The usefulness of the term “auteur” has been questioned by some commentators as failing to acknowledge the complexity of the filmmaking process. With reference to one of the directors studied so far on the module, discuss the degree to which analysing his films through an auteurist perspective can help or hinder understanding. You should take into account the ways in which your chosen director uses the resources of cinema as a medium as well as the question of personal vision.

Film director Pedro Almodóvar was symbol of Spain’s newfound freedom in the post-Franco democracy and has since developed into the dominant figure of contemporary Spanish cinema. Paul Smith (2000: 5) describes him as “the one true auteur to emerge in the 1980’s”, while many commentators see him as a “consummate and undisputed auteur” (Jordan and Allinson, 2005: 77). However, attempting to conclusively define Almodóvar as an “auteur” is challenging as the concept has been consistently defined and redefined since its inception. Vernon and Morris (1995: 13) state, “Models of auteurism at work today bear scant resemblance to the term’s original meaning”. Through an auteurist perspective, we must consider how both Almodóvar and his films conform to aspects of both the original ‘theory’, such as personal vision and ‘signatures’, and subsequent developments of the concept focusing on areas of collaboration and commercialisation. Our conclusions can then be used to determine whether Almodóvar’s status, as an auteur or not, helps or hinders our understanding of his films.

The original term “auteur”, pioneered in the pages of French journal Cahiers du Cinéma in 1954, instilled filmmaking as an art form, resulting from the personal vision and distinctive style of a single individual, most commonly identified as the director. The concept was both popularised and internationalised in the 1960’s by American critic Andrew Sarris with his notion of “auteur theory”, defining auteurism under a theoretical framework. Sarris (in Grant, 2008: 43) outlines ‘distinguishable personality’ as the second of three criteria used to recognise an auteur. He underlines this by saying that a director must exhibit “recurring characteristics of style, which serve as his signature” and their films should have “some relationship to the way a director thinks and feels”. Almodóvar directly adheres to this premise due to his unique personal vision, filled with visual and stylistic ‘signatures’ that are heavily influenced by his origins.

La Movida, the extreme social and cultural reformation of 1980’s Madrid, provided the context for Almodóvar’s early films and arguably shaped the director’s vision. Almodóvar used this setting of newly liberated Spain to challenge gender roles in his films, rejecting traditional conventions to focus on gay characters that no longer speak of guilt or homophobia. One aspect is his total restructuring traditional Spanish family, often void of a father figure. In La ley del deseo (1987), he presents an unorthodox family unit in which Ada’s father figure is a homosexual and her mother his transsexual brother.

Many recognisable signs of Almodóvar’s authorship reside in his treatment of mise-en-scène, his highly stylised sets and his trademark use of colour. The explosion of colour seen in his films links well with the high drama and corresponds to both his and his characters’ personalities. Through his personal vision, all his colours are meticulously coordinated and combined via props and costumes. Frequent use of red, typically associated with Spanish culture, provides a constant link to his origins. The vitality of his colours was his way of fighting the austerity of his origins in La Mancha (Strauss, 2006: 86).

Perhaps his most characteristic ‘signature’ is his mixing of genres, often combining melodrama, comedy, romance and thriller within the same film. While some interpret this as a metaphor for the new liberated Spanish identity, others see Almodóvar’s awareness of genre a vehicle for his personal vision, presenting him as the artistic auteur. His originality lies in his hybridity, seeking independence from the constraints and conventions of European cinema. Even as aspects of Almodóvar’s films eventually adhere to classical conventions of Hollywood structure, the generic boundaries remain undefined.

Viewing Almodóvar against original models of auteurism can significantly aid understanding. The ability to witness Almodóvar’s recurring personal vision and its influences provides viewers with a basic platform from which to start analysing his other films for the first time. Furthermore, knowledge of his ‘signatures’, such as generic hybridity, bright pop aesthetics and challenging gender and sexuality roles, gives us an insight to the cultural explosion and during La Movida, even after Almodóvar’s transition towards Hollywood with Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios (1988).

Challenges to auteurism highlighted failures to describe the inherent complexity of filmmaking. Subsequent developments acknowledge many resources of cinema that directors have access to, such as collaborators and commercial aspects of the process. Having examined how early auteurism influences our understanding of Almodóvar; we must do the same using these developments.

In 1972, Perkins (in Grant, 2008: 70) stated, “Individual creative responsibility and artistic control are limited wherever filmmaking is a group activity; that is, almost always.” This became the focus of criticism surrounding the auteur theory as it allowed critics to ignore creative collaboration, an element both “standard” and “undeniable” (Nelmes, 2012: 152). Academic studies questioned whether a film, as a product of a fundamentally collaborative process, could ever be attributed to an individual creative source, and if so, who? Bordwell and Thompson (2010: 30) respond by saying the most commonly accepted solution is to regard the director as auteur, “as their role comes closest to orchestrating the stages of production which most directly affect how a movie looks and sounds”. This modified form of the auteur recognises the director’s involvement through linking and coordinating collaborative elements into one and directly relates to Almodóvar’s hands-on approach.

For Mujeres… (1988) Almodóvar actively involved himself in areas of production typically outside the role of director. During shooting Almodóvar himself would often act out the characters and instruct the actors to imitate his delivery of the dialogue (Smith, 2000: 100). Furthermore, Almodóvar himself picked out the bright pink costume that Julietta Serrano (“Lucia”) wore for the final scene of the film (Strauss, 2006: 84), seeing its dramatic and comic potential when combined with the character’s murderous intent. Almodóvar also collaborated with fashion designer Juan Getti, designing the opening collage title sequence (Strauss, 2006: 84). His pursuit of realising his personal vision in his films drives this involvement, in this case presenting an elegant pop aesthetic to help establish the film’s feminine world for the audience.

Considering Almodóvar as a postmodern auteur, the contribution of skilled collaborators is central to this status. On the production side, he worked habitually with his brother, Agustín, who produced his films and Pepe Salcedo as editor, whilst his group of actors included Antonio Banderas and Carmen Maura. With his role as orchestrator, Almodóvar was able to delegate to these trusted and competent personnel, knowing they were sympathetic to his personal vision and would help him achieve it. He knew his actors fit the roles he wrote, once describing Banderas as, “the perfect vessel for his transgressive early pictures” (Brooks, 2011). Almodóvar personally acknowledges the importance of collaboration following the release of Matador (1986). He found the producing to be “strictly a bureaucratic task” that “played no active role in production” (Strauss, 2006: 63). Almodóvar enjoyed and profited from his professional partnerships and had no interest in continuing such non-collaborative relationships with producers, leading him to establish his production company, El Deseo.

Arguably the latest academic development is the extra-textual notion that Timothy Corrigan calls “the commerce of auteurism” (1991), that progressed from the increasing cultural visibility of directors, not linked to their role as filmmakers (Nelmes, 2012: 153). Paradoxically, whilst contemporary film theory has attempted to break free from auteur theory, technological change and marketing ‘savvy’ have reinvigorated discourse (Jordan and Allinson, 2005: 72). Manifestation of the auteur-star can be seen as a modern revision of Sarris’ ‘distinguishable personality’, whereby primary access to the auteur is not through their films but rather the media, through numerous interviews, promotions and trailers.

Almodóvar is a prime example of the auteur-star who has mastered the art of promoting his own films and cultivating his public persona. The international success of Mujeres… was partly due to Almodóvar’s huge commitment to its promotion. His influence is shown as he himself appears alongside the cast in publicity shots for the film. Furthermore, the rubric ‘un film de Pedro Almodóvar’ preceding the names of actors in the credits affirms his authorship and recognises the commanding presence of Almodóvar as a brand. This element is critical to understanding Almodóvar’s cinema and how it “lays siege to the traditional notion of auteur, re-inscribing it as a postmodern phenomenon” (Vernon and Morris, 1995: 16).

Whilst acknowledging his marketing ability, due to the underlying belief that commercial control is incompatible with artistic accomplishment, critics repeatedly deny Almodóvar the status of traditional auteur (Vernon and Morris, 1995: 15). However, Almodóvar evidently personifies the postmodern auteur, for whom maintenance of celebrity persona has become at least as important as filmmaking. It is difficult to underestimate the contribution that collaborators lend, helping to achieve high levels of continuity across his films. These aspects influence our understanding in several ways. Some argue that audiences prefer to form their own opinions about films rather than having judgements clouded by preconceptions from interviews, while others prefer not having to think when viewing a film. Commercial aspects tend to dominate audience’s thinking about a film and there is certain scope for auteurs to manipulate these to further instil their personal vision on their audiences, as perhaps Almodóvar does.

I examined Almodóvar and his films through an auteurist perspective from both its original concepts and subsequent developments, showing they can significantly help understanding. He lays claim to the status of contemporary auteur, not only from his role as director, but also through his control of the resources of cinema and involvement with production and commercial aspects of the filmmaking process. By conforming to this status, it is easier to identify Almodóvar’s personal vision and ‘signatures’ and facilitates analysis of these intentions, seeing his work as a collection of films, across which patterns are generated. This perspective establishes setting for his films and helps audiences understand why certain directorial decisions are made. Hindrance to this understanding will most likely to come from ambiguity surrounding the many definitions of auteurism.

Word count: 1649
Bibliography
Allinson, M. (2001) A Spanish Labyrinth: The Films of Pedro Almodóvar, London: I.B. Tauris.

Barthes, R. (1968) ‘The Death of the Author’, in Grant, B. (ed.) (2008) Auteurs and Authorship: a film reader, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Bordwell, D. and Thompson, K. (2010) Film Art: An Introduction, 9th edition, New York: McGraw-Hill

Brooks, X. (2011) Antonio Banderas: Almodóvar and me – Interview, [Online], Available: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jul/29/antonio-banderas-interview-almodovar [5 January 2013]

Caughie, J. (1981) Theories of Authorship, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

Cornelius, K. Auteurs: Hitchcock, Almodóvar, and Burton, [Online], Available: http://pittqueerfemfilm.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/auteurs-hitchcock-almodovar-and-burton/ [4 January 2013]

Corrigan, T. (1991) ‘The Commerce of Auteurism’, in A Cinema without Walls: Movies and Culture After Vietnam, London: Routledge

Dafni, K. (2011) Pedro Almodóvar’s Renegotiation of the Spanish Identity, [Online], Available: http://www.moviesin203.org/2011/01/pedro-almodovars-renegotiation-of-the-spanish-identity/ [4 January 2013].

Davies, A. (2007) Critical Guides to Spanish and Latin American Texts and Films: Pedro Almodóvar, London: Grant and Cutler.

D’Lugo, M. (2006) Contemporary Film Directors: Pedro Almodóvar, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Edwards, G. (2011) Indecent Exposures, London: Marion Boyars

Grant, B. (ed.) (2008) Auteurs and Authorship: a film reader, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Jordan, B. and Allinson, M. (2005) Spanish Cinema: A Student’s Guide, London: Hodder Arnold.

Jordan, B. and Morgan-Tamosunas, R. (1998) Contemporary Spanish Cinema, Manchester: Manchester University Press

Kinder, M. (1987) ‘Pleasure and the New Spanish Mentality: A Conversation with Pedro Almodóvar’, Film Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 1: pp. 33-44

Nelmes, J. (ed.)(2012) Introduction to Film Studies, 5th edition, London: Routledge.

Pardi, R. Film Reference: Pedro Almodóvar, [Online], Available: http://www.filmreference.com/Directors-A-Ba/Almod-var-Pedro.html [4 January 2013]

Sarris, A. ‘Notes on Auteur Theory in 1962’, in Grant, B. (ed.) (2008) Auteurs and Authorship: a film reader, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Smith, P. (2000) Desire Unlimited: The Cinema of Pedro Almodóvar, 2nd edition, London: Verso.

Stam, R. (2000) Film Theory: An Introduction, Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell.

Stone, R (2002) Spanish Cinema, Harlow: Longman.

Strauss, F. (ed.) (2006) Almodóvar on Almodóvar, London: Faber.

Triana-Toribo, N. (2008) ‘Auteurism and commerce in contemporary Spanish cinema’, Screen, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 259-276.

Vernon, K. and Morris, B. (1995) Post-France, Postmodern: The Films of Pedro Almodóvar,
Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

Wollen, P. ‘The Auteur Theory’, in Grant, B. (ed.) (2008) Auteurs and Authorship: a film reader, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.