The Seventh Seal

There are a few timeless questions that philosophers have struggled with, regardless of what period of human history they lived in. Is there a God, and why are we here, come up over and over again in the works of the great thinkers. Ingmar Bergman almost certainly falls under the category of "great thinker" and his movies and screenplays reflect that. His most famous film, and maybe his most philosophical, is the 1957 black and white movie, The Seventh Seal.

The basic plot of the movie is very existential. A knight and his squire return to Sweden from the crusades with their faith destroyed by decades of holy war. The film opens on the shoreline of Sweden where the knight learns that Death is coming for him. In a desperate ploy for more time, Antonius Block challenges Death to a literal game of chess for his life. The longer he can hold off Death in the board game, the longer he has to remain among the living. As he travels across the 14th century swedish countryside that has been ravaged by the black plague, Block meets various characters who throw in with him on his journey.

This movie is essentially about a search for God. Block cannot believe that God might not exist, or even that He is absent while humans endure so much suffering. And so, Block relentlessly searches for a sign from Him. The knight's traveling companion, the surly, cynical, squire has no use for God anymore, but Block continues to search without hope, even as Death closes in.

Antonius Block is played by Max von Sydow in a career making performance. The noble and kind knight that is tormented by the lack of a creator. The pain he injects into Block is magnificent. Gunnar Bjornstrand is excellent as the faithful squire. He also provides much of the levity that makes the tremendous austerity of The Seventh Seal bearable. The beautiful Bibi Andersson, Bergman's frequent muse, also appears as an innocent wife and mother of a family that Block meets.

The image of Death playing chess is iconic and frequently parodied, but remains powerful. This movie offers questions, but supplies no real answer. In a tremendous monologue, Block offers the basic dilemma of the both the film, and its creator.

"Is it so terribly inconceivable to comprehend God with one's senses? Why does He hide in a cloud of half-promises and unseen miracles? How can we believe in the faithful when we lack faith? What will happen to us who want to believe but can not? What about those who neither want to nor can believe? Why can't I kill God in me? Why does He live on in me in a humiliating way -- despite my wanting to evict Him from my heart? Why is He, despite all, a mocking reality I can't be rid of."

27/30 

Robin Hood

The film opens upon a spectacular battlefield. Steely men from the pages history stare each other down as they prepare to engage in vicious battle and hand-to-hand combat. One man stands apart from the throng, noticeably distinct from all the rest. General Maximus, leader of the Roman army readies himself... wait, hold on... wrong movie. Unfortunately I think Ridley Scott also got confused during the filming of his new movie. The recently released Robin Hood bares many similarities to Scott's masterpiece, Gladiator (2000). Not the least of which is the main character, portrayed by Russell Crowe in both pictures. Crowe appears to have perfected the ability to display the nobility of the common man with uncommon valor. While the character of Robin was often known to crack jokes and make witty comments at King John's expense, in this update, Robin is more of the strong silent type.

As a film, Robin Hood is simply decent. A bit long with a tendency to drag, it is populated by epic action scenes, and highly regarded character actors. What Scott and Co. attempted is to create a realistic origin story for the lovable legend. That means King Richard the Lionheart (Danny Huston) is actually violent and egotistical, and King John (Oscar Isaac) and the Sheriff of Nottingham (Matthew Macfadyen) both make appearances but are not the main villains. That distinction belongs to the French, and the English traitor Godfrey, played by the leering Mark Strong. Robin Hood returns home from the crusades right as the French are attempting to use political intrigue to split England in two. Of course impassioned speeches, ambushes, lovely maidens, and Scott's trademark ability to film a battle all ensue.

Like all Scott films, the technical side is well done. He knows how to shoot an adventure, and he knows how to shoot a period piece. The only complaint is that the pacing lags a bit in the middle. The cast side fares just as well. Crowe is always a solid lead, Cate Blanchett handles the role of Maid Marion with grit and aplomb, and Mark Strong is creating a really fun bad guy persona. Other notables include William Hurt, Max Von Sydow, Eileen Atkins combine with Danny Huston as they bring some acting cred to the table.

As adventure films go, it is well done. The film is entertaining, and well-acted. This particular film however, had a larger responsibility than that. Robin Hood is one of the most beloved legends of all time, and while Scott and Crowe provide a gritty and exciting update, they fail to revive any of the spirit and jauntiness of previous incarnations. The band of merry men, while frequently present, have little in the way of lines of character development. The bottom line is as a movie, Robin Hood is fine. As an update of an old story, it fails to live up to is predecessors.

20/30