Critical Approaches to Film
Genre/ Auteur Essay
Option 1:
What is genre theory?
What is auteur theory?
What will your essay be about/ cover?
Option 2:
What are the differences between auteur and genre theory? (Briefly)
Which have you decided will be more relevant to the film in question?
What will your essay cover?
Option 3:
Explain they are different approaches to film criticism. That they have
advantages and disadvantages in being used for critical analysis. Debate
from critics and criticism?
Will you be using ‘I’
or not? Choose and
then stick with that.
Brief background to the auteur
theory / genre theory. Examples of
where it came from.
What are the strengths and
weaknesses of the theory? e.g. not
taking into consideration others
involved in the film. Hitchcock - his
films are based on novels. By
focusing on the mise-en-scene, the
writing is ignored.
Does the film use elements of the
genre to construct the director’s
own vision.
How much creative control did
the director have?
Who else has thoughts on the
genre theory?
Who else has thoughts on the
auteur theory?
Are these thoughts positive or
negative towards the theories?
Jim Kitses believes the director rather than the form has
occupied critical attention (2000).
If the director receives more attention then the auteur theory is
favoured.
Explain what the auteur theory is used for: it’s about personal
authorship in cinema. Used to study a director’s works by tracing
characteristic themes, structures, formal qualities.
What genre is your film? What recognisable generic
conventions are in your film? (Think about storylines
etc…)
Pinpoint specific ones and draw on scenes/ parts of the
film.
Can the idea of an auteur director be applied to your
director?
Are there personal marks at play?
Which ones can you list? Draw on specific scenes and
parts of the film to highlight your points.
Does your director move
away from typical
conventions of the genre?
Which examples can you
give?
Think about the characters, are
these traditional representations of
the genre?
Are the characters also typical of
the director? e.g. Hawksian male
and female?
What are the themes of the film?
Typical of the genre?
Typical of the director? If it is the
latter then is auteur theory more
useful?
Are there any critics/ writers that
can back this up too?
e.g. Andrew Sarris describes Ford
as a director who would ‘often
soar beyond genre conventions’
(Sarris. 1976. 41)
If your director moves away
from typical conventions,
then is genre theory still
worth applying?
Surely auteur theory would be
more useful because the
director is putting their own
spin on the conventions?
Where can you see your
director’s style in their
other films as well as the
one under discussion?
E.G. Ford working with the
same cast.
Is there a negative aspect
to being an auteur? Using
the same faces? Same
styles? What are the
positive aspects of it? Is
the film limited by the
auteur director?
Are the two
theories at
opposition with
each other in the
film?
Do both theories
have uses? Are
they both
relevant?
How relevant is the auteur theory?
Can the director’s personal marks
of authorship be seen? (Give a few
brief examples that you’ve already
discussed).
What about genre?
Which is more useful?
Which will be more relevant when
studying the film?