ROBIN WOOD IDEOLOGY, GENRE, AUTEUR ‘heath ea one dea but mary Arabian Nigh va. msc, 197) ach theory of film 30 far has insisted on its own pris polarization. Mon- tage theory enioes eng asthe esenial creative at atthe expense of other a5- pet of il, Bazin’ elt theory seeking right the Balance, merely subsites [sown imbalance, downgrading montage and artie; the revolutionary theory cen- tered in Britain in Seren (at today very widespread) rejets—or a any rate seks to "deconstruct" arin fvorof the sealed open tx. Auteur theory, in its heyday, concentrated steno excsively onthe fngerpris, thematic o y- iti, of the iad! ats rece atempts to discuss te complete “mic tex” ave tended othow out ideas of persona autborshipallogedber. Each theory bas, {vem underlying positon, is own valdty—the validity being dependen upon {nud ested bythe poshion. Each can offer fight ito diferent areas of cinema tnd differen aspects ofa single fim. “have suggested clacwhere’ the Sesrablity for eries—whase aim should le sways be to ace the work ar wholly 3s posible a5 tobe able vo draw on the ‘dacoveries and particule perceptions ofeach theory. each positon, without com ‘tng theeles exclusively t any on. The ideal wil no be easy atin, at {ren the empl raises all kinds of problems, Ue chit of which isthe validity of ‘evaluative eter hat ar ot support by a pacar system. For what. then, do they receive support? No cite, obviusly, can be fee fom a src of vale, fo can he ot se afford to withdraw fro the sugges and tensions of UVing 16 IDEOLOGY, GENRE, AUTEUR « some postion of "esthtic™ contemplation Every critic who i wort reading has been, onthe conray, very much eaght up inthe effor to define values beyond purely aesthetic ones (if indeed such things exis). Yt to “ive historically” need ol entail commitment toa syem ora cause; ate, it can avlve being alive to the opposing pulls the tension, of en's wo “The pas two decades have seen a numberof advances in term af the opening up of crea possiblies, of areas of relevance, especialy with regard 10 Holly- ‘wood: the eshoation of aster theory ints various mafeaons he ners ‘genre; the interest in Ideology 1 wan er tentatively 10 explore sme ofthe way Inwbicn mere caparse approaches o Hollywood movies igh imerponete jr —of an Individual a, what ‘ver the function of at inthe parla society and even when (ae withthe Chartres hed) o0e no longer knows who the individ ast wee Ie sony through SR Wee a Mane ie nts veo Pom ah 9on FILM GENRES he medium of he advil hat dena lensions come ino pariclt foc hence become of eh as wells seilgkal ners. can pape be sued tht works ae of epi ines when ts dete parca of set ter with psf elo! eso nd when the im se rm mee a "Te se be iolgeal Wonder sane bas ideological tains operate in both sa Wonder Life and Sta of Det They fr ath oe ba basen Sony is by no means the excave pace of he wes, Bedford als ad Suma Rosen be stn ate ft own seventy oro Jes en ty embody the develop of he ization whose eben was cade oe sae ne by Ford in My Darling Clementine (1946) Wi is elaonip to e ‘este inthe tckground (tn Caps im made eect exis) eo ‘tension n bth Hin canbe derived in om ef ger: the Seong fn ffi oe inthe word of sallow domes comedy. ia eon cen eset in Clomeie as wal the opposonbeween te ayn td hy Tombstones.) = ms ‘The song cons presen by he two fins eis tothe decisive let of he ‘mervenion os cll defied sic peealiy Ina weolgestpers {us Boh ins havea cea ceaopa oj te reaffimaion of ly ad snulliown vale tht he con hs ale io aetna Cape feat eee, fon spite convincing (bt wh fl ectwledpeet of ape, sions on which it dpe and onan is precwioonesy in Hoses {s comply holow. The very leet enon eects af fms te a ing cath nd etn anes of Caps te“ as” (n which so my ave comes) af Hicks —ae very dl ted nt Oy Ins aes two cys denial pensalies bane Gv Wesel sevig (ne ofthe main idecopcal and thematic tesons of I a Wonder Life is ‘esuly ecard nthe see which George Buy James Sevan ad May (Donna Ree) smash windows in» dec Bowe ay & peace o mane hs Geog’ wih ge the mone oleate BefordFalle wich he Sx ‘arm nd consicing and wave abut te wor Mays wah expe ‘in words, but ni sabcqunflientonmig be ele! Wt wis dot ome if ou speak the is tse and Ceoge wl many se Son and ft ayn te sane dei eed tl a arg “Tiss devlped ugh he extended segues in which Gore me siplaed no maryng Mary is rote’ rer ome with mile snd ace eb aps George in taying in Bdfd Flt take over tary bane Wi tbehonecoming eeraons cong inet hose inh tckgoan, Gorge ‘is dicomsolay one fot prc; we beara ascertain while oon ‘resets His motes indspesaeBelsh Bond comes oat and Begs og, ein” that evi Maye appa og ain er com, Pyseay ed thy by Mie, te repped walls a pst nea op este dcton “his ead i, wit peter idologcalgenei log, to Vo (Goria Gahan). The Visa oposion san hyp er rang of cena Neth: ' i ' IDEOLOGY, GENRE, AUTEUR on wood female opposition that erose al geercboundaies—as wih Susan (Kater ine Hepborm) and Alice CVtgns Walker in Bringing Up Baby, ene (Simone Si- ‘mon) and Alice Gane Randopt) in Cat People, Chitaua (Lida Darel) and {Clementine (Cathy Downs) in My Darling Clementine, Deby (Gloria Graame) and Katie Gocelyn Bando) in Te Big Hoar Pitz Lang, 1953) But Viole (in fomt ‘of an amused aoience) rejects his poetic invitation to 3 barefoot ramble over the Ills inthe moonlight; the good-ime al fers no more solution tothe he's Wa erst than the wifemother figs ‘So back o Mary, whom he bins to the window by tenting a sick aggressively agains the fence ofthe peat, eclosed front gurden—a beaulyprecie expres Sion of his ambivalent ste of mind: desire to tract Marys tention warring with bier resentment of his growing enapment in domesticity. May is expecting hi his mothe has phoned her, knowing that George would end wp at her house. Two ‘ideological premises combine hee: the notion hat he “god” ther always know, precisely and wit absolute certude, the workings of her sons mid and the no- tion thatthe female principle i cenzl wo the coninity of svat, thatthe “weaker sex” is compensated wil a sacred rghiness. Indoors, Mary shows George carton se has drawn of George, in cowboy den- is, lasoing the moon. The moment is ich in cotadictry conotations. 1 ex: pllcily evokes the westem andthe figure of the adventurer hero fo which George spires. Ear, i was for Mary that George wanted 1 “lasso the moon” the a: ‘entre’ exploits modvated by a desire to make happy the woman who wil tally entrap im in domesticity. From Mary's poi of view, the picture i t once affectionate (acknowledging the ver's aspirations), mocking (reducing them to car featur), and possessive (reducing George an image sb ceaes an holds within he han). “The most overly presented of the film's stuetural opposition ie that between the two faces of capitalism, beng and malignant. On the one hand there are the alleys (father and son) and ther building ad oan company, ts business practice ‘based ona sense of human neeis and belie in himan goodness; on the othe, there is Pour (Lionel Barrymore), described expiily as sider, maivated by ‘red, egos, and miseines, wih no faith in human narue- Pur belongs 10 2 ‘very deeply rooted tadiion. He derives mast obviously from Dickens's Serooge (he film i set at Christmas)—a Srooge disturbingly unrepentant and. ie: ‘deemable—but his more distant anecedeats ren the ogres of fy tes “The opposition ves us not only two ates 0 money and property but two f- ‘er images (Balle, Sr, and Pots) cach of whom gives hie name othe land (Ba ley Par, in small-town Bedford Falls, and Potrsvile, the vown's dark alternative. “Most interestingly, the two figurs representing America choices, American ten ‘encies) fed thelr vivid ideological extensions in Hollywood genres: the happy. ‘sunny world of smalltown comedy (Bedford Falls is sen mostly inthe daytime) andthe word of film north dirk underside of Hollywood ideology. Potersvilo—ie vision ofthe lown ast would have been if George had never existed, sown him by his guardan angel (Henry Travers)—i jst areal” a8 (Or ‘0 more sized than) Beford Fall. The iconography of emall-iown comedy f= fchanged enmisakbly or Ut of film nol, wih police sens, shooting ia thestcets, daknes, vicious dives, aleobolsm, burlesque shows, sip clubs. and the plier and stadows of noir iin. George's moter, embitered and mlevolee. fans a seedy bordinghouse; the goodstime galife-motber opposion, wns Ino noi terms, becomes a0 opposion of posite and repressed spinseitar~ Tan, The towns emerge as equally valid images of Amedca—vaised by their ere failaiy. ‘Beside Shadow ofa Doub, I's a Wonderful Life maaages a convincing and mov- ing affimaton ofthe valves (and value of Bourgeois family if. Yet wha is r- ‘led, when dsr eleases Georges sppresid tensions, ste intesity of his resentment ofthe fanity and dese deseoy it—and with it in giant rae ‘Cols work hs ealminaing scion ie foul to overthrow the dein ‘board wit his plans for more smalltown houses). The film reengnizesexpicily tha behind every Bedford Falls rks a Potesvl, and impicily thst within every (George Baie irks an an Edwards of The Searcher. Pot, tempting George, 1S given te devil's insight nto his suppressed desires. His remark “You once Called me 2 warped, frst old man--now youre a warped, ferated young tman” i amply supported bythe evidence the film supplies, What i nally stik- fg abou the len’ afirmation the extreme precariousnes ofits bass and Pot {er suvives without remorse is time unexposed and unpunished. It may wel Be ‘Capa's masteece, but ki more tan that. Like all the retest American ims— fed by a complex generic adi and, beyond tha by the fears and aspirations of {whole crest at once anecends is director and Would be inconceivable wit om hi, “Shadow of« Doubt has always ben among the most popular of Hichcock’s smial-prod fl, with cites and publ alk, but thas been percsived in very eet, almost ismetically opposed ways. Onis appearance it was greted by Bish esa the film marking Hiichoock’'s coming fo vers with Americ: his Bath ims were psized for hel humax and "soil ers” as mocha or heir suspense, andthe ealy American fms, notably Rebecca (1540) and Suspicion (A941), seemed like atemptsaificialy to reconstruct England in Hollywood. In Shadow ofa Doubs Hitchcock (wth th id of Thornton Wilder and Sally Benson) at st brought to American mills society the shrewd, stica, ffestionste fue previously bexiowed on the Bish Isler generation of French tics (no {iby Rohmer tad Chabon their Hock Bea) praised the im for very ai (erent reasons, establishing Hs set formalism (Truffaut's “un fin fondé sar hfe and seing it ton ofthe keys 1 consistent Cahoic interpretation of fhtencock, + gore worn cut Ucn of xin sn, he os of tnosence, the fallen worl he exchange (or iterchangeabity of guilt® The French note {he family comedy beloved of Bish ens, Hat ll, aba madly annoying ds- vaction “Tat both hese views conespo to import elements inthe Fm and dvow ligt on cerainaspoce oft i beyond doubt bot, however, now appear fale and ‘mis dependent upon the abszaing of elements from the whole If hem is, ee tytn oe You Unga 1998 ‘in a sense, completely dominated by Hitchcock (ating in ts unmarked by bi ants pesoaly), a complete reading would net 10 see the smalwn-faiy lemens abd the Cul elements are deads weaving trough a comple fabric In whic, apnin,eolgieal and generic deeints ae crucial The kindof “syle” analysis have suggest (going beyond an erst in the individ aster) reves 1’ « Wonderfal Lif 38 fa nae potentially sub- ‘ersve film han has been generally recognized bat its subversive element a, in the end, succesfully contained In Shadow of Doub te Hollywood decogy 1 have sketched is shatered beyond convincing recuperation. One ca, however ce through the il its atempts to impose ict and ender things “safe” What sin Jeopardy i above all the fanly—But, give the fais central ideological sinif- feance, once tht iin jeopardy, everyting i The sll town (Sl rote in the sgyaian dream, in dal ofthe vgn land asa garden of ingoence) and the united happy family are regarded athe rea sound heart of Apeican elilizaton; he ie- logical project iso acknowledge the existence of sickness and evil but preserve ‘he family from tse contaninato, "A numberof saleies can be dicered here: the atempt to insist ona separe- tin of Unle Chari rom Santa Ross his death atthe en ofthe film as the de- Fnkve purging of ev the production o the your detective (he belly, whoe- some, smalown mal) as 4 mariage partner or Young Chats tat he family ‘may be perpetuated: above all, the alban of Lncie Charlie's sexual pathology {0 childhood secidet asa means ofexonerating the family ofthe charge of pro- ‘acing a monster, a possibly the American popular cinema, withthe conempo- ‘ary overuming of wadonal valves, can now exvisape—for example, I's Alive (Gry Coben, 1939, “The famous opening, wih its parallel introductions of Uncle Chari and Young ‘Chl, insists om the city sod he sal own as epposed sickness and evil being ofthe cy. AS with Bedford FallsPoterville, the fm ras lavishly onthe conog- raphy of ucvally discrete genes Six hos (wih ll movement and dection—he ‘dg, he panning. the eiing—consisenl ighward) leading up othe fat a- terior of Urele Care's room give ws urban echaclgy, wreckage bth human ihe ‘down-ad-ous) and material (he dumped care by te sgn "No Dumping Allowed”), children plying in he street, te nomber 13 on te lodging-house dor. Six shots {movement and dietion consist left) leading to the fist inter of Young {Charlie's room give us sunny sect with no set games (Sania Rosa evidently as parks), an onery town with smiling, pater pliceman presiding over waf- fie and pedentins. Tm Catolic terms, his is the len world again a world of apparent prelapsr- fan ianocene; but just a vali to lnterpet he images, a in I's « Wonder [fein terms of the to faces of American expalism. Uncle Charlie has money (the fits of his eres and is aberrant sexual) litered in disorder over table 2d floor te Santa Rosa policeman has bend bin the Bank of America. The tld paralting of ule and niece ca ofcourse be read as comparison as mech 1 contrat andthe opposion that of two sides ofthe sme coi. The point is clear- ‘sin that enol, profoundly csmrbing scene were fi noir erupts ito Santa Roca itl the vist wo the Tl Two bar, where Young Charli is confronted withher aer og Lovie he waist omer classmate. The sen el invites Colic nt Marni commentaries tfc ees from eel othe allen wrerleapaistconopn-an-depaton a thea oh Ameria sal The ove jntapnon of Genes as pasa each rapt he wle Frasca of claseal Haywood chews The subversion cology wid he im i verywhertncabe Hichcek's gecece othe stp dient rk at bhind tsa ae of i pc nage, Hs Cahier realy the Unger on a his wo of te Ur pe of Caboiemytnoog: tell nowt raven. The traces ae cea SSowgh You Chale wants mince sh inks of Br unl ap "he on who Se sve wr" Gad ber ter iat ks, “What do You na, sve wi" ‘Tena finds helo every aro cdg hers, et econ san ee Trae He beard meh heard me” Hick ets once oa lweangh sot of Uitte Care's in tng toward Set Ross, undetining he effect wih an on tows cing chord on he sound tek. ‘Voce Ces one oe supreme embodiment ofthe ky Hichcock gue: angus cov sds sol Wen ean Sana Ros, the image is Back aud by is sole Pom hi first oppenance, Chat sociated consistent with Spars pac comtatons ect from he oat ne seve with he ln ‘sh and openly sown nth wea oe cring ond is ead (one Shen te fim amok excep oe the pled aber, wo has apes ple sway ut), Severl lens (he ep fom Be policemen he besianin, the pap dow slammed a y fete con ive tim wi uassupema te pos: Raber tn esi te fi 2 Cale edges lope © Sno ise mars hoes the ed of sopeston hat rns trogen {Ger romber 3 the fat oo tebe "Sing Bead youl mary a rary ba {an rato dead fhe werance however noc of he rien words “Nery Widow) an he elepahy mot (be eegans te tne oping from toad he} te whole Htcerelisn see of He athe ery eile, predic fr ta have tbe hep dove. “he Hichoctan dead of repre fees chances accompanied by see ofthe empress the sre word th eeu em, ads rucily Mees he presen of he Amen salon fal in Sado of «Dow. ‘he warm nd opens, he tal esposivens anda that Capea {oem een nthe Rely fails, ser andi, of 1's Wonder ‘Gjee ere snosentrely lcking-and his espe atin el of ae Slgia! crest tha te teament the family in Shadow of Dob sees Any been ected even one gus, by Hihcock hime) a eon "he mt ing cacti ofthe Specs ie separa ofeach me ter th curing pi of teen veiaping gu is Dato oe eve cm win anyone es sayng, Esch std na separate fanasy wor Eney in he ps Je ite, Ate a books tha fe ead apparel ess fr pean han asta of smasng knowledge wih which ses teem a conc hs ao ees a rei te eh we), Te pc ae eepel pet mata (bth pod to Youre Chae’ ds Eilon wih sump ath ing som mony ad ance on "hon i | | i | toi” asthe means of using up energies. In Shadow ofa Doub he Seologlcal image ofthe alow happy fai becomes the inset facade, That s many se nonetieless deceived by i testis only he strength ofthe deology—one of ‘whose faetons is of court ahi the imagining of radial alemaives ‘have argued elsewhere that te key o Hitchcock’ msi es suspense than sexuality (or, alleratively, tht his suspense” always cars sexual eharge in ways sometimes obvious, sometimes ese) and tht Sexual relaashis in his ‘Work are inevitably based on power, the obsession With power and dread of impo- tence beng as cena o his method ao his thematic. tn Shadow of a Doubt is above all sexuality that racks part the fail facade, As fara th Hays Code p= ‘mite, double incest theme runs tough the film: Uncle Chae and Emmy, Un- ‘le Chae and Young Charlie, Necessary, his is expressed tough images and ‘mots, never becoming verbally explit cera ofthe images depend on 3 Sop ‘pressed verbal play fr ther sgifeanee or the reunion of bother and sister, Hichock gives us an image (Emmy posed Jet of sere, arested in mid-movement, Charl ight, under tees and sunshine) that icongrapicllyevakes the eunon of lovers (Chari wants to see Emmy agin ts she was when she was "the pts gion the block’). And Emmy's break ‘down in front of her embarassed friends and neighbors, atthe news of Chatie's limminentdepanure is eloquent. As for uncle and niece, they are inroduced sym ‘mercally Ing on bed, Uncle Charlie fondling his halle cigar, Young Chari prone, hands teind bead. When Uncle Caries of the tain he is Bent ove Sc, pretending oe ll as son ashe sees Young Chat he "comes erect.” Nut [shag the sek. One of his first actions on aking over er bedroom i 0 pluck a rose fr his battonhoe ("deflowering"). More obviously, there isthe business with Ie ring which, a a symbolic token of engagement, ot only inks Chale sexu ally with her wel, but also inks her, trough its previous obersip, 10 his se- ‘exscion of mery widows. The im shows sexual phology the esr ofthe Amer. ican farily, he necessary product of ts represslons and subliatons "As forthe "scedent"tat od eric! stumbling Block—it presents no problem tall, provided one is eady to acknowledge te validity ofa psychoaraytial read Ing of movies Inded, it provides ater beaoifl example of the way ia which ideology, in seking wo pose ise, succeeds merely in confirming ts ova sub- version. The “accident” (Chale was "riding a biel" forthe ist time, which re Sus ina “olson ca be ead a an elementary Freudian mete forthe auto ‘of premature sexual awakering (afr which Chale was “oer the sme again) ‘The smothering sexual/pssessve devotion ofa doing eke sister may be lft 10 provide cle tothe seal motivation behind the metry-widow murders; Chale 1st interested in money. Indeed, Emmy is connecied tothe ery widows by an sociative chain in which import links are her owe practical widowhood (het ieectsl usta is largely ignore, her ladies cla, and ts leading light, Mr Pour, Uncle Chat's potential next-inine 'A aller analysis would need to dwell onthe tinittons of Hitchcock's vison ‘nearer the nlite han the rage; on his nal to conceive of repressed ener fie as ober than evil and the srface word that represses them a oter than shal- {ow and unulling. This explains why there can be no heaven comespondig ©on FILM GENRES, “ste for vey von of even tht ee ev io a ‘Scotter tinh recon ot ody, which ich LSSEivay dey Bat my al ss seo evaluat of pair ices har oe plains for acca fhe Hlywcd nema Sa eee crcten an pl aciny The ben epg 1 Sfoninte Hlywost gers ania be very elo tac ody aoe coefe Bt och oe ggete nd sien» wa ‘Santee Dougie ould eer ave ese wn BRUCE KAWIN THE MUMMY’S POOL Helo: Have be ep 1 ad seage dams. reas of scien yp ‘Thar wa someone ike Jou in an Avath Bey My pol sometimes woul, Oot se stage fais in ew they pase eas t Si Jl Talo: stores se ater, When Wt come oh eaves | one rts The Karl Freund's The Mammy (1933), George Waggnet's The Wolf Me Reginald LeBors's The Mummy's Ghost (1944), and Peter Weir's The 1 (1998) each pointe some very ineresing connetions among horor fi ‘mares, and propetcdeams—comections that might ep expla wha do and why they remain interesting 1 viewers who probably stopped be Dracula along with Santa Cau. To clarity Some af hese points—such a tions between displacement and refeivity, prophecy andthe atraction: theft vito.” catharss andthe Land of the Dead reincarnation and ey itis mecessary to define the elementary ways in which me are ike dean bwoad characterises of hoor film as a genre. Witching afm and having a dream ar both passive and active ev ‘reameaudenc i physialy cushioned in darkened room, mos of | ‘mens restricted to light shits of postion ina ed o ei, and mental, us deers of lens, watching vl ros ton els or