Fröken Julie
Director: Alf Sjöberg
Casts: Anita Björk, Ulf Palme, Märta Dorff
Year: 1951
International Title: “Miss Julie”
The film is adapted from the stage screnplay “Fröken Julie” by August Strindberg.
“Miss Julie” is one of the classic title with a quite controversial theme. This Swedish film discuss the themes that are still somewhat sensational in its time: sex (and related matters). The interesting thing about watching “Miss Julie” is watching the classic perception about sex in a stage drama that solidly wrapped into a black and white screen. In fact, nudity sex scene is not presented in this film that discusses this sexuality, but more on the game of seduction and the effect on one-another.
Set in 1874 in a luxurious residence of a Count in Sweden, Miss Julie (Anita Björk), despite born in nobility, the daughter of the owner’s residence trying to find happiness with maids and servants. This, of course, is violating the values of the period in which the strata and social status are important in the fabric of society. Person like Miss Julie found to be inappropriate crowded with servants. But the stubborn Miss Julie decided to mingle at a servants’ party in the kitchen. She danced with the servants. Miss Julie attracted by a charming servant, Jean (Ulf Palme), which is much more polite, more mannered, and educated compared with other servants.
Miss Julie, in fact, not a friendly figure. She is quite a bossy. All of her orders must be obeyed. Miss Julie is a dictator for herself. She hit Diana, her dog, with a wooden stick when the dog was not obedient. No doubt Miss Julie also treat her ex-fiancee with the same act – as result, her engagement was broken. Miss Julie is the figure who puts herself on the side of power, and fully aware of it.
There is an interesting game of power in this movie. There are three stages of the game of power. First, Miss Julie realized she had power over her nobility. Miss Julie fully aware of it. And Miss Julie understand well how to use the power that she realized it. Moreover, Miss Julie was educated by his mother with the dogma that a woman she should not be subject to any man – but Miss Julie finally fell also on Jean. The second power is to Jean. Jean, whether consciously or not, has the power as men (sexually) to Miss Julie. Jean is a man who strongly opposed the surrounding rules about strata and social status. At the beginning of the film, Miss Julie’s seduction, in fact, absolutely had no effect on Jean. And this make Miss Julie felt more challenged. And the final power is held by the father of Miss Julie. The power of the father is the most absolute power, and later was the most hinder to the Jean and Miss Julie affair. He has the power to both Jean and Miss Julie at the same time because he is a nobleman, a slaveholder, as well as a father.
Initially, the film rolling as a fight between Miss Julie and Jean on the night of the party. Jean actions that seem completely inedible to the seduction of Miss Julie, makes Miss Julie more challenged and challenged again. Until the night, the more intense closeness between Miss Julie and Jean, and fight the “power” was also changed instantly into love (or just a mere lust). Starting from this point, Miss Julie and Jean is no longer fighting against the power of one another, but they were already on stage fighting acquiring their relationship over the power of Miss Julie’s father. It was obvious they could not openly acknowledge their relationship in front of Miss Julie’s father. Here is the power of his father’s influence.
The movie flows smoothly, effectively and efficiently without any detail that was disrupted and no excessive dramatization. Both of the main actors, Anita Björk and Ulf Palme, perform their duties in accordance with their respective portions. Anita Björk gives a very smart dramatization to Miss Julie figure. Not to mention the gesture she creates, the look on his face, plus her sharp eyes make the characters seem convincing on screen. “Miss Julie,” overall, offers an extremely challenging situational assessment. It is, in a a simple but smart way, presents the structural stages of a political-sexual game (of love?).