The Exterminating Angel (1962)

To contact us Click HERE

courtesy of cinephilefix.wordpress.com

As many times as I went to bars when I was in college, I only remember actually staying until closing time once. In Pennsylvania, bars close at 2-2:30 and, while I typically wouldn't just go home and go to sleep, I could never see the reason to stay until they were locking the doors and sweeping the floors. But, one night late in my college life, a group of friends and I stayed out 'till the end, singing "Piano Man" with arms linked while chairs were being put up on tables. It wasn't like we planned it - we just never left before then. When we realized they were closing, we all walked back to one of our houses and played "Scene It"...at 3 AM...seriously.
Always the critic of the upper class, director Luis Buñuel offered a surrealist look at the bourgeois lifestyle and the sin of social acceptance in 1962's The Exterminating Angel. Taking place in Mexico City, the film centers around Edmundo and Lucia Nobile (Enrique Rambal and Lucy Gallardo) as they throw a dinner party for some local upper class players. At the beginning of the party, the majority of the staff and servants mysteriously leave under secretive pretenses, leaving the party with dwindling food and drink. By early the next morning, the hosts begin to wonder why no one has left the party yet. As the guests cozy up for what can only be described as a slumber party, the class slowly deteriorates and it becomes apparent that this is not just a case of people deciding to spend the night - no one can leave this house or this room for reasons that can't be determined.

As you can expect, the longer these seemingly well mannered individuals are stuck in this room, the more the politeness breaks down and the demons begin to arise. The underlying hatred these people feel for each other and their growing distrust begins to take form, whether melodramatically or simply. Not only that, but we have two servants in the room - one taking the role of a patient helped/leader, the other turning to rage to fight back against an unjust system that has forged a hatred of these people for many years. All the while, police look on that mansion, refusing to make any effort to free them, as the whole concept alone is ridiculous. It seems, without the ability to stomp on the working class, these rich folk are left to their own nonexistent devices.
Buñuel is one of cinema's most gifted directors in terms of the surreal, never needing to rest on the need for narrative structure or explanation. His film debut was the famed short Un Chien Andalou, which is essentially a bewildering visual nightmare, based mostly on the dreams of he and artist Salvador Dali. He then moved on to feature length films with L'Age d'Or, where he added a hazy plot that involved a man and a woman trying to consummate their marriage, only to be prevented time and time again. The Exterminating Angel, though grasping dearly to a very thin plot, sits in the same pantheon with his two early films, while also pairing nicely with his 1972 Oscar winner, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, the story of a group of upper class citizens who never can meet for dinner, as opposed to never being able to leave. Among all the surrealist tendencies, Buñuel's films all seem to have a need for criticism of the class system, whether it's from a political, economical, or religious standpoint. The Exterminating Angel, while suffering through some slow-moving moments, still gives birth to plenty discussion points. At some point in the film, you stop caring why they can't cross the threshold into the kitchen or foyer and start focusing on the veiled personas that begin to come down. We see some falling ill (which may be a nice bit of respite for them). We see some pointing fingers and placing blame. We see some trying to mediate, only to eventually get pulled into minor arguments that turn into much larger ones. This room full of molehills is slowly turning into a mountain range.

courtesy of cinespect.com

What gets lost (possibly deliberately) is the family aspect of these people. A number of these couples have children and, while they show early concern, that concern eventually disappears. We even meet a few of the children, who don't seem too broken up about the situation either. While this lack of relationship may be a pointed overstatement of a self-involved higher class, it takes a lot of the emotional context out of it. Buñuel isn't making a family drama, but he certainly doesn't have a problem skirting some pretty heavy topics in favor of his own sociopolitical grudges.

While The Exterminating Angel isn't really meant to "go anywhere" in terms of narrative, it never seems to go anywhere in any other way either. It's a brilliant idea that has been imitated in a number of ways by more recent films, but Buñuel's groundbreaking film doesn't actually point out anything that isn't relatively obvious. It doesn't matter how much money you have, when put in "survival" mode, even you will behave like an animal if the situation calls for it. Yes, it touches on some themes critical of the Catholic church and organized societal tropes, but never to the point beyond "hey, that does make sense, now that you think of it." Without some extra research post-viewing, it's entirely possible to miss every point Buñuel is trying to make.

Outside of maybe David Lynch, successful filmmakers like Luis Buñuel don't really exist anymore. Buñuel made his fair share of more traditional (though slightly off-center) films (Belle du Jour is a brilliant film), but he mostly marched to the beat of his own drum and didn't care who he offended or confused. Anti-establishment directors are a dime a dozen nowadays and have many more failures than successes, but that type of gung-ho, hyper-stylistic practice gives the world films like Mullholland Dr. or Amelie. So, while I may not enjoy The Exterminating Angel or Eraserhead, I at least respect and appreciate an attempt of making something incredibly personal and no-holds-barred, rather than another low-rate Katherine Heigl rom com.

SHOULD YOU SEE IT: Possibly