Simon of the Desert

Audience Reviews

View More

Mix R @Foxxxy Apr 26 Proof that the best portrayals of Satan has been by women. See more Matthew B @RT07450941 09/17/2023 Two leading characteristics that can be found consistently throughout the career of Luis Buñuel are his love of surrealism, and his detestation of religion. When one thinks about it, the two themes go rather well together. Many of the beliefs and behaviours inspired by religion are positively surreal in themselves. Take the example of the fifth-century Syrian saint, Simeon Stylites, a man who was canonised for nothing more than his decision to stay on top of a high pillar for 37 years. What could be more absurd and futile than that? Such behaviour almost cries out for satire, and naturally it was Buñuel who supplied the necessary mockery. Buñuel's movie is about Simon of the Desert (Claudio Brook), the supposed son of Simeon, who has stayed up on his pedestal for six years, six weeks and six days at the time when the story begins. Six six six. Hm, no wonder the devil appears. Before that happens however, the locals wish to honour Simon for setting them an example with his devotion. A wealthy man whom Simon cured is ready to offer Simon an upgrade, an even bigger pillar for him to stand on. Simon comes across as a silly figure. Hungry and thirsty through deliberately depriving himself of food and drink, he cannot remember his prayers, and gets easily distracted. He breaks off his praises to God in order to mutter insults against a young monk, and to worry about the flies. He begins randomly blessing living creatures for the fun of it. He responds to temptation by standing on one leg for a time. Below Simon's pedestal is the pitiful figure of his mother (Hortensia Santoveña), wishing to stay near her son, even though he rebuffs her during his brief few moments on the ground when he passes from pillar to, well, bigger pillar, and then ignores her when he is settled into his new dwelling. Her martyrdom is just as foolish as his, but harder to condemn because she is a loving mother, and not a holy fool. Simon is not as indifferent as he seems. He fantasises about descending from his plinth and running across the sand with his mother. Still his willingness to put his obtuse interpretation of God's will over love for his mother seems cruel and misplaced. Early on, Simon performs the kind of miracle that is often used to discredit faith healers who lack this particular ability. A former thief, whose hands were chopped off, begs Simon to restore his hands. Simon does exactly that, but receives no thanks, as the couple go home to dig a hole. The new hands find a more immediate use when the thief cuffs his daughter on the back of her head. The most remarkable visitor to Simon is the Devil. As the song suggests, the Devil is a woman (Silvia Pinal), and a sexy one too. Appearing and disappearing in a roll of thunder, she wears a variety of revealing outfits, and flashes her breasts, backside and legs at Simon. She is wearing naughty suspenders too. The Devil sings blasphemous and insulting songs about Simon. She poses as God, and tells Simon to renounce his abstemious lifestyle, and become more wicked and worldly. Later Simon spies a coffin moving along the ground. The door to the coffin springs open to reveal the Devil lying inside. Finally we arrive at the famous and bizarre ending, as the Devil appears to Simon for the last time, and tells him to prepare for a journey. It is an ascension of sorts, but Simon is not raptured and sent to Heaven. He is instead whisked away in an aeroplane to a modern city, where he finds himself in Hell. This is not the Hell of Christian mythology, but a noisy, swinging nightclub where young people jig their bodies to a dance called Radioactive Flesh. Simon, now with his hair shorn and with a pipe in his mouth, looks like a depressed hipster, as he stares at the scene in bewilderment. What on earth does this ending mean? As Buñuel is a surrealist, we do not have to look for any precise symbolism. In less direct terms, the ending once more shows the absurdity of Simon's lifestyle, something that has no relevance to a contemporary age of nuclear threat, skyscrapers, and happy young people dancing to groovy music. The abrupt shift in settings may reflect budgetary problems in making the film. There seem to be conflicting stories about whether Buñuel had intended to film extra scenes and ran out of money, or whether the film was intended to be part of an anthology, but the other directors refused to contribute to the film. I cannot exactly say that Simon of the Desert is better for not having those missing scenes, as I do not know what the film would have been like if he had been able to include them. I can only say that the short movie seems satisfyingly complete in itself. Simon of the Desert is an amusing and provocative short work that never outstays its welcome. I wrote a longer appreciation of Simon of the Desert on my blog page if you would like to read more: https://themoviescreenscene.wordpress.com/2021/05/13/simon-of-the-desert-1965/ See more nefasto r @Nefasto 09/22/2021 Would have been great in the 60s. I get it. I just don't like it today. See more 02/15/2017 Simon of the Desert clocks in at barely 45 minutes, but it's still a sufficient, strange allegory about spiritual devotion and principles, pious prejudice, sleaze, and worldly things. See more 08/21/2015 F 8.3 [Luis Buñuel] [Mx] See more 03/22/2015 An interesting look at the downsides of religious extremism. See more Read all reviews

Simon of the Desert

My Rating

Read More Read Less WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW POST RATING