IMDb > Un Chien Andalou (1929) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Un chien andalou
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Un Chien Andalou More at IMDbPro »Un chien andalou (original title)

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 16: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 151 reviews in total 

The definition of surrealist film...

7/10
Author: jackasstrange from United States
19 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Luis Bunuel debut and infamous at the time of release 'Un Chien Andalou' is now considered one of the most influential films and arguably the most widely-known short film ever made. It's surrealist dream logic plot and the depiction of aberrant disturbing images for the standards of the 20s also helped to increase his popularity.

About the eye-slicing scene, in an interview in 1975 or '76, Buñuel claimed that he had used a dead calf's eye. Through the use of intense lighting, and bleaching of the calf's skin, Buñuel attempted to make the furred face of the animal appear as human skin.

During the bicycle scene, the woman who is sitting on a chair, reading, throws the book aside when she notices the man who has fallen. The image it shows when it lays open is a reproduction of a painting by Vermeer, whom Dalí greatly admired and often referred to in his own paintings. In Buñuel's original script, the final shot was to feature the corpses of the man and woman "consumed by swarms of flies". However, this special effect was modified due to budget limitations, with the film ending with a still shot of the man and woman, who had been walking in the previous beach scene, half-buried in the sand and apparently dead.

The movie contains several thematic references to Federico García Lorca and other writers of that time. For example, the rotting donkeys are made in reference to the popular children's novel 'Platero y yo' by Juan Ramón Jiménez, which Buñuel and Dalí hated.

Anthropologist Jean Rouch has reported that after filming was complete, Buñuel and Dalí had run out of money, forcing Buñuel to edit the film personally in his kitchen without the aid of a Moviola or any other technical equipment.

So if you want to watch this film, do it. It's length probably won't hurt anyone, and is really a must watch film to understand the surrealist movement. 7.3/10

Was the above review useful to you?

A movie about dreams

7/10
Author: R-P-McMurphy from United States
6 July 2013

Weird and cool, its easy to see the impact this dreamlike work of art and other Bunuel films had on David Lynch's career.

Based on two strange dreams Salvador Dali and Luis Bunuel had, the movie lacks a narrative and is hard to explain, its more like an abstract experience the viewer will understand only after watching it.

Its a little more interesting than I expected it to be. Being as old as it is, I expected something a little slower, but it ended up being kind of fun and I couldn't keep my eyes off it. Still, it might be more interesting to art aficionados than it might be to an average moviegoer.

Was the above review useful to you?

Undeniably absurd yet irrestible film that plays with our minds long after we watch it

8/10
Author: sashank_kini-1 from India
13 March 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Salvador Dali quoted that he had once observed a team of ants devouring an insect till only its shell remained, and Dali could see the sky within that shell. Un Chien Andalou has incidents that seem so hollow and absurd that our dear academicians, critics, scholars and plain viewers give their own meanings and interpretations to it. Dali may have not intended to give any definite meaning to his film, just as his many of his paintings that have been put up on his official site seem completely boundless to meaning, but he did have some purpose to make the film and the paintings and his purpose may not be understood by us, but that isn't important. The more important part is that we give his paintings and this film some reason to exist, and that has given Un Chien Andalou its cult status.

On my second viewing of Un Chien Andalou, I decided that it would be purposeless to watch the film without lending some connection to the events running on screen. I have made my own story about the characters, and you may find it silly and absurd, but that's how I could make any sense of Un Chien. The lady in the film is probably a tough woman who lives with this effeminate man in drag who was possibly mistreated by his staunch father for his feminine preferences in his childhood, which in turn made him commit the heinous act of patricide. The young man suddenly gets aroused by the features of this girl and fondles her but she resists and tries to attack him. Later, the lady gets rid of the man by ridiculing his pansified nature but he too pokes fun of her hairy armpits as she leaves. The lady finds new love in a handsome virile man on the beach and they find this black box that contains her previous lover's clothes.

There I have conjured my own story, something that is quite crazy but again, watch the film to see what real 'crazy' is! Un Chien Andalou is a solid surreal film that should be watched to see how Dali can play with our minds. It isn't a preachy experimental film, thank god, but a highly entertaining one.

My Rating: 8.1 out of 10

Was the above review useful to you?

more bark than bite?

8/10
Author: Michael Neumann from United States
9 November 2010

The notorious collaboration between filmmaker Luis Buñuel and artist Salvador Dali proved at least one thing: behind all the poems, paintings and manifestos the Surrealist 'Movement' may have actually been one big meaningless giggle. The pair threw everything they could think of into this twenty minute long series of random episodes: dead mules inside a piano; ants crawling over a man's hand (a popular Dali obsession); and, most famously, a woman's eyeball slit by a razor blade. But, contrary to what the symbolists and semiologists would have you believe, it never was meant to express any sort of subconscious logic. The film is really about two young guys with a camera being spontaneously abstract, the results of which can still be perversely funny to audiences in the proper frame of mind.

Was the above review useful to you?

Got me a movie I want you to know

7/10
Author: Red-Barracuda from Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
16 September 2010

It's nice to know that some things never change.

Un Chien Andalou is as bewildering now as it ever was. It's pure, unrefined surrealism, and amazingly after eighty years it still has the power to shock - the slicing up eyeballs scene will never ever not get a reaction. But most importantly of all is it's refusal to play by any rules whatsoever. Luis Bunuel and Salvador Dali created something here that is simply impossible to analyse in any conventional way. In this day and age of lazy remakes and reboots, it's great to look back on a primitive film that is utterly free of convention or rules.

There is no attempt at narrative whatsoever. The only logic that matters in Un Chien Andalou is the bizarre logic of dreams. One strange event follows another, with character motivation being almost impossible to determine. There's frank sexuality, dead donkeys, ants crawling from wounds, anti-clerical imagery, eye-violence and frankly a whole lot more. It benefits too from the weird ambiance that silent films possess by default. It may very well be the most famous short film in the history of the medium. It certainly is one of the most memorable.

Was the above review useful to you?

1001 Movies to see before you die

8/10
Author: lastliberal from United States
28 March 2009

Oscar-nominee Luis Buñuel (That Obscure Object of Desire, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie), the father of film surrealism, joins with another surrealist, Salvador Dalí, in his first film as a director.

The film opens with a man cutting a woman's eyeball, but it get stranger as we see ants come out of a man's hand, and, well, it just keeps getting more bizarre.

Don't look for a plot as it is more like free association, where psychoanalytic patients are invited to relate whatever comes into their minds during the analytic session, and not to censor their thoughts.

Programmed for a short run, this film lasted eight months in the theater.

Was the above review useful to you?

Cinema at its most traditional; a purely visual experience

Author: Graham Greene from United Kingdom
22 April 2008

A mad jumble of images all flowing dreamlike from one to the other - sometimes boring, sometimes frightening - often without interpretation or any kind of greater context outside of the broader notions of surrealism for the sake of it, or in some cases even, a cheap pun. It's still seen as something radical - perhaps dangerous? - even eighty years after it was first released, but really, this is classic cinema in the traditional sense; a collection of abstract but penetrating images intended to be viewed by as many people as possible at the same time to create a shared and sensory experience. There's no shame in laughing at it - just as there's no shame in shielding your eyes from the more grotesque of images - as the film has no real intent other than to be experienced. In this sense, the film is beyond criticism, or at least, beyond the higher intellectual level that it normally receives, with the film standing as an ode to cinema at its most simple and sublime. All notions of intellectualism, or pseudo-intellectualism (whatever that means?), are thrown out of the window as the film transfixes us with some stunningly imaginative images that flicker to life on the screen.

To seek answers from the film is missing the point, as there are no questions to be asked. The point of the film is not to entertain on the base levels of character, narrative and simple human emotions, but rather, to present us with images that we have never seen before. It's artistic expression. If you have no interest in this then you have no interest in film (and why on earth would you be using a website such as this if you cannot gleam some kind of simplistic pleasure from a film as pure and as immediate as this?). Some of the images intended to shock, others to amuse and others to titillate and provoke thought even when there is nothing to really think about. Above all else, it is an experience, like all films, and one that is entirely visual and approachable on even the most immediate of levels. Don't think too much about it, or attempt to see something that isn't there. The point of surrealism was to go beyond such notions of the real and mundane to present something illogical, imaginative and devoid of rational thinking. That's what this film represents.

Was the above review useful to you?

What?(SPOILERS)

8/10
Author: I_Am_The_Taylrus from Minnesota
9 February 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

SPOILERS

That is the most simplest word that can describe this short film, what? I mean, was there a plot? No. I am left with so many answers but not enough questions. I mean, reverse that. I do not know! I am left with nothing! Nothing, I tell you! Anyway, this French film is pretty good, despite the fact that you will be left staring blankly at the screen for fifteen minutes, waiting for nothing. I waited for something that can explain that whole basis of this movie to come up on my screen, but nothing happened. This is a disturbing and strange and not to mention surreal film. I have nothing on this film.

Here is the something of this film. I can not call it a plot, nor can I call it empty. There are just a bunch of really disturbing and surreal images in this film. Trust me, it will confuse you. Anyway, here is the images. In the beginning of this film a woman's eye is sliced open by a cigarette smoking man with a razor. Then, a blind woman pokes a hand with a stick. Then there is guy with ants coming out of his hand. There is a calf on a piano. There are a whole lot more disturbing and weird images, but in the end a man carries a woman in his arms at the beach. Do I know what happened? No.

Overall, I just can not explain this movie. It was a good movie, but the aspect is nothing. There is no point of this movie ever being made. Who cares, though? It is a good little short silent movie. Plus, when the man slices open the woman's eyeball is just plain creepy and disturbing. That caught my attention, ant it will catch yours. I think that whole entire movie caught my attention. This is a very strange movie and will definitely leave you scratching your head. I am still scratching my head and I saw this movie about a half-hour ago. That is how weird this film is.

8/10

Recommended Films: Nosferutu.

Was the above review useful to you?

Good For What It Is.

9/10
Author: Son_of_Mansfield from Mansfield, Pennsylvania.
28 October 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This was made solely to put up a collection of images that would fascinate and repulse people. It works, I couldn't take my eyes off of it. It strips away everything to show the base of humans: violence, sex, connection, laughter, and death. All in a compact sixteen minute package that leaves you with your head cocked and your eyes wide. The image that everyone talks about is highly effective. A man gets a razor ready, stands behind a woman, and slices her eye open to let the insides ooze out. There is also the image of a man with bugs crawling out of his hand, a woman being run over by a car, and a man imagining he is feeling a woman's naked body. If this sounds like something you wouldn't like, then you are the person that they wanted to watch it.

Was the above review useful to you?

Un Chien Andalou

9/10
Author: utperetz from United States
12 October 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Un Chien Andalou-which Bunuel and his then best friend Salvador Dali first showed to the world in 1929-begins with a close-up of a razor slicing open the eyeball of an actress. It begins by attacking you- the viewer.

This film was made for art, Bunuel and Dali created it with no intentions of gaining fame or wealth, and so it probably helped establish cinema as an art form, not just entertainment. Un Chien Andalou is a surrealist masterpiece, filled with nonsensical images,or, one could argue- symbols. The film's mere sixteen minutes never fail to shock: a man has a hole in his hand from which ants crawl out of, a girl carries a severed hand in a box close to her heart, dead donkeys are sprawled across a piano which is attached to two priests on the floor-who are then attached to ropes and a man fighting to pull all of this baggage.

This is Bunuel's first film, and although his friendship with Dali ended after this film, he continued to create more legendary surrealistic films, essentially, L'age D'or. Similar in structure and style to Un Chien Andalou, L'age D'or is feature length- 60 minutes-but was even more scandalous than its predecessor. It offended people so much that it was banned from France from the day of its premiere in 1930, until 1980!

To anyone interested in the art side of cinema rather than the entertainment, moneymaking business it has become- Un Chien Andalou is a must see. It will shock you, it will confuse you, and you will never forget it. Watch it as proof that art is made for art's sake.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 16: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history