Viridiana (1961) - film review

Before taking her vows, a novice nun,Viridiana, visits her only living relative, her uncle, Don Jaime, who lives alone on his large country estate. Don Jaime is struck by Viridiana’s resemblance to his wife, who died on their wedding night years ago, and attempts to coerce Viridiana into staying with him.  When she refuses, he commits suicide.  Guilty, Viridiana returns to the country house, which she inherits along with Don Jaime’s illegitimate son, Jorge.  Whilst Jorge attempts to renovate the estate, Viridiana rounds up some lame paupers and provides a home for them in an outhouse.  Whilst Jorge and Viridiana are away, the paupers repay their benefactor’s kindness by holding a bawdy dinner party in Jorge’s house...

Few would disagree that Viridiana is one of Luis Buñuel’s best films, combining the stunning cinematography and surreal black comedy for which the Spanish director is best known.  The film was also one of his most controversial, being banned in Spain immediately after it won the Palme d’Or at the Cannes film festival, and creating a scandal in Italy, where an order was issued for Buñuel’s arrest if ever he set foot in the country.

It is not difficult to see why the film would upset Catholic sensibilities.  The famous last supper scene, where a group of disabled paupers re-enact a debauched version of the famous biblical painting by Da Vinci, is one of Buñuel’s most flagrant attacks on Catholic hypocrisy.  This scene, and much of what precedes it, shows that poverty or ill-fate is no barrier to moral corruption: the poor can behave just as badly, if not worse, than the most fortunate, given half a chance, in strict contrast to the teachings of Christ, which are based to a great extent on the nobility of poverty.

Viridiana’s own small attempts to do good are a spectacular failure compared with Jorge’s lesser attempts, the difference being that Viridiana is doing good as a conscious effort to follow her religious beliefs, whereas Jorge is governed by basic humanitarian responses (for example, the scene where he rescues an ill-treated dog).  Examples like this about Buñuel’s perceived flaws in Catholic teaching abound in this film, culminating in an almost heretical ending.

Honest the film may be; subtle, it is not.

© James Travers 2001

Write a review for this film...

What do you think of this film?