If you enjoy beautiful, Black and White films, HUNGER is one for you to enjoy. The film captures the look and feel of 1890 Oslo to perfection. According to the commentary, in 1966 this picturesque area of the city still existed, and the film was shot on location. Another compelling aspect of this film is the depiction of 'madness'. Per Oscarsson's portrayal really allows the viewer to inhabit his skewed paranoid world.

Dozens of films have demonstrated insanity caused by drugs, alcohol, and sexual obsession. However, in this movie the protagonist is pushed over the edge by sheer force of will.

His unyielding and rigid moral code will not allow him to take even the most reasonable course of action. The movie is bleak and somber, yet one is able to empathize with the character. In fact, the last scene in the film-the last expression on Pontus's face-leaves the viewer with a wide range of possible interpretations. Is the character embracing a new and hopeful turn of events, or is he under the spell of a new obsession?

An intriguing character study that focuses on a few days in the life of a writer in 1890 Christiania, `Hunger,' directed by Henning Carlsen, stars Per Oscarsson as Pontus, a starving artist seeking more than just the sustenance of food. Though living in the middle of town, he is emotionally isolated, cut off from the real world because of a perpetual state of disorientation that makes connecting with any reality beyond that which exists in his own mind impossible. Psychological, as well as physical hunger induces the erratic, irrational behavior he exhibits, often at the most inopportune times. Working sporadically on an article throughout the day, the bulk of his time is spent dreaming-- at times hallucinating-- and simply struggling for survival. Yet his suffering is seemingly by choice; there are indications throughout the film that leaving the city to go back to the country, and apparently his home, is an option that is open to him. One he rejects, however, out-of-hand. And while he longs for nourishment of soul and body, because of his mental state and his inability to negotiate even the simplest social amenities, his needs remain elusive, just out of reach. Pontus fails to recognize that the pride and ego that may have at one time sparked the flint of his artistry have now become detrimental, not only to his work, but to his very existence.

Carlsen's presentation is fairly academic, and the clinical approach he takes to the material has a way of keeping the audience somewhat at arms length; it doesn't afford the emotional involvement that would've made this a memorable film. As it is, it's compelling to a point, but never manages to deliver what it seems to promise, especially early on. Though Carlsen does a good job overall-- his characters are believable, and the pace he sets, aided by the stark black & white photography, exacts that sense of realism necessary for a film like this to work-- it would've been interesting to see this story developed by someone like Ingmar Bergman, who always had his finger on the pulse of his material and had an affinity for being able to convey the innate humanity of his characters to the screen. Carlsen simply doesn't take the story far-- or deep--enough. And the brief interlude Pontus has with a young woman he calls Ylajali (Gunnel Lindblom) stretches credibility a bit, while the ambiguity of the Rimbaudesque ending is less than satisfying.

Oscarsson gives a solid performance as Pontus, his manner and appearance evoking a cross between Tom Courtenay and Guy Pearce; but there's nothing in the character or the way he's played to elicit much sympathy. In the end you're left with the feeling that all of what has happened is rather self-indulgent and unnecessary, while raising some question as to the prudence of suffering for one's art. For how can one deprived of physical and mental faculties hope to create? And that is the very issue it appeared Carlsen was attempting to address until the very end of the film, which compromises any statement he had intended to make.

The supporting cast includes Birgitte Federspiel (Ylajali's Sister),Knud Rex (Landlord),Hans W. Petersen (Grocer) and Henki Kolstad (Editor). An interesting, but less than engrossing character study, `Hunger' in the end, is a slice-of-life examination of the human condition that comes up a bit short and leaves you with a feeling every bit as ambiguous as the ending. Had Carlsen been able to maintain the strength of the early part of the film and carry it through to the end, it could've been exceptional; as it is, for those interested in all aspects of filmmaking and who invite comparison, it's worth a look. But anyone seeking an in-depth, riveting character study, or especially those just looking for an evening's entertainment, would be better served looking elsewhere. I rate this one 5/10.

At first glance, Pontus (Per Oscarsson) looks like a well-groomed businessman but on second look, there is something not right. His smile reveals a core of rotting teeth and his manner seems odd. He follows two young women on their walk through the city of Christiana (later Oslo) in Norway in 1890, yet keeps telling one of the women that she has dropped her book. He stops a policeman to inquire about the time, but insists that the officer is in error. Based on Norwegian author Knut Hamsun's psychological novel of the same name, Henning Carlsen's Hunger probes the inner working of the mind of a talented young writer living in poverty and on the verge of insanity.

Shot in black and white, the film captures the bleakness of a world looking for a soul. Oscarsson totally captures the struggling author in a magnificent performance for which he won the award for Best Actor at the Cannes Film Festival. Not only is he in every scene in the film, but the film can scarcely even be conceived of without his presence. Pontus wanders the streets of Christiana moving from a semblance of rationality to hallucinatory madness yet still retaining his dignity and cool intelligence. Though he is reduced to trying to sell his glasses, the buttons from his jacket, and his only overcoat in order to stay alive, he refuses assistance from friends, and when he does come into a bit of money, he promptly gives it away. Though his poverty and suffering appears to be self-inflicted (there are hints he could go home to a cottage in the country),psychologically he is not in full control.

Pontus has submitted an article for publication and his hopes are bound with the editor's decision. Told to come back the next day at 3:00 PM., the hours go slowly as he tries to negotiate renting a room with the promise to pay the next day. The editor at last recognizes his talent but tells him to tone his article down and bring it back the next day, at which time there will be some money waiting for him. Asked by the editor whether he needs money, his pride does not allow to admit the obvious and he refuses help, seemingly attached to his deprivation as if he has staked out a position that he must defend at all costs.

He is moved almost to tears when a lovely blonde he names Ylajali (Gunnel Lindblom) takes an interest in him but apparently his presence in her home does not fit her picture of the romantic starving artist and the relationship ends quickly. Staying alive by scraping meat from dog bones, Pontus grasp on reality slowly fades but he maintains his dignity while refusing to compromise with the world, yelling insults to God for the mess he is in rather than seeking to find a way out. Oscarsson's portrait is unforgettable and makes what could have been a very depressing film into a tribute to the worth and dignity of every human being, regardless of their circumstances. Hunger is a classic film worthy of Bergman and Bresson.