El

cold, strange, cruel. like majority of Bunuel films. a window to darkness. and too realistic to be only shadow of fiction. it is a good film. and, in many senses, picture of our time. the ball of paranoia and love as scary, the need to control and menace, the desire and the series of masks, the fragility and the madness as form of control, all is, piece by piece, ingredient of our society. this is the secret for who the movie remains impressive. and for who the genius of its director is basis for an inspired art circle. it is a definition of happiness search. and proof of a splendid science of details. a story. and result of an entomologist observations. is it enough ? sure. in measure to be one of the characters.

As his most technically accomplished Mexican-period movie, and almost a mainstream one, this film can be an enjoyable first introduction into Buñuel's obsessions: the same ones that ruled the surrealistic movement. The underground psychological streams in the mind are finely expressed in this story of a pathological jealous and his victim. In his Mexican exile, Buñuel was forced to make "nourishing movies", that were the most conventional ones in his filmography, but he managed to smuggle his surrealistic ideals into all of them (even he could make the absolutely surrealistic "The Exterminating Angel").

Based on an autobiographic novel by Spanish fellow countrywoman Mercedes Pinto, this film is the vehicle for displaying many marvelous surreal moments. It can also be viewed as a brilliant clinical recreation of paranoid distress, but Buñuel recognized that the protagonist, Francisco Galván, although insane, had many of his own obsessions: his view of love as an absolute imperative, the violent impulses, the fetishism for female feet…The story shifts from one point of view to another, which is the only way to understand the "two stories" in psychotic disorders.

Part of the story and many of the ideas were used later by Hitchcock for his masterpiece "Vertigo (From among the dead)". It is difficult to say plagiarism when talking about cinema, but this would be one occasion for it. It is not coincidence that both directors share a taste for the expressive properties of objects (not only as Macguffin); as two reluctantly catholic directors, objects usually act as "sacraments" for their narrative. In "El" the church and its symbols are the background for the repression and the blooming of instincts; other Buñuel's stories may be more connected with religion than this one, but "El" shows a life absolutely permeated by the relationship of primary impulses ("eros" and "thanatos") with spiritual transcend ency. With churches as the setting of the key moments of the story (desire, love encounter, the urge for murder, disappointment), church is at the beginning and the ending of this story narrated by the man who said "Thank God, I'm an atheist".

Although was filmed in three weeks, in the midst of the limitations of Mexican film industry, the movie is close to perfection in formal terms. In contrast with his previous movies, in which a still camera was predominant, in this one the camera movements are constant. The performances and the choice of cast is the most accurate of the Buñuel's Mexican-period.

Made in 1952, between "Robinson Crusoe" and "Wuthering Heights," this may not be one of Bunuel's major films, but it contains several of his key themes and recurring images, starting with the ceremonial washing and kissing of feet. The film also goes into the politics of submission and domination, the effects of long-term sexual repression, and -- of course -- sewing.

Bunuel understood obsession and was able to convey it on screen like no other director. As irrational as his characters can get (and Francisco gets plenty irrational in this film), Bunuel knows that we all have our hangups which seem normal to us, no matter how grotesque they may look to an outside viewer. (There's a reason why the alternate title for this film is "This Strange Passion.")

This tale of a pathologically jealous husband, whose delusions of cuckoldry teeter over the edge into madness, ranks with BELLE DE JOUR and the early surrealist films as the first rank of the Bunuel canon. The ending, which has audiences screaming out loud in a mixture of gruesome delight and horror, would probably drive Brian DePalma to death by alcohol if he saw it. Brian, don't watch, okay?

I had these words by Alex Epstein in mind when I left the theater. Before I went to watch Él I knew Hitchcock had taken a bit to draw Vertigo. Well, it's not simply a bit.

Buñuel's style is both graceful and low-key. It's a pity this made his work less obviously marvelous to masses. On the other hand if there is something lacking in Él this is a gripping suspense. Something Hitch mastered with his will to enthrall masses. Buñuel's directing is more on the side of actors for us to hesitate between judging the characters and just waiting for more... which is exactly the theme.

Bringing psychological torments to screen is definitely not easy a directing choice . It's a challenge for the upper-crust and I remember Hitchcock's Spellbound was not really convincing, neither was Fritz Lang's Secret beyond the door. Yet each brought something to be chewed for others to experiment.