The film “Exterminating Angel”
Introduction
The film “Exterminating Angel” is Luis Buñuel’s most darkly funny and vicious satire of upper-class mores, an exenterating description of how easy the aspects of civility, dignity and respect can be dilapidated; the movie follows a bunch of visitors at a dinner party.
How the bourgeois treated the working class
From the film the “Exterminating Angel”, the bourgeois treated the working class with a lot of injustices such as cruelty, as well as murderous violence. This is also supported by the fact that, they are humiliated and denied a chance to leave (Buñuel pg8). In other words, the relationship between the bourgeois and the working class is presented based on the struggles between the two groups or the savagely enforced class structure depicted in the film.
Stratification also between the groups of bourgeois
The film shows stratification amid the groups of bourgeois; in regards to Max Weber layers of social class (class, status and power), the differences among the groups is depicted based on class or money (Buñuel pg11). There are groups of poor and rich people. For instance, the guests attended a party organized by an upper-class couple; the couple were wealthy; this distinct the upper-class/ wealthy couple from the other group of the bourgeois (low class) in terms of wealth. Having attended the party, the lower class guests were unable to leave. Another difference that exists between the groups of bourgeois is that, there existed two groups differentiated based on political power in the society.
Stratification from; conflict theory, functionalism and interactionism
Stratification describes a system of classes, or categories. From the movie, “The Exterminating Angel” stratifications can are depicted from functionalism, conflict theory and interactionism based on various instances in the movie. For instance, in terms of conflict theory, in even before the guests realized they were unable to leave, the dinner party itself demonstrates the inherent conflicts between the guests since they were divided into clusters and every each group was gossiping about the others (Buñuel pg13). There is also an instance of class conflicts, majorly seen between the working class and the bourgeois. Functionalism states that, various parts in a society are social organization, each designed to achieve dissimilar needs. For example, the film depicts a Catholic society created to murder Spanish liberals. The film offers a depiction of interactionism from human interaction and behaviour, in the sense that, guests are seen to turn on one another and selfishness overrules the better good.
Functions of the Animals in the film
The animals presented in the film such as two bears, several sheep and even a chicken leg were to be used for different purposes; the animals were to be used for entertainment purposes, while the chicken leg was to be used for rituals as a charm for good fortune. Additionally, the chicken leg as presented in the film was to portray witchcraft practices or for ritual performance; this can be seen when Ana Maynar illustrates her gullible nature with the chicken leg in her purse in addition to a ceremony from the Kabbalah (Buñuel pg23). The sheep have also been presented in an allusive way, in the movie, frequently as a censure of the
bourgeoisie in addition to its conventions. In general, the animals were used to expose instances of human savagery.
Conclusion
Conclusively, the film ends with a series at a church which posits the likelihood of a whole new film, applying a similar subject and switching it from bourgeois to the clergy. The conclusion forms a multi-layered as all details appear complex, proposing the recurring nature of misery, its recurrent presence as well as the arbitrariness of its appearances, in addition to the union amid the upper-category and religious organization; Buñuel asserts that the Church and the bourgeois can be satirized in similar manners.