Auteurism In The Conversation And Apocalypse Now
Francis Ford Coppola is an emblematic face for the American auteur. To illustrate this point, the main characters in The Conversation and Apocalypse Now serve as perfect models for Coppola’s placement within the first and second phases of the New Hollywood Cinema (NHC) and for highlighting his auteur qualities in creating relatable characters who undergo significant psychological trauma, and fully submerge the audience in their psyche. The viewer becomes aware not only of being a spectator in a theater, but also of viewing these narratives through the eyes of Harry Caul and Captain Willard, underscoring the subjectivity of experience. Therefore, in both The Conversation (1974) and Apocalypse Now (1979), Coppola’s distinct auteurism is highlighted
…show more content…
Coppola can be remembered as an auteur in specific for his concepts of self – conscious films that pay homage to the past’s new wave cinema. As Turner discusses, Coppola was fascinated by the idea of a misanthropic man that lives alone and is constantly preoccupied with surveillance, drawing ideas from films like Michelangelo Antonioni’s Blow Up (Turner, 9). This 1996 film centering around a photographer who accidentally photographed a murder, also features the subjectivity of perception and can be traced as the origins of Coppola’s mime reference in the opening shot (Turner, 4). Coppola also borrows sequences from Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960) in the sequence where blood is flowing from the toilet (Braudy, 25). Moreover, Coppola adapts the story in Apocalypse Now from Joseph Conrad’s 1899 novella Heart of Darkness, and morphs the story’s structure and material to reflect his own experience (Kinder, 13). Kinder agrees that this is a prime example of Coppola’s auteurism as he has the ability to adapt someone else’s story and still let his vision shine through to such a large extent.
After placing Coppola in the context of NHC, we can now use the lens of thematic and stylistic choices in The Conversation and Apocalypse Now to validate Coppola’s auteurism. Both of these films embody open endings with main characters that have undergone a large mental shift; this viewer enthrallment in the protagonist’s plight highlights how the viewer is not just a spectator, but rather, is self – aware that they are watching a constructed psychological narrative through the specific lens of the protagonist. This further affects the viewer by underscoring the subjectivity of
Coppola can be remembered as an auteur in specific for his concepts of self – conscious films that pay homage to the past’s new wave cinema. As Turner discusses, Coppola was fascinated by the idea of a misanthropic man that lives alone and is constantly preoccupied with surveillance, drawing ideas from films like Michelangelo Antonioni’s Blow Up (Turner, 9). This 1996 film centering around a photographer who accidentally photographed a murder, also features the subjectivity of perception and can be traced as the origins of Coppola’s mime reference in the opening shot (Turner, 4). Coppola also borrows sequences from Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960) in the sequence where blood is flowing from the toilet (Braudy, 25). Moreover, Coppola adapts the story in Apocalypse Now from Joseph Conrad’s 1899 novella Heart of Darkness, and morphs the story’s structure and material to reflect his own experience (Kinder, 13). Kinder agrees that this is a prime example of Coppola’s auteurism as he has the ability to adapt someone else’s story and still let his vision shine through to such a large extent.
After placing Coppola in the context of NHC, we can now use the lens of thematic and stylistic choices in The Conversation and Apocalypse Now to validate Coppola’s auteurism. Both of these films embody open endings with main characters that have undergone a large mental shift; this viewer enthrallment in the protagonist’s plight highlights how the viewer is not just a spectator, but rather, is self – aware that they are watching a constructed psychological narrative through the specific lens of the protagonist. This further affects the viewer by underscoring the subjectivity of