Tried watching this at Caribou Coffee on my laptop with my earbuds in. Even though I was in such a position so that no one could see my screen I only got five minutes in because I felt vulgar and obscene. Watching it in it’s entirety at home that feeling is gone, but not the disturbing feeling that this film is so well known for provoking.
I mean, it's not trying to assemble the images to actually mean anything; it's a strange visual experiment. So, I'd say it's definitely lacking on substance. On the other hand, it is the first surrealist film, and one of Bunuel's first films, so it has tremendous historical significance. In the end it seemed fairest to split the difference and give it a three.
The free flowing association can get muddled here but there is something undeniably great about this film. Striking, jarring, quirky, and downright uncomfortable. The movie flows extremely well despite its connected yet loose narrative. The music is spectacular and catchy.
It doesn't make sense, nor does it want to. Now to some that is a joyous experience, to those who seek meaning it can be painful. Maybe there are some Freudian themes there. Beyond that notice that it holds a great arsenal of editing and techniques especially on a small budget. Yet it is its ambiguity which makes it history.
I have stinky, guilty, dead horse feelings about my sexual desire too, but I only want bourgeois society to feel a little bad about it... that psychic hybrid of sea urchin + armpit hair is pretty sexy tho. I just wish Dali & Buñuel gave space for women's sexual desire. They were brothers from the same mother of Frank Zappa. Sublime sneering, but where's the love?