"Psycho" Essay 1 Outline

Main Argument:

• ·         I am going to take an ideological approach to further analyze the scene from Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho where Marion Crane is in her bedroom with the stolen $40,000 packing her suitcase.  Although both a formalist and an ideological approach are applicable to Psycho, this particular scene I think is best looked at through the eyes of an ideologist.

Claim 1:

·      Ideological Approach and Sergei Eisenstein:

o   According to Eisenstein, the meaning of a film is arrived at through relationship between two successive shots, independent of one another.

o   Support: Sergei Eisenstein’s article “The Dramaturgy of Film Form”

·      Formalist Approach and V.F. Perkins:

o   Perkins takes a “synthetic” approach to criticism in which he considers how various elements of a film compliment the film as a whole. What one particular scene means in context with the entire film.

o   Support: V.F. Perkins excerpt from “Film as film: Understanding and judging movies.”

Claim 2: Ideological Approach

• ·      In the scene where the audience correctly assumes that Marion is about to leave town, a sequence of shots occurs which begin with a medium shot of Marion in her bedroom, looking worriedly at something off camera. As the camera pans down and tracks forward, we see that the envelope filled with money is on her bed, along with an open suitcase. This opening shot is important because it lets the viewer know that Marion did not go to the bank to deposit the money. I would argue that it is the first turning point for the film. Before this scene, we as viewers have nothing to be suspicious or anxious about. We had little reason to suspect that she would take the money home. As the scene continues, we are shown one shot after another of Marion getting dressed, packing her belongings, and glancing down at the envelope. This scene is only approximately a minute and a half but is the movies first manipulation of fear. Through this sequence of shots and the music that accompanies them, the spectator begins their decent into Marion’s problems. Yet, at the same time, we have very little background on the character. We can’t be sure why she is taking the money and we have no idea where she is going with it. But that doesn’t matter in this scene, because all we need to know is that she is taking it and to feel the anxiety she feels.
• ·      Support: Eisenstein’s article “The Dramaturgy of Film Form”

Claim 3:

• ·      Because of the emotional effect on the viewers, I believe that an ideological approach to the packing scene would be the optimal choice.
• ·      Support: Eisenstein’s article “The Dramaturgy of Film Form”

"The Grapes of Wrath"

The moment I have decided to dissect from John Ford’s “The Grapes of Wrath,” is the one we discussed in class. It is when the Joad’s slowly drive into the migrant camp. By placing the camera on top of the Joad’s truck, Ford was able to capture the faces of disgruntled migrant workers from the point-of-view of the Joads. The decision to position the camera at that angle was, I believe, intended to give the viewers the same perspective as the Joad’s, in order to empathize with their family and not with the people going through very similar situations.  

I chose this moment because in class we spoke about the differences between John Steinbeck’s novel and John Ford’s adaptation of Steinbeck’s novel and about how maybe some of the spirit in Steinbeck’s book was lost in Ford’s translation. Now, although I have never read the novel, from the class discussion I am under the impression that John Steinbeck’s intent for this book was for readers to empathize with migrant workers in general, as a unit. And on the other hand, using this migrant camp scene as an example, Ford is allowing the audience to empathize with the Joads and only the Joads.

I think there is a little too much assumption involved in this theory however. I am willing to argue that John Ford’s decision to have us follow the Joads from beginning to end was purely a cinematic one. I think it is possible that Ford thought, in order to get viewers to believe in a story and empathize with a situation, they need to be able to truly care about the characters in the story. 

 To further emphsize this point the I use modern day broadcast news as an analogy; people only tend to care about news when there is a face attached to it. For instance, if an anchor on CNN announced that John Smith had died, a very few amount people would pay much attention. Now if later in the day, the same anchor reported they had made a mistake and the deceased was actually Oprah or Obama, it would catch the attention of a massive amount of people, all over the world. There would be shrines on sidewalks with groups of crying people huddled together, holding candles. It is much easier to be empathetic toward things you care about, things that are tangible.

Also, it seems true to the nature of “survival of the fittest” for the other migrant workers to not welcome the Joads with open arms. These people are hungry and tired.

Validity of Auteur Theory

            Yes, I think auteur theory is a valid area of film studies, if not only because it exists and was very prominent in recent history.