Few other directors would dare to equate the male libido with international terrorism, but the final feature by master surrealist Luis Buñuel is a dark comic web of sexual obsession (too dark to be truly funny) set against a background of random explosions and political assassinations. The always dapper Fernando Rey stars as a wealthy gentleman who develops an all-consuming infatuation for his young Spanish maid, who by turns tempts him, teases him, refuses him, and finally humiliates him. All Rey wants is to carry his passion to its logical conclusion, but her (deliberately?) unpredictable shifts in mood, from coy temptation to spiteful rejection, leave him in a state of dangerous frustration. Buñuel applies his usual sly wit to the otherwise cynical and pessimistic scenario (one man affectionately refers to women as "sacks of excrement"), going so far as to cast two completely different actresses in the title role and interchanging them at random. The film is at once perverse and disturbing, providing a suitably mordant swan song to a long and distinguished career in movie iconoclasm.

First I would like to clarify the issue of the two actresses playing the same character, Conchita. Bunuel initially worked with Maria Schneider (Last tango in Paris) for the title role. In the course of shooting the film Maria Schneider quit; her reasons were that she could not understand, and therefor portray, the character as was requested by Bunuel. This honesty is to this actress' credit. Then Bunuel took the full logic of the character, Conchita, as a bi-faceted character indeed, sometimes cool and calm and serene (played by the quietly beautiful Carole Bouquet) and on other times sensuous and hot and lustful (played by the fiery beauty Angela Molena).

Now what can one say about this masterpiece of a film? It is the eternal story of man chasing woman, to satisfy his earthly desires, and the woman who is sometimes romantic, sometimes wild, always passionate and self-conscious, driving the man mad, humiliating him and toying with him, then again satisfying his ego and deepest fantasies and even truly loving him. Freud knew it all along. Man and woman are surrounded by inexplicable events, absurd, surreal, strange as life can be. And their game goes on. In the course of the film Bunuel "winks" and reminds us of his eternal dislikes of the "bourgeoisie" -here in the form of an upper class rich and corrupt diplomat- who are genuinely so keen on etiquette and good manners, as evidenced by the rat that appears on the main character's dish ! and also the director's dislike of the church establishment and supposedly "devout" people as evidenced by the hypocrisy of Conchita's mother practically selling her daughter. It's a superb film, summarizing the eternal relationship between man and woman, amid normal extra-ordinary events, with top class actors under the directorship of Bunuel the genius.

Contrary to the initial comment on this page, the director Luis Bunuel did not use two different actresses to play the lead role as a plot device to show "One actress for her placid nature and another actress for her tempermental side."

While this is an oft-repeated misconception, it's not remotely true. In Luis Bunuel's autobiography, "My Last Sigh" (A fantastic book, still in print) the director discusses the reason for this unique directorial device, and how funny he finds it that so many "fans" assume that the choices were based on the actresses temperment or his desire to "express" something obscure. In truth, two actresses were used simply because the lead actress quit partway through production after having completed many critical scenes. Luis was beside himself over the wasted time and money in reshooting, so he hired a replacement to shoot only the missing scenes, and edited them irregardless of who was acting in a given scene. It served him well, as the end result was brilliant.

Buñuel's "That Obscure Object of Desire" dripped with substance and stunned me throughout the entire film. The masterful working of the two women into the role of Conchita was wonderful. I do not believe Buñuel for a second when he claims that he intended to use one actress, but she quit unexpectedly after shooting several critical scenes. If it is true, it is one of the more miraculous accidents in film right up there with Casablanca and The Third Man. I can be certain that he consciously gave the different Conchita's different personalities and modes of behavior. That comes across as being the focal point of the movie, turning a mediocre "one actress" film into an engaging event. If I had to put my money on something, I'd say that Buñuel is pulling some Andy Kaufman trickery here... the film worked too well with the so-called "change of plans." Or... if you have enough monkeys on typewriters, you'll get the Great American Novel. I don't believe this was chance at all. 10/10.

This is a typical Buñuel film , as there is a lot of symbolism and surrealism , including mockery or wholesale review upon sexual behaviors and jealousy of higher classes represented by the great Fernando Rey . Recounted in flashback , it deals with the romantic perils of Mathieu (Fernando Rey was actually dubbed by Michel Piccoli) , a wealthy Spanish old man who obtains a gorgeous 19-year-old girlfriend called Conchita (changing physical identities : Angela Molina and Carole Bouquet , but Maria Schneider walked off the picture in protest at the amount of nude scenes) , daughter of a poor woman (Maria Asquerino) . But Conchita refuses to sleep with him .

Buñuel's masterpiece filled with drama , surrealism , romance , terrorism , and colorful as well as absurd images . Surrealism and sour portrait upon higher classes , an extreme sexual obsession of an elderly man on a very young woman and their subsequent sexual rites by the Spanish maestro of surrealism , the great Luis Buñuel . "That Obscure Object of Desire" also titled ¨Cet Obscur object Du Désir¨ or ¨Ese Oscuro Objeto Del Deseo¨ is available with subtitles or dubbed and contains a lot of surrealist images , such as the sack scenes , when a gypsy carries a hog , baby-alike , and when it appears a woman mending a bloody nightgown , in fact , this was the last scene Luis Bunuel shot as a filmmaker . Luis Buñuel was given a strict Jesuit education which sowed the seeds of his obsession with both subversive behavior and religion , and that would preoccupy Buñuel for the rest of his career . Interesting and thought-provoking screenplay from the same Luis Buñuel and Jean Claude Carriere , Buñuel's usual screenwriter , and based on the novel "La Femme Et Le Pantin" , which has been used as the premise for several other movies , including : ¨The Woman and the Puppet¨ (1920) by Reginald Baker with Geraldine Farrar , "La Femme Et le Pantin" (1929) by Jacques Baroncelli with Conchita Montenegro , ¨The Devil Is a Woman¨ (1935) by Josef Von Stenberg with Marlene Dietrich , Lionel Atwill , Cesar Romero , and ¨La Femme et Le Pantin¨ (1959) by Julien Duvivier with Brigitte Bardot and Antonio Vilar .

Very good performance by Fernando Rey as a middle-aged French sophisticate person who falls for his former chambermaid . Acceptable acting from two young beautiful actresses : Angela Mólina and Carole Bouquet , the decision to use two players to play Conchita saved the movie from dropping out . Maria Schneider was dismissed from the film , the true reason was her heavy drug use , which caused her to give a "lackluster" interpretation and caused tremendous friction between her and Buñuel . Pretty good support cast gives fine acting ; it is mostly formed by nice French actors , such as Julien Bertheau , Milena Vukotic , André Weber and Spanish ones , such as Maria Asquerino and David Rocha . In addition , Luis Buñuel cameo : as in 'Belle De Jour' and 'Phantom of Liberty' Buñuel does another walk-on in streets , immediately after Fernando Rey's first scene , as Luis and his chauffeur are blown to bits on their way to the bank , victims of an unexplained terrorist attack .

Thid wry and enjoyable motion picture was well photographed by Edmond Richard and being compellingly directed by Luis Buñuel who was voted the 14th Greatest Director of all time . This Buñuel's strange film belongs to his French second period ; in fact , it's plenty of known French actors . As Buñuel subsequently emigrated from Mexico to France where filmed other excellent movies . After moving to Paris , at the beginning Buñuel did a variety of film-related odd jobs , including working as an assistant to director Jean Epstein . With financial help from his mother and creative assistance from Dalí, he made his first film , this 17-minute "Un Chien Andalou" (1929), and immediately catapulted himself into film history thanks to its disturbing images and surrealist plot . The following year , sponsored by wealthy art patrons, he made his first picture , the scabrous witty and violent "Age of Gold" (1930), which mercilessly attacked the church and the middle classes, themes that would preoccupy Buñuel for the rest of his career . That career, though, seemed almost over by the mid-1930s, as he found work increasingly hard to come by and after the Spanish Civil War , where he made ¨Las Hurdes¨ , as Luis emigrated to the US where he worked for the Museum of Modern Art and as a film dubber for Warner Bros . He subsequently went on his Mexican period he teamed up with producer Óscar Dancigers and after a couple of unmemorable efforts shot back to international attention with the lacerating study of Mexican street urchins in ¨Los Olvidados¨ (1950), winning him the Best Director award at the Cannes Film Festival. But despite this new-found acclaim, Buñuel spent much of the next decade working on a variety of ultra-low-budget films, few of which made much impact outside Spanish-speaking countries , though many of them are well worth seeking out . As he went on filming "The Great Madcap" , ¨El¨(1952) , ¨The brute¨ (1952) , "Wuthering Heights", "The Criminal Life of Archibaldo De la Cruz" (1955) , ¨Death in the garden¨(1956) , ¨Nazarin¨(1958) , ¨Robinson Crusoe¨ , ¨Fever mounts El Paso¨(59) , ¨The exterminator Angel¨(62) , ¨Simon of desert¨(1966) and many others . And finally his French-Spanish period in collaboration with producer Serge Silberman and writer Jean-Claude Carrière with notorious as well as polemic films , such as ¨Viridiana¨ , ¨Diary of a chambermaid¨ (64) , ¨the milky way¨(1968) , ¨Tristana¨ (70) , ¨Belle De Jour¨, ¨The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" (1977) , and this his last picture , "That Obscure Object of Desire" .

Depending on your point of view, this film is either a biting, insightful, timeless illumination of human dignity and indignity or a woeful commentary on how painfully slowly we evolve. The main story, humorous and poignant by turns, is punctuated by subplot bits that come right out of this week's news. Not bad for a film shot a quarter of a century ago.

Fernando Rey is simply wonderful, and Conchita are fabulous! Bunuel, as always, is once again a delight.

Buñuel weaves his tale of a jilted (attempted) lover quite effectively until the conclusion which was a little far-fetched despite complimenting the theme.

What starts of fairly slow and uninteresting soon naturally evolves into a suspenseful and psychologically taxing study into the obsessiveness behind relationships and how that plays out between the two sexes.

Much has been made out of Buñuel's use of two different females to interchange with the lead character, although anyone who has researched the film knows that this was unintentional and has no greater meaning then necessity despite wild fan theories.

I would like to begin by saying that this is one of the most bizarre films that I have ever experienced in my career as a movie buff. I have seen some twist endings, some passionately bad French films, and even some stalker films, but nothing compares to the cinematic genius that I just witnessed. Being a Bunuel 'virgin', I didn't know what to expect coming into this film.

I was ready for anything, but interestingly enough nothing will prepare you for this film. Deeply rooted in cinematic symbolism, we watch as two very interesting devises that are used to bring forth the overall theme of this film. Two devises that I have never seen used in a movie, until now.

The first is the obvious. Bunuel successfully uses two different actresses to play the same role of Conchita. At first I thought perhaps it was going to be one of those 'twin' double-cross films where these two girls used this older wealthy man for all his money. I was wrong. Similar to the title of this film, this is a film about passions and desires. It divulges in the emotion of obsession, and the reaction a man can have on someone that he desperately and sexually desires. Mathieu is our possible victim in this story. While both are not the most interesting characters (both have flaws and troubles), they do provide some structured characters. Mathieu is willing to give up everything for this woman that he hardly knows, but is physically attracted to her. It is hard to say that he loves her, but he does lust for her. The dual role of Conchita in this film is used for two purposes. The first is as a distraction, while the second is emotion. Both Conchitas are different in their own way and are used to push forward the story. Whenever Bunuel needed to convey a different emotion, he would bring in the actress that best represented that emotion. At first it was confusing, but as the film progressed you began to see less and less separate actresses, but instead as one character. It is impressive how Bunuel created this illusion.

As I mentioned above, there were two devises that I have never seen in a movie before. I explained above about the use of two women for one female role, but the second is a bit subtler. I briefly mentioned it above about how these two women (one character) were used to distract. If you pay attention to the film terrorism is a big part of the universe surrounding Mathieu. While he pines continually for Conchita, the world around him is falling apart. Bombings and deaths are at an all time high, yet he doesn't really seem to notice this. He is so caught up in Conchita that it seems like nothing else exists. He is oblivious to his surroundings. In fact, I would go so far as to say that we are also oblivious to the surroundings. Bunuel does this job of keeping our eye focused on the interchanging women that we sometimes forget or miss the actions surrounding this film. I believe that Bunuel is trying to prove the point that obsession does obscure your vision. It blurs your eyes and forces you to miss crucial elements of your surroundings. It isn't until the end when we are reminded violently of the truth surrounding our characters. I felt that Bunuel was slapping me in the face with that final scene. I had nearly forgotten myself of the terrorism outside, but easily he reminded me.

This was a spectacular film that really opened my eyes to a completely new way of film-making. It reminded me of some of the early works of another favorite director of mine Francois Ozon. Both of these talented artists have their own way of creating a world and an emotion, and both do it with some of the most beautiful strokes of their mechanical brush. I would recommend this film to anyone that is willing to experience radical, yet provocative film-making at its best. You will be impressed.

I cannot wait to include this film in my collection to watch over and over again. Thanks to Criterion, they have provided a beautiful packaging to this obscure film.

Grade: ***** out of *****

... Bunuel (not Sam, in this case). This movie is again about human obsession! The trick using 2 different actresses for one role as stated by another user, is not unique per se, but heightens the surrealism of the movie. And it does work perfectly as to other films that couldn't handle that same weight. Or couldn't convey it to the viewing audience at least!

While it has a slow pace, the movie feeds from it, especially because you have to get a grip of the story- and time-line you have to handle. It is not difficult to follow, but you might need to watch it a second time to really appreciate it :o)

even though it was made many years ago, it stands up as a great film, wonderfully acted and directed. The previous reviewer says everything so I will just add that if you can find the uncut version, there is a scene with Conchita (Angela Molina) dancing flamenco in the nude that lasts a good few minutes and is not cut like in the Criterion DVD... this full scene adds weight and more strength to the film and brings home the main character's jealousy more. It is the turning point of the film and it is a shame that it was cut, not even keeping the uncut version for adults to see.

This is the only scene that was cut from the film and when you consider what is in other films it is difficult to understand why, I think the main reason was to obtain a younger certificate for the film. If you are a fan of Angela Molina then check out 'The Eyes The Mouth' to see more of her. It was also good to see Carole Bouquet in 'That Obscure..' in her pre James Bond days. All three main characters are superb actors. Oh how I wish I could find the uncut version!..lol If you know where I can obtain a copy of the uncut (107 min duration) please email me at paul22@paul22.freeserve.co.uk ..enjoy!

A middle-aged man is obsessed with a young woman who remains elusive. In his final film, Bunuel keeps the narrative more straight-forward than in many of his earlier examples of surrealism. The only notable aspect to the story is that the title character, a woman who is by turns icy and flirtatious, is played by two actresses. No explanation is offered for this odd casting and the switch between hot Molina and cold Bouquet occurs without any rhyme or reason. Naturally, the critics and Bunuel worshippers declare the dual casting gimmick a stroke of genius. There's a clumsy subplot involving terrorists that leads to a predictable conclusion.

Sorry to disappoint all those who were trying to find some deep, intentional meaning in the choice of two actresses for the same role, but if Fernando Rey is to be believed, here's what he told me when I bumped into him at a party in the early 90's: he said that he and Buñuel liked both actresses for the part, couldn't decide which one to use, so they used them both.

Now, perhaps there was something working on the unconscious level about the dual nature of Conchita, but Rey maintained there was no grand decision they made regarding the specific scenes assigned to one or the other.

Of course, artistic choices can be obscure, especially even to the artist, but Rey insisted it was just a whimsical idea, one which I thought worked brilliantly.

A movie about the fundamental theme of male sexual obsession with a woman. The wealthy old bachelor Mathieu is intrigued by beautiful young Conchita, who lives in poor conditions with her mother. He becomes more and more sexually obsessed with her as she keeps turning down all his attempts to have sex with her and varies between feelings of love, indifference and hate towards him. He keeps following her around Europe and is increasingly obsessed and violent.

Buñuel lets two women play the same character, symbolizing the conflictual sides of her personality. This is a brilliantly outrageous idea, no matter whether Buñuel intended it or not, as the other commenters have discussed at length.

This brings me to the fatal flaw of the movie. I was disturbed by the sexism, violence, and repulsiveness of the main character because the movie never makes it completely clear where it stands towards him. The movie puts us on the side of the man trying to understand him as he becomes more and more obsessed with her, tries to buy her from her mother, has her deported, tries to rape her, and brutally beats her. His obsession never drives him to the tragedy that would be morally logical outcome, but the movie ends symbolically without conclusion.

The story is told by Mathieu (played by the excellent Fernando Rey) to a group of strange people in a train carriage compartment. He is a wealthy man who meets a beautiful young woman named Conchita. They begin to see each other often, and Mathieu's desire for her grows stronger. Conchita is poor and lives with her mother in a small flat. Mathieu gives them a lot of money, but mistakenly tries to buy Conchita away from her mother. Conchita is played by two beautiful actresses, but strange as it may seem, this doesn't effect the film negatively. Sometimes when one version of Conchita walks through a door the other figure enters the next room. But this unique style does work.

Conchita teases Mathieu throughout the film and comes across as a manipulative vixen. Also, there is a group of terrorists bombing buildings and cars throughout the film. A strange sack is carried around and seen several times, too. These are the mysterious things Buñuel likes to add to his films. You also get the feeling that Buñuel knew this was going to be his last film with the ending, which is perfectly abrupt.

I am not a huge Bunuel fan, and this isn't his best work. Nevertheless though this is great stuff, for some inexplicable reason we have two different actresses playing the lead role of Conchita. Why is that exactly? My theory is that Bunuel sat down and thought I wonder what would happen if I did this, so he did it.

I won't go too thoroughly into the plot, but a man is basically tormented in different ways by a woman with shifting personalities (thus the two actresses).

I liked this movie because it was so strange, the seventies were an interesting period.