Kira Moore

An auteur production is a “vehicle for making ‘significant statements’”. To what extent would
you agree with this viewpoint when making a comparison between your chosen films. [40]
I think that it depends on the auteur as to whether or not they choose to make a significant
statement. As a rule, however, I would agree that auteur productions do tend to make
significant statements if not outright within the moral of the film, then they carry subliminal
personal messages.
An auteur is a director whose style is easily recognisable as unique to them. For example,
Orson Welles and Ridley Scott. These directors each have an easily recognisable aesthetic
that they use to convey messages in their films.
Welles’ production of ‘The Lady From Shanghai’ (TLFM) demonstrates many of his auteurial
traits. Welles’ enjoyed using iconography such as smoke and mirrors in his films. This is very
evident during the fun-house sequence in ‘TLFS’. One of his most famous pieces of cinema
where a combination of fast cut editing and canted camera angles gave a very tense and
unclear impression of a gunfight. Welles is also deeply influenced by the Film Noir genre in
terms of his character choices. The main character in ‘TLFS’ is the classic morally troubled
anti-hero of the Noir genre and his leading lady, played by Rita Hayworth, is the classic
Femme Fatale role. She tempts O’Hara into an affair with her eventually leading to his
ultimate downfall.
Within ‘TLFS’ Welles uses these stock characters and his unique stylisation to make both a
personal statement and a larger social one. One sequence where this is very clear is the
house of mirrors sequence at the climax of the film. This is rapidly edited and really
showcases Welles’ visual aesthetic. There are many shots within this short sequence where
the characters faces overlay each other at varying degrees of transparency. There is one
particular shot where Elsa and her husband are having their standoff and Hayworth’s face is
semi-transparent and as large as the form of Sloane (playing Arthur Bannister) who takes up
the centre third of the screen. The very left third is taken up by Hayworth’s standing figure.
This one shot demonstrates the power struggle between the pair perfectly. With Sloane’s
stood form being slightly taller and more domineering than Hayworth’s next to him. He has
physical dominance over her but then her close-up next to his form demonstrates her mental
dominance over him. The fact that the lighting only covers their face and bodies so the
mirrors are virtually invisible really foregrounds the tension between the characters. This is a
shot that is cut back to several times throughout the sequence which highlights its
importance. Even without the context of the rest of the film it is clear that there is a message
being conveyed about the power dynamic of the Bannisters’ relationship and how O’Hara’s
involvement as a third party lead to its downfall. Hence the auteur conveys the social
message that getting involved with a married woman can only lead to trouble.
Scott has a similar style in his use of the Noir genre but uses less iconography and focusses
more on the motion of the film. Scott’s films are never still whether it be in lighting, sound or
literal motion. Scott’s film ‘Blade Runner’ (BR) definitely contains a much more personal
message from him as well as carrying the social message about the apocalyptic future.
Similarly to Welles, Scott has a troubled protagonist. This time a retired Blade Runner rather
than an ex-soldier. It is also arguable that there is a Femme Fatale in ‘BR’ with the character
of Rachel leading to a lot of troubles for Deckard due to her being unrecognisable from
humans in many ways. She feels and this makes Deckard’s job of putting Synths harder.
The social message Scott wanted to put across comes through really clearly in the climactic
fight sequence between Deckard and Roy. Here Scott uses his trademark shafts of light
coming through steam and the constant motion of the industrial fans and hover cars and rain
 Kira Moore

(the overall mise-en-scene is literally moving) to make the scene come to life. This scene
really epitomises the entire premise for the film as it is about life and death. Roy is expiring
because his mechanical body has come to the end of its use. The only thing Roy is trying to
achieve is lengthening his life but he has failed. So when, at the very end, when he knows
he will die he clutches to life in the symbolic form of a dove. He wants some connection with
life still so, again, he chooses to save Deckard on the brink of his death rather than let him
die. This is one of the most static sequences with the entire monologue “like tears in rain”
delivered through two different shots that are repeatedly cut back to. In this way Scott
conveys the message about life and death and the overall social statement about the danger
of developing sentient technology.
However, while it may be true for these two auteur’s that their films are a vessel for making
significant statements, it is not always true. Auteurs such as Tim Burton seek to tell stories,
become vessels for escapism rather than making a statement about the current state-of-
affairs. It is even arguable that it is not always true for Scott and Welles that their films will
always make a significant statement. Welles did an adaptation of Othello which is not his
original story so cannot be his own significant statement and Scott has done work on such
things as the spoof TV series ‘BrainDead. So I don’t think that it is always true that an auteur
production is a vehicle for making significant statements, however, in the case of the two
films I have chosen, it is true.
The significant social statement are clear in both productions, however, there is an element
of a personal message within the films as well, especially in ‘BR’. I think this really attests to
the importance of them being auteur productions. At the time that ‘TLFS’ was made Welles
and Hayworth had just gone through a divorce and, while they parted as friends and
colleagues, there was obvious tension remaining in the relationship. This feeds into ‘TLFS’
through the Bannisters’ relationship and how it slowly deteriorated throughout the film.
Welles’ personal life is reflected in the films he makes which makes ‘TLFS’ inarguably an
auteur film as well as conveying a significant message about his personal life. Whether
intentional or not. Scott’s personal life had a much darker influence on ‘BR’. He was
originally working on a film called ‘Dune’ but then his brother passed away and he moved on
to ‘BR’. One of the main aesthetics of ‘BR’ is the near constant rain which links to the north
of the UK where Scott and his brother grew up. The overall theme of life and death and the
way Deckard is powerless to save Roy’s life even though Roy saved his also greatly links to
the situation Scott was in with his brother. He could only watch him die.
Therefore, while I cannot agree completely because not all auteur productions make
significant statements I do agree that for ‘BR’ and ‘TLFS’ Scott and Welles do make
significant statements. This applies to many of their other works as well such as Scott’s
‘Alien’, another film about dystopian future and the dangers of pushing technology and
nature too far and Welles’ ‘Citizen Kane’, containing another anti-hero and his downfall.
Hence, I agree that an auteur production is a vessel for making significant statements.