Casablanca And Bonnie And Clyde: Auteur Essay

Compare how far your chosen films reflect the auteur signature features of their filmmakers.

It could be argued that both Michael Curtiz and Arthur Penn are filmmakers who prove themselves to be more the products of other artistic, economical or financial influences and not in any way ‘auteur’ figures of cinema. Casablanca (Michael Curtis, 1942) and Bonnie And Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967) are two prime examples of each of their work that demonstrate that not only are these directors lacking in a sense of creative individualism, but that their application of style and cinematic technique are completely defined by the work or ambitions of others (whether this becomes the intentions of the studio financing the film or other artistic movements having had an impact on the director’s approach).

The 1942 film Casablanca, directed by Michael Curtiz, has gone down in history as one of the greatest movies in the history of cinema and defines the ‘Golden Age’ of Hollywood movie making. Winning best picture, this Romantic War-Drama boasts legendary stars Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. It is said to have inspired almost every Hollywood movie since its release as a result of its script and revolutionary cinematography, however; it could be argued that director Michael Curtiz is, in no way, acting as an ‘auteur’ in relation to the stylistic qualities of this film. Instead, Warner Brothers (being the studio to produce the film) is demonstrating more auteur features than the director of this feature. 

The film, taking place in Casablanca, Morocco during the war, follows the characters Rick Blaine and Ilsa Lund who had been in love in Paris before they were pulled apart by the effects of the war. One sequence which demonstrates how the studio is, quite possibly, more of an ‘auteur’ than the director comes when we’re introduced to the location of Casablanca after a sequence of non-diegetic narration. This comes in the form of a wide crane shot showing a busy area in Casablanca and the activities that take place in this area. As the camera moves down through the street, the lavish production values of the feature are revealed and a cut doesn’t take place for a considerable amount of time as to immerse the audience in this impressive, exotic environment. The ‘house style’ that the studio Warner Brothers became famous for was, predominantly, based around their pictures consisting of urban, city environments for the action to take place in and the story to develop, therefore; this is an example of how this sequence is defined, not by the director’s artistic intent, but the studio’s previously established aesthetic. 

In terms of the narrative and dialogue within a typical Warner Brothers film, Warner Brothers was known for having fast-paced back and fourth dialogue between characters that would move the plot along at a rapid rate and keep an audience entertained. This can be seen within the climatic ending to Casablanca in which we see characters Eilsa and Rick talking about their complex past, framed within a wide two shot as the camera pushes in quickly to heighten the sense of drama and emphasise the emotional importance of this moment for the audience. Warner Brothers aspired to make sequences energetic, in terms of how the narrative plays out, to keep their audience’s hooked. Their style became very famous for being dark and realistic in comparison to other studio’s productions of that era. This was because of their tendency to make crime films or dramas with realistic dialogue, which can be identified in this scene of Casablanca. This ‘house style’, at the time, was considered to be extremely fast paced and dramatic but in a way that still favoured story and empathetic, admirable protagonists in these gritty political dramas.

Director Michael Curiz started rising to prominence following his 1938 technicolour feature The Adventures Of Robin Hood which he directed for Warner Brothers. Directors like Michael Curtiz, at this time, had very little creative control in the grand scheme of the medium despite the fact that the role is now considered the most important and requiring the most stylistic decisions within the filmmaking process. However, Michael Curtiz had a lot less control over the ways in which Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, 1942) was made in comparison to, for example, Executive Producer Jack Warner. Being the co-founder of Warner Brothers, Jack Warner formed his own style simply from the genre of films he decided to finance and the atmosphere he wanted to convey throughout all of his productions, therefore providing the studio with more clearly identifiable ‘auteur features’. For example, during the final sequence within Casablanca, a hard cut takes place and we get an angled tracking shot as the camera simultaneously pushes into a Nazi driving quickly in his car. Accompanying this, is a sinister non-diegetic score which is indicative not only of whom the audience should be empathising with, but also whom Jack Warner wants the viewer to support during that time in history. This demonstrates just how much influence the studio had on the cinematic techniques utilised for film production at this time. 

It could be argued that, instead of a director displaying ‘auteur features’ as a result of style and vision, the studio is what drives the overall creative vision, enforcing thematic, narrative and aesthetic ideas into Casablanca having attained their own identity over time. Casablanca is therefore a product of this. It epitomises the ways in which Warner Brothers was producing films at this time having become famous for their specific focus on political films (social dramas) and the methods of which they create them. This makes the studio itself an auteur as a result of this.

As a result of studio decline and televisions becoming a lot more popular as a form of entertainment and storytelling, the Hollywood film industry took a significant dive financially. Following a series of court cases to do with the studios’ control over a feature’s production and release, directors during the 60s and 70s became more willing to go against the status quo of film production which resulted in such films as Bonnie And Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967) which would take inspiration from other more ambitious and boundary pushing cinematic movements such as The French New Wave.

Directors such as Arthur Penn drew lots of inspiration from global cinema as it was countries like France which were, at the time, revolutionising the way in which films were being produced from a very ambitious and artistic standpoint. Within countries like France cinema had no longer been considered an industry defined by pleasing audiences and making money and instead were aspiring to revolutionise visual and storytelling ideas. Auteur filmmakers such as Jean Luc Godard, Francois Truffaut, Jaques Tati and Ange Vada would purposefully go against the norm and build their narratives around unconventional stylistic elements (such as jump cuts or unusual camera angles and movements). Their visual techniques had a huge influence on filmmaker Arthur Penn whom, arguably, is not an auteur in his own right due to the amount of techniques he draws from others. Penn’s 1967 film Bonnie And Clyde epitomises the idea that Arthur Penn, in this case, cannot be defined as an ‘auteur’. 

Bonnie and Clyde is a classic crime romance released in a period of transition in terms of the Hollywood system. Its empathetic characters, kinetic direction and shockingly violent sequences of action has cemented it in history as a revolutionary and boundary pushing piece of filmmaking. Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow were made famous during the great depression as they would thief from banks and smaller gas stations all around the country and these activities would then make it in the newspaper for America to see. One sequence in which Penn’s creative inspirations are particularly prevalent comes during the iconic opening credits. Photos taken during The Great Depression jarringly flash on the screen. This places what’s to come within the context of the real world. Notably, there is no non diegetic composed score accompanying this sequence making this a cold and unwelcoming introduction to the world of the film. 

In terms of editing, straight ‘cuts’ are being used for the transition between each image and credit as oppose to a ‘dissolve’ being used for example. A ‘dissolve’ is most commonly used to gently allure the audience into the story, however; these jarring cuts are purposefully included to divert expectations and create a sense of unease. You could suggest that the jarring nature of a cut emulates the violent acts of characters Bonnie And Clyde. This is not typical of a classic Hollywood film and is instead more reminiscent films like Francois Truffaut’s The 400 Blows (1959) which similarly uses editing in a way that adds to a sense of realism. Arthur Penn diverts audience expectations within this sequence in the same way that French New Wave filmmaker Francois Truffaut did in 1959. 

French New Wave films were almost always shot on location giving the films’ environment a sense of realism and depth. This was also a lot cheaper than constructing set based around the sequences written in the screenplay. Bonnie And Clyde is also a film that is mostly shot on location because of the gritty and naturalistic atmosphere created by these accessible locations. For example, this style of filmmaking becomes particularly apparent when the character of Bonnie runs off into the middle of a field, followed by the character of Clyde. At this point in the story, Bonnie feels conflicted as she desperately wants to meet with her mother but understands the risks due to their criminal actions. 

The camera (in the form of a crane shot) moves up as they both run off into the distance. This expansive and cinematic type of shot demonstrates that, as Arthur Penn chose to shoot on location to achieve a sense of realism, Penn takes advantage of the natural landscape and aspires to emphasise the natural beauty of the environment he’s been provided with. During this shot, a dark cloud moves over the landscape and the field is suddenly in darkness. This further shows how shooting on location opens up possibilities for unexpected and uncontrollable natural events. Arguably, this adds to this sense of realism and (like Cinema Verite) grounds the narrative in believability from the audience. 

The film is most famous for, amongst other things, its shocking violence the likes of which most film sensors hadn’t seen before at this time in cinema history. The cold and realistic way in which killing was treated was so gritty partially due to the way in which the film is shot. Taking inspiration from Cinema Verite, Arthur Penn decided that long and disorienting focal lengths would be what makes the film feel as real as possible to the audience and would allow actors Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway to improvise in frame without the need of a camera change or repositioning the lighting setup. 

This can be seen when Bonnie And Clyde meet with Bonnie’s mother and her family at in an abandoned area to avoid being seen. The long focal lengths utilised with this sequence serves less as a stylistic choice and more of a practical one. The audience observes (from a distances) characters Bonnie And Clyde play with the children of Bonnie’s family. Not only does the long lenses compress the image and make the depth of field extremely shallow which adds to a dream like atmosphere for this particular sequence, but it also allows actors Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway to travel around freely and spontaneously without the cinematographer needing to move the camera. Instead, the cinematographer is able to track their movement in a natural and cinematic way, from a distance. 

‘The French New Wave’ is a film movement which began during the late 50s and is defined by, for the most part, experimentation (both narratively and stylistically). It could be argued that Penn embraces this to such an extent that he cannot possibly be viewed as an ‘auteur’ filmmaker. Part of how ‘The French New Wave’ was so revolutionary from an artistic standpoint was the result of artists purposefully doing things an audience would find often jarring in nature. Jean Luc Godard for instance introduced the concept of the ‘jump cut’. This technique, and many other techniques introduced through this movement, did not conform to any previously established editing or storytelling conventions and pathed the way for indie filmmakers of future generations such as John Cassavetes, Elaine May and particularly Arthur Penn during the production of Bonnie And Clyde.

It could be argued that, in the same way that Arthur Penn cannot be considered an auteur as a result of his own cinematic inspirations and how grand an impact they had over his directorial decisions, Michael Curtiz can be viewed as the same but as a result of the intentions of studios developing their own stye and creative sensibility based not on ambition or experimentation, but purely on financial gain.