290 The Phantom of Liberty

[justeleblanc]

I'm hoping Belle De Jour sees a decent re-release. Besides the whole picture quality, it's the subtitles that bother the hell out of me. And honestly, I'm not a big fan of the commentary either.

You'd think they'd get someone like Gilliam to do a commentary, or maybe even someone else inthe Python group.

[oldsheperd]

Yeah, the Kino L'Age D'Or. I plays for about the first thirty minutes, then 10 minutes of nothing then more till the end. It's pretty standard fare and nothing I didn't already know.

[swingo]

Yeah, the Kino L'Age D'Or. I plays for about the first thirty minutes, then 10 minutes of nothing then more till the end. It's pretty standard fare and nothing I didn't already know.

Really? too bad... I'm also sad for the commentary of one of my fave flicks: Andrei Rublev

[bunuelian]

I guess I don't find the Miramax Belle disc all that bad, but maybe that's because the only other time I saw the film was on a horrible VHS tape. I was so desperate to see Tristana that I made the mistake of renting another VHS Bunuel - I decided to stop watching after the first five minutes. DVD has spoiled me.

The problem with Bunuel's films is that they can be so full of potential meanings. The only "proper" way to do commentary tracks for Bunuel would be to have multiple ones by different scholars with different opinions. I'm of the opinion that the viewer should be made to struggle a bit with Bunuel - it makes the discovery of him that much more rewarding. Most scholars are probably unqualified to comment on him, anyway - even the brilliant, thoughtful ones.

With Phantom, how much is there to say? Point out the correlation between the sniper of the film and Jon Malvo? To hell with symmetry!

[What A Disgrace]

Back cover art

[jorencain]

Just watched this...the quality is what you would expect, based on Criterion's previous Buñuel releases. I wish the interview with Carriere was longer, although the printed Buñuel interview gives plenty of insight into the film. While it's not my favorite Buñuel film (I'm still holding my breath for Criterion to release "The Milky Way"), it's certainly a lot of fun.

[numediaman2]

Unfortunately, this film is mixed in with a couple other CC releases in my Amazon order -- therefore, they won't ship to me until all the films are out. (I think they include the Wajda films and Au Hasard Balthazar.)

Not a big deal really since I've seen this film a half-dozen times and have it on VHS. I've always put this high on my list of films I enjoy for pure pleasure. Its slapstick, in a way.

Thanks to the Bunuel fest on TCM last month, the only two Bunuels I really crave at this point would be Tristana and The Milky Way. Of course, we could use better prints of a lot of others.

[justeleblanc]

I finally watched this film for the first time last night. I found it hit and miss. Maybe I'm just a little Bunuel-ed out at the moment after the marathon on TCM. It just didn't seem to have the same energy as say Viridiana or Obscure Object. The segments at the Inn especially, with the S & M people and the religious poker game and the incest moments.... like I said maybe I have too high of a bar. Of course, the mailman in the bedroom was brilliant.

Does anyone else hold this as one of Bunuel's weaker films? Or weaker good films, I should say.

[Dylan]

I haven't seen this, but my girlfriend, who viewed the pretty bad-looking full screen NTSC VHS, has always considered this Bunuel's weakest film (though she isn't as much of a fan as I am). I've always thought that it sounded like a lot of fun (particularly one segment involving people's reactions to a certain photograph). Also, Monica Vitti is in it, and she's one of the greats. I should Netflix this very soon, and I'll post my thoughts.

[justeleblanc]

It is fun, but repetitive. After a while, after a lot of the satire of arbitrary codes runs thin.... it just doesn't hold up. I think it's the concept as a whole. He was given free reign after DISCREET CHARM and he might have jumped to ideas to quickly because he could, instead of whether or not he should. I did still like it though.

[Eric]

For what it's worth. Also, I know it's Ed Gonzalez's favorite (or second favorite or thereabouts) of his films... but then he also considers The Milky Way his least tolerable, so adjust accordingly.

[zedz]

I may be alone in this, but, enjoyable as they are, I consider Bunuel's 70s films his least interesting period. Far less striking and innovative than the first three films, the great Mexican period, or that golden run (Viridiana, Angel, Simon) in the early 60s.

[justeleblanc]

I would agree, but I think Obscure Object might be his best. And appearantly Lubitsch was thinking of making a movie from the same source material. That would have been an interesting comparison.

[Michael Kerpan]

Discreet Charm is still my favorite Bunuel and Obscure Object rates up with the best of the earlier films.

Just watched Phantom last night. It seemed structured more like a long Monty Python show than like other Bunuel films I've seen. Some great bits, some boring bits. Glad to have it.

[justeleblanc]

When Bunuel died, the members of Monty Python (I think all 6 were still alive) wrote a long obituary for him and it was published in the LA Times, probably in other places as well. In it they do talk a lot about PHANTOM as well as his other works. Has anyone read this? I've only heard about it.

[numediaman2]

For me, any Bunuel film from this period would be a "blind buy". In fact, from Nazarin on, I would be hard pressed to name a film I didn't enjoy at one level or another.

[daniel p]

Can anyone please tell me if this disc is actually single layer or not? It is listed as so here.

[thesemodernsocks]

Can anyone please tell me if this disc is actually single layer or not? It is listed as so here.

According to the official Criterion website, it's dual-layered.

[mmiesner]

For me, any Bunuel film from this period would be a "blind buy". In fact, from Nazarin on, I would be hard pressed to name a film I didn't enjoy at one level or another.

for me, any Bunuel would be a blind buy. this is the first film i've seen by him that i didn't think lived up to any of the hype i had heard of it, but it was still worth buying. there are still more films by him i would rather see released, most notably Tristana and The Milky Way, but any Mexican films would be welcome as well.

[numediaman2]

I think Tristana is the logical one because of its stars -- but rumors (here) are that The Milky Way is scheduled. In any case, I'd buy both.

Having said that . . . I think the films recently shown on TCM would make a fantastic box set: Los Olvidados, Nazarin, Viridiana, Exterminating Angel, Simon of the Desert.

[colinr0380]

Discreet Charm is still my favorite Bunuel and Obscure Object rates up with the best of the earlier films.

Just watched Phantom last night. It seemed structured more like a long Monty Python show than like other Bunuel films I've seen. Some great bits, some boring bits. Glad to have it.

I agree with Michael about Phantom of Liberty. I really like the way that, as Carrière describes in his interview, that we follow all the stories until the point at which they are about to deliver an important, or explanatory, piece of information and then get immediately whisked away to another plot. I would take issue with Carrière's description of moving to something much less interesting, rather the film constantly resets itself to the beginning of another story, gives us the setup and then moves on to the next thing just as the plot begins to develop beyond its initial set up.

All of these ideas have potential but they are left just in that form - not just as gifts of half-finished stories for the viewer to finish off themselves but more as a mind boggling array of different ideas and themes hat can be touched on without having to be fully and laboriously fleshed out, likely to an eventual lesser effect as the viewer has already gotten the most intellectually stimulating elements of the idea from the concept already (Perhaps Richard Kelly's The Box is an example of a film taking the opposite approach - beginning with a basic concept and then enjoying its own vaguely frustrating, but also liberating, freedom to expand off into wild areas once this extremely basic framework has been set up). It allows many more ideas to be explored within one film than would be possible otherwise, including the major idea of frustration.

I think Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie and Phantom of Liberty are a beautifully matched pair of films. Phantom takes Discreet Charm's continual frustration of the character's plans and transposes that to the audience for the film themselves. Instead of ironically, but maybe unselfconsciously, enjoying watching our corrupt bourgeoisie surrogates trying and failing to just enjoy a meal together we the audience instead have our attempts to just relax and enjoy watching one film continually frustrated by having the 'hardest' part of watching a film - being introduced to a bunch of new characters and situations - continually repeated (In that case we could think of it as a pair of buttocks cheekily being brandished at an arthouse audience looking for intricate content that is also in depth!)

Sometimes we have a bunch of stories Russian-dolled inside one another, such as those that take place at the inn; or a 'major and minor' story within one segment, which could just as accurately be called 'factual and fictional' (such as the kids getting the indecent pictures in the playground that seques into the father played by Brialy having his bizarre visions during the night; or the opening historical sequence that is revealed to be Muni reading a book; or the teacher at the police station having problems with unruly grown up pupils and then we have an illustration to his two remaining pupils of the point he is trying to make about the problems of switching morality with the 'going to the toilet in company and eating in private' sequence).

The funniest aspect of the film is the anti-authoritarian one. Almost everyone, from teacher, hotel manager, priest, nanny, parents, doctors and policeman are undermined and have their rule based, self assured pomposity poked fun at, while the children or gun toting maniacs (even the zoo animals!) are just misunderstood indiviudals wanting to be understood, or even just acknowledged by those who run society only in their own interests.

[HistoryProf]

Out of Print as of June 30, 2010.