Blog Assignment #3: Grapes of Wrath

1) At the end of Grapes of Wrath (1940) the famous depiction of Rosasharn offering her breast milk to a dying man (in Steinbeck's novel) is omitted. Many modern critics may claim that director John Ford is keeping this scene from his film as an auteur, but obviously, this occurrence would not be allowed to be shown in cinema in the 1940's, despite what Ford truly desired. Instead, Ford places a happier spin on the ending of the film. Does this make him an auteur? The simple answer is yes, he is because he creates and 'alternate ending' but does so in order to get his film approved by the board.

2) Auteur theory delves into the idea that an author, or director, has a unique and consistent touch on all the films he or she directs and that a director makes of breaks a film. This theory is interesting, but also cannot be completely confirmed or solidified because of many factors. If one is to believe that auteur theory is completely true, then he or she is likening the director of a film directly to an author of a book or a piece of writing. However, one cannot merely dismiss the fact that an author of a book is the sole proprietor of that piece of work, but a film director is the spearhead and leader of the film, but there are many many other people involved. People who spend their time trying to prove the absolute validity of auteur theory waste their time because the fact that a myriad of people have their hand in the work is unavoidable. Andrew Sarris claims that, "an expert production crew could probably cover up for a chimpanzee in the director's chair," and furthers that in order to find the director's true impact on the outcome of a film one needs to examine what happens "after a number of films, a pattern is established," (Sarris 141). He is correct in asserting that auteur theory is substantial because it emphasizes and recognizes the director's role in creating a film, but is not the absolute truth.