Skip to main content

The Decline of the Auteur

Sight and Sound's latest issue features a wild bunch of out-there auteurs. Also, a fawning interview with director Quentin Tarantino. I haven't been to Cannes or seen his latest Nazi hunter film, though I know his production company once expressed interest, about ten years ago, in a Nazi hunter screenplay I'd co-written. I'll be interested in seeing his movie. I actually think Tarantino has done some expressive, stylish and startling work of importance, especially in Kill Bill 1, and he seems a key cultural figure of the 1990s. I also think it is a sad reflection on the decline of the arts, and the auteur, that, in 2009, as significant an arthouse journal as S&S should be hanging on this indie maverick's every word.

The problem, it seems to me, is that QT's ideas - if translated into a literary or literate medium (and he often speaks in terms of novelistic devices, like chapters) - would be sub-par, or even old-hat. Apart from his explorations of genre, via the lenses of violence, soundtrack and character - which he does with genius - the man has little to say. Certainly, it has become tedious to consider that his movies continue to be indulgent adolescent male fantasies, populated with sexy women, killers, and other pulp tropes. I am all for low culture meeting high culture - I am the poet who wrote a poem called Gun Crazy, after all.

I suppose I am worried that film is being colonised by a very low common denominator. Of course, Hollywood and commercial film product can and should entertain - but Tarantino makes claims to be an artist, much like Welles was, and magazines of note like S&S support such claims. Welles made the supreme B-movie - Touch of Evil - and its bravura helming is still breathtaking.

Many of the nouvelle vague films were crime-inflected, to be sure. And, the best of the film noirs are high art - as with Aldrich, one of the key original autuers, and a maker of the great Kiss Me Deadly. But is Tarantino in that Welles-Bresson-Aldrich league? Is he a Huston? I fear not, if only because his emotional palette appears so limited. He badly needs to explore humanity (if not morality) in one of his next films, much as Scorsese has done, or Spielberg. It is true that Hitchcock remained a supreme master, but also focused on depravity and murder - but his Vertigo explored a major theme that has been superficially touched upon in Tarantino's work: love.

Comments

Cheryl said…
I actually thought that his best film was Jackie Brown, for exactly the reasons that you mention. It was a shame that he didn't develop that further and instead fell back and away from the character. (I'm not saying that Jackie Brown was his most perfect film-- I'd have to give that one to Pulp Fiction, but Jackie Brown had the most heart).

(I'll go back into lurk mode now...)
Unknown said…
I just saw Inglourious Basterds. I think it might actually be his best work! After seeing it, it feels like...despite being so long...and despite being so...trying to be epic...it has a real light touch! So many of his films (even including Jackie Brown, which is fairly light), fail to be coherent. This one makes extra effort to be coherent, despite the fact he really doesn't have too. It's awesome film. I want to see it again, even though I don't have to. I knew what happened throught. But all the same, I was enthralled by it.

Popular posts from this blog

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".

THE SWIFT REPORT 2023

I am writing this post without much enthusiasm, but with a sense of duty. This blog will be 20 years old soon, and though I rarely post here anymore, I owe it some attention. Of course in 2023, "Swift" now means one thing only, Taylor Swift, the billionaire musician. Gone are the days when I was asked if I was related to Jonathan Swift. The pre-eminent cultural Swift is now alive and TIME PERSON OF THE YEAR. There is no point in belabouring the obvious with delay: 2023 was a low-point in the low annals of human history - war, invasion, murder, in too many nations. Hate, division, the collapse of what truth is, exacerbated by advances in AI that may or may not prove apocalyptic, while global warming still seems to threaten the near-future safety of humanity. It's been deeply depressing. The world lost some wonderful poets, actors, musicians, and writers this year, as it often does. Two people I knew and admired greatly, Ian Ferrier and Kevin Higgins, poets and organise