Scary to think that one can become so influential that everyone then gets bored of you…
But anyway it won’t harm his feelings anymore…
If that’s true would that make Bergman’s subjects less human maybe but I don’t believe its indicative of his limits as a filmmaker anymore than for example extracting limits from Ozu’s filmmaking because he really only made shomin- geki (social comedies) films.
Who in their right mind would label Red Desert or L’Eclisse middlebrow? I can see how someone may perceive The Seventh Seal or Cries and Whispers as such, not that their bad films, but if it wasn’t for Antonioni going Anglophone he would be perceived as being just as highbrow as Tarkovsky, Bresson, and Bela Tarr.
Also, everyone seems to have their own definition of middlebrow. What’s middlebrow to one can be highbrow to another and vice versa. Some people will even go so far as to call Dostoevsky, Shakespeare, and Dickens middlebrow, which I think takes it a bit far and is in my opinion plain unfair. Calling Philip Roth or Toni Morrison middlebrow I can understand, but…
Also, wouldn’t it be better to determine whether or not each work individually is middlebrow instead of simply labeling an artist incurably middlebrow or not? For example, Before the Revolution is probably the last film on earth a cinephile would consider middlebrow, but later in his career Bertolucci mostly made films which were thoroughly middlebrow at best.
“Rosenbaum is correct when he says Bergman is not the subject of very much discussion anymore.”
You could probably say that about Hawks, or perhaps even Ford, too. Bergman is definitely out of fashion right now, but so was Antonioni for years, and suddenly he ‘came back’ after a new generation of directors claimed to be influenced by his work.
PISCES: If Cries and Whispers is middle brow, that just means that the definition has changed quite a bit over time. I mean, to me a middle brow film maker in America would be Ron Howard(in drama mode), or Alexander Payne. Cries and Whispers is far harder to sit through than any film those guys ever made don’t you think? especially for a casual viewer. And Persona is considered high brow, isn’t it? I’d say that Bergman is somewhere between high and middle personally, but i can accept that films like Fanny and Alexander veered towards the middle, as good as it is.
I agree Joks. I guess what I was saying is that I could sort of sympathize with such a sentiment, but what I think is ridiculous is it’s gotten to the point that some people will call something middlebrow the second a “non-intellectual/non-highbrow” has heard of something (i.e. calling Joyce, Proust, Schubert, or even Antonioni middlebrow), even if only a very small group of people genuinely appreciate the work of such artists and don’t only claim to be familiar with it simply to impress others.
^^There are always snobs and pseudo-radicals trying to work against everyone else. I met a guy recently that said Von Trier was too commercial and that Kiarostami should have never worked with Binoche. She is too ‘middle brow’. and appeals mostly to women in their 40’s and 50’s(his words, not mine).
You would think he might get a little satisfaction out of the fact that some ‘typical’ middle brow viewers might have went to see ‘Certified Copy’ because of Binoche and walked out frustration and/or confused after the experience, but no, that isn’t enough ;-)
“Rosenbaum is correct when he says Bergman is not the subject of very much discussion anymore.”
Obviously he hasn’t been reading these forums, though.
It think in general the critical world is taking a breather from Bergman, Kurosawa and especially Fellini and we will see that in the next Sight and Sound poll in both critics picks and directors picks. I have also noticed an anti-Godard trend, but that will be be followed by a pro-Godard trend- (it is a yearly event) I really admire Fellini but I don’t mind that he’s kind of passe. It is highly unlikely that he will be erased from cinema history!
Frida Kahlo is middlebrow. Just sayin’.
Jerry Johnson
People have come accustom to Bergmans themes and it may recieve little impact in return.
I would say people have become accustomed to the way Bergman presents his themes, which is indicative of his limits as a filmmaker: his style has become stale. Rosenbaum is correct when he says Bergman is not the subject of very much discussion anymore.