| This dissertation examines the juncture between three films by Luis Bunuel and the novels by Mercedes Pinto, Rodolfo Usigli and Miguel Alvarez Acosta. The primary approaches are narratological and comparative. While much of Bunuel's work has been studied from other perspectives, strict narratological and comparative analysis of the texts have been all but absent from the extensive critical work surrounding Bunuel.;After I offer a breakdown of what is to be included, chapter one offers a historical framing for the controversial topic of adaptation and the chosen "transpositional" approach by orienting the discourse to the multiple critical offerings. Furthermore, it lays the groundwork for my utilization of transpositonal theory as a tool to analyze in detail the literary and cinematic texts. The middle part examines Bunuel's life, his connection to literature and the films that he based on novels and dramas. The chapter concludes with an examination of the techniques he used to adapt or transpose literary works into films.;In Chapter two I investigate the correlation between Pinto's groundbreaking and feminist centered novel, El, and Bunuel's film of the same name. The discussion demonstrates changes to the novel's plot, characters and language as Bunuel transposed them to cinema. There is also a significant analysis of a device---silence---used by characters and how its constant presence and absence affects the storyline.;Chapter three centers on Ensayo de un crimen, novel and film, and its characters. An important part of the story is Mexico City, and its characterization triggers comparisons to film noir. Both texts are historically important, for the first one has recently been labeled as one of the most important Mexican novels of the 20th century and the second one is considered the genesis for Bunuel's eventual French films.;The fourth chapter studies Alvarez Acosta's utopian/dystopian Muro blanco en roca negra, and Bunuel's violent El rio y la muerte. The reasons are clarified on why the Spanish director eliminated certain characters and why he had to respect the message of the film, one that he fully disowned.;Finally, the conclusion synthesizes the results of the investigation and the matters that were left uncorrelated in order to contextualize the further analysis that still needs to be done on the works of Bunuel, but more importantly, literary authors that are as relevant today as they were yesterday. |
