The Serpent's Egg (1978)

From what I've read, "The Serpent's Egg" is considered Ingmar Bergman's worst movie. Watching it, I didn't find it terrible. I guess that I haven't seen enough of Bergman's movies to fully judge (I've only seen "The Seventh Seal" and "Autumn Sonata"). It had the feeling of a 1920s expressionist film. I guess that the movie was a metaphor for the rise of Nazism: people slowly realized that something terrible was rising but felt helpless to stop it. The cabaret scenes are neat. I did find the ending abrupt, though.As he often did, Bergman cast Liv Ullmann. The surprising cast members here are David Carradine (Bill in "Kill Bill") and Gert Fröbe (the title role in "Goldfinger"); also appearing is James Whitmore (a noted actor for many years, he appeared in the Miracle Gro commercials towards the end of his life).So, it's not a masterpiece, but nothing terrible.

I say this with a heavy heart as I love Bergman and his films, but while it has good points and it is at least better than All These Women The Serpent's Egg didn't do it for me. It is an incredibly well made film, I cannot deny that, Sven Nykvist's cinematography is wonderful and adds so much to the atmosphere. The scenery is similarly evocative. On top of that, the opening sequence is a brilliant one and promises so much, Liv Ullman shows once more why she was and is one of Sweden's finest actresses and Heinz Bennett makes for an effectively sinister villain without it being too stereotypical.The Serpent's Egg however is while quite different and interesting a disappointment, especially considering that we are talking about one of cinema's greatest directors here. Bergman does seem out of his depth, introducing some interesting ideas but not developing them enough and there are not enough I feel of his distinctive trademarks. The story is rather convoluted with an ending that comes across as rather heavy-handed, some intriguing ideas that come across as half-baked and a brothel scene that is among my least favourite scenes ever in a Bergman film. The dialogue is rambling and banal and David Carradine's performance is overwrought and stiff on the whole.All in all, has its good and fascinating moments but one of Bergman's lesser films. 5/10 Bethany Cox

The design, locations, photography and minor character actors all are excellent. Ullman seems unsure of what she is doing and Carradine just wanders and when he speaks it's unconvincing.The real problem is the script as Bergman made an elementary scriptwriting error, the sort of basic thing that is criticized at a first draft stage: the protagonist is not interesting and does not change but seeks information and so he goes from place to place all documenting the sordid life in Berlin in 1923 and making portentious allusions to Nazism, but as such he has little or no dramatic action until the end when he and the audience are told exactly why and what is going on. In a book that structure might have worked but not in film.

This movie is quite different from other Ingmar Bergman films for many reasons. First, it stars David Carradine--an actor very unlike the stock company actors and actresses Bergman usually uses. Second, instead of focusing on mental illness or death, it is a German Existential film about manipulation and murder. Third, because it is SO different, it will probably alienate many die-hard Bergman fans.What did I think of it?! Well, based on the score of 3 (and that MIGHT have been a little generous), it wasn't a film I particularly liked. It seemed very cruel, bloody and violent compared to other Bergman films. Also, I have never been a fan of David Carradine, but he REALLY looked out of place here.