Outline Essay 1

Main Argument
Using the Formalist Approach, I plan to analyze a specific scene from John Ford’s 1940 film “The Grapes of Wrath”. The scene where the entire family is eating at their Uncle’s house reveals a significant amount of information about the film as a whole.

Claim #1

The Formalist Approach yields greater value in the world of cinematic critique compared to the Ideological Approach.

Support for Claim #1

V.F. Perkins “Film as Film” – Tom Gunning “The Cinema of Attractions”

Claim #2

The scene where the family gathers to eat at their Uncle’s house in “The Grapes of Wrath” reveals how the director changed the concentration of the film from that of the novel’s author’s intensions.

Support for Claim #2

Andrew Sarris “Notes on the Auteur Theory in 1962”

Claim #3

The camera angles, editing, and other director and photographer’s choices in this scene control and reveal the meaning behind the overall film.

Support for Claim #3

Robin Wood “Pyscho” – V.F Perkins “Film as Film” – Tom Gunning “Primitive Cinema: A Frame Up? Or the Trick’s On Us?”

Betrayal is the only truth that sticks - "The Grapes of Wrath"

Unfortunately, I have never read the actual text of “The Grapes of Wrath”. In class we spent a good amount of time establishing what Steinbeck valued about his novel. From this conversation as well the others I have had about this book in the past, I have gathered an idea of what Steinbeck was looking to establish when he wrote this book. Director John Ford and his associate Gregg Toland were in charge of making the movie about this text. Although they looked to portray as much of Steinbeck’s ideas as possible in the film, Ford and Toland’s view and ideas were heavily influential in the end product. They did stay true to the text and spirit of the work in certain stretches of the movie but in overall themes, they author and director went separate ways. A scene that captures this alteration from book theme to move theme is the scene where the family has gathered to eat at their uncle’s house. The scene is intimate with the family. The viewer begins to understand the struggle and turmoil the family was personally dealing with. Steinbeck was writing this book in regards to the nation as a family. The lower class of our society could only rise up from the oppression of that time by uniting and fighting the losing battle of poverty together. Ford looked to concentrate of the family that was at the center of the film. The scene discussed displayed multiple cinematic qualities. Through the scene, the camera changes from view of one talker to the view of the others as if you were sitting across from the speaker. The camera angles allow the viewer to step into the room with the actors. These altercations that Ford and Toland made strayed away from the letter and spirit of the book. He changed the overall concentration of the book. Ford did put his on twist and signature on the film but at the cost of the original text. I would not agree that Ford was an auteur because he did not stay true enough to the spirit of the film.

I believe that when Truffaut initially thought the idea behind the Auteur Theory he had great reason and influence. The directors of his time motivated him to react to their “unfaithfulness” to the original text. Presently, I feel this theory still applies. We are seeing Hollywood not only push out a lot of movies based on books but also remakes of old movies. These categories apply because the author is looking to put his own signature on the work without losing faithfulness to the letter or spirit of the original. Most authors have their signature and their films can be identified by it. I had watched book series made into film that were directed by multiple directors and each film showed you where some authors strayed from the letter and spirit, diminishing the quality of the film, or those who were able to adapt the film to their liking while staying true.