Buñuel is reaching new heights in his art, in his cinema, he is burning stages, and initiating new phases in his evolution as an audiovisual creator, his obsession topics are reaching their peak, the return to Europe finally materializes, not yet completely, but at a safe pace. In this film something not very common occurs in the filmmaker, since he does not adapt a literary work to the big screen, in this opportunity the script was born from Julio Alejandro, but Buñuel participated directly in its elaboration as co-author, which gives him a great authority and freedom at work, which addresses many of Buñuel's themes par excellence. After
The Young One (1960), the filmmaker returns to the desire of an older man towards a young girl, when a lonely individual of mature age falls in love and obsesses with his niece, a nun, will try to join with her and fail; the young woman, affected, will try to practice charity with some beggars, only obtaining disastrous results in the mansion where she lives with her cousin, the unrecognized son of the first individual. One of the most controversial, powerful and appreciable films of the huge Iberian filmmaker, of which always spoke in positive terms, rejoicing in the way he could work on this film, because it is one of the occasions when greater freedom of maneuver he was given, and you can tell it.
In a convent, Sister Viridiana (Silvia Pinal) is informed that her uncle wishes her to visit him. Without much enthusiasm, she goes to the estate of Don Jaime (Fernando Rey), her uncle, he lives with his maid, Ramona (Margarita Lozano); Viridiana barely knows her uncle, but he makes her dress like his dead wife, and by declaring that he wants to marry her, to live both together, scares her. Jaime then drugs her, makes her sleep, tries to rape her, but stops; he tells her that he did violated her, that they must marry, and in spite of finally confessing the truth, she leaves in a daze; before leaving, however, he learns of a misfortune, his uncle committed suicide. Viridiana no longer returns to the convent, returns to the mansion, where she lives with her cousin Jorge (Francisco Rabal), Jaime's son, and Lucia (Victoria Zinny), his friend, and where she takes a group of beggars to help them. The beggars give some problems, but they all live together, until Lucía notices that Jorge is attracted to Viridiana, and leaves. At one point, Ramona and Jorge have an affair, and then the masters leave home for a few hours, Ramona included; the beggars manage to enter the mansion and arm an atrocious banquet, destroying everything, until the patrons return. With the help of the police they put order, they evict all the beggars, and finally in the house stay Viridiana, her cousin and Ramona, living together in a singular and uncertain situation.
At the beginning of the film the hallelujah flows, sounding in the prologue we are already given notice, with that powerful prolegomenon, of the intense and irreverent religious dilemma that we will witness, because Buñuel will take a step further the concerns and approaches that in that regard had already presented. Yes, Buñuel, who had a deep and confessed Catholic formation in his childhood, now appears with a deep religiosity -of course, a Buñuelian religiosity-, and will parade crosses, a crown of thorns (which symbolically burns at the end) and even nails and hammer, a film that abounds in Christian figures, even having the leper; there are also the ashes that Viridiana takes to Jaime's bed, representing penances and death, she says, and thus ends up being in effect. All these Christian figures reach a delirious climax with the sumptuous and orgiastic banquet, a morbid representation of the Last Supper, one of the major Christian symbols, which is the bizarre framework for vulgarity, atrocity, orgiastic and repulsive, Buñuel takes to the extreme his representation, probably never so powerful and irreverent the representation of religion here. But all that irreverence, of course, has an earmark, as we have seen before, Buñuel conveys to us his concerns, the same concerns that we had already slipped not with little vigor in
Nazarín (1959), the question of a genuine Christianity applied in the reality, in a day to day basis, the way in which a Christianity fully exercised in the world of mundane humans is incompatible. In the first part of the film, indisputably the most plagued and steeped in religiosity, there is a marked mysticism, differentiated from the rest of the film footage, with sacred music framing many passages, as when Fernando Rey is seen transvestite in front of the mirror, and Viridiana appears sleepwalker, without words that well-achieved sequence; with that effect, that and other sequences feel impregnated with liturgical halo, the presences of both feel almost hieratic, especially that of her naturally, a
silent surrealism flows not with little bizarreness. Differentiated will be the remaining part of the film, but in some way, with all the religious charge -which even decreases, never disappears-, it is as if Rey and his sordidness still hover over the universe of the film. We saw him cross-dressed, his obsession is pathological, in him the traumas are fused with torture, he is humanized a little by saying that he once wanted to do something good for humanity, but now he is prey to his obsession, even with lies he wants to get his niece, although finally he can not sustain the wicked lie; he is torn, insecure and fearful, between one thing and another, a stamp of many buñuelian characters.
For this film, the filmmaker repeteadly asserted he enjoyed a freedom to work, a freedom to shoot that he almost never had again in his cinematographic journey, affirms that since
The Golden Age (1930) he had not similar freedom. The filmmaker told us that from the aforementioned surrealist film, he had not been able to continue with his particular artistic traditions so authentically, and if that is something appreciable for him, perhaps it is even more so for the spectator, who will see all his symbolic and thematic power unleashed. Thus, for the connoisseur of the cinematography of the Iberian, to appreciate this film by Buñuel, it is like talking to an old comrade, in which his details, his words or expressions in the conversation are noticed. Analogously, we appreciate here the details of his art, his cinema, his figures, like the feet, first of the girl jumping the rope, then Jaime and Viridiana, he fiddling nervously at their first contact; the director delights showing feet, one of his most traditional images, because this is one of the films that most shows that detail, and then we will see the feet of Jaime in the organ, just to mention another example. Another of his classic images, the female on duty discovering her flesh, especially her legs, will flow, and we see Viridiana, who is already shown as the carnal object of desire on this occasion, taking off her stockings, showing off her legs, thighs, another buñuelian image par excellence. Buñuel affirms that with some lukewarmness he may have "plagiarized" his own work, previous figures of his, and there will be someone who sees in Fernando Rey looking out the window, the female character in
Un Chien Andalou (1929) in a similar situation, or when Viridiana peels a fruit, one might see similar figure of
Mexican Bus Ride (1952). Another image of this unusually free Buñuel will flow, we will see a tremulous camera approaching a cat that hunts a mouse, buñuelian way of insinuating the carnal union that has just taken place, Jorge and Ramona, master and servant; Buñuel always had a special way of filming the implicit extension of a loving situation, having here a singular example. Interesting and disturbing sequence, because we know that Ramona was to some extent an accomplice of Jaime in the almost outrage that Viridiana was a victim of. Ramona is therefore an undeniable part of that dark universe, let's not forget that after Jaime was unable to rape Viridiana, he shields himself, more than once, with his servant with cowardice, and that she collaborated and tried to consume that sordid incestuous union, and of that failed attempt, Jaime will come out in a state of disrepair, recognize his illegitimate son just before taking his own life, as if trying to find redemption, as if he left a "clean" extension of his in that shady universe.
Viridiana, center and core of the film, has an existential break, quixotic journey has had, an epiphany has occurred, breaks her religious canons, initially conventional, because after the uncertain rape, his Christianity changes and gives herself to take care of beggars; like the priest in
Nazarín, she embarks on a journey that will not have a good end. If with
Nazarin the director assertively posed certain questions in that regard, here leads to hyperbole, with a very acid portrait, the confessed atheist has free road to act, something that takes other forms when we remember the profound Christian formation of the director. For Nazario, kindness and charity brought catastrophes, did not fit in reality, saw his new path shipwreck, although now Viridiana has a different journey, she does not "take off" like the priest; at the end of the previous film, Nazario takes off completely, with uncertainty, of everything, but she does not, she "returns", she gives herself to Jorge, in that disturbing closing scene to form what is clearly a
ménage à trois, while a modern rock music sounds (by then, of course), severe opposition to the sacredness of Jaime. And we have the final symbolism, her crown of thorns burned by the child, burns, corrosively questions whether the idea of true Christianity is futile. She is in suggestive mode, a sleepwalker, she, with fear pulls the udder of the cow in a sequence very Buñuel, she has Marian representation before the almost rape, a complex character who builds an untied Buñuel. At a technical level, the subtle but determined camera behaves with the sufficiency already exhibited in previous works, brief and precise movements will bring us closer to the actions of the protagonists, the technical mastery of the director is undeniable, and his staging, sometimes accused of neglected, it is noticed purified, ready to make the final jump in his total evolution. We have the narrative and transitive resource of the rope, the toy, it starts with the girl Rita, it will reappear powerfully with Jaime's suicide, then also, when the beggars have just arrived at the mansion, then in the second rape attempt, it is an acute leitmotiv that connects the segments of the film, which leads us back to the main thread, which articulates the facts. The sequence prior to the orgiastic banquet is superb, never seen in the director an exercise of this nature, that type of assembly in Buñuel, powerful, opposing physical and spiritual activity, work with prayer, meat with spirit, in an exquisite resource few times by Buñuel wielded; we also have the beggar painter and the nod to Goya, along with Galdós, his two confessed greatest influences. The beggars personify the carnal desire, the hunger, the excess, the fury, the resentment, the wide human range of sins, which end up destroying and breaking Viridiana's principles. Apart from the huge representation of the supper, which is the visual heart of the film and triggering the final break of Viridiana with those principles, we have another symbol, the crucifix-knife, or knife-crucifix, in whose anecdotal inclusion even Carlos Saura got involved. The freedom of the director is noticeable, and it is overwhelming, mocked the censorship, the film in Spain was just released when Franco was out of power, the selling of the crucifix was prohibited, in addition to the immediate reaction of the Vatican; the powerful cinema of Buñuel did not leave anyone indifferent. Fernando Rey is superb in his brief but solvent performance, it is understandable that he became an almost fetish partner of Buñuel in the twilight of his career, in some of his best films -in the year of this movie, no longer too far to see the light -. Buñuel is almost at his maximum expression, as the Spaniards would say,
estaba que se salía (he was rocking), it was the moment, the best was already here, the prodigious genius of Calanda was about to set the final stage of one of the most brilliant filmographies seen in the cinema.
Buñuel is reaching new heights in his art, in his cinema, he is burning stages, and initiating new phases in his evolution as an audiovisual creator, his obsession topics are reaching their peak, the return to Europe finally materializes, not yet completely, but at a safe pace. In this film something not very common occurs in the filmmaker, since he does not adapt a literary work to the big screen, in this opportunity the script was born from Julio Alejandro, but Buñuel participated directly in its elaboration as co-author, which gives him a great authority and freedom at work, which addresses many of Buñuel's themes par excellence. After The Young One (1960), the filmmaker returns to the desire of an older man towards a young girl, when a lonely individual of mature age falls in love and obsesses with his niece, a nun, will try to join with her and fail; the young woman, affected, will try to practice charity with some beggars, only obtaining disastrous results in the mansion where she lives with her cousin, the unrecognized son of the first individual. One of the most controversial, powerful and appreciable films of the huge Iberian filmmaker, of which always spoke in positive terms, rejoicing in the way he could work on this film, because it is one of the occasions when greater freedom of maneuver he was given, and you can tell it.
At the beginning of the film the hallelujah flows, sounding in the prologue we are already given notice, with that powerful prolegomenon, of the intense and irreverent religious dilemma that we will witness, because Buñuel will take a step further the concerns and approaches that in that regard had already presented. Yes, Buñuel, who had a deep and confessed Catholic formation in his childhood, now appears with a deep religiosity -of course, a Buñuelian religiosity-, and will parade crosses, a crown of thorns (which symbolically burns at the end) and even nails and hammer, a film that abounds in Christian figures, even having the leper; there are also the ashes that Viridiana takes to Jaime's bed, representing penances and death, she says, and thus ends up being in effect. All these Christian figures reach a delirious climax with the sumptuous and orgiastic banquet, a morbid representation of the Last Supper, one of the major Christian symbols, which is the bizarre framework for vulgarity, atrocity, orgiastic and repulsive, Buñuel takes to the extreme his representation, probably never so powerful and irreverent the representation of religion here. But all that irreverence, of course, has an earmark, as we have seen before, Buñuel conveys to us his concerns, the same concerns that we had already slipped not with little vigor in Nazarín (1959), the question of a genuine Christianity applied in the reality, in a day to day basis, the way in which a Christianity fully exercised in the world of mundane humans is incompatible. In the first part of the film, indisputably the most plagued and steeped in religiosity, there is a marked mysticism, differentiated from the rest of the film footage, with sacred music framing many passages, as when Fernando Rey is seen transvestite in front of the mirror, and Viridiana appears sleepwalker, without words that well-achieved sequence; with that effect, that and other sequences feel impregnated with liturgical halo, the presences of both feel almost hieratic, especially that of her naturally, a silent surrealism flows not with little bizarreness. Differentiated will be the remaining part of the film, but in some way, with all the religious charge -which even decreases, never disappears-, it is as if Rey and his sordidness still hover over the universe of the film. We saw him cross-dressed, his obsession is pathological, in him the traumas are fused with torture, he is humanized a little by saying that he once wanted to do something good for humanity, but now he is prey to his obsession, even with lies he wants to get his niece, although finally he can not sustain the wicked lie; he is torn, insecure and fearful, between one thing and another, a stamp of many buñuelian characters.
For this film, the filmmaker repeteadly asserted he enjoyed a freedom to work, a freedom to shoot that he almost never had again in his cinematographic journey, affirms that since The Golden Age (1930) he had not similar freedom. The filmmaker told us that from the aforementioned surrealist film, he had not been able to continue with his particular artistic traditions so authentically, and if that is something appreciable for him, perhaps it is even more so for the spectator, who will see all his symbolic and thematic power unleashed. Thus, for the connoisseur of the cinematography of the Iberian, to appreciate this film by Buñuel, it is like talking to an old comrade, in which his details, his words or expressions in the conversation are noticed. Analogously, we appreciate here the details of his art, his cinema, his figures, like the feet, first of the girl jumping the rope, then Jaime and Viridiana, he fiddling nervously at their first contact; the director delights showing feet, one of his most traditional images, because this is one of the films that most shows that detail, and then we will see the feet of Jaime in the organ, just to mention another example. Another of his classic images, the female on duty discovering her flesh, especially her legs, will flow, and we see Viridiana, who is already shown as the carnal object of desire on this occasion, taking off her stockings, showing off her legs, thighs, another buñuelian image par excellence. Buñuel affirms that with some lukewarmness he may have "plagiarized" his own work, previous figures of his, and there will be someone who sees in Fernando Rey looking out the window, the female character in Un Chien Andalou (1929) in a similar situation, or when Viridiana peels a fruit, one might see similar figure of Mexican Bus Ride (1952). Another image of this unusually free Buñuel will flow, we will see a tremulous camera approaching a cat that hunts a mouse, buñuelian way of insinuating the carnal union that has just taken place, Jorge and Ramona, master and servant; Buñuel always had a special way of filming the implicit extension of a loving situation, having here a singular example. Interesting and disturbing sequence, because we know that Ramona was to some extent an accomplice of Jaime in the almost outrage that Viridiana was a victim of. Ramona is therefore an undeniable part of that dark universe, let's not forget that after Jaime was unable to rape Viridiana, he shields himself, more than once, with his servant with cowardice, and that she collaborated and tried to consume that sordid incestuous union, and of that failed attempt, Jaime will come out in a state of disrepair, recognize his illegitimate son just before taking his own life, as if trying to find redemption, as if he left a "clean" extension of his in that shady universe.
Viridiana, center and core of the film, has an existential break, quixotic journey has had, an epiphany has occurred, breaks her religious canons, initially conventional, because after the uncertain rape, his Christianity changes and gives herself to take care of beggars; like the priest in Nazarín, she embarks on a journey that will not have a good end. If with Nazarin the director assertively posed certain questions in that regard, here leads to hyperbole, with a very acid portrait, the confessed atheist has free road to act, something that takes other forms when we remember the profound Christian formation of the director. For Nazario, kindness and charity brought catastrophes, did not fit in reality, saw his new path shipwreck, although now Viridiana has a different journey, she does not "take off" like the priest; at the end of the previous film, Nazario takes off completely, with uncertainty, of everything, but she does not, she "returns", she gives herself to Jorge, in that disturbing closing scene to form what is clearly a ménage à trois, while a modern rock music sounds (by then, of course), severe opposition to the sacredness of Jaime. And we have the final symbolism, her crown of thorns burned by the child, burns, corrosively questions whether the idea of true Christianity is futile. She is in suggestive mode, a sleepwalker, she, with fear pulls the udder of the cow in a sequence very Buñuel, she has Marian representation before the almost rape, a complex character who builds an untied Buñuel. At a technical level, the subtle but determined camera behaves with the sufficiency already exhibited in previous works, brief and precise movements will bring us closer to the actions of the protagonists, the technical mastery of the director is undeniable, and his staging, sometimes accused of neglected, it is noticed purified, ready to make the final jump in his total evolution. We have the narrative and transitive resource of the rope, the toy, it starts with the girl Rita, it will reappear powerfully with Jaime's suicide, then also, when the beggars have just arrived at the mansion, then in the second rape attempt, it is an acute leitmotiv that connects the segments of the film, which leads us back to the main thread, which articulates the facts. The sequence prior to the orgiastic banquet is superb, never seen in the director an exercise of this nature, that type of assembly in Buñuel, powerful, opposing physical and spiritual activity, work with prayer, meat with spirit, in an exquisite resource few times by Buñuel wielded; we also have the beggar painter and the nod to Goya, along with Galdós, his two confessed greatest influences. The beggars personify the carnal desire, the hunger, the excess, the fury, the resentment, the wide human range of sins, which end up destroying and breaking Viridiana's principles. Apart from the huge representation of the supper, which is the visual heart of the film and triggering the final break of Viridiana with those principles, we have another symbol, the crucifix-knife, or knife-crucifix, in whose anecdotal inclusion even Carlos Saura got involved. The freedom of the director is noticeable, and it is overwhelming, mocked the censorship, the film in Spain was just released when Franco was out of power, the selling of the crucifix was prohibited, in addition to the immediate reaction of the Vatican; the powerful cinema of Buñuel did not leave anyone indifferent. Fernando Rey is superb in his brief but solvent performance, it is understandable that he became an almost fetish partner of Buñuel in the twilight of his career, in some of his best films -in the year of this movie, no longer too far to see the light -. Buñuel is almost at his maximum expression, as the Spaniards would say, estaba que se salía (he was rocking), it was the moment, the best was already here, the prodigious genius of Calanda was about to set the final stage of one of the most brilliant filmographies seen in the cinema.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario