Auteurism and Scorsese's King of Comedy

Auteurism refers to the worldview of a director and how, whether consciously or not, that view can be located by analyzing their body of work. For the majority of directors-for-hire, a singular worldview is not discernable, but there are those few genius directors – among them, Hitchcock, Hawks, Wilder, Ray and Sirk – working within the strict confines of the classical Hollywood studio system, who produced work that revealed very specific and consistent world views expressed through their personal styles and masterful mise-en-scene. The concept rose to prominence in France following Alexander Astruc’s article on the camera-stylo in 1948, Francois Truffaut, building on Astruc’s work, published his polemic, A Certain Tendency of French Cinema, arguing that director’s, as the author’s of their films, should be producing works that reflect their personal visions. The nature of film production is innately a collaborative process, rendering the very idea of an auteur altogether unusual and, some might surmise, impossible. And yet, their remains that rare director who manages to represent their personal view of the world on screen: a view that, through watching the oeuvre of their work, becomes clearer – almost as though it were a mysterious jigsaw of sorts. Therefore, auteurism is virtually indiscernible just by viewing a single film. One must see multiple films. We can, however, begin to delineate themes from one film and from there, note whether these themes cross over into the director’s other work. The King of Comedy (1983) directed by Martin Scorsese can be approached from an auteurist perspective as we investigate Scorsese’s critique of a culture that is obsessed with fame, success and celebrity. Through his depiction of Rupert Pupkin, played by Robert DeNiro, we get a sense of Scorsese’s jaundiced outlook on the American Dream.

An auteur is a director who leaves an individual style and unique trace on their film which distinguishes them from other artists....