i should no longer be surprise when critic miss the most obvious thing in work of art and because they be human being and and the vast majority of human being be lazy by nature . that say and the simplistic notion that ingmar bergman great 1968 film shame ( or skammen ) be merely an anti war film do a great deal of damage to the reputation of this very complex and and highly nuanced and film . compare to it more filmically showoffy predecessor and persona and hour of the wolf and shame be seemingly a more classic film and in term of narrative . but and the key word be seemingly and for while it lack the bravura pop psychologizing of persona and the gaudy horror film homage of hour of the wolf and it be one of the best film ever make about war and not a an anti war film and nor a pro war film . a such and it have to rank with wild strawberry a one of his great film and as well a one of his best screenplay and if not the best . although ostensibly a more psychologically exterior film than the film that precede it and it truly say far more realistic thing about the human psyche and the will to survive . in it and max von sydow and liv ullman play jan and eva rosenberg ( perhaps a nod at the infamous american spy and whom many european intellectual felt be innocent ) and two musician who use to play for the local philharmonic orchestra before a war break out and and they retreat to live on a small plot of land on an island and content to work in a greenhouse . the country they live in be unnamed and a be the island they live on and although the film be make on bergman small island of farö and just off the northern end of the swedish island of göttland . it seem that their nation have be at war for some year with an invading country and or perhaps engage in a civil war with rebel from another province . this be all left deliberately hazy and a this war be mean to symbolize all war . this be reinforce a the film start with assorted war quote on the screen and a the credit roll . these include quote from hitler to vietnam era american military figure . after early scene that depict the prosaic nature of their rural life and and then the come of war and where even old men be conscript and an aerial attack ravage the rosenbergs land and a enemy jet fly overhead and drop bomb and what seem to be chemical weapon of an agent orange like nature . one plane be hit and and a parachutist jump out and end up hang in a tree . jan and who start off the film a a snivel coward and refuse to go and help and so eva go alone . jan join her and they find the pilot have be shoot . it seem he be and indeed and part of the invading and or possibly rebel and force . a bunch of government soldier soon stop at their home and ask question about the dead pilot and then advise the couple to leave their home and a the invader be near . there be the misinterpretation of the film on a micro level and such a that of bergman scholar marc gervais and who provide the film commentary on the dvd of the film . like many other critic and he claim that jacobi be a quisling and who have collaborate with the invader . but and this be clearly and demonstrably wrong and for jacobi be with the original fascist government . a proof and first off and the invader be repel after they invade the rosenbergs land and shoot their agitprop interview . we know this because the government that late question them of the fake interview and and word put into eva mouth and see the film a suppose proof of their treason and and jacobi be clearly work with them and the fascist big brother statists . secondly and jacobi be in charge of decide which of the townsfolk be send to concentration camp and for collaborate with the invader and and the rosenbergs and again and be among those spar . thirdly and in his seduction of eva and jacobi tell her his son be on leave from the military and and clearly and if he be an invader and he would not be speak so happily of his son serve the state . also and rebel force be not official army and and do not grant official leave . lastly and filip be clearly with the rebel and or invader and of the organization and and why would he have kill a colleague . that gervais and other critic so blatantly and wantonly misinterpret and flat out miss such a key and manifest point of this film bring into question their ability to discern any and all aspect of all of bergman film . this be a wonderful and great film and and very high in the berman canon and but it be disappoint to read how so few critic and viewer have really understand it complex message and instead opt out for the cheap and lazy and and easy claim of it be merely anti war and and a rather simple film in comparison to it two showy predecessor . and that and in the long run and be the real shame of shame .