From the Archive: Professional Wrestling for Amateurs – The Final Countdown

Exams are over! Holidays have started! What a time to be alive! And so as things return to normal it seems only fitting, on the theme of closure, that we bask in the final piece of the 6 part series from the archive! I feel like there should be some Green Day playing in the background – in fact, as a last hurrah to the Professional Wrestling for Amateurs series  press play on this and try not to tear up too much as we say goodbye.

Before we do that though lets go back together – yes I am coming with you this time – and take a look at what the whole point of this blog series was all about. Part one gave a detailed account of what it’s like to live as a fan of professional wrestling, the social stigma involved, and the sly comments and subtle digs you have to put up with on a regular basis (see recurring comment; “You do know that’s fake, right?”). From here we moved into Part two where we looked more at the physical side of things – using Mick Foley’s best selling book “Have A Nice Day” as a point of call, not only for evidence, but also as the point where I truly fell in love with the sport as a young child.

As May was world mental health month it seemed fitting that in Part three we touched on some of the confronting mental situations that workers in the industry are faced with regularly – most of which are overlooked by those of you who fail to see past the character into the person underneath. To get a better understanding of this we went out and got some first hand insight from someone who actually gets in the ring with Part four, which is still our most successful part to date, which was a sit down interview with O’Shay Edwards – who is easily my new favourite wrestler (and should be yours too) as he is taking the world by storm. Finally, in Part five, we looked at the growing sub-culture that has developed from the wrestling industry. The common themes that bring people together through wrestlers crossing the threshold within the mediasphere to becoming actors, wrestling approved and associated music, or just the overall sense of camaraderie that is shared between members of the broader wrestling community.

All of these topics were outlined and decided upon as, to date, there was no easily found and up to date source with similar information. The aim was to act as an educational tool for those who didn’t know – or as a point of reference for those who did – and as the series has unfolded I feel like I have legitimised everything that I set out to achieve. Hopefully you feel the same and, even if it is only a small titbit, something that I have said will remain with you long after you finish reading these words.

What started as an ambitious attempt to watch wrestling and pass it off as study when questioned by the wife has now turned into a nifty little blog that I have become more and more attached to and proud of as time goes on. For this reason – while this six part series is done – I will be sticking around to continue enlightening you with more of my quality insight which I am sure you are all growing to love (if you aren’t please try harder) and I look forward to looking back at this project as a collection of wrestling knowledge for everyone to enjoy for years to come.

Thank you for reading.


This piece was originally published on June 4th 2016 at http://botchworldorder.wordpress.com

Advertisements

From the Archive: Professional Wrestling for Amateurs – What, Culture?

Another week of preparing for the end of term has left me short on time – luckily there is still more to go back to from this original series on the misunderstood art of professional wrestling.  Previously we sat down with an actual, real life, wrestling machine – O’Shay Edwards – for a look at the life of a wrestler as well as touching on the physical and mental commitments and sacrifices that are made by performers. If you haven’t had a chance to read those earlier parts I would strongly recommend them as they are each a literary delight before tackling part 5 of this gripping tale of intrigue and romance.

So far the majority of this series has been looking at things from a wrestlers perspective and trying to break it down for better insight. What has been overlooked, and what will be touched on now, is the way in which the wrestling industry has influenced a sort of sub-culture in the modern world. A place where, thanks to social media, wrestling fans and pundits alike come to pay tribute to the sport they love in many different ways.

As the popularity of wrestling grew through the late 90’s it reached cult status, establishing the careers of many modern day film actors, most notable the likes of The Rock and John Cena. But it wasn’t always wrestlers becoming actors. In fact in 2000 Actor David Arquette became the WCW World Champion in what can only be described as a piece of sheer booking genius from then head booker Vince Russo – the man famous for making everything infinitely better by putting it on a pole.

It was around this time that wrestling and music also began to go hand in hand. Yes, I know Cyndi Lauper was at the first Wrestlemania, but this is more than that – and no I’m not talking about the Macho Man’s foray into rap either (which is pure brilliance if you haven’t already heard it). The surge in popularity of hard rock/post-grunge/nu-metal music saw bands that would not normally get the time of day thrust into the spotlight and if you were to quiz most modern day wrestling fans on the likes of Cold, Drowning Pool and Limp Bizkit they would be able to tell you that in 2002 they were all close personal friends of Tazz.

Moving away from the main stream influence in modern pop-culture professional wrestling has also created a brilliant and beautiful virtual world – sometimes even more misunderstood than wrestling itself. “eFedding”, another term for online roleplaying games based around the sport of professional wrestling, has grown massively as a hobby over the last 20 years from chains of emails, to MSN message boards and into the present day with social media (there are entire rosters worth of characters constantly tearing into one another on Twitter). The attention to detail shown by some roleplayers, or “fedders”, is immense and there are often people outside of the hobbies inner sanctum who mistake them for real people. A more in depth analysis of this subculture can be found here in the essay An Exploration of Social Gaming.

All of these things, be it films, music or games, bring millions of people together every day and unite them with one common trait; a love of wrestling. Whether it is loved or hated the wrestling industry as a whole is a global phenomenon – second only to sports like football (soccer for you Americans) and boxing for global popularity and viewership – and deserves to be treated with the same respect.


This piece was originally published on May 31st 2016 at http://botchworldorder.wordpress.com

From the Archive: Professional Wrestling for Amateurs – The View From Inside

And then there were three! Past the halfway mark and ready to go again with another insightful and informative look at the world of professional wrestling. So far in this series we have identified some of the physical and mental challenges faced by the men and women who go out night after night in bars, clubs, halls and arenas worldwide to put on a show as well as some of the stigma that is associated with being a wrestling fan. As always if you have missed any of the previous three parts we will take a moment now to wait for you to go back, catch up and make sure you know what you are getting yourself into.

In part 4 (that’s this one) we are going to be looking at some of what life as a wrestler is all about – courtesy of an exclusive interview with American Premier Wrestling’s O’Shay Edwards – and go over some of the points that we have touched on already with someone who has experienced them first hand.

How long have you been wrestling and how long did you train before you debuted?

I have been training since February of 2016 with my first show coming in April.

Whereabouts can we find you working in the ring?

I’m currently being booked for American Premier Wrestling, which has produced its first NXT product (Macey Estrella) and I’m currently in talks with LaGrange Championship Wrestling to start working for them too. I’m excited to see what happens.

How often do you train now – both in ring and general fitness?

It depends on how often I can actually get in the ring. If I can get in the ring 2 times a week I’m usually in the gym one day a week. If I can get into the ring 1 time a week I’m in the gym 2 times a week. What if I can’t get there anytime that week? Then I usually spend 3 days out of the week in the gym.

Do you use your own name, or a character/gimmick name, and if so does your character differ much from your real self?

No, I don’t use my own name. My gimmick name kinda happened on the fly but personality wise I don’t differ much. Its just myself ramped up to a 1000%.

 

What’s the biggest crowd you’ve worked for? Likewise, what’s the smallest crowd you’ve worked for?

The smallest crowd was about 50 or 60 people. The largest crowd so far has been a little over 200. The goal is one day to wrestle in front of a thousand plus people.

Furthest you’ve travelled for a show?

The farthest ever was about 3 hours from Atlanta to Statesboro Georgia.

Do you have a favourite opponent?

So far my favorite match has been wrestling against Iron Man.

Have you taken any bad bumps or botches that have legitimately hurt you, serious injuries etc?

Ironically enough while wrestling Iron Man I took a punch and it landed right above my right eye. It busted open and I bled all over place but we had the match of the night.

Finally, what do you do when you’re not wrestling?

I’m a full-time Firefighter in Atlanta.

We would like to sincerely thank O’Shay for taking the time to talk to us and answer our questions. Be sure to check him out, and the rest of APW, if you are in Georgia and you have the chance.

Hopefully this interview has given you some good insights into the life of a professional wrestler and will serve as a reminder that you should always be respectful to the talent – regardless of whether you may like the character or not – because, in this case at least, if you live around Atlanta a few boos and a nasty tweet could see your cat stuck up that tree for a little bit longer.


This piece was originally published on May 16th 2016 at http://botchworldorder.wordpress.com

From the Archive: Professional Wrestling for Amateurs – The Hard Road

Who would’ve thought that we would be back here again, eager as beavers for part 3 of our wrestling extravaganza? Well, I would’ve (because I’m contractually obligated to be here) but you are here of your own volition and I must say that is very much appreciated.

In case you new to the blog, and this series in particular, previously in parts one and two we have touched on the stigma that is sometimes associated with the professional wrestling community as a whole and the physical side of the business that is often discredited as being fake – but what about the mental challenges that are faced by male and female wrestlers all over the world.

Right now, as you read these words, there are literally thousands of professional wrestlers around the globe waking up or going to sleep in a cheap motel somewhere, thousands of miles away from their families. Ordinary people, who like the other 99% have a job that they get out of bed for – the only difference being that they don’t have the luxury of sitting behind a desk for eight hours and then clocking out and going home to the wife and kids, sitting around the table for a decent home cooked meal and hearing about how little Timmy’s football match went. Birthdays, Anniversaries, Dance Recitals, Dentists appointments, so many different activities – seemingly ordinary to the rest of us – are missed because they have to work a schedule as mentally gruelling as it is physical.

Now, and I can already hear you saying it, they get paid stupid amounts of money to do that and to an extent I would agree. If we were talking about the guys and girls working the big contracts in the big companies to put on the big shows it cannot be denied that, while facing these challenges, they are duly rewarded. But what about the rest?

Like everything in life (and here’s where we digress into politics a little bit) wrestling is like capitalism. The people at the top get all of the money and the guys trying to climb up that pyramid – well let’s just say that they don’t quite get as much. Now to put this in perspective wrestling doesn’t really differ from any other sports; you wouldn’t pay Tom Brady the same money as a rookie kicker fresh out of college. It’s just the way of the world. The guys who generate the revenue and make the franchises are rewarded accordingly with big money deals – but it has to be noted that before they were the big money guys, they were the same ones who were sleeping in dives and clocking up hundreds of miles or catching a red eye flight to another country just to try and get their little suckle on the golden teat.

If we are to look at this objectively – the main reason they do it (as naïve as it may sound) is for the fans. Without the people turning up and paying in to watch them they could be the greatest wrestlers in the world – they still wouldn’t make it. Obviously there are other factors, personal motivation and competitive drive being big ones, but you would be hard pressed to find any man or woman around who would be motivated to succeed when they are spending their birthday away from their partner and children.

Sadly the overzealous outsider, or the casual fan, often overlooks these challenges. Turning on their TV and instead of seeing a person doing their job they see a character they don’t like. So instead of appreciating that person’s hard work they throw a brick at their screen, refuse to watch until something is done about them and tweet them death threats. It’s this kind of abhorrent, short sighted attitude that creates problems for other fans and wrestlers alike. It needs to be remembered that while you can buy in to kayfabe, the characters and their stories, off screen they are ordinary people just like the rest of us – and they should be treated with the same respect.


This piece was originally published on May 7th 2016 at http://botchworldorder.wordpress.com

 

From the Archive: Professional Wrestling for Amateurs – Back With a Vengeance

Here we stand back on the front line, trying to to make the world a better place by eradicating ignorance and informing the uninformed. In case you missed the first part in the series it would be my strong recommendation you go back and give it a look (and not just because I wrote it). Once you’ve done that meet us back here to regroup. It’s fine – we will wait.

Honestly, take your time.

Are you ready?

Excellent, now, to finish this anecdote we will have to go back to the year 2001. It was an eventful year for many reasons; the great Sir Donald Bradman passed away aged 92, the Socceroos claimed third place at the Confederations Cup beating both France and Brazil and, most importantly, 10 year old me was taken into a Dymocks bookshop by his mother and told he could pick any book he wanted. I’m sure she was expecting me to come back with a stupid joke book or something similar – which was more of my style at the time – but not on this occasion. Instead something caught my eye on the bottom shelf on the farthest wall of the shop. After a little bit of persuading I left that book shop with my very own copy of Have A Nice Day: A Tale of Blood and Sweatsocks – the 544 page epic story of legendary wrestler Mick Foley – and I never looked back.

This was the first real insight I had into the world of wrestling and I fell in love with it instantly. The raw emotion in Foley’s words and twisted humour that he worked into his stories made it a more than memorable experience from start to finish and I still remember carrying it around with me, recounting passages to anyone who would listen. To this day I still have the same copy, though the last 15 years has left it seeing better days. Foley’s insightfully graphic accounts of the injuries he suffered, from the famous ear incident with Vader, to the infamous Hell in a Cell match with The Undertaker (most of which Mick himself didn’t remember – unsurprisingly) it showed a young wrestling fan how much punishment these competitors put themselves through and how hard they worked to get to where they were. One particular passage that stuck with me was when Foley went to see a doctor about a scan on his back – the doctor told him what he had to and asked if he had any questions – to which Foley replied he was worried about the colour of one of his discs. It was white, while all of the others were grey. The doctor explained that they were supposed to be white and that the grey colouring was from the constant physical toll that wrestling was taking on his body.

How does this finish off the anecdote from Part One? I’m glad you asked. This is one of the many stories that I used to explain my love for the wrestling industry and to justify the risks that these men and women take on a nightly basis. Some people struggle to appreciate the lengths that competitors go to – often wrestling multiple times a week – for nothing more than the entertainment of the fans and their own personal enjoyment. Professional wrestling may be a scripted story with a predetermined result but by no means can anyone say that what those men and women do is fake in any way.


This piece was originally published on May 7th 2016 at http://botchworldorder.wordpress.com

 

From the Archive: Professional Wrestling for Amateurs – An Introduction

Professional wrestling. Just the mention of those two little words can divide an entire room full of people. Whether it’s right down the middle or all against one nothing seems to divide opinion as much as wrestling. If you are out on the lash with a bunch of lads and someone says, “did you catch the fight last week?” chances are they are not talking about the Intercontinental Championship match on Monday Night Raw. The inspiration for this blog, and the series of posts that will follow in the Introduction to Wrestling series, was inspired by a situation much the same as this one.

Before I start I will go on the record as saying I do not watch as much wrestling as I probably should (or at least think that I should). I keep up to date mostly with dirt sheets and Twitter and I like to think I have my finger on the pulse – though I’m not going to pretend like I’ve heard of your favourite wrestler from the Independent circuit in Guam. The majority of my actual watching is done via the WWE Network, which essentially means I watch NXT once a week and the monthly Pay-Per-Views.

This is where our story begins.

It was sometime during the weeks leading up to Wrestlemania, a brisk Saturday evening, and a handful of friends had called around for drinks. I thought to myself, excellent, we could have a few cans and once the wrestling starts throw it on and have a bit of a laugh. Everything was going to plan; until 10 minutes before the show. Someone looks at me and goes, “Will we have a game of FIFA?” Ordinarily I would jump at the chance to have a few games of PlayStation with someone, especially a visitor in my own home (it would be rude not to), however on this particular occasion I said, “No, I want to watch the wrestling.”

Silence.

Everyone looked around, not really knowing what to say, as I tried to brush it off and get the show on the road. The show started – Roadblock for those of you playing along at home – and as the girls continued to talk amongst themselves, the last man standing (apart from myself) proceeded to grill me.

“Why do you watch this? You know it’s fake, right?”

“Isn’t it a bit gay watching oiled up guys pretend to fight in their underwear?”

“UFC is much better than this shite.”

These were just some of the comments that I remember from that conversation and, while I have been enduring jibes like this since I was about 9 years old, I just couldn’t help myself. I ended up going in to bat for wrestling and its fans everywhere – and that was when it hit me. Is it wrestling that is the problem or is it just a misunderstood art form that people outside of its warming glow don’t understand?

Which brings us here. It was this interaction, for the thousandth time, that was my inspiration to write this piece. Over the coming 5 weeks I intend to go over the wrestling industry in depth, not from the tunnel visioned stand point of a mark – replying angrily to comments on a Facebook post “IT’S STILL REAL TO ME DAMMIT!” – but from a rational and educational stand point. Giving insight and understanding with facts rather than opinions and, hopefully, creating something that will be able to help wrestling fans everywhere. Whether that is by expanding their own knowledge or giving them something to show to their non-wrestling friends the next time one of them says, “You do know that’s fake, right?”


This piece was originally published on May 1st 2016 at http://botchworldorder.wordpress.com

 

Digital Communities and Social Media – A prequel of sorts

Digital Communities and Social Media. Where to start? For anyone questioning the growing social media culture in which we live I can assure you in the time it has taken me to write these three lines I have closed Facebook and reopened it at least 6 times. What I am trying to determine now – and with the help of some of the theories I have covered – is, why?

Boyd (2012) believes that we as a society are ‘always on’. This term isn’t to be taken literally, though there are many from the older ‘back in my day…’ generation who will no doubt feel differently, but rather an acceptance that with the technology we have integrated into our every day lives we are closer to permanent connection than ever before. We might not actively seek out the internet, but if we need it, it is there with the touch of a finger.

To some extent I agree with Boyd – though I find myself in an interesting predicament that most others wouldn’t. Living the last three years between two countries I find that social media is an absolute godsend when it comes to keeping in contact with family and friends who are on opposite sides of the world at any given time. To this end I cannot dispute my online presences as ‘always on’ as if I am not conversing with locals on the same time zone by day I am talking to the others by night. Waking up to a hundred notifications is nothing uncommon – especially with the lads group chat on WhatsApp split between four countries.

Whether you agree with Boyd or not the integration of social networking into our every day lives and the ease at which we can now connect with our peers is astonishing given that 10 years ago you couldn’t use the phone and the internet at the same time without hearing some precursor to dubstep. Whether it is in digital communities like those of reddit or the closed network of a Facebook or LinkedIn or in more ambiguous social media platforms for public interaction like Twitter society has been empowered through these connections in a way that was never previously possible – and may have never even been dreamt of save for in science fiction.

As we continue to move rapidly through 2017 I look forward to being able to explore in further detail some more of the concepts and theories being looked at and hopefully gaining some more insight into both my own social media consumption and others. Hold that thought – I just got a notification, I’m off to check Facebook (again).

 

References

Boyd, D 2012, Participating in the Always On Lifestyle, in Mandiberg (ed) The Social Media Reader, NYU Press, pp. 71-76.

 

Pulp Fact-ion: An Exploration of the Auteur Theory (starring Quentin Tarantino)

Even before I started studying film Quentin Tarantino has always been a personal favourite of mine. His attention to detail, both in his film making techniques and in the narrative landscapes (and entire universe) he has created, are unbelievable. So when given the task of writing about the auteur theory  (and with a universal ban on Hitchcock) Tarantino seemed the logical choice. While the theory itself is fairly ambiguous – and for the most part roughly translated from French – I think I managed to make enough sense out of it to put together something coherent and finish off my first year of studies with a bit of style. With that said I give you Pulp Fact-ion: An Exploration of the Auteur Theory (starring Quentin Tarantino)


The aim of this essay is to analyse the usefulness of the auteur theory as a methodology for studying screen texts. This essay will look to explore and discuss the auteur theory, and the strengths and weaknesses therein, before linking these with direct reference to the body of work of Quentin Tarantino. The theory itself has evolved immensely since it was first discussed in France the early 1950’s and has done much to legitimize film as an academic subject. In order to obtain the relevant information regarding the theory it was necessary to research and examine an extensive array of sources – both English and French. The main outcome of interest is to demonstrate an understanding of how the auteur theory has evolved over the years and how it can be applied when defining a filmmaker the like of Quentin Tarantino.

The foundation of the auteur theory, much like the foundation of modern Hollywood cinema, can be traced back to France during the 1950’s. (Hillier 1985) The writers in French film criticism magazine Cahiers du Cinema developed the concept of a ‘film auteur’ – eventually as a means of linking films together by director – citing a use of recurring film techniques and stylistic manipulations between projects as a reflection of the auteurs own influence over the project (Watson, in Nelmes 2012). However the initial article, published by Jean Truffaut in 1954, that would go on to be the basis of the theory was not intended to create a theory or critical framework at all. (Staples 1967) Truffaut, growing tired of a French film industry that was making films for awards rather than to express artistic creativity, attacked the screen-writers of the time and demanded that something should be done to spur a change.

“I cannot believe in the peaceful co-existence of the Tradition of Quality and a cinema of auteurs.” (Staples 1967)

By 1957 the Cahiers writers had developed Truffaut’s ideas into a very basic outline of the auteur theory that is known today. It is worth noting however that an article published in the April of 1957 by Andre Bazin served to remind audiences that the theory had developed from criticism and had never formally been written down (Staples 1967). Bazin would go on to further discuss the auteur theory at length for the remainder of his life and it was from here that it began to develop into the learning that it has since become.

The concept of the auteur was not brought to the attention of the English-speaking world until the 1960’s due largely in part to the publication of Andrew Sarris’ essay “Notes on the Auteur Theory”. (Sarris 1962) In his writing Sarris expanded on the ideals that had been debated by the Cahiers writers in the previous decade and identified his three premises of the auteur theory as;

  • Technical competence
  • Distinguishable personality of the director
  • Interior meaning

With his auteur theory arguing that the director and their choices were the driving force behind a film, similar to an artist or musician, rather than the film itself. It was this interpretation of filmmaking, and the auteur, that would allow film as a medium to become a seriously recognized subject of study. Similarly to his predecessors from Cahiers Sarris would also state that it was not his intention to create a theory and that his article was written in an experimental manner and “not intended as the last word on the subject.” (Sarris 1968)

“Auteurism shifted attention from the “what” (story, theme) to the ‘how’ (style, technique), showing that style itself had persona, ideological and even metaphysical reverberation… It facilitated film’s entry into literature department and played a major role in the academic legitimisation of cinema studies.” (Stam 2000, p. 92)

Auteurism granted film critics a framework by which they could analyse film in a way that had not been possible previously. Cinema had been shown the artistic and academic legitimacy (Watson, in Nelmes 2012) that other art forms, such as music and visual art, had already been afforded for many years before. Critics were able to look past the story and analyse how it was told; reviewing the mise-en-scene and film techniques used by an auteur as opposed to the traditional review of the narrative of the film itself. By doing this both the artistic merits of the film and its maker were evaluated simultaneously. By adhering to the auteur theory when analysing film a critic could now look across a filmmaker’s body of work for stylistic consistencies, thematic preoccupations and a particular worldview (Watson, in Nelmes 2012), identifying the auteur and distinguishing their personality within their works.

While this newfound appreciation for the auteur was of great benefit to the world of cinema it did come at a price. The theory itself, while legitimizing film as an academic medium, was fundamentally flawed in the sense that it was entirely up to the mind of the critic to decide what did and did not fit its framework. What one critic may have deemed to be work of an auteur another may have seen as a metteur-en-scene and as a result the theory has been constantly challenged throughout its history. Ironically the majority of criticisms of the auteur theory have come either from critics themselves or from those involved with the film industry. This suggests that the theory itself is practical, however, it does not always suit the agendas of those who oppose it and is therefore contested.

Another point of contention in the auteur theory, further to the above, is the overall recognition and distinction between directors. While writing for Cahiers Bazin coined the term ‘metteurs-en-scene’ (literally translated as ‘scene setter’) which was used as an allusion the directors who were competent in their filmmaking skills and abilities but did so without a discernable individual style. In a transposition of the beginnings of auteur theory it would be Truffaut expanding on Bazin’s writing when he used the term in his essay ‘A Certain Tendency of the French Cinema’ (Sarris 1962). Unlike Bazin who was using the term descriptively Truffaut would give the metteur-en-scene a derogatory connotation, implying that these directors were inferior, juxtaposing the term against that of the great auteurs. In more modern times, thanks largely in part to Sarris, there is less distinction between the auteur and the metteur-en-scene. Nor is there a prescribed course by which a director must evolve as one or the other. Sarris describes his auteur theory as a “pattern theory in constant flux” (Sarris 1962) declaring that, regardless of the ever-changing definitions, a genuine director can be identified by the patterns that are established after they have produced a number of films and left behind a body of work. It is this definition that allows a filmmaker to operate as an auteur, a metteur-en-scene, or a combination of both at different points throughout their career without being defined by it.

It is for these reasons that the auteur theory is always going to be widely open to interpretation and at the discretion of the critic as to whether or not they deem a filmmaker to be an auteur. Due to this lack of concrete definition filmmakers such as Quentin Tarantino, who will become the subject of discussion form this point forward, can frequently become the subject of debate as to their merits as a true auteur. While it cannot be disputed that Tarantino has shown all the hallmarks of an auteur, with his use of recurring film techniques and stylistic manipulations, his attention to detail in the mise-en-scene of his films cannot be denied either. Regardless of the critical interpretation of the auteur theory there is no doubt that Tarantino can be called a genuine director with a body of work spanning from Reservoir Dogs (1992) to The Hateful Eight (2016). As noted previously Sarris was of the belief that the genuine director could be identified by the patterns established over such body of work and it is by this admission that a discussion can commence.

Looking at the areas of the auteur theory that have already been raised in this essay it can be argued that Tarantino fits the mould under Sarris’ three premises (Sarris 1962). From a technical standpoint his abilities are more than competent and, as mentioned previously, his recurring use of particular techniques – such as Dutch angles and overtly stylistic violence – are prevalent throughout his body of work. This first premise is, arguably, the least impactful when it comes to discussing the auteur theory as for any director to be successful they must be competent. Tarantino’s body of work starts to come to life when considered for the second and third premises. Unlike the traditional director who works for the studio Tarantino has made his career by expressing himself and marching to the beat of his own drum. Through this desire to create a film from the ground up, using ideas that he may have been holding onto for years (Sordea 2009), his personality is easily distinguishable in his titles. Further to this he has often discussed at length the ‘universe’ in which his films take place (Smith 2016), which demonstrates the effort, and detail he puts in to the creative process – showing the interior meaning that he assigns to each project. While all of the thematic criteria are met in considering Tarantino as an auteur to deny his ability as a metteur-en-scene would be an insult to his ability in creating a mise-en-scene. Many critics believe that Tarantino makes some of the best scenes in modern western cinema (Aalbers 2010). This is a prime example of Sarris’ “pattern theory in constant flux” whereby Tarantino is able to operate with the abilities of a metteur-en-scene while still being considered an auteur.

Another great hallmark of the auteur that is shown by Tarantino is his assimilation into the mainstream education system. The auteur theory was responsible for legitimizing film as an academic medium and it is not uncommon now for Tarantino to be used as an example, often next to the other great auteurs like Hitchcock, when cinema is being studied. Be it the contributions his films have made to modern cinema, or the techniques within them, his personal style and world view is accurately captured and as a result will continue to be relevant for future generations as they continue to study film. This perfectly encapsulates what it is to be an auteur. While interpretations may change, and critical opinions differ, the history books will always remember those auteurs that are written in the history books. For want of a better term, given the great auteurs of the past, Tarantino is somewhat of a ‘modern’ auteur. His individual style hovers between that of a classic auteur and a metteur-en-scene, but remains relevant none the less.

Taking this all into consideration it cannot be stressed enough how important the auteur theory has been to modern cinema and how, from humble beginnings in the magazine pages of 1950’s France, the film industry could be forever changed by an article that was never intended to spark the change that it did. As a point of contention critics will never agree with one another but thanks to Truffaut, Bazin and Sarris they will forever have a guideline by which they can disagree on the auteurs of the past and those that come in the future. Regardless of these opinions there can be no denying that Tarantino has showed throughout his career that he is deserving of the title of an auteur.

 

References

Aalbers, J 2010, Tarantino is a ‘metteur-en-scene’ – the Inglorious Basterds review, WordPress, viewed February 7th 2016,

<https://jasperaalbers.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/inglourious/&gt;

Hillier, J 1985, Cahiers Du Cinéma, the 1950s: Neo-realism, Hollywood, New Wave, Harvard University Press

Nelmes, J 2012, Introduction to film studies, 5th edition, Routledge, London

Sarris, A 1962, ‘Notes on the Auteur Theory’ in L. Braudy & M. Cohen (Eds.), Film theory and criticism: Introductory readings, New York: Oxford University Press.

Sarris, A 1968, The American Cinema: Directors and Directions, 1929-1968, Perseus Books Group

Smith, J 2016, ‘They all inhabit one universe’: Quentin Tarantino FINALLY confirms all of the characters from his films are connected, Daily Mail, viewed February 7th 2016,

< http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3404845/They-inhabit-one-universe-Quentin-Tarantino-FINALLY-confirms-characters-films-connected.html&gt;

Sordeau, H 2009, Quentin Tarantino talks Inglourious Basterds – RT Interview, RottenTomatoes, viewed February 7th 2016,

< http://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/quentin-tarantino-talks-inglourious-basterds-rt-interview/>

Stam, R 2000, Film theory: An introduction, Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Staples, D 1967, The Auteur Theory Reexamined, Cinema Journal vol. 6 (1966-67), pp. 1-7, University of Texas Press