{"id":47227,"date":"2020-08-18T11:31:09","date_gmt":"2020-08-18T18:31:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/?p=47227"},"modified":"2020-08-18T11:31:09","modified_gmt":"2020-08-18T18:31:09","slug":"hal-ashby-and-the-rise-of-the-auteur","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/?p=47227","title":{"rendered":"Hal Ashby and the Rise of the Auteur"},"content":{"rendered":"

Paper by Torrey Nicholson.<\/p>\n

\"\"One notable development in the world of filmmaking in the late 1960\u2019s and early 1970\u2019s was the rise of the \u201cauteur\u201d director. As defined by the Oxford Dictionary, the term \u201cauteur\u201d describes \u201ca filmmaker whose personal influence and artistic control over a movie are so great that the filmmaker is regarded as the author of the movie\u201d (Auteur). The rise of this younger generation of auteur filmmakers marked a significant shift in the world of film. Prior, the primary guiding authority throughout the production of a film had been the studio, but the new wave of auteurs ignited the Hollywood Renaissance (otherwise known as New Hollywood, or American New Wave), which saw the majority of authority move into the hands of the director. One director who perhaps exemplifies this renaissance the best, is Hal Ashby.<\/p>\n

Unsurprisingly, the most prominent thematic styles featured in the Hollywood Renaissance era closely mirrored the values and views of the greater American youth culture of the time, who made up the films\u2019 target audience. American youth culture in the 1960\u2019s and 70\u2019s is largely characterized by anti-establishment and counter-culture values, moral ambiguity, and an affinity for social deviance. While these ideals can manifest in many different forms, the work of Hal Ashby reflects them all in a manner that is artistically significant, without losing poignancy in the commentary.<\/p>\n

That being said, Ashby\u2019s exemplification of the American New Wave Cinema extends beyond his films. Ashby himself was a walking snapshot of the era. Ashby was a \u201c\u200bvegetarian with crooked teeth, (who) couldn\u2019t be bothered with vagaries or politesse,\u201d (Fennessey). For every bit as much as the youth culture favored individualism, they despised authority. Ashby, while perhaps not considered among the \u201cyouth,\u201d certainly was no exception to the subscription of this ideology. He was a \u201ccommitted rebel and inveterate pot smoker, the beat of his drum was in sympathy with a spiritual drift through life, and he scorned authority, systems and indeed earthbound materialism in general\u201d (Mantgani). In his earlier days as a young editor, he would purportedly \u201cspend all day watching film, then sleep four hours a night, and then smoke a little pot, run a reel, ruminate over sequencing, and begin cutting and dissolving frames\u201d (Fennessey). Perhaps it was his early days working as an editor on such films such as \u200b \u200bThe Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming\u200b (\u200b 1966), and \u200bIn The Heat of the Night\u200b (1967), both directed by Norman Jewison, that sparked his disdain for, and ultimate rejection of the studio system.<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2018The studio is not your friend; the studio is the enemy of the artist,\u2019 director Norman Jewison told Ashby during their collaboration, which is advice he took to heart\u201d (Mantgani). It is no surprise that Ashby took the advice to heart, as according to Bud Cort (the titular Harold), after filming \u200bHarold and Maude,\u200b Paramount took control of the edit, which devastated Ashby. Cort, who had become close with Ashby during production, threatened to withhold promotion of the film. Ultimately Ashby was given control, but it would result in his good friend Cort being blackballed for decades to come (Godfrey). Not only did Ashby clearly share many of the aforementioned values of the era, it was his willingness and desire to find his own method of creating, deviating quite starkly from the traditional and \u201caccepted\u201d methods of filmmaking brought about in the Classical Hollywood Era, that ultimately set him apart and led to his success.<\/p>\n

In order for one to best understand the multitude of changes that occured with the New Hollywood era, and how Ashby most clearly exemplifies them, one must first have an understanding of the typical characteristics of the preceding Classical Hollywood era. \u201cThe Classical Hollywood Style follows a set of norms, paradigms, and standards that match and gratify viewer\u2019s expectations. In other words by the end of a classical Hollywood film, answers for all questions have been provided and one doesn\u2019t leave the cinema perplexed and startled\u201d (\u200bTiwtarriela).<\/p>\n

When one begins to examine popular films of the Classical era, those norms and paradigms become all the more apparent. To see this more clearly, we will briefly examine the work of Robert Wise, a renowned Classical era director, known for films such as \u200bThe Sound of Music\u200b, and \u200bWest Side Story\u200b. The narrative structure in Wise\u2019s films, and \u200bWest Side Story\u200b in particular, closely follow the unwritten rules of the Classical era. The film is built around the typical three act structure, with an exponentially escalating and overarching conflict (in this case it is the \u201cforbidden\u201d relationship between Tony and Maria, who belong to rival gangs) that eventually results in an all out brawl (between the two gangs) near the end of the third act, before the conflict is ultimately resolved (as the Gangs are able to make amends after their feud results in Tony\u2019s death). Wise\u2019s \u200bWest Side Story,\u200b similar to the vast majority of its Classical era contemporaries, is a film whose story is a sort of chain reaction of events that fit neatly inside of its runtime.<\/p>\n

Beyond this, the Classical era cinematography sought to make the camera seem invisible to the audience, almost as if to create the illusion that one was there, in the story–forgetting they were watching a film. Not to mention, the subject matter was restricted to only a very few number of categories, namely \u201c\u200bWesterns, screwball comedies, musicals, animated cartoons, biopics, melodramas (weepies), monster movies and war pictures\u201d (\u200bClassical Hollywood Cinema), with few exceptions.<\/p>\n

As the younger generation of auteur directors began to gain more control over the creation of their films, the New Hollywood era films began to look much different than their predecessors, with clear inspiration from the French New Wave Cinema movement of the decade previous. Similar to the French New Wave, the American New Wave films began to become more artistic and experimental. The subject matter began to expand, creating dozens of new genres and sub-genres, the cinematography began to become more surreal (at least in the sense that it were more clear to the audience that the story was, in fact a movie–in contrast to the Classical era\u2019s \u201cinvisible camera\u201d tendencies), and the narrative structure became more free-form, often much less reliant on an overarching conflict, but rather exploring the world and emotions of specific characters or groups of characters.<\/p>\n

While these changes are on display in each of Ashby\u2019s films (as well as those which he received credits other than \u201cdirector\u201d on), the film that perhaps most clearly exemplifies them is Ashby\u2019s breakout hit \u200bHarold and Maude\u200b (1971). Ashby\u2019s cult classic tells the story of the unconventional romance between 20 year-old Harold, \u200ba death-obsessed loner who acts out against his oblivious mother by repeatedly faking his own death in a series of increasingly egregious fake suicides, and Maude, a mischievous 79-year-old car-jacker, nude model, amateur painter, and aroma collector. One major characteristic of the American New Wave was pushing the limits of storytelling beyond what was once acceptable, and needless to say, the portrayal of a romantic relationship with a nearly 60 year age gap was quite shocking in 1971 (and perhaps remains shocking to this day). That being said, the film is not so much a romance story, but rather a comedic and off-beat examination, and ultimate confirmation, of a social outsider. The film expresses a great deal of anti-establishmentarianism, such as with the satirization of Harold\u2019s classical conservative mother, and (presumably) her brother, Harold\u2019s uncle, the hard-nosed, one-armed, stern military commander purported to have been General MacArthur\u2019s right hand man. Furthermore, the film has an underlying core devotion to individualism. The most clear example of this comes just over a third of the way into the film, when Harold tells Maude which type of flower he would most like to be. Harold settles on a white dandelion, and gestures toward a sea of them. \u201c\u2018Why\u2019s that?\u2019 Maude asks. \u2018I don\u2019t know,\u2019 he replies thoughtfully. \u2018Because they\u2019re all alike?\u2019 Maude reassures Harold that that\u2019s not true, that every flower is different in some way. Ashby caps this scene by ambiguously juxtaposing those white flowers with a panoramic shot of identical white headstones neatly arranged in a cemetery.\u2019\u2019<\/p>\n

This scene seems to hint at the idea that we all wish to fit in, especially since we typically perceive others as fitting in, but that in reality everyone is an individual, and that ought to be embraced. As one author put it, \u201chere lies the individual; Ashby knew him well\u201d (Abrams).<\/p>\n

Perhaps even a step further than this (although a bit on the nose) is the scene where Harold explains to her why he ritualistically fakes his death. Harold recounts his first fake suicide, and begins to laugh uncontrollably, which quickly turns to sobbing. Maude then delivers what could potentially be seen as the film\u2019s underlying theme (or one of them) in soliloquy form. \u201c\u2018A lot of people enjoy being dead. But they\u2019re not really dead. They\u2019re just backing away from life. Take a jump. Get hurt, even. Play as well as you can.\u2019 She continues by insisting that the only real answer to Harold\u2019s problems is to, \u2018L-I-V-E: live,\u2019 emphasizing, \u2018live\u2019 with brio. Then she playfully scrunches her nose up and jokes, \u2018Otherwise, you\u2019ve got nothing to talk about in the locker room\u201d\u2019 (Abrams). Similar to Ashby\u2019s own ideology, this scene expresses the importance of indulging in one\u2019s interests, and marching down your own path.<\/p>\n

According to the Criterion Collection, \u200bHarold and Maude\u200b \u201ctook values that had been expressed by youthful rebels and dropouts in the late 1960s\u2014peace, love, understanding, distrust of authority, a determination to march to the beat of a different drummer\u2014and put them in the mouth of an old woman embroiled in one of the oddest and most original love stories ever filmed\u201d (Seitz). \u200bHarold and Maude,\u200b similar to much of the New Wave Cinema, does not fit squarely into any category, follows a completely unconventional storyline that was not only unprecedented, but socially reprimandable, and has a deep philosophical regard, which, at the very least, prompts the viewer to question their understanding of life in some regard. For all those reasons, it is perfectly exemplary of the greater Hollywood Renaissance era.<\/p>\n

What makes Ashby himself, however, most exemplary of the era, is that those same values and characteristics are presented quite differently in a number of his films. That is to say, while there are certainly a number of other directors that embody the spirit of the American Renaissance, Ashby seems to be the best overall representation of the era, given that he created a number of quite different films that each present the qualities of the era in a different manner. While directing \u200bHarold and Maude\u200b alone may have made him a decent candidate, Ashby went on to direct a few other films, such as \u200bComing Home\u200b (1978), which can just as easily be seen as representative of the American New Wave. As the British Film Institue put it, \u200b\u201cF\u200b rom the cold open featuring a discussion on the war cast with improvising real-life veterans, to the film\u2019s rock-n-roll mini-climaxes as the players crack up about or fight back against the system, to its lyrical moments of intimacy, \u200bComing Home\u200b is an accessible, unsentimental spectacle of characterisation that\u2019s an overpoweringly moving and nimbly crafted example of Ashby\u2019s compassion and his rage\u201d (Mantgani).
\nHal Ashby himself was a man who would have not been out of place as a character in his own films. He was individualistic in nature, paid close attention to detail in creating his films, but was not so authoritative as to create them entirely himself. Instead, Ashby would opt to let his actors develop the characters. This allowed his films to develop naturally, as well as expand in depth, as certainly each actor has something unique to provide that Ashby himself could not. This is perhaps the most important characteristic of the auteur. \u201c\u2018Don\u2019t ever stop searching it,\u2019 Ashby once said. \u2018Make your film so goddamned good that you see something in it all the time. Every sonofabitching time you sit down and thread up a god damn reel and you punch a button and you start to look at it, you get a different idea. And whether you pursue it or not doesn\u2019t matter. The film will tell you what to do\u2019\u201d (Fennessey).<\/p>\n

While it is certainly possible to better understand the Hollywood Renaissance with a deep examination of a number of different directors and films from the era, an examination of Ashby himself, and a few of his films is certain to yield strong results.<\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/strong>
\nAbrams, Simon. \u201c’Harold and Maude’: A Comedy That Happens When Absolutely Everything Goes Right.\u201d \u200bPolitico PRO,\u200b 4 Mar. 2012, www.politico.com\/states\/new-york\/city-hall\/story\/2012\/03\/harold-and-maude-a-comedy-t hat-happens-when-absolutely-everything-goes-right-067223.
\n\u201cAuteur: Definition of Auteur by Lexico.\u201d \u200bLexico Dictionaries | English\u200b, Lexico Dictionaries, www.lexico.com\/en\/definition\/auteur
\n\u201cClassical Hollywood Cinema.\u201d \u200bClassic Art Films Classical Hollywood Cinema Category,\u200b www.classicartfilms.com\/film-movements\/classical-hollywood-cinema.
\nFennessey, Sean. \u201cThe Realistic Magic of Hal Ashby, the Greatest Director of the 1970s.\u201d \u200bThe Ringer,\u200b The Ringer, 6 Sept. 2018, www.theringer.com\/movies\/2018\/9\/6\/17826818\/hal-ashby-documentary-harold-maude-la st-detail-hollywood-shampoo-being-there-coming-home
\nGodfrey, Alex. \u201cBud Cort: ‘Harold and Maude Was a Blessing and a Curse’.\u201d \u200bThe Guardian\u200b, Guardian News and Media, 10 July 2014, www.theguardian.com\/film\/2014\/jul\/10\/burt-cort-harold-and-maude-blessing-and-curse.
\nMantgani, Ian. \u201cWhere to Begin with Hal Ashby.\u201d \u200bBritish Film Institute,\u200b 2019, www.bfi.org.uk\/news-opinion\/news-bfi\/features\/where-begin-hal-ashby.
\nSeitz, Matt Zoller. \u201cHarold and Maude: Life and How to Live It.\u201d \u200bThe Criterion Collection,\u200b www.criterion.com\/current\/posts\/2337-harold-and-maude-life-and-how-to-live-it.
\nTiwtarriela. \u201cClassical Hollywood Style.\u201d \u200bNever Stop Wondering,\u200b 31 Aug. 2013, rjctarrielacinema.wordpress.com\/2013\/06\/26\/classical-hollywood-style\/.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Paper by Torrey Nicholson. One notable development in the world of filmmaking in the late 1960\u2019s and early 1970\u2019s was the rise of the \u201cauteur\u201d director. As defined by the Oxford Dictionary, the term \u201cauteur\u201d describes \u201ca filmmaker whose personal influence and artistic control over a movie are so great that the filmmaker is regarded […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":504,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[72,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47227","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-academic-papers","category-films"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47227","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/504"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=47227"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47227\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":47228,"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47227\/revisions\/47228"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=47227"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=47227"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studentfilmreviews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=47227"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}