It was through the duration of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s that an influx of immigrant directors from Europe, travelled to America and began challenging the dominance of the Hollywood studio. Prior to this, directors were contracted to studios and obtained very little control; it was instead, the producers who guided the vision and they became known as the ‘kings of Hollywood’. For example Jack Warner, one of the Warner Brothers, was responsible for the 1964 musical, My Fair Lady. However, the rising of the auteur meant that directors were gaining more artistic control within the film industry. The term ‘auteur’ is the French word for author. It was devised during the 1950s by French film director and critic – Francois Truffaut. He distinguishes the work of the ‘metteur-en-scene’(simply meaning the setter of the scene) from the ‘auteur’ (Truffaut, 1954). Those who constantly express their distinctive style and hold a cinematic vision, imprinting their own signature upon their film could classify as ‘auteurs’. On the other hand, film makers who lack their own unique style or do not display a distinct personality through their work are defined as ‘metteurs-en-scene’. It is interesting to note that the ‘auteur’ only accounts for 10% of all directors, showing how significant and unique their work is.
Douglas Sirk, a German director and auteur, travelled to the USA in 1937 after having a successful career in stage and film direction in his native Germany. Throughout his career as a Hollywood filmmaker, Sirk was primarily known as a director of the melodrama; these were films designed for a female audience that featured strong, attractive male leads in a domestic setting. However, Sirk’s films were ‘rediscovered’ during the 1970s, “he was to be identified as a director who deployed cinematic mise-en-scene in a strategic fashion to subvert the apparent meanings of a film” (Mercier and Shingler 2004: p.48); In this essay I aim to explore Sirk’s charming, 1955, melodrama – All That Heaven Allows, specifically examining the way in which Sirk subverts the conventional woman’s film of the time.
Firstly, the film demonstrates some underlying critiques of suburban American prejudgments and attitudes. The opening title sequence immediately illustrates that this picture is going to shroud romance, with the craning panoramic; the aerial shot encapsulates the pretty, quiet and ‘everyday’ goings on in the fictional town of Stoningham. Perhaps this is Sirk’s method of embedding irony as this peaceful, idyllic setting is soon to be disrupted once Ron and Cary’s love story blossoms. Once we arrive to the cocktail party, we can identify that “the notion of the country club…is presented as the social focus of the small community and we quickly realise that it is also a locus of gossip and snobbery” (Mercier and Shingler 2004: p.61). These snooty, conceited and rather pompous women serve as crucial representations of the women in which these melodramas were originally designed for; most specifically, the character Mona, who reflects the stereotypical middle-class woman, a ring leader who gets satisfaction from criticising Cary’s lifestyle choices. Filmmaker and theorist Laura Mulvey in All That Heaven Allows: An Articulate Screen makes the observation – “He gives them the screen space appropriate for their status” (Mulvey 2001: Online) which is interesting as Mona is very restricted in her on screen space as she is always crowded by her guests – perhaps this is an underlying theme where Sirk is portraying the lack of authority she really possesses. The passive comment “there’s nothing like red for attracting attention” said by Mona at the country club, echoes the bitter and sardonic traits these women acquire as well as emphasising women’s constant desires to become invested in other people’s business.
Cary later returns to the country club with Ron, the handsome younger gardener whom she has fallen in love with and “this choice, and its consequences, brings the prejudice of both Cary’s community and family into stark relief” (Mercier and Shingler 2004: p.62). As they arrive, a group of women eagerly spring to the window gawking, like animals given fresh meat to tear into. When they walk through and introduce themselves, Mona inevitably gives a scrutinising comment saying, “Shall we say hello to Romeo and his Juliet?” Mona here can simply be reminding everyone that their love is forbidden within the American lifestyle they live as well as assuming that what they have together can only lead to destruction because it is breaking the social norms.
Sirk also toys with the motifs of isolation, self-reflection and colour. The theme of mirroring becomes apparent through various shots, including earlier on in the film when Cary is at her dressing table, preparing for her evening out, to one side stands the vase containing the cut branches given to her by Ron and then the children first appear reflected in the mirror, coming in between Cary and the vase. This one shot foreshadows the dilemma her character will be facing as well as aspects of self-reflection. Additionally, the Scott’s residence seems through aspects of the mise-en-scene to be cold, and too structured to be a home; consequently portraying the isolation and alienation shrouding Cary’s character.
Finally Sirk’s use of colour deems very significant, at the second cocktail party Mona wears emerald green, symbolising her jealousy as a character, then at Christmas time, towards the end of the film when Cary’s daughter tells of her engagement she is dressed in red, reflecting that worn by her mother at the start of the film – linking again also to Sirk’s theme of mirroring. Red connotes romantic passion and love as well as Christmas, which conjures to mind a time of generosity and celebration, perhaps foreshadowing once again that both her and Ron will rejoice. “The irony of the vase of red roses in the background, tells the audience that she realises her own dreams have been crushed” (Mercier and Shingler 2004: p.65).
All That Heaven Allows subverts the woman’s film by using underlying elements embedded within the characters, setting and visual aspects of the film, distancing it from the genre in which it was so heavily linked to during its initial release. Throughout the film it is apparent that Sirk comments on American society at the time, mocking the female socialites through the infamous cocktail parties. The ending is very typical of a ‘the woman’s film’ as both Cary and Ron reunite with the hope of the ‘happily ever after’ ending. “Although All That Heaven Allows does, on the face of it, have a happy ending, it’s ‘happiness’ is twisted with more than a touch of Sirkian irony’s that surround them” (Mulvey 2001: Online). Perhaps, this ending could just be a clarification of Cary as a maternal figure as she makes it clear she wants to aid Ron back to health, Sirk possibly implying that roles will never be reversed and the melodramas be nothing but a worn cliché. Consequently showing how Douglas Sirk’s 1955 tale, perhaps appears as nothing more than just a parody of the genre.
Reference List:
Mercer, J. & Shingler, M. (2004) Style. In: Melodrama: Genre, Style and Sensibility. London, Wallflower, pp. 48-65
Mulvey, L. (2001) All That Heaven Allows: An Articulate Screen [Online] Available at: https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/96-all-that-heaven-allows-an-articulate-screen [Accessed 25 November 2016].
Printerspiemm. (2015) Auteur Theory and Authorship [Online] Available at: https://multimediageek.wordpress.com/2015/02/22/auteur-theory-and-authorship/ [Accessed 25 November 2016].
Truffaut, F. (1954) 2011. “A Certain Tendency in French Cinema” in Graham, P and G. Vincendeau (eds), The French New Wave: Critical Landmarks. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 39 – 64.
