Gertrud tells the story of a woman who just wants to be loved. When her current husband reveals his aspiration to become an official, Gertrud reveal her feelings about their relationship AND an affair she was having but its does not end well for her. She sets off, yet again, to be fulfilled on her own.
Personally was confused of Gertrud but its very interesting.
To be frank, because I do not understand Gertrud's thinking. She's the kind of person who loves to wear her feelings on her sleeve AND has that Thoreau mentality for the simple. She seems like she was a very well known personality before her marriage. Everyone is enamored by her presence BUT she just felt enclosed by these fanaticism around her. She just do not want the adoration and familiarity. She just wants to be loved unconditionally.
And when everything falls apart, sShe decides to leave it all behind.
Is this a feminist morality play? An existentialist meandering? Or simply one of life's disappointing truth? Or all of it?
I personally do not know.
I do fully would give kudos to how Dreyer framed it. It might be a confounding material BUT it does lend to it being read in multiple ways. Its a text that begs to be watched and be interpreted like a Rorschach inkblot test. Just enough details and form without really turning into a blank paper.
Probably would watch again AND is a harder film to interpret. Not recommended for beginners.
Personally was confused of Gertrud but its very interesting.
To be frank, because I do not understand Gertrud's thinking. She's the kind of person who loves to wear her feelings on her sleeve AND has that Thoreau mentality for the simple. She seems like she was a very well known personality before her marriage. Everyone is enamored by her presence BUT she just felt enclosed by these fanaticism around her. She just do not want the adoration and familiarity. She just wants to be loved unconditionally.
And when everything falls apart, sShe decides to leave it all behind.
Is this a feminist morality play? An existentialist meandering? Or simply one of life's disappointing truth? Or all of it?
I personally do not know.
I do fully would give kudos to how Dreyer framed it. It might be a confounding material BUT it does lend to it being read in multiple ways. Its a text that begs to be watched and be interpreted like a Rorschach inkblot test. Just enough details and form without really turning into a blank paper.
Probably would watch again AND is a harder film to interpret. Not recommended for beginners.