues his work about religion and family. Karin is a mentally ill person, but is not the only one with problems, and in some respect is the most free of all, as she, in some respect, tries to break free from her ties. Her husband is actually her doctor, and treats her as if she was a baby. Her brother is still trying to cope with his just awoken sexuality, and her father is a self-centered person, detached, and who can't help but see his daughter's illness as a chance to observe a person on a path of self-destruction.

Bergman plays again with death, God and love, how humans can destroy each other, and how our acts can have horrible consequences. All the actors do a great job, but the story is burdened a little bit by the atmosphere and the style of direction, which makes it feel as a play. All the acting, scenery and shots make it very similar to the experience of watching a play, and in some respect, remember the viewer that they are watching a work of fiction.

Through a Glass Darkly marks one of the first collaborations between Bergman and his long time cinematographer Sven Nykvist (who passed away this last September). Nykvist shot films as varied as Lasse Hallestroms 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape' to Woody Allen's 'Crimes and Misdemeanors.' Nykvist's touch is present throughout the film, a style that begins to become a part of Bergman's signature mise-en-scene.

Bergman's screenplay is transitional because of it's scarcity of saturation. Using a cast of only four and only one location, the family's country home on an island off the coast of Sweden. Karin (Harriet Andersson) is slowly going mad, her family (fiancée, father and brother) are trying to understand her and not send her away, trying to let her know that things may be alright as she descends into hysteria, talking to walls, waiting for god to come out of the closet.

The film is quite simply a masterpiece. A portrayal of descent into madness and the effect on others that feels more grounded in reality than even the best of films on madness (see: Shock Corridor – Samuel Fuller, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest – Milos Foreman, or The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada – Tommy Lee Jones) Nykvist's mostly static camera gives the film a brooding sense of anticipation, lingering motionlessly, allowing the actors to move freely into deep frames, marginalizing themselves as they move about the large empty frame. The camera even goes so far as to linger a little too long at times, waiting long after the actors have exited the frame, making sure that the audience is aware that the hollowness, these spaces they live and think in exist without them, these voids the audience is watching never go away.

These sentiments are echoed by the well penned script. The father's regret over the madness of his deceased wife, the husbands jealousy, his inability to act, the nearly sexual love the brother feels for Karin, his isolation and inability to get over his immaturity. It's a delicately woven, exquisitely beautiful film on the landscapes of the mind and the solitude of life and the search for god. A good introduction to the psychological drama of Bergman for anyone unfamiliar with one cinema's masters.

In a small family island, Karin (Harriet Andersson), her teenage brother Minus (Lars Passgård) and her husband Martin (Max von Sydow) welcome her father David (Gunnar Björnstrand), who is a writer permanently absent traveling around the world. Karin has just left a mental institution and has inherited the incurable insanity from her mother. Minus feels lost and alone, estranged by his selfish and cold father that left Karin and he behind after the death of his wife. Martin is neglected by Karin and has no sex life with her anymore and spends his time taking care of his wife. When Karin finds the journal of her father hidden in a drawer in his desk, she reads that her degenerative disease is incurable and triggers a breakdown.

"Såsom i en Spegel" is the beginning of Bergman's Trilogy of Silence, with a direct reference to the lack of communication and the absence of God. With this uncomfortable film, Ingmar Bergman won his first Oscar in 1962 in the category Best Foreign Language Film. The performances are awesome as usual, with wonderful black-and-white cinematography and magnificent camera work. The haunting music score of J.S. Bach gives a tune of melancholy to this depressing story. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Através de um Espelho" ("Through a Mirror")

Her eyes could not deceive what her mind made her believe, though to others she's disturbed and increasingly perturbed, as a cocktail of delusion, creates confusion and illusion, and there's nothing they can do, except observe as she looks through.

There are outstanding performances and there are Harriet Andersson performances and there is a difference between the two, especially under the guidance of this director, as she takes you on the nightmare that Karin lives, the struggles she endures (and of those that surround her), as her world cascades through torment and torture that she can do very little about, and at the time nobody else could be of much help either.

When I was in my teens and twenties, Bergman was god. So profound! How clever I must be to appreciate his darkness! Now in my 70's, I am revisiting the great films of my youth. Kurosawa and Truffaut and Fellini and most others still stand strong. But Bergman, at least in this film? What pretentious drivel. For the first half hour I convinced myself it was a satire. Sadly, no. I'll try another - Persona or Hour of the Wolf or 7th Seal, but if it doesn't hit me differently, I will get to cross a lot of films off my list of classics to rewatch. We used to laugh at people who didn't appreciate Bergman - how insensitive! Now...well, time works numbers on you, and I now must be insensitive. That, or else while living life i found it to be far more glorious than Bergman and the young me imagined.

I would have given this only 2 stars but the camera work is beautiful, the rich B&W. But even the constant tight face shots get old after a while. Major disappointment.

this is one of bergman's most serious and devastating, sometimes horribly depressing and (it's only flaw) a little too heavy handed for even the toughest and healthiest viewers. it is fascinating to watch bergman come to terms with the absence of god and man's tragic isolation in an indifferent universe through the art he uses like no one else could or does, the art of film. karin is a mentally disordered young woman, intensely loved by her family and well cared for but nonetheless subject to bouts of extreme madness and delusions of divinity that are so convincing and well performed as to be hard to watch (particularly the scene where she is convinced that a deity disguised as a spider is going to crawl out of a closet). although it ends on a semi hopeful note, the film's atmosphere is largely one of sterility, emotional dryness, impoverishment and despair. karin lives on an isolated island just as we inhabit a vast, incomprehensible universe that is essentially little but a doomed speck of dust in a monstrous cosmos that does not care. i think there can be little debate as to the correct interpretation of this movie, which is the utter void at the center of false human beliefs and illusions of happiness or omnipotence. order is a lie and religious belief is founded on deliberate self deception. a masterpiece of the most passionate artistry and integrity.

The first part of a 'religious' trilogy of films released from 1961-1963, Through the Glass Darkly may be the most accomplished of the three, and has the literary qualities of some of the best authors while still sticking to a character-driven story about mental drought and bewilderment. All four members bring out the heart of Bergman's message, with Andersson playing Karin in true sincerity and passion for the plague of her mind that has brought a cloud over her and her father, husband and younger brother (a woman with three generations of men). Some might digest the speculation on the inter-relationship of god and love with insanity, yet it is undeniably a masterwork by a artist filmmaker. A+

Here's a film which will tweak your sensibilities. The family...yes the family, center of all great and good. An early sixties Swedish family has gathered in an isolated summer vacation spot on the sea to examine itself and its ties. The two male adults are intellectuals of sorts and the female is both the daughter of one and the wife of the other. She is also the sister of her writer/father's adolescent son. Love is at the center of familial relationships and this film makes no bones about it. Yes, love is the tie. It is also the tie between Man and God, or so it would seem to have been told, especially to those in the West and specifically in Sweden: those who have fallen for a Christian message.

We see in "Through a Glass Darkly" a family in strife. A daughter and wife who is just back from an insane asylum; a teenage son who is unsure of himself, most grievously because of the lack of fatherly love; a husband who is part of this family and yet remains apart from the family and a father who has been running away from familial love since the death of his wife, the mother of the son and daughter. He has been running away from loving responsibility under cover of his "art".

What can be made of this strange brew is made well by Bergman, a man who questions the authority of God, the Family and Patriarcy; but who still comes up on the side of love?

Bergman was a complicated man who made complicated movies. He shocked a lot of critics and audiences in the early 60s. Essentially, his cinematic art was a window through which one could vicariously watch Bergman question his faith and the meaning of life and by extension, his audience could participate in this philosophical exercise. Bergman said once:

"My fear of death was to a great degree linked to my religious concepts. Later on, I underwent minor surgery. By mistake I was given too much anesthesia. I felt as if I had disappeared out of reality. Where did the hours go? They flashed in a microsecond.

"Suddenly I realized, that is how it is. That one could be transformed from being to not-being -- it was hard to grasp. But for a person with a constant anxiety about death, now liberating. Yet at the same time it seems a bit sad. You say to yourself that it would have been fun to encounter new experiences once your soul had had a little rest and grown accustomed to being separated from your body. But I don't think that is what happens to you. First you are, then you are not. This I find deeply satisfying. That which had been formerly been so enigmatic and frightening, namely, what might exist beyond this world, does not exist. Everything is of this world. Everything exists and happens inside us, and we flow into and out of one another. It's perfectly fine like that."

What does love mean to those who are obviously imperfect? How can one pursue love when the way is blocked by either madness or fear or lust or all of these forces to one degree or another?

These are questions which Bergman examines in "Through a Glass Darkly". See it.

Ingmar Bergman I love and admire very much, and Through a Glass Darkly is another example of a brilliant film. It may not be among Bergman's finest like The Seventh Seal, Wild Strawberries, Fanny and Alexander, Cries and Whispers and Persona, but there is much to love. The cinematography as ever from Sven Nykist looks atmospheric and beautiful at the same time and the scenery likewise. Bergman's direction is as ever accomplished, allowing us to be constantly engaged no matter how bleak the story is, and this is quite an unrelenting and I think incredibly moving story. His summer images are far from the optimistic ones we are used to, but bleaker and more searching. Considering the story though, this approach was necessary I think. The music is as ever haunting, and the film is very thought-provoking, which has always been the case actually with the written quality of Bergman's films. Of the acting, Harriet Andersson has a role that is quite impossible, but she is just outstanding in it. Max Von Sydow as ever impresses with his knowing face and commanding presence, and Gunner Bjornstrand gives a performance that requires him to be morbidly curious and helpless than his somewhat droll one in The Seventh Seal and he excels here. In a nutshell, brilliant and definitely worth watching. 9/10 Bethany Cox

This "chamber film" by Ingmar Bergman (whose name is a quote in the Christian bible) has just four characters: a writer (Gunnar Bjornstrand), his schizophrenic daughter Karin (Harriet Andersson), Karin's husband, Martin (Max von Sydow) and Karin's teenage brother, Minus (Lars Passgard). With the exception of Passgard, all the other three are Bergman regulars, having appeared in many of his films.

The movie happens in a single day period in an isolated island, and it's basically about how Karin goes from being relatively normal at the beginning to absolutely crazy 24 hours later, and the reaction of the three people around her. The Bjornstrand character, for instance, feels guilty about his daughter madness, though we now know that upbringing has little influence on mental illness. Also, her descent into madness is so rapid during the movie (though we are told that she has been in a mental institution before) that perhaps is not very believable. Also hard to accept are the solemn lines the characters spout about the "silence of God". Of course, many people have thoughts about existential issues like this, they just don't talk about them in such solemn manner. Of all the major directors Bergman was the one whose background in the theater was more obvious. In some of his movies, like this one, this stage background makes a little more of "noise".

So this is a worthwhile film, but not in my opinion among Bergman's best: At about the same time he did with Bjornstrand Winter Light which is somewhat lesser known, perhaps, but far better.

What do you do with a movie that is intentionally banal for its first half hour or so? Do you turn it off because you have better things to do with your time than to watch a family bicker about who's going to get the fish nets and who's going to set the table for dinner? It's all done lightly and in a friendly manner, but, still, it seems to be about nothing. If watching casually, it can feel like the setup to nothing, but watching closely and it becomes evident that there are very dangerous undercurrents.

There are four members to this family, the patriarch (David), his son (Minus), his daughter (Karin), and the daughter's husband (Martin). We see a play put on by the youngest three for the novelist father about the pointlessness of art. It's an innocent jibe at the father, but he obviously takes it seriously. There's talk of Karin's sickness that she may be over, but it's doubtful. We hear that Martin and Karin haven't been intimate since her sickness, while Karin teases Martin in a way that carries obvious sexual undertones.

Our first view of the family, coming in from the water to the shore of their island, practically hand in hand, and talking joyously, begins to feel like artifice within the first half hour. The biggest driver for this break is Karin's illness, a never named mental condition that's most likely some form of schizophrenia or possibly a dissociative disorder. She wakes early in the Swedish morning before anyone else, goes up the stairs of their two-story vacation home, into a worn down room and begins to see things that entrance and terrify her. Her spell passes and she seems new and innocent again.

When Martin and David take their boat to go into town, that leaves Karin and Minus alone. Karin shows Minus the room and describes what she sees. It's a room full of people waiting for a door to open and reveal someone, she believes it to be God. They end up isolated in a wrecked ship on the coast in a downpour with heavy implications of an act of incest. While this small adventure is going on, we find the reason the David has taken curiously unemotional notes in his diary about Karin's illness. He's so detached from her that he sees her descent into madness as an opportunity to collect material for a new novel.

This family is messed up.

The movie comes to a head with its most famous scene. Karin returns to the upper room, tailed by the other three members of the family, where she sees the culmination of her vision. The invisible masses are there as the door opens (both literally a closet door and in her mind) and in walks the somebody. She freaks out (it might be the best performance of a freak out I've ever seen, Harriet Anderson is a very good actress and Bergman was great with actors), and when she calms down she describes what she saw. It was God in the form of a spider. It tried and failed to penetrate her and then crawled over her to come to the wall.

Bergman had always struggled with his faith. The iconography of The Seventh Seal is probably the most visceral manifestation of this, but I believe that Through a Glass Darkly is the most potent dramatically. The description of the masses in the room are a vicious attack on organized religion, and the image of God as a spider is just as potent. It portrays God as either a malevolent force, or a natural and uncaring one.

Bergman tried to counterpoint that image by evoking the Book of John as David explains to Minus that God is love in all love's forms, but it feels empty in comparison to the strength of Karin's experience. It feels like Bergman trying to square the circle of his extreme doubt and his need for God at the same time, and the doubt is winning.

Through a Glass Darkly is a great film that takes time to build. I imagine the struggles of its first audiences, because the movie is actually a pretty hard watch the first time through. I have seen the movie before, but it's been about ten years and I didn't remember a single thing. I ended up reading several things about the movie afterwards (the essay from the Criterion's massive book that came with the collection and Roger Ebert's Great Movie essay on the film) to help me get a stronger grasp of what it is that I had seen. I'm not parroting what I read. I knew I loved the film, but I couldn't quite explain why, so let me boil it down.

I see Through the Glass Darkly and Alien in a similar light. They both begin in the mundane and end with a tour de force that shakes the audience in different ways. I loved it thoroughly.

Bergmann seems to try and get away on reputation alone with this one. There must have been a dearth of Foreign Films for this to get the Oscar in 1962.

Harriett Andersson was excellent. Bergmann should have calmed Lars Passgard down some as he seemed far to hyper which detracted from Andersson's performance. Max Von Sydow was totally lost and disinterested.

The film was jerky and lacked any significant punch. The various characters lacked substance and proved rather shallow.

Once you watch some of Krzysztof Kieslowski's work, such as his Trois Couleurs Trilogy or the Decalogue, you will tend to forget about Ingmar Bergmann.