That Obscure Object of Desire

The best surrealism seems firstly to be disjointed or unreal, but then, through some mysterious alchemy, generates uncanny effects. Interpretations of this film seem to miss this crucial element. Buñuel: "I don't enjoy rummaging around in the cliches of psychoanalysis." "In addition to the theme of the impossibility of ever truly possessing a woman's body, the film insists upon maintaining that climate of insecurity and imminent disaster—an atmosphere we all recognize, because it is our own."

This movie is good but at the same time frustrating as shit because apparently women are crazy as hell and I don't understand them. The plot of this is absurd and everything that unfolds makes zero sense. Yet, I found myself intrigued by nearly everything. I even yelled at the TV a few times. The way the story was told could've been better, having a dude sit on a train and tell his life story is pretty lame. The 2 actress gimmick was good because I got to see 2 pairs of titties you feel me

I will never understand why the fuck he didn't kill that bitch. I will never understand women. I will never understand love and desire. But I don't care. I want to be exploited. Just a little bit.

The fruitless pursuit of the titular "object" becomes more and more maddening, not because it is unfulfilled, but because Mathieu can never "have" Conchita because she refuses to be objectified, and he fails to realize this. The absurdity of Buñuel's final film is subtle, but satisfying.

A solid, enjoyable Buñuel film. The acting is very effective and the touch of absurdity that permeates the film makes for a very fun experience. The commentary on desire and control is well executed and provides some interesting things to think about, especially given the ending.

Dating framing device aside, Bunuel's final film is a splendid summation of his main thematic preoccupations related to class, sex and desire.

Buñuel knows how to craft a movie, and it's a decent tale. But I submit that it would have been at least as effective with only one actress in the female lead role.

I'm probably stunted by a lack of knowledge of Bunuels movies here. But I just can't get over the fact that he makes France unenticing and Spain unsexy. The dynamic between the lead and the girl is well-played but much of the surrounding movie falls flat.

Luis Buñuel's swan song "Cet obscur objet du désir" is a gimmicky, maddening and occasionally brilliant examination of erotic obsession. The surreal touches are here (although toned down from "Le charme discret de la bourgeoisie") but don't distract from a story as compelling as it is frustrating. Rey turns in another low-key but strong performance, while the two-actress trick is efficient. A very satisfying film overall. It overcomes its flaws and emerges as a largely entertaining masterwork.

A horny old(er) man is repeatedly turned down by a young(er) manipulative woman (or more to the point, a cock-tease), all the while terrorists proceed to literally blow up their bourgeois world. This is the refusal of sexual gratification, the denial of the consummation of sexual desire, in film form. Rey as Mathieu and Carole Bouquet/Ángela Molina as Conchita are entirely convincing as the lustful man and virginal woman. Buñuel's decision as to when Conchita appears naked is masterful.

Brilliant skewering of the entire genre. It's been called sexist, but I disagree - both genders come out petty and obsessed.

After the regressive Phantom of Liberty, Buñuel finishes strong with a penetrating and evocative exploration of human desire. The seemingly absurd backdrop of terrorism aptly weaves in and out of the film's foreground concerns.

I'm sort of not sure how much I really like this film, as one part of my brain admires it for what it is, yet another similarly sized part of my brain tells me Bunuel is just fucking with me. I was enjoying it at first, with the unraveling of this story being affective, though two different actresses playing the same role for no reason (other than production issues) took more from the film than it gave, and towards the end the romance becomes as annoying as your friends'.

Luis Buñuel's swan song is an intriguing film bolstered by the good main cast, which includes two actresses in the same role, a choice that is interesting even if their alternation isn't necessarily timed in any distinctly meaningful way, and the engaging story, which plays with your expectations and pulls off a subversive if not totally unpredictable twist towards the end. The symbolic aspects of the plot are not completely weightless but feel unexploited and a little limp compared to the rest.

# 354

okay it's somehow revolutionary that he uses two actress for the same character, there is nothing surreal concerning cinematography

I don't really get it, but it left me with lots of things to think about. And it was definitely entertaining. I've only seen two Buñuel movies but I'm becoming a fan, especially considering when these movies were made. I mean... Belle De Jour was made in 1967!!

Bunuel's marvelous idea of having two different actresses play the same role gives a whole new twist to this old story (first filmed with Dietrich) of sexual obsession.

w/ Gamze & Buket

Couple this with Lacan and a film like "Phantom Thread" and you have the utmost truthful lesson about human self-deception. The desire is never there to fulfill itself, we desire inasmuch as to rekindle the cycle and dialectic of desire once again, through petty obstacles. Desire is to have the ability to desire again -and for ever. The real anxiety is loss of this ability to desire; self-deception is the fantasy we project upon the obstacles; as if "this one" will fulfill us, but will it ever?

430

The parallels between internal and external conflicts, the level of humor, the level of drama...What a film! When I found out that there were two women playing one character I instantly began to doubt this film, but it works perfectly. I don't want to spoil anything, but I think the sum of the dynamism it created eclipsed even what Bunuel envisioned himself. I don't think I've ever seen the wonderfully horrible terror of love played out better on film in all of its ridiculous glory.

Fernando Rey is a great man.

84.00

Buñuel has a unique side to all his films, This one included. But it's not as cheaky and overwhelming as some of his other works. Still, there are some incredible scenes, some making you want to strangle the girl - others making you to worship her. Which is a refreshing mix of emotions.

ger; [Dieses obskure Objekt der Begierde]; ein älterer mann erzählt seinen mitreisenden wie er eine junge frau kennenlernte - es ist eine geschichte von anziehung und ablehnung.;

"That obscure desire to penetrate" is a more fitting title. First half is really interesting, but by the second half the direction becomes obvious and repetetive. Compelling character study from Bunuel as usual. If we assume Fernando Rey's characters throughout Bunuel films are all but one, that man of a heartless wolf has fallen under the spell as he got older.

watched: 2011, 2015

One of the best of Bunuel's normal movies, in my opinion. Of course, "normal" is relative for Bunuel, seeing as this one has two different actresses playing the same characters. It's gimmicky (though, by some accounts, not intentional) but it works to great effect. The whole movie works, and is technically superior to most of Bunuel's other movies as well.

Lindo!

"From Un Chien Andalou to That Obscure Object of Desire, Luis Buñuel spent almost 50 years cataloging the frustrated romantic desires of his characters." - Ed Gonzalez

Dieu nous sauver de la traîtrise des femmes diable.

Watched this for the second time with an almost constant smirk on my face. The overall feel that Buñuel creates is at the same time comically, sexually and psychologically engaging; moulding the three aspects into a personality which in the film takes the form of a character, fantastically played by Fernando Rey.

Thematically relevant even today.

483

A last skewed mirror show about himself and about all our lives and about movies, with some text and story and actors as excuses. And a beautiful, touching ending with a bloodied and torn cloth being mended in a store display, and "a little music to get our minds off our troubles". Amusing, light as a feather, and deeper and more telling than most of the heavies. Petit mysteres galore.

Compelling and entertaining, maybe my favorite Bunuel. I'm not sure I really get what he's trying to say here, but the movie is interesting and the decision to cast two actresses in the same part is fascinating, though I'm not really sure I understand the reason for it other than being different. Also not really sure about the ending, but it's a good film.

As our desires become intertwined with the affection love demands, one is deceived by both sides of the Real object at hand. This hedonistic drive is beyond conscious capabilities and prevents even simple recall of the true other that is greatly desired.

Last 30 minutes or so of this are amazing.

#519

I see it as a movie about domination and how you can terrorize others with your own weapons: Mathieu as a rich man who repeatedly allows himself in Conchita's life and dominate her with his money. Conchita who plays with Mathieu's desire and cages him with it, playing with her youth and beauty. While the terrorists in the background are using their weapons for (probably) political reasons and are repeatedly in the news, looming over the normal bourgeois lives.

Two different actresses play the role of the pursued woman. Bouquet and Molina switch off throughout, never with a flourish nor following any readily discernible pattern. Bunuel's deftness means the cinematic tactic underscores and enriches his themes, emphasizing the woman's elusiveness. What's more, it creates the sense that the woman herself is unimportant; it's the idea of her that has captured the man, and that lack of meaningful investment is the reason why he will never truly have her.

Pretty depressing with small touches of black comedy.