MovieChat Forums > The Young One (1961) Discussion > Bunuel's forgotten masterpiece

Bunuel's forgotten masterpiece

posted 19 years ago by nedhorn
23 replies | jump to latest

I saw this on TV at 3am about 25 years ago. And when it was over I wondered if I has briefly been transported into an alternate world. I thought I had seen all of Bunuel's later work, but here was a powerfull movie (in English!) with a strong, tight narrative, that dated from the start of his great run of masterpieces (just a year later he directed Viridiana), which I had never heard of, with a strong, non-stereotyped black protagonist (made in the 60's!). Those who think of Bunuel only as a great surrealist have to see this. It is a revelation.

The thesis of the movie is also fascinating and, I think, very profound: racism is a form of transference of guilt, a way of avoiding facing our own inner criminality. And the solution is to recognize and come to terms with the demons inside ourselves. Although much is left unresolved, this is Bunuel's last movie to have a humanistic sense of hope (albeit with a slightly deSadean edge).

At least, that is how I remember it a quarter of a century later. Has anyone seen this movie around lately? It seems to have dropped of the edge of the world.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jettloe 17 years ago

Have just watched - finished it moments ago. Have seen Bunuel's 'famous' films - never heard of the Young One.

It's a friggin' masterpiece.

I was astounded right from the beginning - nedhorn is right = you are transported into another world. The photography! The shots! The intense yet naturalistic acting.

All in a perfect 90 minutes.

___________
Jett Loe
lta.worldcriminal.com

[–] clockwork_orange2001 17 years ago

If I remember correctly, I believe, Bunuel really disliked this film. I thought it was pretty good myself. Some of the acting could've been improved, but the external shots and images were terrific and shocking (i.e. gutting out rabbit; racoon killing and eating the chicken). It's definitely an overlooked gem from Bunuel.

"I think that silent films got a lot more things right than talkies." --Stanley Kubrick

[–] FilmTx 17 years ago

It was one of Bunuel's favorites.

[–] Mike_Bunuel 17 years ago

This is an excellent film and I still think it's one of the best American films to deal with race, especially at the time it was released against all that silly Hollywood liberalism (I'm thinking of "To Kill a Mockingbird" especially). And like the above poster said, he was quite fond of this film.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Well I never thought of Luis as a pessimist and his films utterly devoid of hope. I mean there's a bit of hope in all his films but most people can't see it because they have a fixed image of Bunuel.

that dated from the start of his great run of masterpieces (just a year later he directed Viridiana),

Well Bunuel made great masterpieces in the 50s as well...Los Olvidados, The Criminal Life of Archibaldo de la Cruz, the incomparable Nazarin, and then El as well as Robinson Crusoe and The Young One his two films in English.

His period in Mexico is a fascinating and still undiscovered period of his career and it's not a barren blank spot that is to be dismissed. It's a period that reveals a deep complex artist who with the freedom of his final years changed everybody's idea of cinema.

People dissapear ever day...everytime you leave the room - The Passenger

[–] shroomn 16 years ago

This guy has very little imitators going on in a lot of American cinema. I was curious if anyone has better knowledge on modern Mexican cinema? Has Buñuel's influences carried over to any 'children' of cinema?

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Bunuel was a fairly big influence on Brazilian directors like Glauber Rocha, Nelson Perreirra dos Santos and the current master of Mexican Cinema and one-time friend, Arturo Ripstein. Bunuel's The Criminal Life of Archibaldo de la Cruz was a big influence on the French New Wave and so were his other movies. Cahiers du Cinema recognized his genius from Los Olvidados onwards. Tha film was Bunuel's comeback and it influenced Nicholas Ray's Rebel Without A Cause(but of course differently since the characters in the Ray movie are way better off than the kids of Bunuel).

This guy has very little imitators going on in a lot of American cinema.

So does Rabelais and Diderot for that matter. But one American director who is quite similar to Bunuel(even with regard to working habits) is Samuel Fuller. Fuller admired Bunuel greatly. They came from entirely different backgrounds but they both share a very critical intelligence with regards to the status-quo and both were savagely iconoclastic even if they betrayed a belief in the ideals and values being corrupted.

Some will say David Lynch but then the key thing most people don't understand about Bunuel was that he(at least after L'Age d'Or made so early in his career) was a very rational director, very sober and what makes his movies so off-putting is the fact that the absurd scenes are presented with realism and not treated with any shock. Bunuel shoots the dreams and fantasies in the same way he shoots the other scenes.

Alfred Hitchcock was also a big admirer of Bunuel but I don't think he was influenced by him. He gave a homage to Un Chien Andalou in the Dali-inspired dream sequence of Spellbound but that's it. I think Hitchcock appreciated a kindred spirit with Bunuel more than anything else.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] shroomn 16 years ago

Appreciate the response. I think I am pretty well read in most American and European film lit. so I was aware of Hitchcock's appreciation and David Lynch's "unlearning" of Buñuel's early material. I should have specified my question to pertain to Buñuel's later and more sober work (which I prefer greatly to his more surreal pieces) Though Exterminating and Belle de jour is on the top of my list still.

However, those listed Brazilian talents I have yet to even break into. Samuel Fuller on the other hand I have seen his work but never have I guessed a connection to Bunuel. Now i have to watch more of his stuff. That is awesome! Oh and the Ray comments are spot on for me too - I saw the connection thematically but never realized it was so literal since Bunuel gained a comeback from it! Glad you are in the parties who realize the underlying difference between Lynch and Bunuel without just saying it is different. It is as simple as the shooting structure. For me it is like a reversal of how Fellini shoots everything like a flamboyant and sensuous dream, even the real scenes in his case.

I always felt that Bergman was like an evil brother of Bunuel. Bergman whose work can take years to crack seems a bit easier to understand in comparison to Bunuel for me so far.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

I should have specified my question to pertain to Buñuel's later and more sober work (which I prefer greatly to his more surreal pieces) Though Exterminating and Belle de jour is on the top of my list still.

It's okay. One of the main misunderstandings people have of Bunuel is related to the misunderstanding of surrealisme outside France. In France, surrealisme means super realism just like surnaturalism means supernaturalism. Part of the aim was to approach man and the modern world as if they were as unreal as trolls, dwarfs and giants. Not to glorfiy mankind but to show how utterly grotesque people allow themselves to be. Basically surrealisme like all artistic movements attempted to deal with internal and external reality. It's just that it's form didn't fit conventional people's idea of what real life is supposed to be.

However, those listed Brazilian talents I have yet to even break into.

Well don't mistake me as an expert or anything. I've seen a few of their movies that's all.

Samuel Fuller on the other hand I have seen his work but never have I guessed a connection to Bunuel. Now i have to watch more of his stuff.

Well try Shock Corridor, The Naked Kiss, and of course the first avant-guarde Western, 40 Guns. It's just that both directors share a similar sensitivity towards iconoclasm and betray an anarchic spirit. And both directors also worked very fast, often with low budgets and many times only shot one take. Bunuel was different in that unlike Fuller he favoured non-diegetic music and did not like musical scores, and Bunuel isn't that big into the acrobatic tracking shots that Fuller likes very much.

The other similarity is that they also have a very unique sense of humour. It's similar to Nathanael West's novels, where you can't separate comedy, tragedy and horror sometimes all at once. Like Cet Obscur Objet du Desir, Bunuel's last film(and in my opinion his best film) is really a romantic comedy or the closest his movies comes to romantic comedy but it's also so violent and disturbing.

Since the boards are The Young One, this film you might say is Bunuel's most Fulleresque film while The Naked Kiss is Fuller's most Bunuelian. Of course I don't know if Bunuel saw any of Fuller's films. The two did meet up in the 70's and seem to have gotten along well.

I always felt that Bergman was like an evil brother of Bunuel. Bergman whose work can take years to crack seems a bit easier to understand in comparison to Bunuel for me so far.

Bergman's very different from Bunuel, almost anti-thetical to Luis. The only common link is that both are fixated with religion. Of course Bergman managed to get that out of his chest with The Silence and went secular after that. Bunuel on the other hand betrayed an underlying religious sensibility right unto La Fantome de la Liberte for all his "Thank-God-I'm-An-Atheist" talk.

The thing is that Bergman was able to deal with his themes directly. That is sexual neurosis, crisis-of-faith, emotional violence in relationships, death and emptiness is there directly in his films. Bunuel would have made The Seventh Seal into a kind of comedy. Actually, there are a lot of comic scenes in The Seventh Seal but whenever death enters the frame it's very serious while Bunuel would have made death into a kind of court jester with the serious bits reserved for the rest of society.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] shroomn 16 years ago

In regards to Bergman that is precisely what I mean as an evil brother of sorts. I think technically and in approach they are very serious it just boils down to how they represent similar themes. Have you seen The Devil's Eye? Bergman's sense of comedy in the matter of Death is quite similar to what you imagined though of course not The Seventh Seal.

[–] Kinematico 16 years ago

I am agree with the fellow who said that Buñuel is anti-thetical to Bergman.
Somebody also mentioned Ripstein as another "similar" director. Nothing farther from the true. Ripstein raw, somber realism let no place for "surrealism".

But I can understand why some people could consider some movies directed by those and other directors, somehow similar to Buñuel.
The problem is that there are not one single Buñuel but MANY Buñuels. I mean some people relates Buñuel ONLY with his "hardcore surrealist" films like un chien andalou or Simón del desierto; but don Luis also shot melodramas (Susana), screwball comedies (El gran calavera), psychological thrillers (Él), dark comedies (Ensayo de un crimen), Neorealist-like films (Los olvidados), costumbrist and social dramas (El río y la muerte), adventure films (Robinson Crusoe) etc.

So there you have plenty of options to compare Buñuel with other directors. Watch Los olvidados and the references to the works by De Sica or Rosellini are inevitable.
Watch "Él" (This Strange Passion) and Hitchcock may come to your mind, etc.

However there is a thread that unites all the movies by Buñuel. From his more surrealist works to the apparently surrealism-free films like Gran Casino. Watch them all and you'll find that thread.

Hint? What on earth is doing a trio of mariachi players (hats included) singing cheerfully in the jail?
How come a woman asks god for a miracle in order to escape from a prison and immediately a lightning flashes and the woman can easily remove the jail's window?
How come a cat has kittens when it's the only cat on the Island? The Holy Ghost?
Why some dude goes mad when he hears some particular tune from a music box?
And why the chickens and bugs appears almost always in his movies in the most unexpected ways? What about his leg fetishim?
I could go on forever, but it's not necessary I think.

IMO this is why Buñuel was such a great director. He din't make the same movie again and again. He could make movies with a extremely low budget and still to deliver a masterwork, or to work with the top bill stars delivering the same results. He could touch any subject or genre delivering always a good film. He didn't shot sci-fi nor horror films but I bet he could have done a hell of a sci-fi/horror movie if he really wanted.

Cheerios!

[–] zurichpoet 16 years ago

Buñuel could always bring it. Great. I saw some of him in Man Ray's work. The sense of poetic imagery. But Bunuel has much more range, of course.

I will check this one out, too!

Thanks!

[–] thao 16 years ago

Yes this is a fantastic film, almost perfect. The only problem is the acting (in some places).

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

[–] zurichpoet 16 years ago

I take it as Buñuel directing more to the idea of the scene in most of his movies, rather than a certain emotion which leads to certain actors appearing off.

[–] maneatingbear 15 years ago

This film seemed unprecidented to me in its exploration of racism. Traver is by far the most sympathetic character in the film and the one you're rooting for from beginning to end. Sidney Poitier was playing heroic characters around the same time, but, unlike Traver, they could be almost unrealistic in their lack of human flaws. I also think it is interesting that it is not entirely condeming of Miller, though he is a pedophile. Even today, it would be very rare to show a pedophile in this sympathetic of a light. Still for his sick perversity, racism, lack of moral guilt and mean temper, it's kind of difficult to "like" Miller. This movie is in some ways an anomaly for Buñuel(to me) in some ways for it's lack of obvious surrealism, but in its exploration of the contradictions within humans, it's pure Buñuel.

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 15 years ago

MaSSimo Girotti told my uncle many years ago that this was Luis only film influenced by his great love of Howdy Doody. I know it sounds like a stretch, but influentially forgotten today.

Nothing is more beautiful than nothing.

[–] maryborrege 15 years ago

It seems the director of this film didn't appreciate professional actors. Zachary Scott was a skilled Hollywood actor and did try to give a "performance" but Bunuel kept thwarting his attempt in retake after retake:

"He told me in the beginning I was too camera wise, and to forget all about that. When I couldn't, he told me the wrong things to do until I managed to look awkward enought to suit him."

The rest of the cast were non professionals and it was apparent. Especially "The young One'.

[–] teejay6682 15 years ago

i thought "the young one'' was a great movie. maybe not my fav bunuel but up there. loved the acting, the locations and complexity morality.

[–] OliverBagshaw 13 years ago

I managed to pick up this film on DVD, region 2, very recently actually via the Luis Bunuel boxset. It's a great film.

[–] filmscholar35 13 years ago

Me,too!

Is that not a GREAT box set? The best investment I ever made was when I got a multi-region player several years ago. I now have three multi-region players and a big fancy Sony blu ray player. I pretty much watch everything on the blu ray except international discs, which are the only thing I play on the multi-region player.

Anyway, there is nothing currently available in the US that remotely resembles the deal you get on that R2 box set.

I paid just $60 on amazon, and got:

The Young One, The Diary of a Chambermaid, Belle de Jour, The Milky Way, Tristana, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgoisie, The Phantom of Liberty, and That Obscure Object of Desire.

All in wonderful, restored transfers, too.

It was a STEAL, I tell you...

[–] BwlBoy 10 years ago

In my opinion a masterpiece should be classed as the defining work in a director's filmography. There is no way you can rank this film as Bunuel's defining work so I think the term is misrepresented here. My motivation for seeing it was due to its appearance in a book of 1001 movies to see before you die. I found it quite disturbing that the critique in the book describes the film as a taut comedy thriller. It is an exploitative and menacing film with a contrived "happy" ending.

[–] Errington_92 9 years ago

My motivation for seeing it was due to its appearance in a book of 1001 movies to see before you die. I found it quite disturbing that the critique in the book describes the film as a taut comedy thriller. It is an exploitative and menacing film with a contrived "happy" ending.

I also watched The Young One as it appears in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die and I have seen Bunuel's earlier Surrealist films. I agree with you that the description of The Young One as a comedy-thriller is incorrect. However, I would not say The Young One is exploitative or that it has a "contrived happy ending". Although it looks simplistic to modern audiences, the theme of racism in 1960 would certainly be provocative in challenging American society's acceptance of Jim Crow laws and segregation. This is where I disagree with your description of a "contrived happy ending". Despite the condemnation of racism against Traver by the Preacher and Miller's change in attitude, in the end Traver still to run from a proposed lynch mob and it is indicated Miller will be outcasted by local residents for helping Traver.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not.