Expanding on my presentation regarding the film’s context, I wanted to highlight that what makes Viridiana extraordinary is not only the film itself but the set of conditions that made the film possible. As I discussed in my presentation, in 1961 Spain was still under the authoritarian rule of Franco which was a deeply Catholic regime that used culture as propaganda to project stability and piety. In an effort to soften their image and also garner some international prestige in the arts, they allow Buñuel to return and make this film in Spain with creative freedom. I don’t know if it was merely overconfidence on Spain’s part but the irony to have Buñuel who has been exiled and is an outspoken critic of fascism and the Church, return to make this film in support of Spain creates the perfect storm especially given the that majority of the financial backing was from Mexican investor Gustavo Alatriste giving him distribution control ultimately. Viridiana’s critique of false charity and its dark humor about faith slipped past censors until its debut at Cannes where the audience immediately recognized its quiet brilliance. Winning the Palmes d’Or at Cannes turned Buñuel into a kind of international figure of cinematic rebellion while undermining Franco’s regime. Ironically, what was meant to be a gesture of cultural legitimacy became a scandal that exposed the moral hypocrisy of Franco and solidified Buñuel’s reputation as a master of subversion, which I don’t think Buñuel takes enough credit for in his various interviews on the film. Viridiana is proof that even with censorship, the power of irony, timing, and vision can make art impossible to contain which to me makes the film that much more impactful.