User Reviews

-He who commits sacrilege with an impious movie.

-Let him be an anathema!

By the late sixties,Louis Bunuel,who was an atheist,thanks to God,did not take himself seriously anymore.However this work ,"Le Charme Discret de la Bourgoisie" "Le Fantome de la Liberté" or "Cet Obscur Objet du Désir" were not that much different from "Nazarin " "Simon du Désert" "Viridiana" or "La Mort en ce jardin" .One thing Bunuel's oeuvre does not lack is unity.

"La Voie Lactée" deals with religion.If you've been brought up a catholic,if you have a good knowledge of the gospels ,it can help you appreciate such a film crowded with incident,taking place far away on a road with two pilgrims on their way to Spain (St Jacques de Compostelle),or long ago in Jesus Christ 's times.There is an ironical "documentary prologue" at the beginning of the film - a trick the great director had already used in "Hurdes" when,out of the blue,he began a lecture on the mosquitoes.And if the message is not clear enough,the last message reads "all documents,theories and quotes from the gospels " are historically accurate! In his final movies,Bunuel shows his great sense of humour;Jean-Luc Godard ,he is not.He is so much better!An intellectual director whose work is accessible to anyone.Whatever he films,a spoof on the wedding feast at Cana or George Marchal fighting a duel with Jean Piat (and one of them saying " My liberty is a phantom!!!) because of a disagreement about theology, students cursing the heathen ,he rules.

Bunuel tackles the Christian dogma :his priests and holier-than-thou characters such as the butler in front of his luxury buffet or the headmistress of the chic girls school are often contradicting what they said before .And the humble people they meet ask sometimes relevant questions ;dig this one: "what will become of the host (our Lord's body) in the human stomach?".And Bunuel does not confine himself to the Christian religion:"nowadays",the vicar says,"the entire world is catholic! " "What about the Muslims?the Jews?" "The Muslims ARE catholics;so are the Jews ,mainly the Jews." The scene of the crazy priest might have been borrowed from the Fernandel sketch of "Le Diable et Les Dix Commandements " by Julien Duvivier (1962).The scene at the inn,-perhaps inspired by Autant-Lara 's anti-clerical "L'Auberge Rouge"- with its priceless tale of a Virgin Mary's miracle and the mystery of the passing of the hours of the night will be used again in the "Fantôme de la Liberté" with gusto.

The cast is a who's who of the French actors of the era:Laurent Terzieff,an intellectual thespian ,is cast against type as an uneducated tramp (but the films suggest he might have been a revolutionary man);Edith Scob is the perfect Virgin Mary;Delphine Seyrig, the future stand out of "Le Charme Discret ..." has only three minutes to shine ,and she succeeds brilliantly .Plus Michel Piccoli,Julien Berteau,Alain Cuny,Bernard Verley,Denis Manuel,Pierre Clementi and many more.

Do go on a pilgrimage to Saint-Jacques de Compostelle with Luis Bunuel!

In view of its subject matter – the gleeful put-down of Christian dogma, a lot of which is contradictory anyway (explaining the flood of religious sects we have all suffered from!) – this has always been the one Bunuel film that is perhaps hardest to warm up to; more than any other of the director's work, its relentlessly didactic nature requires one's full attention throughout – and, needless to say, the experience can be somewhat daunting (it's definitely not the ideal choice for a beginner!). However, THE MILKY WAY is still a milestone in the Surrealist director's career: his previous effort, the chic and sexy BELLE DE JOUR (1967), had performed exceptionally well at the box-office – hence, Bunuel was given carte blanche on the next one; typically, he responded by delivering that which, on the surface, amounts to the exact opposite of what was expected of him: a distinctly uncommercial venture!

That said, one can't very well overlook the director's approach to the material: it takes the form of a picaresque odyssey dealing with two men's pilgrimage from France to the burial site of a revered saint in Spain, and their many bizarre adventures along the way; Paul Frankeur and Laurent Terzieff appear in the lead roles. They meet scores of people who either help, hinder or simply baffle them – a few of these are actually historical figures (such as the Marquis De Sade, incarnated by Michel Piccoli) or even symbolic ones (say, Pierre Clementi's brooding Satan); most, however, are clergy (even if one proves to be a fugitive from a lunatic asylum!) or common people with a vested interest in Theology (for instance, the maitre d' played by Julien Bertheau – who, after imparting much spiritual wisdom to his 'congregation', denies food to the weary protagonists)!

The journey is interestingly book-ended by the duo's meeting with, first, a man (Alain Cuny) who predicts they will each have a child and, then, a whore (Delphine Seyrig) who offers herself up for the task; what ties the two scenes together is that both strangers supply the same cryptic names to the proposed offsprings i.e. "Ye Are Not Of The People" and "No More Mercy"! Incidentally, the film's episodic structure would be adopted again by Bunuel (indeed, it's improved upon) in two subsequent films – both sublime and uproarious – namely THE DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE (1972) and THE PHANTOM OF LIBERTY (1974); in fact, one could say that these three films comprise a trilogy whose loosely interrelated narratives (in which, literally, anything goes) basically encompass all of Bunuel's many and varied concerns over the years. THE MILKY WAY is certainly the most intellectual of the director's works, but it's all stylishly deployed (he'd retain the deceptively glossy look of BELLE DE JOUR, for which some would subsequently accuse him of selling out[!], throughout all his remaining efforts) and undeniably hilarious for those not offended by blasphemous irreverence.

Some more of the film's indelible images involve: Frankeur thinking of himself as Jesus about to shave off the trademark beard and being dissuaded from doing so by Mary (Edith Scob); Bernard Verley, then, is endearing as a thoroughly commonplace (if snobbish) Christ – his chilling last words (taken from St. Matthew's Gospel), that he came to cause discord within the family unit and that woe befall anyone who loves somebody else more than him, must constitute one of the most wicked finales to any film!; Terzieff's casual swearword costing them a lift by an ultra-conservative driver; his own jinxed nature (wishing a man who has bypassed them to die horribly in a road accident, which happens soon after), ditto when daring God to strike him with lightning and being amazed by the practically instant reply from on high; later, during a school activity in which little children are indoctrinated in religious intolerance, Terzieff also loudly imagines a group of revolutionaries (the events of May '68 were still vivid in people's minds) executing the Pope – played by Bunuel himself! – via firing squad. Incidentally, the director's own voice is heard – reciting a prayer in Latin! – on the radio of the aforementioned burning car; in the same vein, co-scriptwriter Jean-Claude Carriere – a regular Bunuel collaborator – makes an infrequent appearance before the cameras as a decadent bishop presiding over an orgy in the forest (another sequence that is exclusively in Latin). Two more stalwart presences from the Surrealist master's canon are Claudio Brook, playing another high-ranking church official exhuming the body of the saint – to whom our heroes (and, we are told, thousands every year) have come from afar to pay tribute – so as to excommunicate him in view of facts which have only just come to the fore(!), and Georges Marchal, seen dueling for his steadfast beliefs, but the point of the discussion is so muddled that it's soon forgotten by the participants – by the way, a crucified nun is also prominently featured in this scene! For the record, this film contains one of Bunuel's most famous dictums (spoken by an undefined character during a transcendental sermon by a particularly insistent priest), namely "My hatred of Science and Technology almost brings me to the absurdity of a belief in God"!

According to the extras on the Criterion DVD (these include an elaborate trailer, an introduction by Carriere, an interesting interview with noted film critic Ian Christie, and a 37-minute featurette which is given its due elsewhere), the conception for the script came at the 1967 Venice Film Festival after a screening of Jean-Luc Godard's LA CHINOISE, the Nouvelle Vague exponent's full-blown induction into the realm of Political Cinema. Incidentally, it's also said here that THE MILKY WAY garnered the best reviews of Bunuel's entire career!

It's not a film that has all the answers. It's a film that casts doubt on all the answers we've had. Early in the film we hear the line, "A religion without mystery is not a religion at all. A heresy that denies a mystery can attract the weak and the shallow, but can never blot out the truth." My ears perked up. I was keenly interested in a film that was going to confront both religion and its opposition head on.

Two modern-day travelers are on the road as the film opens, from Paris to Spain. It's the customary episodic framework of the poor enduring as transient vagabonds feeling purpose in heading in a particular direction. It's also the even more customary fable of the wandering adventurer and his companion in search of revelation and virtue. Spanish-born absurdist filmmaker Luis Bunuel juxtaposes these narrative customs into a sort of cinematic reality existing in a unique dimension. The pilgrims are contemporary but time and space chaperon them in a continual instant and an all-encompassed earth science.

The protagonists of blasphemy and tradition portray their ideals in age-old Palestine, in the Europe of the Middle Ages, in the Age of Reason, and in today's hotels and fashionable restaurants, and on its boulevards. The Holy Virgin, her son Jesus and his young brothers, an arrogant ecclesiastical headwaiter and his submissive workers, a bleeding child by the roadside, the pope facing a firing squad, the Whore of Babylon ambushing ramblers, the Marquis de Sade, the Jansenist fencing with the Jesuit, Satan himself decked out as a rock star, an overzealously formal schoolmarm and her programmed little students chanting anathemas, self-righteous bishops and demented priests on the lam, this panoramic cast of characters, in itself a smirking take-off of Hollywood's epic ensembles, somehow expresses the barren conceptions of Christian dissent. Is there such a thing as the Holy Trinity? Was Christ God, man, and Holy Ghost one after the other, at the same time, or was he invariably just God the Father disguised as a human, so as to be seen? Was Jesus solely the mortal embodiment of a supreme spirit? Was his anguish then just facade? Because if he experienced pain at the hands of mortals, was he a god? Was Christ merely a smidgen of God's psyche? Are we free to discern between the exploits of Jesus the man and the teachings of Christ the god? Was Christ indeed two men, one born of God the Father, the other of Mary the Mother? Did Mary become pregnant in the same manner that light exceeds through a window glass? Did Jesus have brothers?

As Buñuel conceives visual substance to these religious contemplations, he does so with far- flung ability in banter and farce. The escaped lunatic believes that Christ is in the host like the rabbit is in the pâté. The pope's death by firing squad is something we'll never see. The debate of doctrine by the hostile maître d' and his waiters is in the royal practice of slapstick comedy. The dueling clerics clanking swords for Jesuitical piety and Jansenistic sin are a comic rendition of the vintage MGM swashbuckling jousts pared down to knowingly meaningless and irrational argument.

However, side by side with the broad comical tone, Buñuel is here tussling with the inconsistencies between faith and faithlessness. The young heretic who dons the hunter's garb and shoots at the rosary receives it back from the hands of the Virgin Mary and lets tears cascade down his heretical face. Really, as Pierre tells Jean when lightning strikes, God knows all, but we don't know what he knows. Buñuel apparently favored scenes which could just be pieced together by the ends in the editing room, producing long, mobile wide shots which follow the action. He aggregates all of these significations and implications into a streaming, uninterrupted visual existence recognizing the curious obscurities of both the comformists to the approved form of Christianity and the professed believers who nonetheless maintain contrary theologies and reject church-prescribed doctrines, while prosecuting the dogmatic certitudes of both. How else could you do it? It's a concept for a film that could only befit a surrealist.

This masterpiece is Bunuel at his best. It draws from the confrontational and revolutionary fire present in his Mexican films like "Il Brute", the intelligent and informed humor of his earlier religious farce, "Simon of The Desert", and I believe serves as a living picture of the transition his work seemed to under go between the more vivid and shocking Dali inspired surrealism of his early carrer (the obvious example being "Un Chien Andalou") and the more subtle and organic magical-realist influenced surrealism of "That Obscure Object of Desire". This film is certainly not light however. While there are no razor blindings or ant infested ears, the pope does fall victim to a firing squad of radicals. In fact I believe Bunuel succeds in leaving the viewer much more disgusted and upset by confronting him with the stark realities of the Catholic faith, and after all isn't that what surrealism is all about? It must be said that in order to understand and appreciate this film one must have a very good understanding of a variety of religious thinkers and of the history/practices of the catholic church. If you don't have such a background but are still lucky enough to get a chance to view this film, by all means take it, more likely than not it will inspire you to investigate the matter further and Bunuel conveniently mentions the names of all most all the writers he references in the film so take that list to a library, read up and watch it again, you won't be disappointed.

This movie is one of Luis Bunuel's best and my personal favourite. Though it was filmed between Belle de Jour and Tristana, it has more in common with Bunuel's three last movies - Discreet Charm of the bourgeoisie, Phantom of the liberty and That Obscure object of desire. Bunuel is at his surrealistic and atheistic best. Though some moments may make almost anybody laugh, the movie is intended for highly educated audience, preferably familiar with the history of heresies and the Catholic Church - without this kind of knowledge much of film's charm will be missing. Milky Way may be called a road movie in a sense: two main characters are on a pilgrimage to Santiago-de-Compostella and while on their way, also travel through time - Milky Way is unique in the way it handles this time travel.

Le fantôme de la liberté (Buñuel, 1974) seems to take off right from this film as if it were a sequel, visually and conceptually. This film however is much more determined to denounce the contradictions and hypocrisy of different religions, while Fantôme has even more artistic freedom. Also this is much more coherent and if there is any danger of getting heavy-handed, Buñuel knows how to joke himself a way out using illusionism or a mild shock-treatment. It is simultaneously very rational and miraculous. The anti-clericism and subversive desires frequently come to the surreal surface. I can't help but see this as an inspiration for Monty Python's 'Life of Brian' (1979), because that film also remotely feels like an off the wall road movie in which anything can happen.

The subject matter was sort of tough for an atheist (heretic?) like me, but the humour with which Buñuel lets the characters throw the crucial differences between religions at each other is hilarious. E.g. in the middle of a duel between a Catholic and a Jesuit: 'Prior will is mere impulse. My thoughts and my will are not in my own power ... ma liberte est un fantôme.' 'What does freedom mean anyway? How can I be free if what I do is determined in advance?' etc. And why would all the personnel of a restaurant be caught up in an eloquent discussion about the existence of God while they are at work? See for yourself. Cinematographer Christian Matras (also Le Grande Illusion, 1937) continues to improve Buñuel's visual style using zoom-pan-zoom shots for instance, but keeps it sober.

9/10

The Milky Way is set in comparatively modern times. Two vagabond pilgrims make a journey to Spain. Specifically, to Santiago de Compostela. The remains of James the Apostle were thought to be interred there. On the way they meet various characters from different time periods. Including Jesus, the devil, the Virgin Mary, Jesuits, Jansenists, the Marquis de Sade, assorted clerics and a prostitute. All provide vignettes in which points of heresy are debated. People are routinely condemned to death or challenged to duels based on the fine shading of the wording of faith. It runs like a cross between Pilgrim's Progress and The Canterbury Tales, with just a touch of Life of Brian in passing.

But what puts the Milky Way in a class apart from most films of its ilk – even reverent biblical epics – is its careful adherence to the wording of the theological debates running through Christianity's history. According to Buñuel (who deserted Catholicism for atheism at the age of sixteen), "Besides the situation itself and the authentic doctrinal dispute it evokes, the film is above all a journey through fanaticism, where each person obstinately clings to his own particle of truth, ready if need be to kill or to die for it. The road traveled by the two pilgrims can represent, finally, any political or even aesthetic ideology."

Strangely, the film was welcomed on release both by Buñuel's anti-religious following and (to his embarrassment) the The Holy See itself. According to his biographer, Buñuel had planned for many years a film that would affirm his atheism, the intellectual scepticism he held towards a church he had renounced in his teens. Director and producer compiled a list of apostasies and repression and concluded that most heresies came from six areas of doubt: (1) The double nature of Christ. Was he God or man? God and man? God pretending to be man? (2) The Trinity; how can three natures co-exist in the same entity? (3) The Immaculate Conception. Mary, a virgin, was nevertheless Christ's mother. (4) Transubstantiation. Can bread literally become the body of Christ? Is this just a metaphor? (5) The problem of God's omnipotence. Is God all-powerful? If so, do we enjoy free will? (6) Evil. Did God create evil? "The list suggested no obvious structure, so they simply dramatized incidents illustrating the heresies, linking them with a pair of wandering modern pilgrims."*

Now if you've read this far, you may well already be interested in theology, whether as a believer or atheist, but it highlights one of the big shortcomings of the film. The psychopathology of Christianity is mainly of interest to its own theologians. While the film will just about hold you if you have already pondered such questions, others may be wondering why he spent so long dwelling on such bilge. Having dispensed, he claims, with such imponderables, is he simply exorcising old ghosts from his early teens? One religious-based reviewer wrote: "Whilst it's certainly sceptical about Christianity, the fact that it's been written by people who know their Catholicism inside out, and are not afraid to make a film that is inaccessible to those do not, means the film at least deserves some respect even if ultimately we disagree with its, somewhat tenuous, conclusions." It is a position with which I could only guardedly agree.

"One thing troubles me," says a young acolyte in one of the film's Spanish Inquisition periods. "The burning of heretics – may it not go against the will of the Holy Spirit?" The inquisitor replies, "It is the secular justice of men that punishes them. Not because they are heretics but for their sedition." Pushing his luck, the acolyte counters with, "But then, those whose brothers have been burnt will burn others, and so on. Each one believing he possesses the truth. Why these millions of deaths?" A stern glance and the acolyte desists – before he too is cast to the flames. (The logic seems more applicable to the constant conflicts between Islam and Christianity – or at least Palestine and Israel. In terms of burning people, the Catholic Church triumphed over every other brand of Christianity with unfettered brutality.)

Perhaps Buñuel found it amusing or even instructive to make this film. The millions of deaths, and the fanaticism that led to them, is not condemned. To the believer, perhaps they were God's will. But to this reviewer at least, Buñuel maybe falls short of his usual high achievements in elevating the good or bringing down hypocrisy. The Milky way is clever enough – even erudite – but ultimately an intellectual exercise rather than the powerful film it could have been.

*(nb - six areas of doubt are quoted from Baxter's biography of the director)

I might be tempted to call the Milky Way a masterpiece, but for all of the excellent scenes that dance along on the edge of being silly, strange, dead-serious, and scathing in attack, Luis Bunuel doesn't make it quite an easy first viewing. It is, alongside Phantom of Liberty, though maybe more-so considering its picaresque flow, a difficult film to follow at times, as the folds go in and out of the two pilgrims on their way to Compostela as if in an ocean current. We see Jesus and his disciples. We see some 15th (or 4th) century sermons and heretic slayings and practices, sometimes seeming as mystical as something out of the Dark Crystal. And there's even a duel between two sides of the Catholic coin debating between specifics in the nature of god while fencing furiously. It's what could be defined, if one were looking for an easy label, true surrealism, pointed right at the edge of contradictions, of the daring of the random and of chances taken at the expense of all authority be damned, and at the same time it's a drama of fanaticism and faith in general. What is it to believe and actually buy into these guys, who at their most genial are storytellers and at their worst will burn you at the stake for not going for God in threes versus God as one?

Bunuel, at the least for his admirers, makes an attempt with his collaborator Jean-Claude Carriere, to raise questions in the midst of raucous entertainment. Although Bunuel can be even greater when being devilish and playful (eg Discreet Charm), the Milky Way displays the filmmaker reveling in the history and nature of heresy in a construct that's maybe more daring. One truly can't expect what will come next, as one may see a scene with a priest flip-flopping about whether or not the Holy Ghost is in the communion wafer or not (and soon thereafter taken back to the asylum), and then a scene with a rag-tag group of evangelicals in the woods who may or may not be paying heed to God, or to the Devil, or both, or a chef being questioned about how Jesus walked and then a cut-away to how Jesus really walked. As the two pilgrims go along their way, having their own delirious encounters- missing by a bit being struck by lightning, debating Christian free will, one hoping for a car to crash, which does, and then seeing some angel of death or other in the back-seat, and in their continuous streak of being turned away/kicked out by those who would take them in if not for essential hypocrisies- a pattern does start to form (if one could call it that), or at least the essential pieces to Bunuel's puzzle.

A lot of times one laughs at the subtlety and the outrageousness: should Jesus shave, do nuns crucify one another, how much can a priest pontificate about not having sex under any circumstances. But it's actually after the film ends that even more ideas start to come around. And yet Bunuel is so cunning, so deadpan with how he directs the actors- some part of his repertory, some not- that it skims into becoming straight drama, which in that case would make it almost dull; the film actually faced some (un-fair) criticism when first released that Bunuel had suddenly made a film cherishing the things he used to damn. How curious, deranged, and honest even in this part of the appeal, the playing of both sides. While it is fairly well known that Bunuel became an atheist following a strict Catholic upbringing (one quote of his, also the name of a documentary on the Criterion DVD, is "I'm an atheist, thank God"), it's never clear whether Bunuel will take one side or the other. There's things that are f***ed up about those who go without any question at all, like the little girls reciting verbatim on the stage, but also of what the man envisions of revolutionaries shooting the Pope in a firing line.

Even for those who may consider themselves atheists, as Bunuel might have up to a point (like Scorsese, no matter how much can be sort of dropped, there still remains chunks that stay as part of the auteur), and for those who are rigid believers, The Milky Way attempts to open up a discussion of dogma, heresies- many long forgotten before the writers dug them up in research- and why one should even believe if there is no definitive proof. For all of Bunuel's skewering of schizophrenic or quietly sex obsessed priests and moments of pure mystery like the man who first comes to the pilgrims, there is bits of reverence too, like for the Virgin Mary- who at times becomes part of the debate- and it's challenging and refreshing to see nothing left solidly as 'this is this for sure'. If it may feel a little loose an imperfect on a first viewing it shouldn't detract from everything that can be taken away as pure food for Bunuelian thought.

Two drifters (Paul Frankeur and Laurent Terzieff) go on a pilgrimage from France to Santiago de Compostela in Spain. Along the way , they beg for food a man (Alain Cuny) with cape , hitchhike, and face the Christian dogmas and heresies from different Ages . Both of whom meet up with Jesus (Bernard Verley) showing off his abilities , Virgin Mary (Edith Scob) doing miracles , and the Marquis de Sade (Michel Piccoli) who is with a young girl in chains , a prostitute (Delphine Seyrig) and also Satan (Pierre Clementi) who appears during a car accident .

This is a typical Buñuel film , as there are a lot of symbolism and surrealism , including mockery or wholesale review upon religion, especially Catholicism . Luis Buñuel was given a strict Jesuit education which sowed the seeds of his obsession with both subversive behavior and religion , issues well shown in ¨Milky way¨ . Here Buñuel makes an implacable attack to the Catholic church , theme 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 . After returning his native country, Spain, by making ¨Viridiana¨ this film was prohibited on the grounds of blasphemy as well as ¨The milky way¨ or Via Lactea , both of them were strongly prohibited by Spanish censorship . The stories in La Voie Lactée, (1969) are based on real historical episodes . Luis Buñuel and Jean-Claude Carrière did extensive research for the film, primarily in the Dictionary of Heresies by Abbé Pluquet. It is packed with surreal moments , criticism , absurd situations and religious elements about Catholic Church ; furthermore Buñuel satirizes and he carries out outright attacks to religious lifestyle and Christian liturgy . According to his autobiography, My Last Sight , Luis Buñuel got the idea of making the film after reading , Historia De Heterodoxos Españoles , by Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo. Pretty good cast gives fine acting ; it is mostly formed by nice French actors such as Alain Cuny as Man with cape , Edith Scob as Virgin Mary , Bernard Verley as Jesus, Julien Bertheau as Hotel Maitre and Michel Piccoli as Marquis Sade , Pierre Clementi as Devil and Claudio Brook as Bishop .

The motion picture was 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" , ¨The brute¨, "Wuthering Heights", ¨El¨ , "The Criminal Life of Archibaldo De la Cruz" , ¨Robinson Crusoe¨ , ¨Death in the garden¨ 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¨ , Tristana¨ , ¨The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" and his last picture , "That Obscure Object of Desire" .

I think this is one of Bunuel's best and most hilarious films. I saw it originally in the eighties at Cinema Village in NYC. It was in a packed house too. Very informed, nothing snobby about it, just a very funny film. And of course it's a touch surreal. If you're interested in religion, or perhaps the early history of the catholic church, check this one out. You'll laugh so much your sides will ache, your heart will pitter pat. One of my top ten desert island films. Highly recommended by ME! Now that it's on DVD there's no excuse to not see it. It almost made me want to 'do' a pilgrimage through Europe. Jesus laughed! Viva Bunuel!

Whatever its merits I would hesitate to recommend this to anyone coming to Luis Bunuel's films for the first time. Despite his customary craftmanship and technical expertise together with an excellent cast this is too literate, verbose and intellectual to be of universal appeal.

As a result no doubt of his Jesuit upbringing Bunuel seldom missed the chance to take a pot shot at Catholicism but here he fires with both barrels! Many of the arguments put forward will be too obscure for non-Catholics and some scenes too offensive for the devout.

As a director Bunuel realised the importance of good actors and once again he has enlisted the services of Paul Frankeur, Julien Bertheau, Michel Piccoli, Georges Marchal and the wondrous Delphine Seyrig. Who better to play the role of the Virgin Mary than Edith Scob! It is Marchal who has one of the best scenes as a Jesuit fighting a duel with a Jansenist in which no blood is shed and which marks the beginning of a beautiful friendship. The Jansenist declares that "Freedom is a Phantom" which supplied the title for Bunuel's even more bizarre but fascinating opus of 1974.

Bunuel's professional relationship with writer Jean-Claude Carriere is surely one of the most fruitful in the history of film and the director was fortunate enough to have as producer the astute and far-sighted Serge Silberman who first brought them together. Superlative editor Louise Hautecoeur assists Bunuel once more and I believe this is the only time, surprisingly, that he worked with master cinematographer Christian Matras.

Although not one of his best this is of course a must for true Bunuel devotees. This film reminds us that although one should neither judge the priesthood by the priest nor the faith by the faithful, that is easier said than done!

Best to leave the final words to Bunuel himself: " I am an atheist, thank God."

Two contemporary pilgrims, (Paul Frankeur and Laurent Terzieff), on the road to Santiago de Compostela encounter heretics, agnostics and believers not to mention Jesus and his mother, the Devil and a few other Biblical and historical characters. "The Milky Way" is one of the most irreverent of Bunuel's religious satires but is closer in tone to the scatological surrealism of "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" than to "Viridiana".

It was also a chance for Bunuel to show off one of his all-star casts so we have Alain Cuny tempting our pilgrims on the road, Bernard Verley as Jesus and Edith Scob as the Virgin Mary, Michel Piccoli as the Marquis de Sade, Pierre Clementi as The Devil as well as Julien Bertheau, Georges Marchal and a sprightly Delphine Seyrig as a prostitute. It may not be one of Bunuel's masterpieces, (it's all a bit obvious), but it's clearly the work of a master and is essential viewing for all cinephiles.

The drifters Pierre (Paul Frankeur) and Jean (Laurent Terzieff) pilgrimage from France to Santiago de Compostela in Spain hitchhiking and begging for food. Along their journey, they face the Christian dogmas and heresies from different Ages.

I have seen most of Buñuel films and this director is among my favorites. The master of the surrealism uses Catholic symbols in his films fruit of his strict religious education among the Jesuits. Unfortunately "La Voie Lactée" is an unfunny and boring mess since I can not laugh with jokes with any religion. For me, this is the worst film of Buñuel's filmography so far. My vote is two.

Title (Brazil): "Via Láctea" ("Milky Way")

There are two Bunuels: the cheeky Bunuel who makes movies filled with blatant symbolism and surrealism attacking religion and sexuality, and the narrative Bunuel, who makes more subtle films which approach these same issues in more mature ways.

The first Bunuel, the Bunuel of L'Age D'Or and Un Chien Andalou, was definitely at work on this project. The coherent narratives of Los Olivados, Criminal Life of Archibaldo de la Cruz, Exterminating Angel or even Discrete Charm of the Bourgoise.

Bunuel loved ambiguity and abstraction. He loved making people feel uncertain of things in all his movies - yet many of them maintain a serene, smooth surface nonetheless - there may be dream sequences in them, and things out of the ordinary happening, yet they don't jump around in the madcap way this movie and L'Age D'Or do, constantly making the viewer adjust to a new scene with seemingly no relation to the last, which is afterwards resolved when the pilgrims appear and reinstate continuity.

The two pilgrim characters are our tour guides through a patchwork of historical vignettes involving important religious events.

The highlight of the film for me was when a priest is talking to a man and a woman through a locked door, locked on the advice of the innkeeper presumably to keep the chaplin from coming into their rooms and preaching to them, and the chaplin is talking to them about how Mary could have given birth and remained a virgin. He thinks of an example of this: like light coming through a window. Bunuel cuts from the priest sitting outside the room to the couple inside the room, and suddenly the priest is sitting inside the room talking to he couple. In the next shot, he is outside, and the following shot, inside again. A superb example of cinematic irony.

I'm actually not quite sure what i thought of the film - its certainly not among my favourite Bunuels (Discrete Charm of the Bourgoisie, Exterminating Angel, Los Olivados, L'Age D'Or), but its the sort of film that clearly rewards repeat viewings. As another reviewer commented, a knowledge of religious history reaped rich rewards from it, which makes me wish i knew a little more than i did.

Clifford's Commendations: Like with any Bunuel film, if you're christian, and you get it, you won't like it! If you're not christian, it'll help if you know some christian history to get all the laughs and satire on offer. Without this knowledge, from personal experience, the film has fruits to offer, but you won't enjoy it as much as many other Bunuels.

The Milky Way ends like a documentary would – with the following sentences: Everything in this film concerning the Catholic religion and the heresies it has provoked, especially from the dogmatic point of view, is rigorously exact. The texts and citations are taken either direct from Scripture, or modern and ancient works on theology and ecclesiastical history. This perfectly explains what its topic is. Having been raised a Jesuit, Luis Buñuel developed an obsession with religion, which he incorporated in his movies. His negative portrayal of the aforementioned caused most of his movies to be found extremely offensive, and some were even banned. The Milky Way is one of these controversial movies.

The story is not easily summarised, since this is a surrealist movie – some scenes seem to be randomly inserted into it to break its continuity. Mostly, it follows Pierre (Paul Frankeur) and Jean (Laurent Terzief) on their pilgrimage from France to Santiago de Compostela. While on the road, these two men encounter many people of different time periods in history, beg for food and look for someone to take them to Spain for free.

While the movie is very objective in its portrayal of Christianity through history, its goal is to criticise it, especially the Church and its members. However, it is not anti-religious – it is more of a satiric view of the many pointless theological fights throughout history, and of certain Christian principles. It should be seen by atheists and believers alike, and it will likely, due to its subject, polarize its audience: ones may love it and the others might hate it. In spite of that, the important thing is to realise that even the neutral facts are easily used as arguments against religion. Therefore, I think one of the movie's messages is that we should at least question the opportunity of culturally imposing religion in everyday life. But this review shouldn't turn into a discussion about the basis of religion, especially because there is so much more that can be said about The Milky Way. Although it occasionally seems messy and unclear, since it is, along with Le fantôme de la liberté aka The Phantom of Liberty (1974), one of Buñuel's most surreal movies, these characteristics make it even more enjoyable.

Perhaps absurdly, the movie feels very real, since there is no soundtrack and the characters behave naturally in a common environment, although there are some strange scenes, like for example a person being in and outside a room at the same time. This unusual combination of realistic and unrealistic segments gives the movie a vibe of likable uncertainty. The cinematography is guaranteed to impress you, particularly if you've never seen a surrealistic movie before: as I said, the bizarre dream-like situations are quite enjoyable and funny, and the symbolism in certain scenes is simply superb. Because of its frequent use of the fore-mentioned symbolism, The Milky Way is complex and can be interpreted in many ways. It is very difficult to praise this movie without spoiling it, considering it works really well as a whole and as many independent stories linked by Pierre and Jean's pilgrimage, and each story needs to be summarised to be understood. So just watch it, it's worthy of your time.

Rating: 9/10 Read more at: passpopcorn.wordpress.com

Leave it to Luis Buñuel, a man who once took comfort from the fact that he was "still an atheist, thank God", to provide such an entertaining analysis of Catholicism at its most absurd. In the middle film of an otherwise unrelated stylistic trilogy (along with 'The Phantom of Liberty' and 'The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie') the master surrealist takes us on a guided tour of heretical Catholic doctrine through the ages, following two modern day pilgrims across southern France, where they encounter a bewildering assortment of fanatics, prophets, and true believers. The various digressions are as weird as they are well-documented, but because of its dry wit and detached presentation the film is (perversely) more instructive than it is shocking, except perhaps to the Vatican. Buñuel makes his observations without malice; his aim is to simply illustrate how the One True Faith is, in fact, a motley collection of often contradictory ideas and bizarre rituals.

My third venture into Luis Bunuel's repertoire, after THAT OBSCURE OBJECT OF DESIRE (1977, 8/10) and BELLE DE JOUR (1967, 8/10), THE MILKY WAY, which refers to "the road to St. James", depicts a trek of two vagabonds' pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela, en route they meet a melange of characters converse about their religious outlooks and interweaving with anachronistic re-enactments (or mimicry) of the biblical figures, trying to expound the hidden messages about the elliptical realm of divinity, humanity and heresies.

Religion is never my specialty, and the staccato narrative does remind me of Pier Paolo Pasolini's "Trilogy of Life", consists of terse vignettes or anecdotes, it seems the "reason" is never being considered as the director's prime option, all the impetus is purveyed by the re- created images and the Holy words (condescending, emotionless, authoritative), the two destitute pilgrims barely assume any obligation other than indicating a geographical route for the odyssey.

There are some highlights (for me at least), the transubstantiation argument between an ex- priest who ran off from a mental-hospital and a science-endorsed brigadier; a highly- histrionic image of Death during a car accident after an unintentional swear; the Holy Mary miracle narrated by the Spanish priest, and the eerily perplexing "whoever knocks don't open the door" episode, all come off intriguing for an agnostic's mind.

The film adopts an authentic or natural sound recording, there is no use of concurrent music alongside, a barrage of religious parables may or may not reminisce the vicarious epiphany which the director deliberately intended, as a film under the belt of Luis Bunuel, I feel it is a pity I fail to find enough conspicuous worthiness in this film since the barricade lie between me and that spiritual world is rather too colossal.

It is very strange movie but very interesting. The reality mixed with the biblical stories and historical events. The most beautiful moment of the movie is the spanish priest who tells the story of one Virgin Mother's wonder. However it shows Benuel's relation to catholic religion - of course sometimes - funny and odd - but it worth to watch it.

I found this tale of a couple of tramp like figures ostensibly making a pilgrimage to Spain, interesting and amusing but by halfway was finding a lot of the dialogue annoying. Lots of religious diatribes and spouting and contradictions. I began to weary of the non-stop barrage of stupidity and then it gradually dawned on me that Bunuel was taking the p***. Indeed I note from the closing credits that all the dogma and seeming unbelievable tosh, were all exact quotes from religious tracts and writings throughout the history of Christianity. Bunuel has, in fact, very cleverly set up a believable tale, in which along the way he manages to get so much of this stuff said that it beautifully illustrates just how crazy some of this stuff is. Still not an easy first sitting but maybe with the knowledge gained a second viewing would be more enjoyable.

Starts great, but insistence on exploring all of Catholic philosophy is somewhat exhausting.

Wonderful, spare surrealist take on religion. Bunuel as his best. I saw this as a teenager. I can't think of another film I've only seen once with so many scenes I remember vividly.

Okay, I know I got your attention with my summary. I said what I did both to provoke you (which is exactly what Luis Buñuel deliberately did in most of his movies) and to make a point. The point is that if you asked most folks to join you in a meal consisting of brains, they would say 'no way!' and think you were crazy (unless the person you ask is Andrew Zimern). This is EXACTLY like asking the average person to watch a Buñuel film. It's so strange and artsy that only a tiny percentage of viewers would have any desire to see it in the first place or stick with it once it begins. As for me, I have love some of his films but have found others just too unpleasant to watch--and I'd put "The Milky Way" in this category.

Basically, this is an Absurdist film (a type movie is generally hate)--and it's really not supposed to make any sense much of the time. So, when you see the priest tossing coffee in the policeman's face, there really isn't any reason for this other than the writer/director wanted to do this. Thinking about WHY in an Absurdist film will just make your brain explode--or at least give you a headache! On top of that, scattered very liberally throughout the film are lots and lots of allusions to Christianity--LOTS. I'm pretty sure many at the time this film debuted felt it was rather sacrilegious but to me it just seemed pretty dopey after a while--like there wasn't any payoff other than giving Buñuel a chance to air his gripes about Christianity (a very common theme in his films). Unpleasant and pretty dopey. I know many will think I am just an ignorant fool for not giving this film a great review, but I just didn't enjoy myself and that is why I watch films.

Two impoverished hobos travel on foot through France, en route to Santiago-de-Compostella, in Spain. They are on a spiritual pilgrimage. Along the way they walk into one self-contained story, absorb its value, then leave, only to walk into another self-contained story. The film's structure is thus episodic. And each episode or vignette highlights a parable about some facet of religious belief.

The encounters are set in different eras of history, as for example the time of the life of Christ, or the fourth century A.D. In each little story, inhabitants pontificate their certainty of religious belief that often contradicts other beliefs held with just as much certainty. Thus, differences in abstract religious dogma translate into aggressive and militaristic behavior, to stamp out opposing beliefs.

Throughout the dialectic narrative, a central theme seems to be the casting of doubt on old, rigid belief systems in general, and those of the Catholic Church in particular.

Visuals are competent, though fairly conventional. The script is talky. Acting and dialogue trend stagy and stilted. Music is irrelevant.

Aimed at an audience of the intellectually curious, "The Milky Way" is a message film that can be frustrating for viewers who want everything spelled out clearly. And that's the whole point. Contradictions and logical fallacies in belief systems ensure absolutely a lack of clarity; hence, a narrative journey, or way, that is confusing, opaque, cloudy, or ... milky.