Luis Buñuel

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.

Moderator: DarkImbecile

Message
Author
User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#26 Post by Trees » Mon Apr 18, 2016 10:43 pm

:-k

User avatar
swo17
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Luis Buñuel

#27 Post by swo17 » Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:30 pm

It's called surrealism.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#28 Post by domino harvey » Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:32 pm

Tarkovsky was once quoted as having heard of it (I like Bunuel quite a bit)

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#29 Post by Trees » Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:38 pm

Image

Buñuel + Carole Bouquet = :shock: Resistance is futile (as the main character soon discovers).

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#30 Post by Trees » Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:13 pm

I read Rosenbaum's piece praising Buñuel's film "The Young One" as a "Neglected Masterpiece". My face after I watched it = :roll: The acting is hammy. The girl's acting is flat out appalling. The quality of filmmaking -- directing, story, cinematography, acting -- is all poor.

I cannot recommend this film at all.

User avatar
bottled spider
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: Luis Buñuel

#31 Post by bottled spider » Sun May 08, 2016 3:16 pm

The only thing I didn't like about The Young One was the way it rather condescendingly reassures the viewer of Travers' innocence by the contrivance of the preacher happening to know Travers' accuser and her record of false accusations. Though perhaps that contrivedness is deliberate and sardonic on Buñuel's part. This will be on my Youth list, though much further down than Los Olvidados and Susanna.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Luis Buñuel

#32 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sun May 08, 2016 3:40 pm

Trees wrote:I read Rosenbaum's piece praising Buñuel's film "The Young One" as a "Neglected Masterpiece". My face after I watched it = :roll: The acting is hammy. The girl's acting is flat out appalling. The quality of filmmaking -- directing, story, cinematography, acting -- is all poor.
Even if one were to dismiss every other aspect (which I certainly don't), the cinematography by Gabriel Figueroa is excellent. I'll side with JR on this film.

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#33 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 3:43 pm

bottled spider wrote:The only thing I didn't like about The Young One was the way it rather condescendingly reassures the viewer of Travers' innocence by the contrivance of the preacher happening to know Travers' accuser and her record of false accusations. Though perhaps that contrivedness is deliberate and sardonic on Buñuel's part. This will be on my Youth list, though much further down than Los Olvidados and Susanna.
What about the atrocious acting and embarrassing dialogue? This film was a disaster in my opinion, and I say that as someone who loves other Buñuel films.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#34 Post by domino harvey » Sun May 08, 2016 3:45 pm

Could you give specific examples of poor acting and dialogue? Just doubling down on the generalities isn't helping to clarify your position

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#35 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 5:07 pm

domino harvey wrote:Could you give specific examples of poor acting and dialogue? Just doubling down on the generalities isn't helping to clarify your position
Poor acting = the girl. Actually, appalling and atrocious are better adjectives. Perhaps the very worst acting I have ever seen in a feature film.

Poor dialogue = the black guy. Super cringe-worthy and an outright embarrassment.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Luis Buñuel

#36 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sun May 08, 2016 5:40 pm

Care to also tell us precisely how Figueroa's cinematograhy is "poor"?

User avatar
bottled spider
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: Luis Buñuel

#37 Post by bottled spider » Sun May 08, 2016 5:45 pm

Trees wrote:
bottled spider wrote:What about the atrocious acting and embarrassing dialogue?
Just to clarify, by embarrassing dialogue do mean all the "hep talk"? The slang of the past often is risible. I simply took it for granted that however corny it might sound, the slang was probably an accurate representation of how some people spoke at that time.

I suppose the girl wasn't a good actor, in the sense that I'm guessing she wouldn't be capable of pulling off a completely different role, but she seemed right for this one. The character is awkward, unschooled, essentially unsocialized. Did you object to any of the other actors?

[Sorry, I cross-posted with others. I see you already addressed my questions above.]

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#38 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 6:45 pm

I think this is likely a case of someone directing a film in a foreign language and foreign environment (thus his inability to sense or change the ridiculous slang and super-poor acting). Even the very best directors struggle with this scenario. Think of WKW in "Blueberry Nights" or HHH in "Red Balloon", though to a much, much lesser extent than Buñuel is struggling with "The Young One" . I just found it odd to see Rosenbaum heaping so much praise on this film as a "masterpiece."

Let's look at what Rosenbaum wrote about this film:
Let’s start with a dream scenario, a movie that might have been. What if Luis Buñuel made a picture with an American producer, American screenwriter, and American actors during the height of the civil rights movement and set it in the rural south? What if the main character were a jazz musician from the north fleeing from a southern lynching, falsely accused of raping a woman? And, to make a still headier brew, what if Buñuel decided to work in the theme of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, a recent best-seller — the deflowering of a young girl by a middle-aged man?

As a piece of exploitation, this hypothetical project fairly sizzles; yet in the hands of a poetic, corrosive, highly moral filmmaker like Buñuel, it might conceivably transcend this category. Allowing for the strangeness that naturally arise from a foreign director taking on such volatile American materials — indeed, a strangeness that might enhance the freshness of his treatment -—one could well anticipate the beauty and excitement such an encounter might produce.

The above scenario may sound far-fetched. But the fact is that what might have been actually exists, and has existed for the past half-century. Luis Buñuel did all the things I’ve mentioned in 1960, but hardly anyone noticed–and most of those who did were far from pleased.

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.net/2009/07/22909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It seems to me that Rosenbaum is enamored with the idea of this film, and is perhaps somewhat blind to its poor execution.
Last edited by Trees on Sun May 08, 2016 9:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bottled spider
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: Luis Buñuel

#39 Post by bottled spider » Sun May 08, 2016 8:59 pm

Trees wrote:I think this is likely a case of someone directing a film in a foreign language and foreign environment (thus his inability to sense or change the ridiculous slang and super-poor acting).
But the foreign environment was Mexico, where Buñuel made more than a dozen films, and The Young One wasn't his first film in English. The dialogue would have come primarily from screenwriter Hugo Butler (or possibly the American source novel), not Buñuel.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Luis Buñuel

#40 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sun May 08, 2016 9:21 pm

> It seems to me that Rosenbaum is enamored with the idea of this film, and is perhaps somewhat blind
> to its poor execution.

No, maybe Rosenbaum genuinely _liked_ the execution of the idea -- but just responded quite differently. A word to the wise -- your mode of criticizing films (and critics) will not win you many friends in this group.

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#41 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 9:55 pm

Michael Kerpan wrote: No, maybe Rosenbaum genuinely _liked_ the execution of the idea -- but just responded quite differently.
This could be the case. Rosenbaum's piece started out by clearly indicating that he loves the "dream scenario" premise of the film. Why he may have discounted its glaring flaws is impossible to say. He thinks the film is a masterpiece; I think it is not.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Luis Buñuel

#42 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sun May 08, 2016 10:08 pm

Consider the _possibility_ that others (including but not limited to JR) simply don't agree with your opinion that the film actually HAS "glaring flaws".

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#43 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 10:21 pm

Michael Kerpan, what do you think of Key Meersman's acting in "The Young One"?

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Luis Buñuel

#44 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sun May 08, 2016 10:22 pm

Trees wrote:Michael Kerpan, what do you think of Key Meersman's acting in "The Young One"?
It didn't bother me.

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#45 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 10:25 pm

Michael Kerpan wrote:
Trees wrote:Michael Kerpan, what do you think of Key Meersman's acting in "The Young One"?
It didn't bother me.
I would be interested to hear what others think.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#46 Post by domino harvey » Sun May 08, 2016 10:28 pm

While you're waiting for someone to share your minority view, remember that silence is also an answer

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#47 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 10:38 pm

Rosenbaum himself acknowledged in the article I have linked to that "The Young One" was widely scorned and disregarded, so how am I presenting a "minority" view? Rosenbaum himself acknowledged clearly that it was in fact he who was presenting the minority view.

Do you have any evidence that my view is a minority view?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#48 Post by domino harvey » Sun May 08, 2016 10:56 pm

Minority view here, no one gives a shit about what the world at large thinks concerning a niche art house film. And before you go asking for things, I'm still waiting on evidence of poor acting and dialogue, unless "the black guy" is a line I forgot. Saying something is "atrocious" without explanation or examination is not evidence of anything other than the limits of your abilities to discuss this film when pressed

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#49 Post by Trees » Sun May 08, 2016 11:27 pm

domino harvey wrote:Minority view here
Where is your evidence for this assertion?
no one gives a shit about what the world at large thinks concerning a niche art house film.
Not sure why you are using such hostile language. 8-[ In Rosenbaum's piece, he says that it was publications like The New Yorker and and the big Manhattan dailies that dismissed or trashed the film. Hardly enemies of art-house films. The film doesn't appear in the TSPDT top 1,000, the AFI 100, the Sight and Sound top 250, it won no awards outside of a courtesy "special mention", and basically has little to nothing supporting the idea that it's a "masterpiece".
And before you go asking for things, I'm still waiting on evidence of poor acting and dialogue, unless "the black guy" is a line I forgot. Saying something is "atrocious" without explanation or examination is not evidence of anything other than the limits of your abilities to discuss this film when pressed
I already explained that Key Meersman's performance was the worst acting I have ever seen in any feature film, ever. How much more clearly can I explain my opinion? This was her first of only two acting performances, ever, so it's not like there is a body of evidence pointing to her being a good actor. Just the opposite. Her delivery of lines is literally the worst I have ever seen. Her timing is non-existent. Her emotional involvement in the story simply does not exist at all. She barely seems to understand the lines she is reciting. She had exactly zero understanding of acting. Would you like me to go into greater detail about her failed acting? I can trash her performance line by line if that is what you require, domino.
Last edited by Trees on Mon May 09, 2016 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Luis Buñuel

#50 Post by knives » Sun May 08, 2016 11:34 pm

Trees wrote:
domino harvey wrote:Minority view here
Where is your evidence for this assertion?
Silence, as he said, but if you want unnecessary noise I'm willing to put you further in the minority by saying I find it an interesting and good film.

Post Reply