film Q&As
sharon1997
AndrewSarris.pptxAndrew Sarris
Notes on the Auteur Theory in 1962
One of the challenges of Sarris’ work is his subjectivity. While he attempts to be objective, there are several instances where this is not the case.
When he starts describing auteur theory, he says that critics can assume a “bad director always will make a bad film. No, not always, but almost always, and that is the point.” (42) There is an assumption here that we all agree on what constitutes a bad film and/or a bad director. According to Sarris, a bad director is “a director who has made many bad films.” (42)
Andrew Sarris
Andrew Sarris
His “first premise of the auteur theory is the technical competence of the director as a criterion of value.” After making this claim, he then notes “what constitutes directorial talent is more difficult to define abstractly.” (43) If he cannot discern a director’s talent how can he determine his/her technical competence? Are talent and technical competence two distinct ideas that do not overlap?
Andrew Sarris
“The second premise of the auteur theory is the distinguishable personality of the director as the criterion value. Over a group of films, a director must exhibit a certain recurring characteristics of style, which serve as his signature. The way a film looks and moves should have some relationship to the way a director thinks and feels.” (43)
He dismisses the work of Joseph L. Mankiewicz and Billy Wilder because they are “without adequate technical mastery.” Wilder won Best Director Oscars for The Apartment (1960), Sunset Blvd. (1950), The Lost Weekend (1945); his also won Oscars for writing those films as well.
Andrew Sarris
Joseph L. Mankiewicz won Best Director Oscars for All About Eve (1950), A Letter to Three Wives (1949); he also won the Best Writing for those films.
Note that Sarris’ opinion about writer-directors appears to be in contrast to how Truffaut views this group. Truffaut praised writer-directors such as Hitchcock.
Andrew Sarris
The third aspect of auteur theory is “concerned with interior meaning, the ultimate glory of the cinema as art.”
Sarris seemingly notes the arbitrariness of his theory when he states that “If I could describe the musical grace note of the momentary suspension, and I can’t, I might be able to provide a more precise definition of the auteur theory. As it is, all I can do is point to the specific beauties of interior meaning on the screen and, later, catalogue the moments of recognition.” (43)
Andrew Sarris
Andrew Sarris
Sarris eventually describes technical competence as “simply the ability to put a film together with some clarity and coherence.” (44)
