This Strange Passion (1953) - Luis Buñuel

This is one of the most remarkable Mexican productions by the enormous filmmaker Luis Buñuel, who had already acquired filming and experience in Aztec lands, who had already assimilated the way of making films in that country, having produced features of different natures, obtaining In turn dissimilar results between public and critic. The Spanish filmmaker works again with his right hand as a screenwriter, the great Luis Alcoriza, and as well works with another great collaborator, the famous photographer Gabriel Figueroa to configure one of his most recognized and successful pictures of his stage in Mexico. With these solid pillars in collaboration, the Aragonese adapts one of his most personal stories, in the sense that its protagonist is one of the characters that most contain the essence of the author himself, the filmmaker; is a novel by Mercedes Pinto, in whose adaptation worked the own Buñuel, with Alcoriza. It is the tragic and pathetic story of a conservative individual, a model to follow for society and the church, a chaste individual who sees his existence change radically when he falls in love with a young and attractive woman; that love will be transformed into obsessive jealousy, sickly obsession that will cause man to descend and be lost in madness. One of the author's most memorable films, contains many of the director's main cornerstones, and much more than that even, a real gem.

             

In a Mexican church, the foot washing ceremony is being held on Holy Thursday, during which Francisco Galván de Montemayor (Arturo de Córdova) is taken aback by a beautiful woman, but he cannot speak to her. Francisco is then at home, where he lives with his servant Pablo (Manuel Dondé), receives a lawyer, because he is in litigation for a land that he claims belong to him, the case is complicated. Francisco finally gets to know the woman, in the church, she is Gloria Vilalta (Delia Garcés), but she is reluctant to speak to him; then Francisco visits an old friend of his, who is engaged, invites him to dine at his house with his bride, resulting the bride being Gloria, and that night he seduces her. The time has passed, one day Raul Conde (Luis Beristáin), the initial groom of Gloria, runs into her in the street, and Gloria cannot help telling him her torments, now married to Francisco, remember ever since their honeymoon, his sickly jealousy outcropped. Then, on vacation in Guanajuato, she meets a friend of hers, Francisco goes mad with jealousy, and ends up being beaten; and when his new lawyer gets too close to Gloria at a party, everything gets worse, his irrational jealousy grows larger as his litigation gets complicated. Francisco ends up going crazy, even attacks his friend, Father Velasco (Carlos Martinez Baena), and at the end we will see him alone, confined and turned into a lonely monk.

Ends up in this way a film that Buñuel defines as his favorite, the movie that had more of him, more of his person, as his wife herself confirmed in the book Memories of a woman without a piano, the filmmaker was very jealous; probably without reaching the extreme sickness of Francisco, but has definitely shaped the protagonist as a sort of alter ego of his. The character combines the great obsessions and topics of the director himself, the rigid church, the deep Catholicism in which Buñuel was raised, of course sex (all the most important and representative topics of the filmmaker manifest here), and in this case jealousy, which is what ends up disrupting the poor individual; is the perfect Buñuel, so to speak, is probably the protagonist of his films that comes closest to the creator, and again, art will be more potent and powerful than ever when it is nurtured, when it breathes life itself, as in this case. Thus, and without words, as Buñuel has so often done, from the initial sequences it has been already exposed a peculiarity of our protagonist, who observes the feet of Gloria in the church, and is entranced, almost caught by them; there is no doubt, it is our director, it is Buñuel w we are seeing reflected in Francisco, in his fetishes. The first part of the film, where he seduces Gloria, has a somewhat subjective treatment, by Francisco, from the perspective of him, but mostly impartial, objective. That subjectivity, that subjective perspective will be broken later, to give an example, when the great traveling ends up wandering around the church room where the liturgy is taking place. The second part already changes, from the narrative to the focus, the perspective, narrating everything from the perspective of her, and reinforcing that approach with some travellings and zooms, reinforcing the narration within the narration with the flashbacks, the memories of Gloria. The film is the story of the collapse, the descent of a social icon, of an exemplary and chaste individual, his journey to madness. We are facing a great documentation of male degradation, almost like a binnacle, step by step, of how a man in love, is severely overcome by jealousy, asking his wife for her past, for her prior sentimental partners, pretending to be told that past, pathetic and sickly jealousy, certainly understandable for the person who knows the subject. It is noticed that someone has produced this knowing what he portrays, knowing the subject he tackles, hence the represented is so strong and solid, an efficient portrait, although the first projections rather unleashed laughter from the public, it is said, something that did not irritate Buñuel too much.

Technically Buñuel in many ways evolves in this film, he uses resources that he had not recurred to before, the most notable being that great ellipsis -almost unheard of in him- that great temporary leap that occurs just after the kiss of Francisco and Gloria, a loud noise interrupts us, the construction of the dam in which Raul worked, and then the time has passed, Francisco fulfilled his dream of marrying Gloria. This great resource makes possible the other great novelty, the novelty in the narrative plane, splicing the story in present time with the memories of Gloria, the second part of the film, the flashbacks through which the second segment is built, where the mental and physical decadence of Francisco occurs. Thus we have a new narrative structure in Buñuel, the structure of narration that is structured in the second part with flashbacks, memories, to finish again in the present, with the ruined Francisco in the monastery. Buñuel, with small but significant details, clearly delineates his character, details such as when he orders Pablo "fix that picture that is crooked", or when he perfectly orders Gloria's shoes, another wink to his fetish, and another detail to delineate the character as someone meticulous, obsessed, that was always his personality, prone to passion, to obsession. We will also find interesting shots, the photography of the film, with frames in which the lighting reinforces the foregrounds of the characters, enhancing the perspective, presence and attributes of each one, the predominance of Francisco, and Gloria's submission. Master Figueroa's picture becomes evident, with praiseworthy and expressive frames, light and much darkness games, powerful backlighting, expressive contrasts, frames of that infested main room, plagued with shadows, darkness, the umbrage reigns in that fateful house. The film becomes at times darkly surreal, the stairs and the room flooded with shadows exteriorize his gradual mental deterioration, his disquiet. In that sense, there are repeated approaches to the stairs of the house, a significant detail if we take into consideration that that house, and those stairs specifically, were chosen for reliably reproducing the Spanish house in which the filmmaker grew; we see that the work is impregnated with personal details, like the protagonist himself, a reflection of Buñuel, the cloister in which Francisco decomposes has something of the real life of the artist. He unfolds in the midst of those shadows, those minimal and gloomy spaces.

This has its climax in the powerful, surreal sequence of him on those stairs, alone, sitting on a step, making a frenzied banging of an object, completely surrounded by the shadows, which spill through the room more threateningly than ever, in the more surreal and darker sequence of the whole feature. From the beginning the director skillfully personalizes his film, with that Buñuelian parade of fetishes, a frenzy of one of his fetish objects par excellence, the feet, formidably fused with the religious theme. The mandatum allows the freedom to explore multiple pairs of feet, leading to the feet of hers, when his perdition begins, in that opening sequence that shows us the seriousness of the liturgy, solemnity, chants. A religiosity that continues to insinuate itself and become present with some frames, of Francisco and a religious element completing the frame, and it is not lacking who has seen something of antireligious in the film, the church is almost the site where all the facts of decadence take place. There he meets her, and finally there he attacks the priest, consuming his madness when he sees them all laughing at him, for his paranoia grew geometrically, thinking that everybody is against him, the powerful enemies he claims to have, conspiring against him and his litigation for the land, a natural portrait in which the filmmaker pours himself. Of course, we see that the church subtly delays the subject, represented in Father Velasco, who, when asked, replies "I think, about love, that this turkey is very good". Completely pathological, Francisco suddenly experiences a violent change of mood when he sees his wife's feet under the table, he changes his fury and indifference for passion, unbridled passion, and passionately he kisses her, an anomaly that reinforces his obsessions, which is accentuating his madness. As for her, she is fully servile and submissive, she is the perfect Sadistic victim, she completely folds to all the excesses of her husband, even to be fired with fake bullets, is the typical case of the woman who stays with the man who worse treats and torture her, she is sadistic since her first gesture, which is already submissive, lowering his sight before the eyes of Francisco. Irremediably the film parades at times in the field of melodrama, something that generally mortified Buñuel, and it is inevitable to observe it in the atmosphere of light flirtation, the approach of Francisco with Gloria, she exclaiming "I do not know why I have done it", the first part fully complies with these codes, so that in the second part, they acquire quite more ambitious characters. The music also contributes to this sweet and melodramatic environment, a music that contributes to generate the innocuous atmosphere of that first part of the footage, and which the director would later dispense, to leave room for the passion of man, the capital theme. The film is a vigorous and well-shaped complaint, it builds the perfect model of Mexican society, although the portrait could be represented anywhere, because the core engine, the passion, the jealousy, is something common to every human being. Admired, loved and respected by society, by the church, he is the perfect model, he manages to persuade the priest, symbol of the church, and Gloria's mother, symbol of society, but that perfect model cracks in incredible way, until getting lost in his spiral of jealousy. In the end, wandering away, that zigzagging pace of the final shot was funny to the filmmaker, black humor in the end, Francisco walks tottering, as his mind, as his life, is lost, and remains a dark, ambiguous and undefined detail, for it is implied that the infant is his son. Outstanding film, in fact a small masterpiece, among the best of the Mexican production of Buñuel.

The Brute (1953) - Luis Buñuel

Buñuel would continue his prolific stage in Mexican lands with this film, a film in which he also continues to make clear the experience he achieved, the shooting and dominion he had already acquired after a few years shooting on Aztec soil. The filmmaker returns to work with his scriptwriter Luis Alcoriza, to bring to the big screen a story in which himself collaborated in the script, a crude story, full of pathos, and with which Buñuel returns to his most recognizable and recurring cinematographic topics, that for a moment had left aside in his previous film, A woman without love (1952). Buñuel did not exactly have the best impression of this work of his, as often happened with his Mexican films, lamented some changes that were imposed to him regarding his original desires, but nevertheless he ends up configuring a very well achieved film, concise, that may well not be among his loftiest creations, but it is an exercise worthy of attention. It is the story of Bruto, a hard worker, very strong subject to whom his employer orders to intimidate the tenants of the neighborhood he owns, he wants to evict them, and they resist; the Brutus does it well, but when he discovers love in a young girl, one of the tenants, everything gets complicated, especially when he becomes entangled with the boss's wife. Interesting film by the Spanish director, containing a lot to keep in mind.

                

The action unfolds in a neighborhood, with humble dwellings, in one of them lives Meche (Rosa Arenas) with his father, Carmelo González (Roberto Meyer), who one day are alarmed by a scandal in the neighborhood, the owner of the site: Andrés Cabrera (Andrés Soler), wants to sell the property, demands everybody to leave from there, generating conflict. To silence the tenants, Andrés’s wife, Paloma (Katy Jurado), gives the idea of ​​looking for a thug guy to intimidate them. The one seeked is Pedro, nicknamed El Bruto (Pedro Armendariz), for his great physical strength, his workman to whom he orders to frighten the tenants, especially Carmelo, who leads the neighbors. The Brutus sets in motion, and strikes the old man, with such bad luck that Carmelo ends up dying. The neighbors, alerted, try to kill the aggressor, but he escapes, and knows Meche, who helps him, ignoring he is the murderer of his father. The Brutus also soon becomes entangled with Paloma, intense adultery is consumed, which complicates everything when the woman learns of the romance of the Brute with Meche, telling her without a doubt that he is to blame for the death of her father. Paloma also lies to Andrés, accusing the Brute of abusing her, demanding that he liquidates his workman, but in facing him, finally the worker ends up killing him. In the end, the Brute has managed to keep Meche's neighbors from being evicted, but will have a tragic ending.

Buñuel already shows the experience he has acquired in Mexico with his filming, a filmmaker who proved his versatility, his economy, and his rigor, and we can appreciate the characteristic Buñuelian kick-off, the camera showing a close-up of a detail, then will get back and show us the larger image; in this case, is first seen the frame of Meche with the dropper giving medicines to his sick father, and then his humble dwelling in the neighborhood owned by Andrés. Subsequently, as the best filmmakers always do, that is, narrating without words, presents us with one of the keys of the film, Paloma, who looks at herself in the mirror, who eats some grapes, sensually chews them while watching her reflection, shows the teeth, as the beast that will prove to be; in a few moments we already know that she is a carnal woman, and without pronouncing a single monosyllable. In a similar way, the Brute is symbolically presented, he works in a slaughterhouse, a slaughterhouse, according to the brutality of his personality, carrying huge meats, animal corpses open in half, thus delineating the character well, as was done with Paloma, although the initial case was more exemplary. The deployment of the camera also shows us the maturity in the office, the profession of director Buñuel has achieved, a mobility of the camera that makes his film very cinematic, with subtle travellings, approaches and departures that change us more than once the perspective, and separate it from other filmic exercises that may have had a flatter treatment, close to the theater, as, without going any further, it is the case of the immediately preceding picture, the cited A woman without love. Technically, then, it is a work well done, both for the handling of the camera and its ease, but also for the beautiful photography, with those powerful dark shots that will be repeated, a sober photograph that always beautifies a film. And it is no accident that, the gloomy locations, dark images that always flow with the Brute as protagonist, which complement each other, as externalizing the personality of the iron subject, these obscure images will keep flowing, very noticeably photographed. Always he in the dark, always the Brute moving around in a shady environment, either at his initial home, or at the locations that Andres gives him, the darkness always follows him, but let's not confuse, because here it borns another factor that makes this feature so remarkable and appreciated for some critics.

And it is that our protagonist evolves, his character, El Bruto, becomes complex, and so on the picture, which erroneously would be cataloged as a drama like so many others, we find it difficult to judge him, to declare him a villainous, to see him despicable and condemnable. We empathize with the supposed villain, who falls in love, who dresses well, who humanizes to us when learning that his hard heart harbors warm, tender feelings, wants to change for her, wants to leave that world which ends up devouring him; the rigidity of what would be a melodrama in all its senses is broken, we have a complex character in the Brute of great strength but of little intelligence, that contrast makes the character attractive, and seeing him in the end approaching the fragile Meche, after having liquidated two people, knowing that he is responsible for the death of her father, is almost ridiculous, but tender, he says I will return for you, because I love you very much, a desperate situation that touches pathetism. In that sense, the feature is undeniably a dramatic film, it is a drama, however much Buñuel regrets the final result and asserts that was not his intention at the beginning of the shooting, and probably the imposed changes to which the filmmaker referenced had something to do with that final product. The film, by the way, was born from an idea of ​​Alcoriza, with the nucleus of the story, the tenants who face the landlord, in turn intimidated by a very rough guy; one of the contributions of the filmmaker, who was initially not in the plans, is the element of the owner's father, Andrés, an old man, that some follies originates, constantly repeating "puñales" (something like “damn”). Another recognizable Buñuelian detail is the treatment of love sequences, always an enemy to show kisses the filmmaker, now, as well as at Great Casino (1948), it was Jorge Negrete moving the stick in oil, we see the meat that is cooked, burned, consuming, obvious and very powerful and eloquent wink to the carnal idyll that in turn is cooking. Katy tells Brutus to leave the meat, let the flesh burn... As it was said, in this film Buñuel returns to several of his whole-life- topics, beginning of course by the sexual subject, the flesh, the lust, in the figure obviously of Paloma, carnal woman, intense, fiery and fearsome like a beast, we will see again the games of glances, glances full of libidine.

Also the figure of exchange of person returns, Paloma, first indifferent in the bed before the kisses of her husband, after meeting the Brute, begins already to burn of desire, and although it is Andrés who kisses her, she has the Brute in her head, as it happened in Ascent to Heaven (1952), and Susana (1950), a figure practiced by the surrealists, part of the amical and intellectual circle of the Aragonese; now, the concept is the same, but without the exchange of faces, a warm wink to another of his known resources. There could not be shortage of the animal element, in the so buñuelian detail of the hen, that seems like a dense nightmare, because certainly a nightmare is over, and that final shot with Katy in front of the bird, is certainly another detail added to the Aragonese, and is formidable, again without words, wordlessly, again surreal, an excellent sequence, with no words and eloquently, almost disturbingly, she looks at it strangely; Buñuel considered the hens as nightmarish animals, and he knew how to capture it at the right time, and in the most effective way. The notorious and famous Katy Jurado arises, a woman of iron temperament, fierce and fearsome, legendary actress of character, is already leaving her imprint Jurado (chilling to hear her screaming, "kill him”, "kill him”, unmindful, intense and ruthless, once her lover fleed away, the possessive beast only wants to destroy him), a personality of Mexican cinema, who has always shown his strong humanity, beautiful, young and glowing, perfect for the role of the carnal Paloma. Pedro Armendariz, another personality of Mexican cinema, also plays a memorable role in the gross and in love worker, Buñuel had the right guess and seductive power to have worked with referential actors in Mexico, and always, with some exception, managed to direct them well. Buñuel recovered for this film his topic of unfortunate people, very related to The young and the damned (1947), even for the name of the innocent, Meche, in addition to focusing on unfortunate people, with pathetic dramas, plagued by misery, violence, death, people trapped in their circumstances, circumstances that devour them, a hell from which there is no escape, which consumes their desperate tenants. Someone wanted to see in the film a political milestone within the cinematography of the author, because he had never before exposed so directly the clash of classes, patrons against workers in the figure of the landlord and his tenants, while on the other hand there is the severe feminine counterpoint, severe contrast, the pure and chaste Meche, against the carnal, the dominant Paloma, pure carnality, demonic, ruthless, cutting the stems of flowers, disposing of lives. A history of pathos and misery, extreme situations, a solid drama, which although not completely convinced its author, will be very appreciable for Buñuel's admirers.