(Spoilers) Misogynistic, yet emasculating serio-comedy from the great Buñuel. I have just seen this one for the second time, and enjoyed it even more than before. Although it has misogynistic implications (actually rather more explicit than implicit), the fact that Archibaldo (perfectly played by Ernesto Alonso)never does succeed in carrying out his daydreams of harm to the various women in his life, this fact emasculates his character. The women are not victorious, however, for for every Archie and his failed attempts, the ladies all suffer at the hands of the other men in their lives. Therefore, the misogyny prevails.

I was a bit offended by this film the first time around (when I saw it about 3 years ago), but having seen more of Buñuel's work and more films, both foreign and domestic (US)) of its ilk since, I decided to give it another chance, and am glad that I did. The movie's ironic nature saves it from being too cruel to enjoy. That and the fact that, after the talk with the doctor, Archibaldo seems to reform at the film's end, drowning (in effect burying or suppressing) the music box (the symbol of his deranged desires, and the object to which he attributes dominance, power and virility), throwing away his cane (another crutch), and walking off with Lavinia, who seemed to make him happiest during the film (as opposed to the other women).

The characters of Particia and Carlota (and Lavinia, to a slightly lesser extent) are seen as shrewish and scheming – they certainly all have their own agendas and never come across as wholly innocent – which lends feelings of sympathy towards Archibaldo (who is being used by all of them).

Themes of Catholicism pervade the film, although not in a heavy-handed way. The symbolism, typical of Buñuel, was strong and put to good use, i.e.: the mannequin (represents Lavinia), the music box (see above), the straight razor (a phallic symbol and violence), the cane (a `crutch'), the pottery wheel (goes around and around and no way out, representing Archie's situation), the flaming drink (foreshadows his fantasy for Lavinia), her tour guide/interpreters job (language barrier miscommunication/repression of the true feelings of the characters).

It is interesting to note that Alejandro, the married man with whom Carlota is having an affair, is often addressed as `Architect' instead of by his name. An architect creates and builds, whereas his character destroys – another great touch in a movie full of them.

Some thoughts: 1) How long will Archie's reformation last – if it is genuine at all? 2) I felt sorry for Archie for not being able to actually carry out one of his dastardly fantasies – instead, in each case, he was `saved' by circumstance. This was surely the filmmakers' intent. Well, it worked! 3) Archie is guilty, in his mind, of actually committing the crimes – hence his `confession' to the doctor. This is why he throws the music box (he thought it was partially responsible) in the pond. Good character development/insight into his psyche. 4) I think the writer(s) and director did a an excellent job of conveying to us Archie's early life at home with his mother (who didn't seem to care about him), the hated Nanny (whose death started the chain of events), and the (absent) father. In including this glimpse of his early life, we gain a better understanding of Archie's character (his up-bringing plus this event) and can perhaps conclude that these may be contributing factors to why he did what he did/why he was who he was.

RECOMMENDED!

I have often cited this as my favourite Bunuel film and one of my favourite films of all. Watching it again after a period of some years, I am surprised that it seems so light and amusing instead of dark and dangerous. I suppose this is partly because when first seen the misogyny, the gleefulness at the prospect of killing a woman, is so shocking, that we notice less the playfulness. Whereas on a subsequent viewing we are less affected, having some idea how things pan out. Is this the only Bunuel film with a seemingly happy ending? There are still, of course, many shocking moments, like the bloody/sexy death of the woman looking after him as a child, the whole business concerning the mannequins (that seems burned in my memory for ever) and the most surprising early death of the nun/nurse. Maybe it's partly that when I watched this in my youth I rightly saw it as stunningly original and displaying conduct contrary to that shown elsewhere, whereas now the old cynic in me has been exposed to much more and is smiling throughout with barely a pause for a gasp. Always going to be fun to watch though.