The plot follows Eva and Jan Rosenberg played by Liv Ullmann and Max Von Sydow; they are a childless couple, and a pair of musicians. War has broken out on the mainland and to escape it they’ve migrated to an island and set-up a farm. But the war has followed them and hostilities begin again near their new home. Soon Eva and Jan find themselves in the midst of the bloody conflict again, being attacked by one side and then accused of collaborating by the other side, abused by figures in authority and corrupted by their environment. They want to acquiesce to the demands of those around them but no matter which approach they attempt they help themselves and condemn themselves simultantiously. It is a film of two very clear and distinctive halves, the first being a long and rather plodding portrayal of our central couple’s existence as they elude the war directly but indirectly its consequences are still felt. The second half very literally starts with a bang and then doesn’t let up for what is a terrifying decent into hell. For this half any point where the situation doesn’t seem like it can get any worse it can and it will. Shame is set in an unknown time in an unknown place which closely resembles 1960’s Sweden if only for the language and the weaponry. To clarify: it’s not set in any particular era and therefore presents a vivid demonstration of how quickly any civilisation can break down and destroy itself under duress. This is seen through the microcosm of Eva, and Jan, but also that of Jacobi (here played wonderfully by Gunnar Bjornstrand) a colonel who is a friend of the couple and lives locally. They are the central characters, typically of Bergman films he uses a minimal cast, there are plenty of supporting characters too, but the concentration is most definitely on the central three and using them to show the ability of human beings to violently change in times of war. Someone we perceive to be an honest decent person (given the right circumstances) could be a rapist, thief or murderer when given too much strain, or presented the right opportunity for them to be so. Someone with murderous impulses could have secretly restrained them for their entire lives as so not to break any of society’s laws against such activities, a war time situation then gives them a chance to be everything they’re murderously capable of being with the full endorsement of the state. A similar film to Shame is Michael Haneke’s 2003 film Time of the Wolf a post-apocalyptic feature with a difference, cold blooded and brutal, this was the opposite of the Hollywood portrayal which often exhibit post apocalyptic worlds as rather cool places to be, The Matrix for example, worlds where conventional and common problems and worries like finance and job promotions are replaced with noble struggles and sexual freedoms. “Fuck anyone you want you could be dead tomorrow!” when the reality, as presented in Time of the Wolf and Shame is “rape anyone you want, you could be dead tomorrow.” The romantic vision of mankind united in a costly but righteous struggle to survive is replaced with the more accurate and realistic version of mankind falling apart and unable to stand together because of a collective greed brought about by our own innately selfish desire to “look out for number one” so to speak. This ignorance of the plight of others spreads to everyone, ignorance then begets ignorance and all are complicit in the destruction of civilisation as neighbors turn their backs on neighbors, friends are betrayed to save families and lives are lost to the ever increasing circle of violence. Eva and Jan for example, they’re both artists, they’re well educated people. What did they do when war broke out on the mainland, did they pick a side? No, they ran. Absolving themselves of the war? No, because they’ve ignored their social responsibility and done what most people would do under the circumstances. Things wouldn’t be any better if they had joined a side; neither the authorities nor the rebels are shown in a good light, and both commit atrocities. Even if they protested against the war, by continuing to not take a side eventually they would have to let an innocent person die indirectly through their non-involvement. Basically in war, and a decaying society, no one wins. Humanity in both a literal and metaphoric sense dies and wars flourish because of the indolence of the population. In Shame, Jan, Eva and Jacobi represent three sides of the same process, they’re damned if they do and they’re equally damned if they don’t.
“When society can no longer function, the main characters lose their frame of reference. Their social relations cease. The people crumble. The weak man becomes ruthless. The woman, who had been the stronger, falls apart.” Bergman was particularly dissatisfied with the film and felt that its last act was its only redeeming feature, he felt that the first half and indeed most of the second half didn’t convey the message or present the world as accurately as he would have liked, he stated that: “For a long time before making this film I had carried around the notion of trying to focus on the ‘little war’, the war that exist on the periphery where there is total confusion, and nobody knows what is actually going on. If I had been more patient when writing the script, I would have depicted this ‘little war’ in a better way. I did not have that patience.” He also felt that the problems stemmed from the script and that his own self-protective nature denied him the ability to correct the mistakes. To quote Bergman again: “…We are talking about poorly constructed manuscript. The first half of the film is really nothing more than an endlessly drawn-out prologue that ought to have been over and done within ten minutes. What happens later could have been built upon, fleshed out, and developed as much as was needed. I didn’t ever see that. I didn’t see it when I wrote the screenplay; I didn’t see it when I shot the film; I didn’t see it when I edited it. During that time I lived with the idea that Shame was self-evident and emotionally logical all the way through.” This might seem like heavy self-criticism on Bergman’s part, sure the first half is a tad protracted but there is a certain amount of allowance here which helps to both flesh out the central characters in a “normal” existence only to be mercilessly damaged by the events of the second half. Without the extended first half we wouldn’t care half as much about the couple in the second half. Contextually and visually Shame is vividly distinctive when compared to the other Bergman films of the time, the setting of a modern or even futuristic war for example featuring action-packed scenes of planes dropping bombs on the forests then being shot down, a ransacking of Eva and Jan’s house is shot in an edgier hand-held style which all contribute to Shame being one of the most sensational films in Bergman’s career. Also the sociological examination is wide and effects all citizens of nations involved in war fare, but through its microcosmic examination it seeks and achieves a duel meaning, one of society and another of the individual. The individual in primary question is Jan. The whole of the cast are perfect for their parts but Sydow in particular here gets the juiciest character, Jan is a moaning, pathetic, cowardly, lackadaisical man who is utterly dependant on the affections of his strong willed and feisty wife. Through their ordeal he is humiliated, shrugged aside, and is forced by his own inadequacies to watch his wife be continually taken advantage of. Later he is presented with an opportunity to murder someone who has wronged him – he takes it, partly out of fear and partly out of his socially imposed patriarchal responsibilities. From here Jan changes and becomes the opposite of his former self, totally independent to the point of nearly abandoning Eva, confident to the point of castigating those responsible for his turmoil, and violent throughout. His character gives us a potent and shocking example of how war can bring out the worst in people, and how it is easy to hide behind virtues which have never been confronted by the possibility for vice. But until your back is against the wall, you have no idea what you’re capable of. The last act of Shame is a devastating demonstration of the destruction of a man’s soul which is again countering the romantic perception that the quiet non-aggressive man will become a leader and hero when the time is right, here instead Bergman cynically tells us he’ll become a thug and a murderer when the time is right, and he is most certainly not alone in that regard. Visually Shame isn’t as beautiful as his other works, indeed Hour of the Wolf made in the same year is far richer and interesting in this sense. The composition of shots is neither as well thought through or interesting as Persona for example; that said the hand-held photography and the often grim and bleak lighting is highly effective for the piece and works well in this context. Lending it a gritty and in many respects dirty feeling which only serves to amplify its unflinching pessimistic outlook. This factor does contribute to Shame being one of Bergman’s less accessible films to a certain extent, although simple in concept and execution it’s outlook is so depressing that an audience member might be forgiven for not making it all the way through. Lines like “I have only experienced human nearness a few times. Always in connection with pain” or Eva’s desperate attempts to distance herself from reality as indicated when she states “Sometimes everything seems just like a dream. It’s not my dream, but someone else’s, that I have to participate in. What happens when the one who dreamt us wakes up and feels ashamed?” Interestingly this line is dove tailed in Bergman’s follow-up to this film The Passion of Anna, where in Ullmann plays the titular role, and has a dream which feels like a direct continuation of Shame's final scenes, implying that Shame may well simply be Anna’s dream. A loose but interesting connection between two of Bergman’s films. It is a tough film to get into, but more than worth it, as for personal opinion the second half of Shame represents some of Bergman’s greatest work. M.Dawson |
|||
The late 60’s was a busy time for Bergman, in the space of four years he’d produced films such as Persona, Hour of the Wolf, The Rite, and The Passion of Anna. Whilst typically Bergman fans would accredit Persona with the high honors for this period of his career, and Persona is a truly remarkable film and one of Bergman’s best with truly cogent thematic explorations. However predilection is Shame for its darker story and combination and manifestation of both internal and external conflicts through possibly the most depressing, down-beat and unrelentingly bleak of all of his films.
Bergman once stated that this was the part of Shame he felt succeeded:
Post new comment