Cahiers Du Editorial Policy Allowed Truffaut the Greatest Rcinema, One of the Most Important Journals Possible Latitude
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
New Orleans Review Spring 1989 Editors John Biguenet John Mosier Managing Editor Sarah Elizabeth Spain Design Vilma Pesciallo Contributing Editors Bert Cardullo David Estes Jacek Fuksiewicz Alexis Gonzales, F.S.C. Bruce Henricksen Andrew Horton Peggy McCormack Rainer Schulte Founding Editor Miller Williams Advisory Editors Richard Berg Doris Betts Joseph Fichter, S.J. John Irwin Murray Krieger Frank Lentricchia Wesley Morris Walker Percy Herman Rapaport Robert Scholes Miller Williams The New Orleans Review is published by Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118, United States. Copyright© 1989 by Loyola University. Critical essays relating to film or literature of up to ten thousand words should be prepared to conform with the new MLA guidelines. All essays, fiction, poetry, photography, or related artwork should be sent to the New Orleans Review, together with a stamped, self-addressed envelope. The address is New Orleans Review, Box 195, Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118. Reasonable care is taken in the handling of material, but no responsibility is assumed for the loss of unsolicited material. Accepted manuscripts are the property of the NOR. Rejected manuscripts without stamped, self-addressed envelopes will not be returned. The New Orleans Review is published in February, May, August, and November. Annual Subscription Rate: Institutions $30.00, Individuals $25.00, Foreign Subscribers $35.00. Contents listed in the PMLA Bibliography and the Index of American Periodical Verse. US ISSN 0028-6400 NEW ORLEANS REVIEW CONTENTS SPRING 1989 VOLUME 16 NUMBER 1 The Early Film Criticism of Frarn;ois Truffaut Wheeler Winston Dixon 5 Cotillion Robert T. Klose 33 Feeding Time Lisa Zeidner 34 From Peredishka to Euroflop: Cannes 1988 John Mosier 38 The Satirist's Daughter David Madden 58 Cracks in the Macho Monolith: Machismo, Man, and Mexico in Recent Mexican Cinema Charles Ramirez Berg 67 What We Don't See Laurie Blauner 75 A Death in the English Department Carol K. Howell 76 Art/Work: Capitalism and Creativity in the Hollywood Musical Eric Smoodin 79 Facing the Charms of Emma Christina Crosby 88 The Riddle L.J. Bright 98 Wheeler Winston Dixon THE EARLY FILM CRITICISM OF FRAN<;OIS TRUFFAUT Translations by Ruth Cassel Hoffman ecent collections of articles from Cahiers du editorial policy allowed Truffaut the greatest RCinema, one of the most important journals possible latitude. of cinema theory and practice ever published, do Cahiers has been translated only fitfully into a great deal to shed light on the formative years English; for a short time, Cahiers du Cinema in of the politique des auteurs. 1 However, these two English was published, but it never replicated the oollections, ably edited by Jim Hillier, which cover success of the French original. Thus, Truffaut's the decades of the 1950s and 60s at Cahiers, are writings have only been sporadically translated curious in that they seemingly seek to into English, and while his seminal "Une substantiate the Sarrisinian Directorial Pantheon Certaine Tendance du cinema franc;ais," 4 as well formulated by that critic in the Spring of 1963. 2 All as a condensed interview with Jean Renoir the selections chosen by Hillier for inclusion in (conducted with the assistance and collaboration rthis volume deal with films that have become, of Jacques Rivette), 5 a short piece on the film Dr. 'through the years, "recognized classics" of the Cyclops, 6 a review of Lang's The Big Heat,7 and dnema. What Hillier omits is any criticism which other occasional pieces have been made available 'deviates from the now-established canon. But to the English-speaking public, a large number of Ithere are other selections, previously untranslated articles remain. \untranslated, which demonstrate that several of One cannot help but think that this is extremely · 'the principal Cahiers critics, including Franc;ois convenient for those who might wish us to ignore ·truffaut, were interested in a far greater variety Truffaut's "deviant" writings. Perhaps a few of fOf filmic expression than is generally believed.3 his resurrected thoughts might clash Cahiers editor Andre Bazin in fact encouraged his uncomfortably with what has come to be the reviewers to see all kinds of films, and his accepted view of Cahiers' real critical position in the journal's early years. In Hillier's two volumes, 'Jim Hillier, ed., Cahiers du Cinema: The 1950s; Neo-Realism, Hollywood, New Wave (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1985); and Cahiers du Cinema: The 1960s; New Wave, New 4Frarn;ois Truffaut, "Une Certaine Tendance du cinema ·Cinema, Reevaluating Hollywood (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard fran~ais," Cahiers du Cinema 6.31 (Jan. 1954): 15-29; translated lUniv. Press, 1986). as "A Certain Tendency of the French Cinema," Cahiers du ·. <"· Cinema in English 1 (Jan. 1966): 31-41; also translated in Bill Nichols, ed., Movies and Methods (Berkeley: Univ. of California i ZAndrew Sarris published a first draft of his book, The ,American Cinema, in Film Culture 28 (Spring 1963). Sarris Press, 1976) 224-37. ,ubsequently revised his text, and it appeared in 1968 as The '· '·American Cinema: Directors and Directions (1929-1968) (New 5Frarn;ois Truffaut and Jacques Rivette, "Entretien avec Jean 'tiyoik: E.P. Dutton and Co., Inc., 1968). In 1986, Sarris brought Renoir," Cahiers du Cinema 5.34 (Apr. 1954): 3-22; translated fwt a revised edition of the work. as Renoir in America, in Sight and Sound, New Quarterly Series 24.1(July-Sept.1954): 12-17. '.\!·!Jean-Luc Godard, often writing as Hans Lucas, also wrote Jn!quently and persuasively for Cahiers du Cinema on American °Fran~ois Truffaut, "Notes sur d'autres films: Dr. Cyclops," ~· Much of his writing has been translated in Godard on Cahiers du Cinema 5.25 (July 1953): 58; translated as "Dr. Godard: Critical Writings by Jean-Luc Godard, Cinema Two Cyclops," in W. Johnson, ed., Focus on the Science Fiction Film Series, eds. Jean Narboni and Tom Milne, introd. Richard (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972) 48-49. "Joud(London: Secker and Warburg; New York: Viking, 1972), "'Originally published as Jean Luc-Godard par Jean-Luc Godard 7Fran~ois Truffaut, "Aimer Fritz Lang," Cahiers du Cinema (Paris: Editions Pierre Belfond, 1968). However, a good deal 6.31 (Jan. 1954): 52-54; translated as Loving Fritz Lang, in Leo ol Godard's work on the American "B" film has yet to be Braudy and Morris Dickstein, Great Film Directors (New York: i1ranslated into English. Future scholarly work on Godard's Oxford Univ. Press, 1978) 607-10. The translation in the ·criticism might profitably examine these writings. Braudy/Dickstein volume is by Sallie Iannotti. DIXON 5 only a few pieces by Truffaut are favored with been a few years. He was one of the first, translation. These articles are on more maybe the first, who had the idea to make "mainstream" films, such as Nicholas Ray's films that weren't expensive, with B-picture much canonized Johnny Guitar, or Jacques budgets, but with certain ambitions, with Becker's Touchez pas au grisbi. The selections (by quality screenplays, telling more refined other writers) in the two Cahiers anthologies stories than usual. Don't go thinking that I discuss films such as The 400 Blows, The Lusty Men, despise B-pictures; in general I like them Rebel Without a Cause, Hot Blood, Bitter Victory, better than big pretentious psychological Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, Rear Window, Angel films-they're much more fun. When I Face: 11 A" films all. This revisionist strategy leaves happen to go to the movies in America, I go many questions unanswered. see B-pictures. First of all, they are an What about the fact that Godard dedicated his expression of the great technical quality of first film as director, Breathless (1959), to Hollywood. Because, to make a good Monogram Pictures, that archetypal 11B" studio? 8 western in a week, the way they do at How did Truffaut (who, after all, wrote the brief Monogram, starting Monday and finishing scenario for Breathless) feel about the potential Saturday, believe me, that requires worth and value of the "B" film? How did extraordinary technical ability; and police Truffaut approach a critical appraisal of the "B" stories are done with the same speed. I also film, or even the 11 A" melodrama, as he did in his think that B-pictures are often better than piece on Henry Hathaway's Niagara, which will important films because they are made so fast that be discussed later in this article? How much did the filmmaker obviously has total freedom; they he reveal of himself in these hitherto unavailable don't have time to watch over him. 9 writings? Can one see in this early work some of the concerns which were mirrored in his later At this point in his career, Truffaut was only a work as a director? Why was he attracted to the critic and writer, some five years away from the 11B" film, the genre film, the serial, the crime film, creation of his first feature, The 400 Blows (1959). and films of sexual obsession (certainly evident However, he certainly agreed with Renoir's in Truffaut's lifelong love-affair with the films, thesis, and in the following selections from and themes, of Alfred Hitchcock)? It seems to me Truffaut's early critical writings, one can easily that all of these questions may be profitably see that the American genre film, in particular the explored. However, the corpus of Truffaut American crime and action thriller, had a great criticism now available attacks these queries only influence on Truffaut's later work as a film tangentially, while, as will be seen in this article, director. Truffaut himself confronts his obsessions In researching this article, I was immeasurably (theoretical, social and sexual) head-on.