The Discreet Charm Of The Bourgeoisie (Le Charme Discret de la Bourgeoisie) (1972)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Randy T

  
  Luis Buñuel is an acquired taste that I sometimes have trouble acquiring. His films can be a little cryptic and transcendent (or confusing and pompous - depending on your point of reference). <i>The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie</i> is an exercise in precise… More
  Luis Buñuel is an acquired taste that I sometimes have trouble acquiring. His films can be a little cryptic and transcendent (or confusing and pompous - depending on your point of reference). <i>The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie</i> is an exercise in precise meandering that will either pull you along by your belt loops or leave you standing befuddled in its wake.

• Aditya G

  
  The master of surrealism, Luis Bunuel was about 72 when he made this fantastic film, "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie". It is literally a wet "dream" come true for all those film buffs who like their movies full of oneiric imagery with random occurrences… More
  The master of surrealism, Luis Bunuel was about 72 when he made this fantastic film, "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie". It is literally a wet "dream" come true for all those film buffs who like their movies full of oneiric imagery with random occurrences that, although set in a real world, do not make much sense! [img]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-QPuPIvZ0suA/TtTp7_KJOjI/AAAAAAAACG4/jONi9T9T_P8/s576/vlcsnap-2011-11-29-19h40m48s112.jpg[/img] It must be clear enough now, that there is no single plot to make this film a whole. Rather it is a collection of confounding events in the life of six central characters of the bourgeois class, including two married couples, who happen to be friends. Most events revolve around their repeatedly thwarted attempts to sit down to have a leisurely meal together! The world in Bunuel's film, although real, isn't very logical either. Several seemingly bizarre events are accepted as "normal" with a rather straight face by the characters, which adds to the many qualities of Bunuel's surreal vision. [img]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-iy4TR3jgzwk/TtTp7kgoObI/AAAAAAAACG8/5RacvLEya4M/s576/vlcsnap-2011-11-29-19h37m44s66.jpg[/img] Relating some of the strangest and best events in the film in this review will do disservice to the first time viewer, but assuming that a mention of a couple of other events will only entice the reader to watch the film, instead of spoiling the fun, I think I can safely mention them. The group of the aforementioned six people are walking down a long stretch of an open road on a sunny day. This scene is repeated throughout the film and randomly interspersed with other events in the film. Then in one scene, the three ladies of the group sit down in a restaurant to have some tea. The waiter later comes and tells them that it is unavailable. The cycle continues, as later, no matter what they order, the waiter comes back after a few minutes and informs them that they are "out of it". In the midst of this, a complete stranger, a sad-looking Lieutenant in a uniform, comes to their table, relates a ghostly tale from his childhood and walks away. The ladies don't seem to be express much disbelief upon hearing the odd tale either! [img]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-PH3Xb8Gnc8k/TtTp76XJzmI/AAAAAAAACHM/iYIIH22RHvE/s576/vlcsnap-2011-11-29-19h41m04s14.jpg[/img] Suffice to say, that this is one of Luis Bunuel's best films in which he puts together such amazing episodes that will make you smile in disbelief! The episodes are sometimes disturbing, yet most of the times they are comic. But the comedy comes from the general irrationality of it all; the events are not "funny" in the conventional sense. The stranger it gets, the better it gets, and there is literally no end, as Bunuel subjects the audience to one great scene after other, some laced with wry humour, and some others revealing the hypocrisy of the bourgeois. Fine performances come from almost all of the cast, in which their behavior reflects the eccentricity of the event at hand! They don't really act normal or rational! Some scenes are ultimately revealed to be dreams, but there are yet others which are still off-the-wall yet not revealed to be either dream or reality. If nothing else this film will reveal Bunuel's wide range of imagination where the surrealism doesn't go wild all the way into another world (like in some Terry Gilliam films). Bunuel shows that twisting some reality in the real world can be just as weird and an even better experience than the outlandish, unrealistic universe in which some other filmmakers set their films. Luis Bunuel accomplished at 72 what most other young filmmakers still struggle to do. He made a perfect film for us hungry viewers who seek unconventional cinema! And yet at the same time, Bunuel seems to be having fun himself by subjecting us audiences to his spectacular imagination and having a good laugh at our perplexity. The Academy Award was well-deserved. The jury must have had a ball and handed over the trophy without further thought. Go for it! Super fun and a good mind-fuck is guaranteed! Score: 10/10

• Spencer S

  
  The mere title of this satiric view of the upper crust spells out Luis Bunuels surrealistic take on the subject of the rich and particularly petty: the bourgeoisie. Supplementing an interesting cast with a cynical stance, Bunuel spices up the tragic circumstances of lust, greed, and… More
  The mere title of this satiric view of the upper crust spells out Luis Bunuels surrealistic take on the subject of the rich and particularly petty: the bourgeoisie. Supplementing an interesting cast with a cynical stance, Bunuel spices up the tragic circumstances of lust, greed, and sloth with gorey and/or unobtrusive dreams which are basic human fears and people's undoing. Eclectic, but not particularly funny, it's not only a piece of art, but a interest propaganda film on what's acceptable in our society.

• Carlos M

  
  A surrealistic comedy of discreet humor, you will hardly laugh but mostly feel embarrassed for all the petty bourgeois characters. Once again, Buñuel smartly plays with his film's structure, this time casting a slyly provocative, cynical view on society.

• First L

  
  Combine the surrealism of David Lynch with the absurdism of Monty Python, and you get an approximation of this movie. There isn't really a plot here, but some things happen, which I will describe to the best of my ability. The ambassador from the country of Miranda attempts to… More
  Combine the surrealism of David Lynch with the absurdism of Monty Python, and you get an approximation of this movie. There isn't really a plot here, but some things happen, which I will describe to the best of my ability. The ambassador from the country of Miranda attempts to enjoy a dinner with friends, but there always seems to be some interruption to keep them from enjoying their meal. The ambassador also happens to be a drug smuggler, and is in constant threat of assassination by guerillas from Miranda. Meanwhile, the Bishop comes round to the friends' house and announces he'd like to be their gardener. A soldier stops the women in a little cafe (where they've run out of everything but water), to tell the story of how he murdered his stepfather, and then walks away. The last third of the movie seems to be a series of dream sequences, where each of the party guests dreams of murders and arrests. Apart from a few vignettes, the movie isn't very interesting (and I really hate to oversell the surrealism, which doesn't show up really until the last third of the movie), and neither are the performances. It's only memorable in that it will someday vex you to try and remember the title of "that one weird french movie".

• Ken S

  
  Fascinating, sometimes infuriating but always surreal masterwork by Bunuel.

• Pierluigi P

  
  Buñuel sets a bizarre and hilarious surreal black comedy about a bunch of decadent living deads. as usual, full of surprises from start to finish.

• Tim S

  
  I don't get it.....at all....any of it!

• Cindy I

  
  This is my 3rd Luis Bunuel film in as many months, after Viridiana and Exterminating Angel, and I'm lost as a goose. Am I missing something? I keep expecting these films to wrap things up at the end, not necessarily normally but with some kind of closure. But all these seem like… More
  This is my 3rd Luis Bunuel film in as many months, after Viridiana and Exterminating Angel, and I'm lost as a goose. Am I missing something? I keep expecting these films to wrap things up at the end, not necessarily normally but with some kind of closure. But all these seem like they ended because Bunuel just ran out of film and said "OK. That's good enough." I keep feeling like I fell asleep during the film and woke up just before the end. I keep reading that these films are hilarious. I don't find scenes of ghosts and revenge killings and bloodied bodies particularly mirthful. Can somebody help me "get it"?

• Elvira B

  
  Not even nearly as good as The Exterminating Angel, but still impossible to miss! And yes, it won an Oscar, but that doesn't discredit it (although it must have bothered Bunuel, I'm sure). Sr. Bunuel presents us with totally despicable characters in odd situations, torturing… More
  Not even nearly as good as The Exterminating Angel, but still impossible to miss! And yes, it won an Oscar, but that doesn't discredit it (although it must have bothered Bunuel, I'm sure). Sr. Bunuel presents us with totally despicable characters in odd situations, torturing the heck out of them. It's a joy to watch -the absurdity, the hypocrisy, the drama, all the things he disliked of the alleged bourgeoisie are here ridiculed. All performances are just right, especially Fernando Rey and Delphine Seyrig. The dialogue is, naturally, razor-blade sharp and good enough by itself. Many scenes hold a great resemblance to theatrical montages, considering also that they mostly take place around a dinner table. Bunuel also incorporated dream sequences and bits of non-linear narrative by the end to enhance the characters' paranoia. This is the story of a group of friends who are doomed to never have a pleasant meal.

• Byron B

  
  Rey stands in for Bunuel as a Hispanic ambassador living amongst the French middle class. There are many occasions to poke fun at the manners and habits of these six upper-middle class friends. A gardener priest comes to work for the Senechals and shows how well he fits with their… More
  Rey stands in for Bunuel as a Hispanic ambassador living amongst the French middle class. There are many occasions to poke fun at the manners and habits of these six upper-middle class friends. A gardener priest comes to work for the Senechals and shows how well he fits with their style of life despite being a servant himself in a way. The servants of a few of the friends demonstrate the class distinction. And a troop of soldiers including a strange Colonel with dreams he must tell people also pop into the lives of the Bourgeoisie. With all the dream segments and dreams within dreams as well as ghosts, crack and bloody faces it is hard to get one's bearings. That is surrealism for you, but I guess I'm more traditional when it comes to what I like in a narrative.

• Ryan M

  
  9.1/10 There's something that's always bothered me about Hollywood movies, yet it's something that I never knew bothered me until now. The thing that irritates, troubles, and challenges me is the fact that almost all Hollywood films - good or bad - must… More
  9.1/10 There's something that's always bothered me about Hollywood movies, yet it's something that I never knew bothered me until now. The thing that irritates, troubles, and challenges me is the fact that almost all Hollywood films - good or bad - must have a point; they must make sense. They have a narrative that's genuinely easy to follow, they usually tend to have characters that we like and can relate to. I don't mind this, but then again, it's like I said; it bothers me the slightest bit, and that's good enough for me. I bring this up at this moment because Luis Buñuel's "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" does not make sense; and it almost doesn't have much of a point beyond existence. It's a peculiar film that is meant to confuse; but through trickery, not through muddled screen-writing. The filmmaker must enjoy seeing us scratch our heads with puzzled faces; and he must like it every time we do it. Buñuel is known for repeating himself in some of his movies, but only because people like this quality about the man. Now, "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" is about a group of bourgeois acquaintances who make several attempts to sit down and enjoy a nice dinner. The first attempt fails because they arrive at a time when the meal had not been planned or prepared. The second attempt is also not a success because the manager of the building which they would eat in had just passed away, that very moment. Man, I could go on-and-on about how many times this grand dinner fails to ensue, but I won't spoil too much. "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" is a dish best served cold. You shouldn't know too much or too little about it. Hell, the only thing I personally believe you need to know about it when going in is that it's about people who sit down, multiple times, to eat, but never actually get down to it. Throughout the film, there are some fascinating talks and depictions of dreams. Within these dreams are ghosts and voices that taunt, but cannot be heard. I loved the scene in which a speaking solider tells the dinner guests of his dream, in which he walks a lonely city road, but cannot find anyone who he had wanted to see. There are many complications with these characters throughout the movie, although few of them are actually characterized as many would hope they would be. But this is not your average movie. In fact, no surrealist film should be. Buñuel is a master when it comes to recycling ideas and even premises, or styles, and making us interested all over again. His fans will love this film, and maybe, just maybe, so will newcomers. It's fascinating, and it's often times funny; and sometimes even startling. You know you're watching a one-of-a-kind film when the dinner guests find out they're on a stage, acting in front of an audience full of people, although the sequence later proves to be nothing more than a dream. Look. There's not much else I can say for this movie. It is what it is; well-written, well-directed trickery. The surrealism works, although it's not as extreme as I expected it to be. The visuals are not what matters here; what matters here, is ultimately, what the film wants to do and how much of that it accomplishes. Some may argue that it's not perfect, but I have a good counter-attack for that one: how is it not? The film is interesting, perhaps even intellectual. It is confusing, but decidedly so. It could not have been made any other way, and I openly love it as it is. This is a perfect movie; one of director Buñuel's best. See it because it exists, and because it's as good as it is, and there's really no other reasons beyond those.

• Alec B

  
  Probably one of the weirder films I've seen. As with most satire, its almost impossible to keep the momentum from start to finish, but with a few exceptions this film is hysterical and inspired.

• Lauren D

  
  I liked it, because it was weird. It didn't seem to take itself too seriously and the plot was interesting. But, it dragged at times.

• Ivan D

  
  I have a certain love-hate relationship with surrealist films, with the likes of "Inland Empire" and Godard's "Week End" I consider to be too pretentious, while some like "El Topo" and "Eraserhead" I highly regard. But Luis Bunuel's… More
  I have a certain love-hate relationship with surrealist films, with the likes of "Inland Empire" and Godard's "Week End" I consider to be too pretentious, while some like "El Topo" and "Eraserhead" I highly regard. But Luis Bunuel's "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" is on a different level, having its share of self-indulgent moments, while maintaining the sharp wit and sarcasm of its satiric nature, all the while being a critic on excessive lifestyles without taking itself too seriously. People that belong to the Bourgeois society, when portrayed in a darker light, can be the most irritating of film characters, but when took on stage to forcibly look at their own shortcomings that they hide with their material excesses, can be one of film lovers' secret pleasures to watch on celluloid: Let the self-obsessed hypocrites be deconstructed by some unknown force. But Bunuel, although making the film to be a major attack on the particular social class, did not finish the film laughing along with the audience; But more of like postponing the punchline of an insult joke. As shown in the film, when it's a dream, "kill them all!" and "humiliate the bastards!" can be some of the most recurring of proletariat battlecries, when fantasy fades and reality sets back, "absolve them of their sins" more like. Maybe having them miss some of their lavish lamb chops and caviars is enough. Surrealist film at its top form.

• Marion R

  
  I don't get it, I must be stupid or something.

Read all 16 featured audience ratings