John Huston vs Auteurism (What makes a good Director?)

thank you the winner is midnight cowboy the french connection the sting one two over the top the heat of the night [Music] [Music] it's hollywood the late 1960s and the hottest european trend is sweeping the scene like their european art house counterparts the directors of america are experiencing unprecedented creative control this new generation of mega directors are acclaimed by critics and box office draws what's also up ending for traditional producer-led industry this period saw an assortment of american classics and filmmakers still making waves to this day filmmakers such as steven spielberg martin scorsese and francis ford coppola and among their radical new films are the likes of the godfather easy rider and taxi driver along the way they're also setting the stage for the blockbusters of the 80s with hit films such as jaws and the original star wars even to this day the period is a constant focus of film scholars and often regarded as hollywood's creative and artistic zenith wear taboos of sex is robinson you're trying to seduce me violence race they call me mr tibbs and the american experience all came crumbling down there is a flip side however you know billy we blew it although in retrospect we characterize the new wave as a period of anything goes creative freedom of pure artistry being hit after hit with audiences among them there is a forgotten generation of filmmakers such as the likes of martin ritt george roy hill and frank perry directors whose work was just as groundbreaking and nuanced as their more famous peers yet they're largely forgotten not to mention the older generation of directors who didn't benefit from the new well of artistic license masters such as wells lang wilder and kubrick all moved their productions to europe in an attempt to avoid hollywood interference in a case of history written by the victors it seems there is a plethora of under-appreciated directors whose works can only benefit from rediscovery so the question posed is what has decided this what decides which directors become the subject of constant appraisal and stand the test of time is it enough to be a craftsman to just create great movies or is it a case of personal branding but can personality be useful to our understanding and is it fully possible to negate it to answer this we must look to the legendary director john houston it's all right to borrow from each other what we must never do is borrow from ourselves an oddity of the cinematic landscape houston paradoxically strides the line between craftsman and auteur often reluctantly or unintentionally as a result houston was one of the few directors of the classical hollywood period to somewhat haphazardly transition to the new hollywood style of filmmaking as a strong personality in the studio system and a writer houston made his films undeniably his yet his films all fit into the traditional hollywood method too much of an alter for classical hollywood and too much of craftsman for venue but before we can dive into houston himself we must first go into that monolith of film theory the auteur orter ferry began like many things with cinema the french although the notion of the director being the most important person to a film existed almost as long as narrative filmmaking the directing category is as old as the oscars themselves but it wasn't till the likes of andrew sarris francois fro and the rest of the kahirs du cinema crew till the orter ball really got rolling they first postulated the theory as a push back against what truffaut called france's cinema of quality that directors were too slavish to scripts and literary sources whilst the truly great directors took liberties with the material they praise directors whom they believe left a personal mark on their films directors such as chaplin and hitchcock the theory deposited directors as like the author of a book hence the auteur placing great emphasis on our director's singular vision and style tracking their evolution as an artist letting the artist's personal life influence their interpretation although orter ferry does have a place in film analysis its origins can largely be seen as a way to get films accepted as a serious art form drawing upon romantic notions of a spirited and willful artist there are however several notable problems with auteur theory perhaps most notably and damidly is that film productions are largely collaborative watch for the credits of your favorite films and you will see with a few exceptions especially in the case of some animations that any film will have anywhere from dozens to thousands of crew additionally there's roland bart's death of the author which renders any artistic intention mute or terfari's framework whilst at times useful can also be productive john houston's style can generally be categorized as straightforward and unobtrusive trying to be left unfelt in his films yet whether or not he actually wants it we cannot fully remove houston from his works and so we must ask ourselves is houston an auteur andrew sarris is perhaps one of the most important people to our turf theory helping bring the fury from europe to america at the cusp of the hollywood new wave he outlined these requirements for an auteur first technical competence which with one look at houston's filmography and the number of classics he's made quickly qualifies him secondly his distinct personality their films have a certain feel to them that can be linked to the director that only someone of their character could have made such as the art design of a tim burton film lastly is interior meaning meaning does their filmography reflect the personal views of the author so does houston fit the title or tear first we must find if houston has a recognizable visual style whilst houston may have had a hand in several of his film screenplays the way he composes and blocks his films isn't particularly distinguishable from the rest of classical hollywood houston generally subscribed to the hawkeye ideology of avoiding overly intrusive camera work which for him had to be primarily organically motivated such as character movement this can be frequently seen in his earlier works whilst it is true that houston's style did evolve to much more of a gritty raw realism such as with fat city this was arguably still in keeping with the industry's shift in the late 60s to grittiest storytelling rather than a creative choice whilst on screen houston style may be standard his onset method was unorthodox helping to imprint himself on his films he forgot the traditional shooting style of coverage instead carefully composing each shot using his skills learned as an artist this was done in a manner described by michael kane as like a sniper by doing this houston avoided the editor essentially editing in camera whilst his style may have not been radical as writer director and de facto editor he maintained a tight control on his films although by deliberately avoiding the editor houston is recognizing the creative power held by those other than himself realizing the editor's potential and power to massively reshape a film however although his style may not have been particularly distinct as say that of someone like david lynch we must consider this something very often not regarded that perhaps houston's personal style was that of classical hollywood that he wasn't forced into traditional filmmaking but chose it our creative preference this brings us to what i term vulgar or terrorism it seems to be that those often recognized as an auteur aren't so much those with a personal style but those whose style is incredibly overt and easy to identify these are the directors that fit more easily into the overly romantic notion of artists that's strongly underlined or terrified as often it does not apply to directors with personal styles but those whose style is overt an easy to identify personal brand often failing to appreciate and understand the work of their more restrained counterparts houston's directorial stylings may be nebulous but his personality certainly wasn't as mentioned earlier one of the key components of an auteur is an artist with a distinct personality and interior meaning in short an artist who lets themselves bleed into their work even if not intentional houston's private life shows up in his works in several ways such as the frequent use of family members like his father walter and daughter angelica both winning academy awards under his direction he even quite literally shows up in person across his filmography and his simple and restrained ethos to filmmaking can be seen as an extension to his macho straight talking persona the typical hemingway-esque artist of the early 20th century perhaps most egregious of all is not even in a houston film but in a work of awesome wells the other side of the wind now we could dismiss this film as it's not from houston however there are strong arguments for film stars as authors as individuals whose filmography contains a recognizable style but this film has houston literally playing himself or rather an idea of himself and other maverick directors of the early 20th century although the character of jake hannaford can be more easily identified as wells himself the character's relationship to peter bogdanovich being particularly telling can either use an arteris argument that wells himself denied any biographical intent or a non-orterist like death of the author further highlighting the problematic nature of the auteur but also providing valuable insights the film stars houston as an aging film director at the crossroads of the new hollywood movement the director is notably hemingway-esque dying on the same day as hemingway and satirizing his macho image with his implied homosexuality of course in order to do this whales cast houston for his own macho image known in the industry for his independent spirit houston's life was full of episodes that themselves resembled movies being part of the mexican cavalry boxing and painting on the streets of paris a cadre of macho underdogs permeate his works there are several other elements of houston's personal life that repeatedly crop up in his films like his love for mexico and ireland or his long-running friendship and collaboration with humphrey bogart houston is a textbook example of this anomaly controlling and exacting their creative process yet never trying to repeat themselves with an eclectic filmography mars's work may be too diverse to pinpoint a certain uber celebrity is too strongly tied into his works to be separated this helps him to slip by with the mega directors into the hollywood new wave in their attempt to push back against the cinema of quality they have erroneously failed to take a multitude of directors seriously falsely equating the overt with the personal oterfery even likes the idea with many looking to champion undervalued directors tapping into the romantic ideal of the misunderstood genius but until then maybe we can learn something from the career of houston not to be swept up by larger-than-life personalities and flashy camerawork not to reduce film criticism to simple biographical based cause and effect and cult of personalities yet or terrorism is still extremely insightful and must be commended for helping to move film's perception away from commercialized products perhaps if the label of auteur was extended to more with diverse voices so strongly needed in film we need to look past a pre-established canon of film directors and build something new and nuanced how about it's a deal let's keep going [Music] ah goodbye curtain goodbye howard good luck same to you

Channel: Jordan Sclater Films

Views: 8,520

Keywords: film, video essay, john huston, director, filmmaking, film production, Hollywood

Id: Nv8onLT5r5g

Length: 15min 54sec (954 seconds)

Published: Fri May 28 2021