Consider The Significance Of T Essay Research

Consider The Significance Of T Essay, Research Paper

Consider the significance of the auteur theory to the development of film theory and film culture. Is it still a relevant concept.

In this essay, I shall endeavor to outline the beginnings of the auteur theory, and show the arguments that support and oppose the relevance of the auteur theory in modern film. It is my opinion that it is still relevant, though ultimately only to the individual. That is; the theory may be more relevant to a follower of the industry, and in particular a follower of a certain director, than to a person who takes a film at face value and has no interest in its connection with past works. There are a number of arguments both favouring, and against this theory, which I will look further into. I will concentrate on the work of Steven Spielberg, showing the influences through his work and the relevance they have with regard to auteur theory.

Arising in France in the late 1940s, the auteur theory was the production of the cinematic theories of Andr Bazin and Alexandre Astruc. The theory of director as author was first put forward in Bazin’s periodical Cahiers du cinema, (founded in 1951). Two of its theoreticians, Fran ois Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard, later became major directors of the French New Wave . Unknown, (02/12/2000 [A-level Film Studies Tutorial, online]). The auteur theory means that a film is most valuable when it is the product of the director, and his personal style, rather than taken as the content of the film. The influences of the director can therefore be seen through all of his works, with aspects of his personal life often seen, portrayed in different manners, through each film. Ideally the director can be identified by watching the film, without knowing previously who is responsible for it.

A term also used closely in conjunction with the auteur is the metteur en scene. Cahier critics distinguished between auteurs and metteurs en scene. The term metteurs en scene is used to describe film directors who master the mise-en-scene, and the formal organisation of the completed film competently, but the overall meaning of the film expressed is not her or his own. Mise-en-scene can be described as the way a director sets the scene, having an eye for detail, and can be seen in the disposition of the scene and the way the camera is used etc. This can become the signature of a director. For example, Eisenstein was an auteur in terms of mise-en-scene. He constantly produced his films, showing conflict of shots, which could be further seen in all his works and recognized as being his style of film making.

With modern film making becoming more accessible to the average person, there is a greater scope of quality of film, and a greater quantity of that which is viewed by the public. This abundance of material, in my opinion, has lead to the devaluation of film as an art form, instead making film another everyday source of entertainment, which is subject to floods of bad quality that reduces the overall image. This change in overall image means that directors are instantly considered auteurs, regardless of talent, by the Hollywood Film Industry, since they will no-doubt show some degree of individuality in their work. This is most often seen when a new film is being promoted as, A Film by the director concerned. The whole point of auteurism originally was that it represented especially talented filmmakers, with strong personal points of view, using their film to get their message through and give them due credit for their work. Unknown, (24/11/2000 [Criteria for Criticism, online]).

There are various arguments in favour of auteurism and the need for it in modern film making. One such argument is that there is still a minority of Hollywood directors who have a distinct personal vision, technical competence, a distinct visual style, and an interior meaning which has arisen precisely from the tensions between the director (auteur) and the conditions of the production within which she or he works. One such case is the work of Howard Hawkes. Hawkes is a director who worked for years within the Hollywood studio system. He has worked in almost every genre. He has made westerns, gangster films, war movies, thrillers, science fiction, musicals, comedies, and even a biblical film. All of these films exhibit the same thematic pre-occupations, the same recurring motifs and incidents, and the same visual style and tempo. Another argument in its favour can be expressed in terms of genre, which can actually provide a creative tension, which enables the director to express more in a short period of time, through the audience’s knowledge of the codes and conventions of the genre, than would be possible in other films. Unknown, (02/12/2000 [A-level Film Studies Tutorial, online]).

There are, however, arguments against the auteur theory and what relevance it holds in present society. It is suggested that in the early days of Hollywood, the enormous commercial potential of cinema was recognised, and the rush to exploit that potential meant that innovation and experiment were encouraged. However the coming of sound in 1927, and the establishment of the Hollywood Studio System in the 1930s, gave way to the idea of cinema as entertainment, and producers and stars became more important in the marketing process than directors. The creative source of the film was then tak