Table of Contents

Introduction
Section 1: Auteur Theory
Section 2: Auteur Theory and My Son John
Conclusion
Bibliography

Promotional Information

An explanation of auteur theory, illustrated through analysis of Leo McCarey’s notorious 1952 film.

About the Author

James Morrison is Professor of Literature and Film at Claremont McKenna College, USA. He is the author, co-author or editor of nine books, including Roman Polanski (2007) and Hollywood Reborn (2010).

Reviews

Brilliant … [a] superb history and analysis of auteurist criticism.
*Jonathan Rosenbaum, Cineaste*

Reading My Son John both as an instance of the Red Scare-era ‘film rouge’ and a fine-grained text that generates meaning in the smallest gesture of stay Helen Hayes, leaves little doubt as to the proper value-even in this empathetic, troubling, mutilated picture-of McCarey’s artistry.
*Nick Pinkerton, Film Comment*

Morrison's book is the most illuminating discussion of French auteurism and its influence I've ever read. It's also a convincing defense of writing about movie directors as authors, capped by a brilliant analysis of Leo McCarey's seldom-discussed My Son John. I couldn't put it down.
*James Naremore, Indiana University, USA*

No one currently writing on film has a more beautiful, captivating prose style than James Morrison. Sentence by sentence, his commentary on Leo McCarey and the auteur theory is alive—alive with wit, with continually surprising insights (every paragraph contains a jewel), and with the unfailing precision and grace of his close readings. Morrison blows the dust off the fossilized remains of French and American versions of auteurism—and has startling things to say about the affiliations of auteurists and surrealists, the mysteries of the glimpse or “flash” moment, and the valor of defeat in the work of anointed directors. Morrison’s study builds to its astonishing centerpiece—a stunning, full-scale analysis of McCarey’s much maligned rouge, My Son John. Making ample, sophisticated use of the most intriguing tools in the auteurist kit, Morrison offers an utterly persuasive case for the film as a major work. Too often, facile claims are made for new critical studies as essential reading. Realizing the danger of excess in proclaiming a study’s merits, I will nevertheless declare this one of best books of film scholarship I have ever read.
*George Toles, Distinguished Professor of Film and literature, University of Manitoba, Canada*