Featured Audience Ratings

• Bob S

  
  Finally got to see the full length five hour television version. My hands are tied. Until the judging committee agrees on a new scoring system, I am compelled to give this a perfect score - five stars.

• Lucas M

  
  Criative and inspiring masterpiece tale by Bergman.

• Emil K

  
  Magical and haunting work from swedish-legend Ingmar Bergman. There is two versions of this film out there and i strongly advice you to see the longer over 5-hour TV-version, which in my opinion is way better than the theatrical cut which is 3-hours and 20-minutes long. Personally i… More
  Magical and haunting work from swedish-legend Ingmar Bergman. There is two versions of this film out there and i strongly advice you to see the longer over 5-hour TV-version, which in my opinion is way better than the theatrical cut which is 3-hours and 20-minutes long. Personally i just hate when there are trimmed cuts for theatres or so called director's cuts. In my opinion there is just this one version of a film and that is that. If you later on change the end result, then it's like reworking your own painting. It changes it and then it just is not the same work. This is the main problem with Fanny och Alexander, there should have been only one cut, suggesting to that over 5-hour long version. As a film this is a long and enchanting journey that casts a strange spell upon you and haunts you long afterwards when the credits has rolled.

• Mike S

  
  Without doubt the best movie I've seen by Ingmar Bergman so far! This amazing classic has some of the most beautiful scenery and art-directing ever conceived in the history of cinema. Superb acting all-around and an intriguing story that is incredibly moving. All in all, Swedish… More
  Without doubt the best movie I've seen by Ingmar Bergman so far! This amazing classic has some of the most beautiful scenery and art-directing ever conceived in the history of cinema. Superb acting all-around and an intriguing story that is incredibly moving. All in all, Swedish film-making at its best, and something you can appreciate whichever country you're from.

• Matheus C

  
  A primeira cena de Fanny e Alexander introduz o menino do título (Bertil Guve) a contemplar um palco em miniatura vazio. Nós, no papel de espectadores, nos encontramos em uma espécie de ponto subjetivo, observando o personagem atrás das cortinas. Com este plano, Bergman estabelece um… More
  A primeira cena de Fanny e Alexander introduz o menino do título (Bertil Guve) a contemplar um palco em miniatura vazio. Nós, no papel de espectadores, nos encontramos em uma espécie de ponto subjetivo, observando o personagem atrás das cortinas. Com este plano, Bergman estabelece um paradoxo que percorre ao longo do filme: seria o que se desenrola na tela fruto da imaginação supressa do protagonista ou realmente parte do universo real da narrativa? Ao início do filme, contemplamos a vida feliz levada por Alexander e sua irmã mais nova Fanny (Pernilla Allwin) em meio a sua excêntrica família burguesa. Quando o pai das crianças morre inesperadamente, sua mãe se casa com o bispo de bom nome Edvard Vergerus (Jan Malmsjö), que leva a viúva e filhos para viverem em sua isolada residência. É amplamente conhecido o fato de Fanny e Alexander ser um reflexo da própria vida do diretor sueco, e estes elementos autobiográficos se fazem acentuados a partir do momento em que o padrasto começa a mostrar suas verdadeiras cores (o pai de Bergman era um clérigo estrito). No entanto, o filme também é uma fábula a certo ponto, com Bergman trazendo a tona os aspectos mais sombrios dos contos de fadas - e, de certa forma, a sua verdadeira cerne. A trajetória de Fanny e Alexander traz reflexos de João e Maria, desde sua sedução pela bruxa malvada em pele de cordeiro até sua épica fuga e libertação (neste caso, tanto de corpo quanto mente). Enquanto Alexander atravessa o processo catártico da narrativa, Fanny atua como observadora dos atos de selvageria sofridos pelo irmão - de fato, uma continuação poderia ser produzida apenas explorando os efeitos psicológicos sofridos pela menina. Não apenas um pastiche de estilos, Fanny e Alexander também é uma alegoria de amadurecimento através do sofrimento, da libertação dos desejos mais profundos (não importando o quão impuro eles sejam) e também uma fábula de moral. Tudo isso suportado pelo costumeiro panache visual de seu diretor.

• Dan S

  
  A scrumptious, intricately plotted drama concerning a family in early 1900's Sweden, and how the mother struggles to find a male figure after her husband dies suddenly of a stroke. While the film definitely takes its time and Bergman could definitely be accused of… More
  A scrumptious, intricately plotted drama concerning a family in early 1900's Sweden, and how the mother struggles to find a male figure after her husband dies suddenly of a stroke. While the film definitely takes its time and Bergman could definitely be accused of self-indulgence, the movie is always outstandingly constructed and unmistakably haunting given Bergman's obligatory use of religion and question of God's existence. The movie is not perfect like many critics claim, as it fails to get inside the head of the Fanny character as much as it does the Alexander one, and as a result it feels sort off off-kilter from time-to-time, but that doesn't keep it from being a very good film, and one that forcefully demonstrates Bergman's control off his lens and story-telling ability.

• Jim H

  
  At the end of Bergman's <i>Fanny and Alexander</i>, I wondered if I was missing something. A director of Bergman's caliber doesn't include superfluous characters and events without a reason, yet I can't discern how the film's early scenes and many… More
  At the end of Bergman's <i>Fanny and Alexander</i>, I wondered if I was missing something. A director of Bergman's caliber doesn't include superfluous characters and events without a reason, yet I can't discern how the film's early scenes and many of the uncles and aunts are connected to the central conflict, which doesn't really begin until an hour and half into the film. It is then that Alexander and the Bishop begin their feud, which provides the most compelling moments of the film, and Bergman elevates this conflict to reflections about God, faith, death, and justice. When he's this specific, this focused, and this ambitious, Bergman's work is astounding, intelligent entertainment. Also, while some have argued that the film is anti-semetic, I wouldn't go that far. Though it is certainly true that Bergman does nothing to disspell stereotypes about Jews, the character in question does end up assisting our heroes and looking benevolent in the process. Rather than condemning the film outright, I would temper that statement by saying that the film is certainly problematic in its portrayal. Overall, this probably isn't the best introduction to Bergman, but critics claim that it is essential to understanding his oeuvre. I'm glad I saw it for that reason, but I don't think I'd watch it again.

• Leigh R

  
  I liked it though it seemed to have a slow pace to me.

• Cassandra M

  
  Perhaps the most impressive feature of this wonderful film is the humility with which its creator presents it to the world, as if it were no grander than the old-fashioned Nativity-play shown in the early scenes at the Theatre. At the end of this experience - to term it with any mere… More
  Perhaps the most impressive feature of this wonderful film is the humility with which its creator presents it to the world, as if it were no grander than the old-fashioned Nativity-play shown in the early scenes at the Theatre. At the end of this experience - to term it with any mere technical tag, like 'movie', would be inadequate - Bergman's profoundly grown-up disillusionment has transformed into the pure spirituality of abnegation and acceptance. His intellectual pilgrimage, through possibly the greatest career in films, finds the director arriving back where he began, with the great simplicities of life. But there is a difference with his return, which is that his prodigality over the years has burnt the rage out of him, and finally allowed him to 'enjoy what may be enjoyed' (as one of the Ekdahls says), without further fretting over the puzzle of human existence. From all this human folly (he clearly feels) comes the only wisdom, which is - simply - to be human. It is, indeed, a film like no other for allowing the pieces of experience to settle into their appointed places. There is a beautiful quality of selfless resignation, in this last of his works for cinema, which finally and forever excels the sadistic disciplines of The Bishop. This perverted creature confesses, to the new wife whom he has lost, how it is impossible to 'tear off the mask' as it is 'burned into my face': He is become an authoritarian '... a rite, a law, a custom - not a man'. [Shelley] Having put the notional love of God before that of humankind, there is nowhere for his personality to be re-enacted in the bosom of any kindly recollections that will survive him. Except in that of Alexander/Bergman, where his two, each-in-their-own-way terrifying, fathers, both the White and the Black opposites of an imagination flickering with the director's haunted vision, will project forever onto his Cinematic arena of stark absolutes the inner strife where each of us is locked away, struggling to endure the turmoil of these eternally irreconcilable truths. The White Knight and The Black Bishop: These are phantom moves in our great game with Death, and pieces that will be returned into play for as long as humanity continues. How like Chess Life is: Just a game we play, with arbitrary rules, and yet whose progress is of supreme and abiding concern to each and every one of us. This great work is a monument to play, in all its senses, not least the play of light and the play of ideas, both equally insubstantial and yet the essence of reality, eloquent as the silence of a great, roofless Cathedral. Out of the Ruin of Faith, Bergman has wrought a Peace that passeth understanding. And it is in this ultimate by-passing of the relentless structures of intellect that Bergman finally achieves the resolution of his productive neuroses, in a truly magical film whose every phase is as inevitable as breathing, or the changeable and unimpeded weather. As the grandmother reflects. at last, 'I don't want to put Life together anymore. I just leave it broken. Strangely, it seems better that way.' Death, in the end, is not a calamity, but the choice of all who have truly known Life. In other words, to choose Life is to accept its Dark partner, Death. And to accept each as part of the family group, even though they seem complete misfits there. The old lady, with Strindberg's Dream-play in her lap, knows at last that the whole history of her family is only a personal reverie. And yet how much more real it seems than her son Carl's immature and somewhat absurd, angst-ridden railings against 'cruel Fate'! Had he only accepted his patient wife's gently sympathetic injunction to 'Never mind' the Professor would have been both wiser and happier, enduring with patient fortitude the oceanic inconsequentialities of life's real Mystery, and attending far less to the trivial pseudo-mysteries of his solipsistic men's club. All his morbid rationalising is precisely as much use in real life as the usual state of alcoholic befuddlement which is the only serious pursuit of this club. Reason as befuddlement; The sleep of reason as deliverance. With saint-like humility, Bergman gives us back our ordinary human life, as he surrenders his exceptional life in films. But he knows that the ghost of this life will always be with us. His anguished worldliness will haunt us - as the Ghost of Hamlet's father must haunt Alexander - forever.

• Saskia D

  
  It took me at least a half hour to get into it, I guess it was when everybody got drunk enough to care about appearances. After that the characters got more depth. Sat through the entire five hours in one session, all I can say is that it didn't take any effort at all. Amazing… More
  It took me at least a half hour to get into it, I guess it was when everybody got drunk enough to care about appearances. After that the characters got more depth. Sat through the entire five hours in one session, all I can say is that it didn't take any effort at all. Amazing movie, really got to me. Never failed to surprise, right up till the end. <div style="width:500px;"><a href="http://www.flixster.com/photos/fanny-och-alexander-fanny-and-alexander-4259675"><img src="http://content9.flixster.com/photo/42/59/67/4259675_gal.jpg" border="0"/></a><div style="text-align:center;font-size:10px;"><a href="http://www.flixster.com">

• Randy T

  
  Fanny and Aleander has: A nursemaid with cleavage A pillow fight An uncle who farts out candles Randy old men Promiscuous young ladies A Christmas party A death A ghost A wicked stepfather An enormous aunt Bars on the windows A clever escape Another death Another ghost Puppets An… More
  Fanny and Aleander has: A nursemaid with cleavage A pillow fight An uncle who farts out candles Randy old men Promiscuous young ladies A Christmas party A death A ghost A wicked stepfather An enormous aunt Bars on the windows A clever escape Another death Another ghost Puppets An androgynous, psychic brother Laughter Love And an intermission Five stars for content, minus one half star for its THREE HOUR running time (watch from a VERY comfortable chair!)

• Jennifer X

  
  I feel terrible for saying this, but I literally wanted to kill myself from the boredom. Bergman has never impressed me and this just seals the deal. I wish I could detect the intellectual fulfillment so many seem to derive from his works, but I can't get past the boredom.… More
  I feel terrible for saying this, but I literally wanted to kill myself from the boredom. Bergman has never impressed me and this just seals the deal. I wish I could detect the intellectual fulfillment so many seem to derive from his works, but I can't get past the boredom. Alexander is a boring kid who never seems to do anything but experience things and look depressed, and Fanny barely even appears in the movie. Maybe these things are culturally significant to the movie, but honestly, it's so boring I don't even care.

• danny d

  
  although considered by many to be a masterpiece, this is my least favorite of bergmans films. it is well directed and well crafted for sure, but the goodness ends there. at three hours it is overlong, needing as much as an hour of this slow paced film to be left on the cutting room… More
  although considered by many to be a masterpiece, this is my least favorite of bergmans films. it is well directed and well crafted for sure, but the goodness ends there. at three hours it is overlong, needing as much as an hour of this slow paced film to be left on the cutting room floor. the characters are dry, although bergman did a decent job about making me feel slightly emotionally attached to a few of them. fanny doesnt say more than 10 words the entire film and alexander has no real charisma. the bishop does a good job of making the audience hate him, but there were endless amounts of storyline outside of his that were pointless. the film also introduces a character in carl who seems important and he dissapears an hour into the film, which is poor story telling. overall, the story just didnt matter much. it also felt normal through most of the film, but delved into the supernatural at inopportune and confusing times. overall, not worth much.

• Tom E

  
  One of the BEST Ingmar movies

• Christopher M

  
  This mature fairy tale is based around one particularly strong willed boy (Alexander) and his sister (Fanny), their upper class Swedish family, and the time they spend living under a tyrant when their well meaning mother carries them along into a new marriage like baggage, not knowing… More
  This mature fairy tale is based around one particularly strong willed boy (Alexander) and his sister (Fanny), their upper class Swedish family, and the time they spend living under a tyrant when their well meaning mother carries them along into a new marriage like baggage, not knowing what awaits them. This is the third film I've seen by Ingmar Bergman (first in colour) - and it is filled with vibrant characters, images, spirits, and a riveting plot. Bergman expertly intertwines the metaphysical, fantastic aspects of the story along with his shrewd take on the trivialities of daily life, all backed by a study of the relationship of a very close knit family. I think what I really appreciated most about this movie was how alive the characters were. Bergman has an amazing ability, as is evident in the other films of his I've seen, to bring alive all of the characters in his films so that we almost instantly understand who they are. and what place they have in the film. Fanny & Alexander is a wonderful, rapturous film by a true master filmmaker.

• Chris B

  
  Criterion have put out a fantastic 3-disk set on blu-ray that includes both the 3 hour theatrical, 5 hour and 21 minute television version, and in addition to many other supplements including a thick booklet we are also treated to Bergman's self directed documentary The Making of… More
  Criterion have put out a fantastic 3-disk set on blu-ray that includes both the 3 hour theatrical, 5 hour and 21 minute television version, and in addition to many other supplements including a thick booklet we are also treated to Bergman's self directed documentary The Making of Fanny and Alexander! For the most complete version of Bergman's vision, you must watch the television version as the theatrical has been trimmed almost in half. While the film is extremly long, it is never boring or wasting time with unneeded elements. Fanny and Alexander may start off a little slow as it introduces characters and stories, it is so wonderful to watch the stunning cinematography and poetic dialogue that runs throughout Bergman's whole film and for that matter filmography! With both likable and villainous characters and a phenomenal scriptyou can't take your eyes away even for a second. Hearing the dialogue and watching the beautifully filmed settings, you know this is something special. This isn't just a masterpiece but a visual representation that captures Bergman, the believes and ideals and is such, a piece of him preserved in film history forever! While it is indeed long, its a film that needs the time and attention of the viewer and justly rewards those that are willing to do this!

• Alec B

  
  I can't put into words how I felt about this movie other than to say that I loved it. So many films about families become so sentimental and fake. "Fanny & Alexander" never hits a false not. Even the supernatural moments work beautifully. A masterpiece from Bergman

• Lesley N

  
  This is the choice; the three hour epic or the five hour even more epic. And lucky me, my DVD rental company sent me the five hour version so feet up relax, buy snacks first. Actually I ended up watching it in two sessions, which was easy as it divides into five "acts", so… More
  This is the choice; the three hour epic or the five hour even more epic. And lucky me, my DVD rental company sent me the five hour version so feet up relax, buy snacks first. Actually I ended up watching it in two sessions, which was easy as it divides into five "acts", so you can choose a nice place to stop. This is not a film for everyone. It's a slow long drama about a Swedish extended family at the turn of the previous century. Despite its title, you find out little about Alexander and even less about his sister, and most about the variety of colourful characters that make up their family - the theatrical parents, the manic depressive uncle, the philandering other uncle. It starts with a large Christmas celebration and there's plenty of snow and general Bergmanly swedishness, before the story turns darker as all good epics should and Fanny and Alexander and their mother ... well, I don't want to spoil it. If you're not hooked by the end of act two, then I think you should turn off and go do something else instead. Otherwise open another bag of peanuts, and get comfy. Lucky you, there's a long way to go yet....

• Ivan D

  
  Christopher Moore, a contemporary author of fantasy fiction, has once said that "children see magic because they look for it". This, for me, is the foundation and the root of all questions raised in "Fanny and Alexander", a complexly-themed masterpiece that is,… More
  Christopher Moore, a contemporary author of fantasy fiction, has once said that "children see magic because they look for it". This, for me, is the foundation and the root of all questions raised in "Fanny and Alexander", a complexly-themed masterpiece that is, sadly, also Ingmar Bergman's very last feature film. In hindsight, it may look as if "Fanny and Alexander" is merely about children's innocence and the power of imagination; two themes that are otherwise quite alien to Bergman himself. But seeing the film unfold in its three glorious hours, "Fanny and Alexander" came out to be so much more than that. In many ways, the film is also a complex extension of Bergman's provocative meditation on the non-intervening nature of God (see "Silence of God" trilogy) and his passive role in human existence. Personally, watching "Fanny and Alexander" is like finally putting the last pieces of a jigsaw puzzle in place. But Ingmar Bergman, ever the abstract filmmaker, is indeed not the kind that will bail you out with some clear-cut answers. For the record, "Fanny and Alexander" is littered with magic and the supernatural; two aspects of the film that can be taken either as truly literal or completely symbolic. Nonetheless, the film, on surface level a period family drama, wonderfully takes on a new texture and thematic dimension by utilizing some elements that defy physics or explanation. In addition, the film even flirts with the idea that magic may perhaps be the one and only substitute for the complete absence of God; an absurdist approach on Bergman's part but is also very compelling in how it slightly satirizes the extent of our adherence to the unexplainable. With no real story or narrative, "Fanny and Alexander's" first half is all about the everyday trivialities in the life of the Ekdahls, a well-to-do family of stage actors which, after a relatively happy Christmas eve, was struck by an unexpected tragedy, which suddenly finds Fanny (Pernilla Allwin) and her older brother Alexander (Bertil Guve) emotionally astray and fatherless. By way of Sven Nykvist's dreamy cinematography which has won him a well-deserved Oscar, the film was able to subtly depict both the difficulty of losing a father in the formative years of one's life and the silently mercurial nature of familial existence at the time (early 20th century Sweden) through its use of empty spaces, distant shots and anguished faces. After the burial of the titular characters' father, a bishop named Edvard Vergerus (Jan Malmsjö) then enters the scene. Extremely authoritative and ruthless, the bishop is Fanny and Alexander's, both of which were raised in a tender and carefree environment, worst nightmare realized. But just when they thought that things won't get any worse after the death of their father, Fanny and Alexander then find themselves under the wing of the bishop himself, who has decided to marry their newly-widowed mother (Ewa Fröling). From this point on, after much foreboding early on (with those moving statues and the apparitions of Alexander's father), the film slowly but surely abandons the first half's relatively realistic and lively portrayal of the Ekdahls in favor of a more metaphysical, abstract and gloomy second part. From the approach to the characterizations, it's quite easy to see the definite influence of "Fanny and Alexander" in all those stepmother/stepfather films that it has since predated, specifically Guillermo del Toro's "Pan's Labyrinth", what with its stepfather subplot and whole 'magical realm' aspect. But then, "Fanny and Alexander" is never a film that can easily be defined by classifications. It is, in fact, a challenge to our own grasp of cinematic reality. If an emotionally-focused drama like "Fanny and Alexander" suddenly goes all supernatural (which it did), what then can be our potential response as viewers? Well, it's much preferred to just keep mum and simply relish it; after all, this may just be magical realism's finest moment in cinema. But aside from being a stunning amalgamation of both fantasy and reality, "Fanny and Alexander" is also a conscious allegory about the importance of cinema in relation to our lives ("Outside is the big world, and sometimes the little world succeeds in reflecting the big one so that we understand it better") and is also a film that challenges our perception of the unknown, of the things we can't define and of certain life phenomena that we can't explain and articulate about. But more importantly, "Fanny and Alexander" beautifully pushes the limits of cinema unlike anything I've ever seen before. As what the Ekdahls' matriarch (played by Gunn Wållgren) has said at the end of the film, "Everything can happen. Everything is possible and probable. Time and space do not exist. On a flimsy framework of reality, the imagination spins, weaving new patterns." From where I look at it, this is the subtle justification of the film's surprisingly magical nature; a justification that is quite directed to us, the viewers, who are neither children nor naïve and who never expected or anticipated magic but stumbles upon it anyway because of this film. How sad that Ingmar Bergman's great swan song has come too early. But nonetheless, we should still be thankful that a film like "Fanny and Alexander" has come at all. Now I'm more than eager to watch the five-hour version.

• Tom S

  
  It's no wonder many consider this the finest work of Bergman's career. It seems to contain each of his previous films within it, and yet, in its richness and scope, it is unlike anything else he accomplished.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings