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
[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/
[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/
