User Reviews

This rarely seen Franco-Mexican 'potboiler' is perhaps most significant today for being the first of seven collaborations between Spanish director Luis Bunuel and genial French character actor Michel Piccoli – who would practically become an adopted son to the surrealist master's. Although I am aware of at least one late-night Italian TV screening in the early 1990s, I finally got acquainted with it via the priceless Bunuel retrospective I attended eighteen months ago at London's National Film Theater; thankfully, I came across the film again recently on DivX and, in spite of the uncharacteristically slangy American subtitles – which were difficult to make out (despite being unusually large) whenever popping up against a white background – I now gladly revisited it to mark the 25th anniversary of Bunuel's death.

The film deals with the escape journey (up the river on a corrupt trader's barge bound for Brazil) of a band of misfits from a South American revolution triggered by the Fascist state's retrieval of the rights of any enterprising miner (read down-and-out bums and renegade adventurers) to hunt for diamonds (one of the film's various international monikers was, in fact, THE DIAMOND HUNTERS – which is how it is listed in the 1996 Leonard Maltin guide I own); incidentally, the country-in-turmoil setting anticipates Bunuel's next French movie, LA FIEVRE MONTE A EL PAO aka REPUBLIC OF SIN (1959). After a fairly plot-heavy first half which serves to introduce the major characters and, uncharacteristically for Bunuel, gives rise to some well-staged action sequences, the film really starts to hum when the disparate party of six (four men and two women) embark on their riverside trek through the deadly Amazon jungle (the "garden" of the title). Incidentally, the movie is said to have been a hefty 145 minutes long in Mexico, while being reduced to 107 elsewhere – echoing the fate of the not-too-dissimilar THE WAGES OF FEAR (1953), with which it shares co-star Charles Vanel!

The undeniable highlight comes towards the mid-point with an extraordinary succession of shots which are distinctly Bunuelian: having finally managed to kill and skin a snake, the famished travelers are unable to light a fire to cook it on so the priest (Piccoli) quietly takes out a Bible from his sack and, just as he is tearing a leaf from it, the flame is ignited; however, their elation is short-lived since their reptilian dinner has seemingly sprung back to life while being ravaged by a multitude of ants (an unforgettable image that harks back to Bunuel's life-long love of insects); in the resulting delirium from hunger, a photo of the Arch of Triumph held dearly by Charles Vanel (as it reminded him of his dream of owning a Parisian restaurant) is startlingly accompanied by the cacophony of its typical nightlife, before being summarily torn to shreds and thrown away – an act which later alerts the unfortunate bunch that they have been going around in circles! To top it all, we also have Piccoli's feverish monologue about soft-boiled eggs which, like one of the characters from Bunuel's later masterpiece THE DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE (1972), he feels compelled to impart to his fellow companions. In spite of his unsubtle name, Fr. Lizardi is easily the most fascinating character in the film – piously advocating submission to the state and yet confronted by both lust and greed when left to his own devices. Ironically enough, what finally saves the group (albeit temporarily) is the fact that 50 poor souls had to die in a plane crash, a site which they stumble upon in the middle of the forbidding jungle!

Georges Marchal (in the second of four films he made with Bunuel) plays an adventurer named Shark who is hilariously introduced by giving the index finger salute to the soldiers holding the miners at bay; arrested by the latter, they step inside a Church to pray but at the same time don't hesitate to beat their prisoner into a kneeling position, after which he is stroked by Vanel's lovely deaf-mute daughter whom he had previously mistreated himself (played by Michele Girardon who, despite having no previous acting background, would eventually land a key role amidst another ensemble cast in Howard Hawks' exhilarating HATARI! [1962]…though, sadly, her life ended in suicide at age 36). Simone Signoret plays Djin – another alternate name for this film was the bland GINA(!) – the locale's most popular whore whom Vanel seeks to marry, Piccoli is caught 'with' her by the townsfolk and Marchal loses no opportunity to beat up (in spite of her declared love for him); perhaps this was Bunuel's way of punishing Signoret who, reportedly, proved quite temperamental on the set! In any case, it was a nicely ironic and surreal touch to have her impeccably dressed in evening gown and jewelry (pilfered from the plane crash victims, of course) right before being shot dead by a demented Vanel.

Ultimately, this must surely be one of Bunuel's most accessible films and arguably his most enjoyable genre effort which, as was his custom, the director infuses with personal touches that greatly enhance both the fun factor and thematic value of what could have easily been just another throwaway jungle adventure. Judiciously, Paul Misraki's beautiful acoustic score is only utilized for the start and end credits since the jungle segment is evocatively (yet eerily) accompanied by the sounds of wildlife.

An escaped convict named Chark (Georges Marchal) comes to a little town next to gold digger's camp . In this South American settlement is living a lot of French people . Chark is taken prisoner by local militia , who accuses him of having carried out a bank robbery in a neighboured little village . The police also confiscates the gold mine for the state , due to this the prospectors start a revolt , but it is beaten . As the group of French people must flee the revolution between striking miners and soldiers . There takes place a riot ; all of them have to escape and Chark agrees to lead them to safety but their trek throughout the jungle is fraught with danger and not just from animal life . As Chark , Father Lizzardi (Michael Piccoli) , Castin (Charles Vanel) , his deaf-mute daughter (Michele Girardon) and Djin (Simone Signoret) , a whore to whom Castin is in love are fleeing into the jungle . Where they begin fighting for their lives and suffering lots of perils .

Adventure movie by the great Luis Buñuel , it is filled with thrills , action , revolts , drama and gorgeous outdoors from jungle . This isn't a typical Buñuel film , though there are some symbolism but no surrealism . Interesting and thought-provoking screenplay from Raymond Queen and Luis Alcoriza , Buñuel's usual screenwriter . Pretty good cast gives fine acting ; it is mostly formed by nice French actors such as Georges Marchal as an adventurer arrested by the local police , Simone Signoret as experimented prostitute , Michael Piccoli as Father Lizzardi , Charles Vanel as an old miner who falls in love for a whore , and Michele Girardon , early deceased at 36 , and probably best remembered for her role in the John Wayne comedy adventure ¡Hatari! . Colorful and glowing cinematography by Jorge Stahl , filmed on location in Texcoco , Catemaco , Veracruz , Mexico . Atmospheric as well as evocative musical score by Paul Misraki .

The motion picture was compellingly directed by Luis Buñuel . This Buñuel's strange film belongs to his Mexican second period . It is between Mexican epoch and French 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 with "The Great Madcap" , ¨Los Olvidados¨ , ¨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" .

This film is a surprise for those expecting one of the strange and surreal sort of movies that the director (Luis Buñuel) was known for making during the 1960s. Instead, it's a very direct sort of thing. And, while one of the main characters is a priest, no sort of anticlerical sort of subtext is apparently intended (again, unusual for one of Buñuel's films).

The film is set in some sort of repressive South American country. The local miners are all resentful of the local military that pushes them around and there is talk of a revolution. The priest urges them not to fight, as he thinks they'll be crushed--which is exactly what happens. Then he and a group of motley folks set off into the jungle to escape the carnage. Unfortunately, things aren't much better in the jungle, as hunger, torrential rain and madness are their constant companions.

Seeing how wet and dirty the actors are during the jungle scenes makes you feel a bit sorry for them. You also might feel sorry for the folks wanting a surreal film or who expect brilliance because of the film's director. Now I am NOT saying the film wasn't well made, but it could have been made by just about any director. And, while the jungle scenes were good, the beginning is pretty dull and the ending a bit anticlimactic. Not a bad film but certainly not a film for the novice to Buñuel's films--more for the seasoned fans who want to see all of his work.

CONTAINS SPOILERS .CONTAINS SPOILERS;CONTAINS SPOILERS

At first sight,"la Mort en Ce Jardin" looks like an adventure yarn for the whole family,but I hope the grown-ups are old enough to know better;it's for sure a very accessible work,when compared to former ones (un chien andalou,los hurdes,el)but do not believe the great Spanish director has lost his bite:even when he filmed "Robinson Crusoe" (another "family movie"?),Bunuel's obsessions surfaced.

What puzzles the spectator is the big budget:scope,colors(and the cinematography in the second part is absolutely enthralling),big French stars (Simone Signoret and Charles Vanel ,fresh from Clouzot's "les diaboliques",George Marshall,and also Michel Piccoli who ,though by no means at the beginning of his career,was not very known yet),and a score by Paul Miraski,one of Edith Piaf's favorite composers.

There are two jungles:the first one is Man Jungle.Its predators are the military men,its bitter fruit is religion.As the colonels humiliate,forbid,imprison,torture and kill,the priests-here represented by father Lizzardi(Piccoli)-urge the population to resign themselves to it.This priest character is very important,because he is the rough draft of what will be completely fulfilled two years later in "Nazarin"-"La Mort en Ce Jardin" will seem more relevant if you know the 1958 film-You've got to see Piccoli,bringing religious consolation to the prisoners in their dungeon:The raider Chark (Marshall ),who is practical-minded -and who's thus akin to "Viridiana"'s cousin in the 1961 masterwork- will pretend he take the priest's holy writ seriously,only in order to escape.But the best scene in which Bunuel shows his true face is the one in the church.Chark, prisoner led by the soldiers ,walks across a church where Lizzardi is celebrating mass:with his gun,one of the soldiers forces him to kneel down.Later another character will tell the priest that everywhere he and his religious mates come,begins the exploiters'reign.

This first part has often be criticized,because they say it moves too slow,but it's necessary to make acquaintance with the main characters ,who will leave the first jungle for the second one:outside Lizzardi and Chark,we have an old man( Vanel),who's forced to escape because the army thinks he is an agitator,his mute daughter,and a prostitute Djinn (Signoret,at her bitchiest).

The second part has been praised quite rightly so.Bunuel succeeded in creating a stifling atmosphere full of animal noises -the music is totally absent here and will come back only for the last shots-.The astounding cinematography enhances a green hell garden and these who thinks Bunuel completely jettisoned his surrealistic art should have a second look at it:because it is HERE,even if it's fleetingly.I will take four examples:the first one is the Paris postcard:for a very short while,we do believe the fugitives are back in their dear country;the second one is the snake eaten by ants (seen through the priest's eyes).There's more to the picture than meets the eye:the plane which had crashed in the jungle and which will save some of the characters acquires a surrealistic dimension."God has saved us!" the priest tells.But the raider is not fooled:"it took fifty people's lives (the plane passengers) to save us!".But the most extraordinary picture is Signoret,in the jungle,wearing an evening gown,complete with bright jewels,she's found in the plane.Here again,the priest will be completely helpless,his bible can only be used to light a fire (always Bunuel's practical mind).And Bunuel's religious disgust reaches a climax when the old man goes crazy and yells that God has cursed them .

That work ,generally regarded as a minor Bunuel work,is actually extremely intriguing.Although it has not the strength of such works as the ones I mention above ,it includes almost all his recurrent features.Adapted from a José André Lacour novel,dialogue by Raymond Queneau,who wrote "Zazie dans le métro",which Louis Malle transferred to the screen in 1960.

This is an astounding movie, and it's also one of Bunuel's most accessible films...

The only problem I can find with this movie is that there are no good DVD copy's as far as i know. In the copy I watched, the subs were nearly unreadable in spots and the film had faded badly. Even with those problems, it's clear that this is one of his best movies. Maybe not in his top 5, but certainly in the top 8.

Death in the garden is action packed. There's almost too much social commentary to call it a simple action film, but in every other way, that's what it is. This is a movie packed with emotional violence, physical violence, lurid sexuality (for the time)... Blood sweat tears and constant tension.. I think this may be the only Buñuel film with a protracted massive gun battle, and it's shot expertly. That scene alone proves without a doubt that Buñuel could have went to Hollywood and made big budget commercial films if he had wanted too. His command of cinematic technique would have put him right up there with the best of them, no matter what kind of movie he was working on.

But don't get the wrong idea, this is still a Bunuel film in every way. It's full of social commentary, it has touches of surrealism, his shooting style is just as awesome as it's always been and the script is as sharp as a knife.

This film has some of Bunuel's best characters ever. Sometimes the people in his movies serve as symbols for certain classes of people... Archetypal personalities... The characters from "Death in the garden" are molded to fit into certain category's, but they are more complex and multidimensional than usual. The moral Quandaries they face are difficult and the choices they make are always interesting. He's still examining the whole human race through the lens of a few characters, but his examination is more even handed than usual, and the characters are VERY memorable.

In the end though, I would say this movie has a very pessimistic view of humanity. It's a movie full of meanness, savagery, and betrayal. Even the more likable characters are portrayed as mostly useless because of their lack of initiative. The second half of this film brings to mind the disintegration into animal behavior that you see in "The Exterminating Angel"...

I could probably write for hours... Just suffice to say that this is one of his better works and it should be viewed more often... Hopefully someone like criterion will release this soon. It deserves to be re-discovered.