Reviews of L'âge d'or
Displaying all 4 Review
Written by Bunuel and Dali after their collaboration on Un chien andalou, this film was always bound to have quite a reputation.What we have here is a strangely relevant satire on bureaucracy and capitalism. The plot is remarkably comprenhensible for the writings of two surrealists and the satirical criticism is most misanthropic, my favourite kind. Nevertheless, I think the use of surrealism is uneccessary and questionable. Yet again, I think we should accept its style and histor ical context. Thus once again, I reach no conclusion. I think I have been kidnapped by postmodernism and its promise of no absolute truth.
- Currently 4.0/5 Stars.
The film is a surreal expression of rebellion against sexual repression imposed by society and religion. Luis Bunuel has always been cynical of the upper class society. He likes narrating in terms of vignettes that doesn’t appear to be cohesive. But then again, he is a surrealist and dreams never tend to be cohesive, it merely tries to release a hidden psyche through symbolism and imagery. I don’t think I can make a final review of this film with just one screening. It is far too complex. I may have to view it several times even if some scenes are so disturbing, especially the implied violence on women and children. I understand there was a lot of social upheavals occuring at the time that this film is being made, but it is really, really painful to watch. I just discovered when i looked at my profile on Facebook, that there is a direct link to watch the film. I removed that link because it might be offensive to some of my friends. However, I am posting the review, and it is up to the mature cinephile to find the link through this website The Auteurs. After all, it is free til December 2009 so they might as well take advantage of this because this film is very rare and has enjoyed only a few public screenings. Thank you Auteurs, for giving me the opportunity to watch this…
Depending on how you view it even today, Luis Bunuel’s first feature length film is either a profound meditation on the absurdity of religion, ritual, and social standards, or a total prank that even his friend, and co-collaborator Salvador Dali refused to acknowledge as anything else. It’s probably both, I’ve seen it so many times that every new viewing brings me to a different conclusion about its ultimate worth in the history of the cinema, but one thing I never fail to grasp is that Bunuel, using images and editing for alternating shock and symbolic value, is a master provocateur, and any film that starts with a scorpion, ends with Jesus leaving the scene of a de Sadian orgy, and in between runs the gamut of religious and social anarchy for a tight 60 minutes of often incomprehensible mayhem, is worth the discussion.
- Currently 4.0/5 Stars.
If you are interested in Surrealism or Dadaism, then you must watch this movie for its thematic and intellectual ambitions. That being said, it is a horribly amateurish jumble of shots and tableaus. The dissonance arises from the extreme craft and formal rigor of centuries of technical development displayed in the paintings of Dali, Tanguy, Ernst, Magritte and others, contrasting with the relatively new experiments with film in L’Âge d’Or. Throwing a toy giraffe out a window is not a devasting critique of bourgeois values in my book. See Man with a Movie Camera if you want to see a much more accomplished experimentation of form and content.
- Currently 2.0/5 Stars.