Film and the Auteur Theory - Essay Example

Student’s Name] [Instructor’s Name] [Course Title] [Date] Film And The Auteur Theory All films are collaborative in nature, every film has an author who is the mind behind the movie; the director of the film. A director is an artist capable of working with traditional means and genres and yet be able to impose an aura on the films which sets it apart from others. The term ‘auteur’ was first coined by French film theorists as ‘politique des auteurs’ and refers to a director who commands creative control over a particular body of work and utilizes a sequence of identifiable themes and stylistics which make it different yet recognizable. A few famous auteurs are Hitchcock, Steven Spielberg etc. Some renowned names amongst the French theorists who proposed the auteur theory are Claude Chabrol, Francois Truffant and Eric Rohmer who are claimed to be specifically interested in Hitchcock as an auteur (Caughie, 22-6). According to the Auteur theory, a director makes use of the commercial apparatus available for making films in a manner similar to that of an artist using his canvas and paintbrush or an author using his pen (Caughie, 22-6). It is a medium that serves the need of artistic expression, individual to every director. Andre Bazin, a famous film theoretician described the auteur theory as a method of selecting the personal element in the artistic creation which then becomes a standard for future reference and usually goes on from one film of that director to the next. The auteur theory is regarded as a myth by many while some consider it useful for analyzing the works of other actors who perform in the star system (Sterritt, 91-6). In accordance with the auteur theory, the masterpiece films will prominently bear and speak of their maker’s signature style, which might become the trademark of that individual director and may go on to manifest itself in other bodies of work too. (Truffaut, 64-7) Alfred Hitchcock confirms to this idea in most of his films where he ensures that he makes a screen appearance even if for a very brief cameo spot. This turned into a game as the audience would anxiously await his appearance in the film, guessing all the way in the film as to when he would appear. The critics of the auteur underplay the structural elements and the historical components to stress on the combined logic that structured the movie. These critics analyze the complete range of works of any director; picking out common themes, symbols and/or elements that help describe the vision of the auteur in question (Grant, 45-7). Also the critics prefer the directors who stick to traditional genres like suspense, drama etc, as they offer the most chance to analyze the individual sensitivity even if the medium is cliché. At the time of development of the auteur theory, Hitchcock’s name was synonymous with it as an accomplished exemplar as his name raised standards and expectations about the theme and techniques of execution of the film. As it well suits the master of mystery, Hitchcock, his movies juggled with the audiences’ nerves at best, be it sexual or any other tabooed subject. Consider for example ‘Strangers on a train’, ‘Psycho’ and ‘Marnie’ all of which have a constant element of black comedy and an unconventional characterization (Grant, 45-7). Hitchcock is known to be influenced by German expressionists and immensely appreciated their potential to convert thoughts into a purely visual medium (Spoto, 68). Hitchcock attempts to achieve the same expression of ideas and psychology through his masterpiece films. All of the films by Hitchcock have his signature cinematic techniques which are further demonstrated in his handling of camera views, detailed editing and addition of sound tracks to create the desired suspense. For example, Notorious consists of a remarkable zoom in from an elevated shot position to an extreme close-up of a very significant plot detail. Similarly, in Blackmail there is abundant use of intricate sound tracks and dialogues surrounding the word knife, depicting emotions such as guilt (Stoddart, 78-83). Another signature element of Hitchcock is his attribution of symbolic might to lifeless objects like a lamp or a bulb or a bread knife as in Blackmail. There is also evident stress on the creation of set pieces where he demonstrates his extreme talent for suspense building and detail orientation. Notorious contains many important examples of Hitchcock’s signature themes, like a woman being forced to transform as a different person who is eventually brought to its fruition, a motherly figure being both caring and deadly at the same time and the MacGuffin that is described by Hitchcock as being a narrative instrument that compels the actions of his characters but that is not of much interest to the people watching the film. In Notorious, the MacGuffin was uranium that was hid in wine bottles in a basement (Hollows, 11-6). May critics also regard Hitchcock as being the first director ever who was able to transcend the studio trademark and establish his own. In those times, films were easily identifiable as being the work of a particular studio, based on the facilities it provided, Hitchcock was able to exhibit his creativity and individuality to an extent that people watching the film could see the Hitchcock trademark rather than focus on the studio aspect of the film. Despite all criticism, the auteur theory was the first rational step to create a basic framework to properly categorize the wide variety of mass production taking place at Hollywood. As auteur theory established itself through writings of Cahiers and also through work of Sarris, Andrew, its propositions expanded to cover a lot many aspects. For instance, it gave cinema a status comparable to that of literature and other forms of art which have meaning. It was established that despite being made in collaboration, a film will have value and meaning when the director plays the leading role. A director establishes his status as a true auteur through recurring themes, styles and images over his work (Hollows, 11-6). A true director would use his creative powers and abilities to rise above the limitations imposed by commercialism. With special reference to Truffaut, the essence lay with the unique language of cinema where real auteur exhibited their creativity and skills to conquer the specific elements of cinematography. To see whether the work done by Hitchcock makes him worthy of the auteur status or not, lets analyze a few elements that make one befit for the auteur status. If brash individualism is necessary then Hitchcock presents a sharp obsession and a strong claim. He is renowned as one of the most self-publicized directors of all times (Bordwell, 14-6). He had an ample flair to find ways into his films. He possessed a distinct style which focused on how influential Hitchcock was in controlling and capitalizing every conceivable chance to show his self-consciousness, mastery over the subject matter and his distinct mark in performing suppressive tasks. His camera style alternates between being omniscient; cleverly masking information in order to add suspense and subjective where he focuses on the narrative from a single character’s frame. The variety of styles is a proof of Hitchcock’s mastery over cinematic techniques as a medium for story-telling. In the famous interview with Truffant, Hitchcock voiced his disappointment over the use of sound as he was a staunch believer that the availability of the dialogue diminished the significance of the filmic description (Truffaut, 53-8). He aired his famous statement about the films being made then as he considered them to successive shots of people talking. He also said that one should resort to dialogues in movies only when there is no other option available for the expression. Hitchcock was a staunch believer of story-telling in a cinematic manner. Nearly all works of Hitchcock are heavily influenced by silent movies; being dominated by silent stretches conveying narration through strong visuals and punctuated by dialogues where necessary. The extent of this was in the remake of ‘The man who knew too much’, where in a scene with McKenna and his wife at Albert Hall proceeds without any dialogue for as long as ten minutes. Similarly, in Psycho there was a seventeen minute scene without any form of dialogue whatsoever. Since Hitchcock masters the art of story telling without relying on dialogue, he excels in his use of cinematic techniques which keep the audience interested in the movie. To assess whether the auteur theory is a myth or not one has to analyze a few other aspects. There are certain limitations to the auteur theory (Bordwell, 14-6). First of all it disregards the collaborative effort that goes behind e very film by giving exclusive authority and credit to the director. Every single step of film making involves discussion and feedback from the entire team involved in the process. Every now and then films are made on the same subjects and when one film turns out to be better; we give credit to the auteur and ignore the hard work of the writer of the movie. However, this aspect of the auteur theory does not attract much importance (Hollows, 44). A few features that add to the aura of an auteur include the visual sense but this also includes the vision of the set/costume designers, cinematographers and directors of photography too. Given all the circumstances the classic perspective of the auteur belonging solely to masterpiece movies and to the contribution of the directors is rather illogical. Every film is a collective team effort which entails hard work by each member of the team to realize the vision of the director (Truffaut, 64-7). The current studies in film-making do not value the auteur theory. It is only given the status of a part of an evolutionary puzzle in the history of cinema studies that resulted in the conception of better ideas, applicable in film making today. The auteur theory is nowadays, regarded as a myth due to the over-simplifications and contradictions present in it. Nonetheless, it cannot be completely dismissed in film studies as the critics continue to revolve around a director-focus approach when analyzing the value and creativity of any film (Leitch, 67-9). Having considered all the facts surrounding the auteur theory, I still consider that Alfred Hitchcock was a true auteur and deserved the title. Film making has now progressed with novel techniques and computer technology advancing cinematic techniques beyond ones imagination but, at the time when Hitchcock was directing films and producing his masterpieces, technology was not this far-fetched and the vision of the director was certainly the most important aspect in bringing the film together (Leitch, 67-9). Film-making was even then a collaborative process, as it is today, but the pieces of the puzzle were combined together under the guidance of the director to create a cinematic masterpiece for the viewers. Another important fact is that people admire few film makers because of their signature style or because they are able to transform a story into a film with life (Truffaut, 64-7). Thus, the auteur theory has played an important role in shaping the manner in which we see movies today. Film theorists from a variety of schools have found Hitchcock to satisfy the unique approaches that they put forward (Leitch, 142). It cannot still be determined to what extent the film theory has evolved by extrapolating from what is available in film literature or if it comes from sources that are beyond the scope of the cinema. Another aspect to be kept under consideration is that Hitchcock was a commercial film-maker who went for and also succeeded in achieving box-office thriller successes (Bordwell, 33-8). Hitchcock was fueled by an obsessive desire for financial security and career stability and he also used his auteur status as a marketing method, but nonetheless, Hitchcock was an auteur and exhibited his creativity and mastery over the art of film-making. Works Cited Bordwell, David (2005), The Classical Hollywood Cinema Routledge, London Caughie, John ed., (2001) Theories of Authorship London, Routledge Grant ,Barry (ed,) (2003), Film Genre Reader III, University of Texas Press, Austin Hollows, Joanne ed, (1995), Approaches to Popular Film, Manchester University Press, Manchester Leitch, Thomas (1991), Find the Director and other Hitchcock games University of Georgia Press, Georgia Spotto, Donald (2003): The Life of Alfred Hitchcock, Collins Sterritt, David (1993), The Films of Alfred Hitchcock CUP, Cambridge Stoddart, Helen (1995) ‘Auteurism and film-authorship theory’ Truffaut, Francois (1967): Hitchcock Truffaut, François (2008), Hitchcock  Paladin, London Read More