Fantastic!

best movie i've ever seen.

A lot of fun.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Terrible indeed and admirably performed by that beautiful woman and great actress named Ingrid Bergman, a story directed by her husband the also great film director Roberto Rossellini. A married woman whose husband is a prominent professor has an adulterous relationship with another man. Suddenly a former lover of that man appears and begins to blackmail her demanding high money sums and threatening to tell everything her husband. She is then upset by fear and begins to cede to blackmail. Later we learn that this was planned by her husband with perhaps not very clear intentions. When she knows this she is psychologically destroyed and plans to kill herself of which she is saved by her husband at the last moment and they show that afterwards they love each other. Of course it is psychologically possible that a woman loves two men simultaneously although in different ways (or a man two women). The movie is therefore authentic. Although not exactly a masterpiece this movie is worth to be seen for its intense dramatic atmosphere in what concerns Ingrid Bergman's role and the very good performance of actors and actresses.

A simple story about a simple thing, blackmail. Ingrid Bergman and her husband work in a facility that is trying to work on medical issues, such as the destruction of heart tissue. Bergman, much younger than her husband, has a fling with a playboy type. In the process, an evil woman blackmails her and with each payoff, the amount increases. The film is full of tension as Bergman rushes to get more to this woman. Finally, a ring that means a great deal to the husband is taken. She has to get it back. The events that follow are rather hard to swallow and seem, for me, to diminish the story. Bergman does a slow burn when she gets to that "I've had enough" stage. Things become way too contrived. After seeing the ending, say to yourself, "Is this a real conclusion, even in a 1954 film drama. Bergman, as always, does a really nice job.

This appears to have been mysteriously lost when the history of cinema was being written. It is a hard film to place anyway. Rossellini had hit his stride and was on his way out of the public mind, it's far from the neorealism he became famous for, it's not lurid enough to pass as noir. Antonioni had not yet arrived at Cannes to reinvent the vision present here inside a modernist framework. All this is made worse by the meddling of Italian distributors, anxious for ticket sales. Subsequent generation of film-watchers would have stumbled (if at all) upon something too small, an unfulfilling, incomplete affair.But like so many of these flawed pieces, it is endlessly fascinating. Rossellini was blessed with a gift; his work is not the result of a fiery intuition bursting forth, but of a studied, assured awareness. Grasping and what is grasped become one in his films. It's hard to conceive the great Antonioni, who was so inspired by him and who really opened up what Rossellini contained within a religious language, without a film like this or Stromboli. From a distance, it's simple enough: a story of marital infidelity (which, like Stromboli, inadvertently resonates out of the film and into the illicit love Bergman and Rossellini shared), about a woman's descend into paranoid fear and delusion. An image of the fractured self, painfully learning the lesson that makes whole. Between grief and nothing, as Faulkner would have it.But such richness of appearances. How inner disturbance seeps outside; in the piano concert scene, notice how the music swells from placid to nerve-wracking crescendo. Notice the downpour that accompanies the razorblade-edge crisis of conscience. When the noose begins to be pulled tight around her neck as the husband inquires about a missing ring, faces are drowned in a sludge of shadow like out of Weimar noir.Further inside; the threatening image of the ogre-father to be appeased, with the daughter and wife one before his gaze. He holds the keys to both punishment and forgiveness. The suffering and humiliation born from delusion and desire, and how they trap the soul in chimeras.The other thing I want to stand on is what was originally intended of the compromised vision we have available. Rossellini's daughter is reportedly working to restore the original, a time-consuming affair in most cases, but until then this is all we have.A fishing scene is missing and tiresomely expositional monologue is added in two scenes; from what I could gleam, the opening and finale. Both marvelous renditions of wanderings through night streets, itself an aesthetic ahead of the times. And then the most important thing of all, that pushes the film into cinematic apotheosis. The finale, which the distributors meddled to turn into a cloying sentimentality that ensures closure and balance.Rossellini intended the film to end with a suicide attempt (we see the prelude, with Irene writing her suicide note), but then she thinks of her children and returns home. Rossellini shot footage of this. The footage comprises two shots; one is the shot filmed from inside a car crossing idyllic countryside to reach the remote cottage house, the other is Irene in her favorite armchair as her childhood nanny soothes her.Both these shots were repeated earlier in the film, when Irene and her husband first get to the cottage. To the place where Irene grew up, where her children are now. Childhood comfort is possible there, as refuge from the punishing dead-ends of adult life. We see her, as again in the finale, reclining on her armchair with her nanny by her side.So we have in th end Irene anguishing over her suicide note on her desk; then her regressive trip back into the place of comfort. Whatever end we get in the coming restoration, this is one of the most potent finales in pre-60's cinema, the suicide all there disguised as the journey back.

I viewed a copy of a copy on video of this film and so the video quality was not that great. First, what did I like and not like? I didn't like the beginning or ending, but the rest of the movie was very good. Ingrid Bergman does a very fine job as the wife who has a secret to hide and will go to great lengths out of fear, hence the title of the movie, to prevent her husband from finding out. As the husband, Mathias Wieman does an excellent job playing the part of the kind, understanding Professor Wagner who is not as he seems. Overall, the film is a fine psychological thriller in the manner of Hitchcock and I won't give away the film noirish plot twist or the problematic, to me, ending. This movie is little known but well worth a look.