Reproduction in any form is prohibited. If you are interested, please send a private message.
There are already many analyses of THE EXTERMINATING ANGEL, but what I appreciate the most is the analysis written by Roger Ebert combining his wonderful film and director's personal career , which is concise and comprehensive. But there are few comments on the meaning mapping of bear and sheep.
The director of one of the surrealists naturally does not tell his intentions explicitly, but he was talked about by the professor as an example in class. Only here as a course porter. There are different angles of analysis, but they all make sense.
1. A
plaything. This is mentioned directly, as a plaything after dinner. In the film, the guest is actually the incarnation of capitalist bourgeois (if you understand the director's resume, you can clearly see this relationship), and the criticism of it is naturally expressed in playing with animals. This is a manifestation of power
2.
Bestiality. As animals, sheep and bears, whether docile or ferocious, are relegated beasts. The blurred line between human and animal nature in the film and a speech by the doctor clearly point out the theme of animal nature. If being played is a manifestation of power, then when sheep and bears are "liberated" to walk in species and lose the shallow intention of having fun, they are no different from people. Although there is also a manifestation of human power in roasting sheep, the cooking method is very primitive, which is a primitive manifestation of animal nature
3.
sheep, offerings. If the sheep killed and eaten can also be regarded as a representative of food, then the finalization of the scene confirms the attributes of the sheep sacrifice. And this kind of sacrifice, although there are religious metaphors, does not affect the understanding of audiences who do not understand its meaning. In the end, the flock rushed into the church, not only to be used as a sacrifice to complete the redemption, but also to imply that human nature itself is also a sacrifice, and the sacrifice is the restraint of the self: the stagnation of ideology and culture. The sheep, which has always been docile, are used as sacrifices, rather than chickens, pigs, and cattle, which also reflects "dedication". But this kind of dedication should be spontaneous, just like breaking through the barrier of self to get out of the room.
4.
Bear. tame. The bear in the film is not wild, it did not kill sheep to feed its stomach, nor did it directly conflict with the guests. At the end, it was rescued by people to survive. This tameness is the disappearance of the wild but the skin of the wild remains. Just like in the movie, although the outbreak of the extinction of human nature is reflected, but deep down, I have to say that the evolution of human beings has transcended the wildness, and the wildness has disappeared to a certain extent. Such as blindfolding the sheep, one-on-one beating without gang fights, etc... Of course, many actions can also be understood as the hypocrisy of bourgeois (blindfolding the sheep but still eating it). But it must be admitted that the intention of the bear is not a single original expression in the film, he is a social transformation attribute
5.
The relationship between the bear and the sheep is the relationship between the ruling class and the ruled class under the Spanish franco rule at that time Relationship (**Someone read a local book at the time and used the metaphor of a bear and a sheep, but didn’t understand Spanish, so I can’t find the article. I heard that the director received this influence, but I doubt it can be Credibility. The director has returned many times in Spain and Mexico, and he has never heard of any confirmation in his experience), and their endogenous relationship with the guests has become the second level of domination and ruled. Explain that class relationships are not only hierarchical, but also have small hierarchies between each level. Another example is when the others leave, only the servant remains, servant. Class struggle, a direct satire of the ruling class
6.
Laughs. It is mainly reflected in the scene where the bear climbs the pillar. Interview confirmation
7.
Structure echoes. Since the same animal is already confirmed to be present both in the house and in the church, this double frame greatly reduces the possibility of other animals being present. Can you imagine a flock of chickens running into a church (Kusturica hahaha)? Of course, this has something to do with religion.
8.
Surreal elements. There are a lot of surreal elements in the film, such as the repeated entry into the hall and the repeated toasts - signifying siege; chicken feet and feathers; chasing after candlesticks (wonderful!). The appearance and purpose of the bear and the sheep are only used as objective "facts" in the film and have no specific direct material meaning. To paraphrase what ebert said
she planned an after-dinner entertainment involving a bear and two sheep. Now it will have to be canceled. It is typical of Bunuel that such surrealistic touches are dropped in without comment.
View more about The Exterminating Angel reviews
