Sample Essay #1 Alfred Hitchcock: Auteur du Cinema. By: Keara Williams

What constitutes a great director from a good director? How must a director compose his films in order to set themselves apart from the rest? According to film critic Andrew Sarris, a director must adhere to the auteur theory. Sarris divides the definition of auteur theory into three premises constructed as three coaxial circles. He describes “the outer circle as technique; the middle circle, personal style; and the inner circle, interior meaning”[1] A director must possess these qualities in their films in order for them to be considered an auteur du cinema. However, not all directors make the cut for auteur du cinema. They fall into what Truffaut denotes as the ‘metteur en scenes’. Auteur theory is heavily “concerned with interior meaning, the ultimate glory of the cinema as an art.”[2] This is the third premise – otherwise known as the mise-en-scene. It requires the innovative creations of the director to use certain formal elements in a stylistic way that is autonomous to them. It is analogous to the stamp a craftsman marks on their product. Looking at Alfred Hitchcock, he is arguably deserving of the title of auteur. Analyzing two well-known thrillers he has directed known as Psycho (1960) and The Birds (1963), they encompass recurring formal elements and themes that audiences can tribute as Hitchcock’s style. Hitchcock’s artistic arrangement of cinematography, and sound, or lack thereof, grants his films a distinctive quality in which classifies him as an auteur du cinema.

Hitchcock’s cinematography is well-known and respected for two main techniques. This includes the zooming in or out of a camera’s lens and actual physical panning motion of a dolly to confine the scene or create space. In the The Birds and Psycho, Hitchcock decided to make the opening scene in both films not begin with just a simple, static shot but rather a slow pan into the action. In The Birds, the camera tracks Melanie Daniels movement to keep her in frame. The camera pan movement mimics that of the point-of-view of a bird in flight. It’s as if Melanie Daniels is being watched closely by a bird and we, as the audience, experience the bird’s watchful gaze ourselves. Regarding the birds as a whole, they seem to have a sole purpose of disrupting the narrative. A loud bird caw interrupts this calm progression into the scene. Hitchcock cuts to a point-of-view shot of Melanie watching the birds amassing in the sky. This foreshadows the importance of the birds in the film. The tracking movement of the camera is picked up again when Melanie enters the pet shop.  Hitchcock utilizes the continuity-editing technique so our eyes can follow Melanie as she interacts with Mitch and the birds in the pet shop. The attraction of the two characters is evident as we watch them both move about the space forming a courtship. Our leading man and lady can be seen as two love birds themselves. This conclusion can be made by the audience due to Hitchcock’s clever decision of using a dolly to move in and out of the scene with no interruptions. In Psycho, the same fluid motion into the opening scene applies. However, its significance differs from what is seen in The Birds. Hitchcock systematically progresses the scene. The camera pans over the normal city atmosphere of Phoenix, Arizona and then proceeds to zoom in on an opened window, darkness awaiting us on the inside. The audience is sucked into a world “of claustrophobia, anxiety and shady love between two unfree people, the two lovers Marion Crane…and Sam Loomis...behind the Venetian blinds in their hotel room”.[3] Hitchcock’s choice of the pan and zoom shot sequence is not to be taken literally. This opening scene is packed with metaphorical and figurative underlying meanings.  The camera movement sort of soars across the illuminated city and then slows to an ominous zoom towards the dark, enclosed world of the lovers. Hitchcock has intentionally created a “sequence [that] is exclusively visual except for Herrmann's music, signifying the transition from normal to abnormal”.³ This scene also gives insight as to why Marion Crane stole the forty-thousand dollars. Clearly her criminal act demonstrated how desperate she was to be with her lover and make a life for them.

Another technique that is impeccable in Hitchcock’s cinematography is his extensive use of close-ups. This technique can highlight the reactions of characters to the action. In The Birds, this is evident with Melanie’s expression as she witnesses the gas ignite from inside the restaurant. A series of rapid cuts from her face back to the catastrophe about to unfold generates the suspense. The spectator and Melanie are helpless to stop the explosion from happening. The audience shares Melanie’s abject terror due to the intense, repetitive close-ups on her face. It is very unnerving to cut back from the shot of where the disaster is about to happen and Melanie’s horrified face. Hitchcock strategically times the interjecting cuts so the audience can witness every succeeding shot displaying the fire getting closer and closer to its target - the gas station. This scene from The Birds almost, if not completely, correlates to the famous ‘shower scene’ in Psycho. Here, Hitchcock uses a close-up to highlight an object and a reaction. The audience can infer what ‘Norman’s mother’ is planning to do with the knife with the use of a close-up. The abject terror that emanates from Marion Crane’s face as she is being stabbed to death (accompanied by a bloodcurdling scream), is captured by a close-up shot. Hitchcock utilizes the same intercutting technique seen in The Birds, in Psycho. The shots switch from the ominous figure - to Marion - to the knife in succession. Hitchcock films the murder scene this way for maximum grotesque effect.

This close-up technique is also very effective when highlighting the little details in a scene.  Hitchcock draws attention to objects that he urges the audience to keep a close watch on. In The Birds, Hitchcock creates suspense in the lead up to when Melanie Daniels is brutally attacked by a swarm of birds in the attic. There is another use of the subjective point-of-view shot as she ascends the stairs bravely, yet unaware of her horrid fate. She lingers by the door uneasily. The audience watches with great intent as the camera focuses in on Melanie’s frail, outstretched hand that is reaching for the doorknob wearily. The suspense that Hitchcock creates leading to the climax is unbearable. The audience and Melanie, will soon know that this act of heroism was a mistake. In The Birds and Psycho, “each item mentioned here plays an integral part in the plot of each film and the way he filmed them ensured that each is recognizable to the audience later in the story”.[4]   Alfred Hitchcock - the innovator he was - coined the term ‘MacGuffin’.  The MacGuffin “[refers] to an item, event, or piece of knowledge that the characters in a film consider extremely important, but which the audience either doesn’t know of or doesn’t care about”.[5] In Psycho, when Marion Crane is planning to leave town, Hitchcock uses close-ups to highlight the important objects in the room such as the money. The money close ups, along with Janet Leighs expressive acting, hints to Marion’s thought process of whether she should steal the money or not. This close up can be taken as a point-of-view shot from Marion’s perspective to convey her infatuation with the stolen cash. This, to her belief, is a ticket to a better life. Due to the importance the money has, it would be considered the MacGuffin. Hitchcock intended that some of the objects importance was not to be revealed immediately but rather, exposed later on in the film. For example, the stolen money in Marion’s possession progresses the narrative when the highway parole officer asks for her registration and even when she folds it up in the newspaper at the Bates motel.

Hitchcock’s art of cinematography could not be as spectacular as it was without the use of sound to compliment it. The “Psycho screenplay suggests that Hitchcock was anticipating and experimenting at minimizing music, an attempt that was eventually to culminate in the Birds, which had no conventional musical score at all”.[6] When Bernard Herrmann, the composer hired to score Psycho, cleverly scored “shrieking violins tearing at Janet Leigh’s vulnerable torso, along with Anthony Perkins’ knife, [Hitchcock] gave his nod of approval”.[7] The same high pitched cry cultivated from the stringed instrument during the ‘shower scene’ is analogous to the aggressive bird shrieks signaling their incoming attack. Their abrasive caws coalescing with their barrage upon the townspeople made a frightening effect. Hitchcock’s utilization of isolated sound - rather than music - seemed to be the key to make a notorious thriller. The lack of sound in Hitchcock’s films speaks volumes as well. In The Birds, silence fills the Brenner house whilst fear, anxiety and anticipation brew inside Mitch, Melanie, Lydia and Cathy because they all know what horror is to come. “The influence of silent movies remains strong in Hitchcock’s films, which are characterised by sparse dialogue and long stretches where the narration proceeds purely through visual images”.[8] For example, “in Psycho, there is a 17-minute sequence without dialogue”⁸ where the audience witnesses Norman hiding the evidence of Marion’s murder. “Hitchcock has to rely on cinematic techniques to advance the story and hold our attention”⁸ since dialogue is non-existent.

In conclusion, Hitchcock was more than just your average director. ‘Hitchcock’ is still a popular household name to this day. People honour Hitchcock’s recurring themes and formal elements as they are autonomous to his film legacy. His technical competence of the mise-en-scene allowed him to interpret the formal elements in ways done by no other. This resulted in creating his own personal style that even director’s today attempt to recreate - such as Gus Van Sant. Every shot, image and scene was carefully crafted to fashion a visual masterpiece. His work in Psycho and The Birds is concrete evidence of his originality in film making. To say that Hitchcock just made a couple good horror movies is absurd. It was his cinematography, the sound-track and his use of metaphorical meanings that gave him that distinctive quality and put him a cut above the rest. Consequently, Alfred Hitchcock is well-deserving of the title ‘auteur du cinema’.

  

Bibliography

Aurora, “The Hitchcock Signature”, Once upon a screen. (2012), accessed March 12, 2016.

http://aurorasginjoint.com/

Fordham, Geoff. “Hitchcock’s place in film theory: a significant auteur or director of insignificant

pictures?”. Crimeculture, accessed March 12, 2016. http://www.crimeculture.com/

“Hitchcock Film Analysis: Vertigo, Psycho and The Birds”. El cine signo. (2011), accessed March 12, 2016.

elcinesigno.wordpress.com

Sanchez, Jose. Introduction to Film Studies Readings. Canada: Pearson Canada, 2015, 2007, 2006).

Sanchez, Jose. Introduction to Film Studies Readings. Canada: Pearson Canada, 2015, 2007, 2006).

Grongarrd, Peder. “Hitchcock’s Cinematic Style,” P.O.V. No. 4.(1997), accessed March 12, 2016.

http://pov.imv.au.dk/

Sound in Psycho”. FilmSound.org, accessed March 12, 2016. http://filmsound.org/

Vertlieb, Steve. “The Torn Curtain”. Herrmann and Hitchcock. (2002), accessed March 12, 2016.

http://www.bernardherrmann.org/

---

[1] Jose Sanchez, Introduction to Film Studies Readings (Canada: Pearson Canada, 2015, 2007, 2006), 105.

[2] Jose Sanchez, Introduction to Film Studies Readings (Canada: Pearson Canada, 2015, 2007, 2006), 104.
[3] Peder Grongarrd, “Hitchcock’s Cinematic Style,” P.O.V. No. 4.(1997), accessed March 12, 2016. http://pov.imv.au.dk/
[4] Aurora, “The Hitchcock Signature”, Once upon a screen. (2012), accessed March 12, 2016. http://aurorasginjoint.com/
[5] “Hitchcock Film Analysis: Vertigo, Psycho and The Birds”. El cine signo. (2011), accessed March 12, 2016. elcinesigno.wordpress.com

[6] “Sound in Psycho”. FilmSound.org, accessed March 12, 2016. http://filmsound.org/
[7] Steve Vertlieb, “The Torn Curtain”. Herrmann and Hitchcock. (2002), accessed March 12, 2016. http://www.bernardherrmann.org/
[8] Geoff Fordham, “Hitchcock’s place in film theory: a significant auteur or director of insignificant pictures?”. Crimeculture, accessed March 12, 2016. http://www.crimeculture.com/