Bringing Up Baby” and
“Touch Of Evil”, are both films that tackle socio-political and gender roles of
their times but at the same time are unique examples of the studio made film
making. Howard Hawk’s “Bringing Up Baby” is known for one of the first studio
films that allowed for the Director to have more control and “Touch of Evil”
being a studio film that allowed for more creative freedom from the director.
However both originally not being well received in America ultimately became
classics. On top of this both attack prevalent issues at the time; the Great
Depression and the 1950s red scare. On
top of this they both attack and
re-affirm gender roles which this essay will be discussing in depth.
“Bringing Up Baby” the 1938 film by Howard
Hawks does not only bring up the titular
inappropriate pet that becomes a dominate staple of the plot rather the
socio political and gender roles that are prevalent throughout the 1930s. The
film itself becomes a critique and reflection on the man’s loss of power and
how he can retain it during the great depression. The character David deftly
played by Cary Grant spends the entire span of the movie looking for his
metaphorical manhood, an ancient bone. This bone represent’s the past and the
old archaic gender roles which were being eroded in an increasingly perverted
society. David has to ultimately find his manhood and retain it and with it comes
capitalist gain, in money. Two key points that where prevalent in modern day
America as this film was made in the heart of the depression. Man loses his
ability to provide and thus who he is as a person in a large part, this movie
becomes a reminder for the males in the audience. However the loss of their gender regardless of
the global economy, they will still strive back towards the top and regain
their manhood like David towards the end of the film; the end with the dinosaur
and the destruction seems to indicate towards this conclusion. David and Susan
inadvertently destroy the meticulously place dinosaur bones and start a new
order, where man no longer is being dominated by past doubts and a strong woman
where he can control his own life. The bone itself the “intercostal clavicle”
is one of the most important thing that hold’s the body apart and thus beings a
representation of David. Rather than having this shoulder bone to keep him
together like an atypical male, he collapses under pressure. Ultimately David
must find his support to regain his superiority and reclaim his genders pride.
Additionally the male
gender norm is not the only one that is called into question but rather what
role the woman should take in a patriarchal society. In the film we have two
negative examples for different reasons of what a woman should not be,
according to the societal norms at the time. We have on one hand Alice his
fiancé. Her last name swallow could be in reference to both a sexual euphemism,
or rather that David should swallow his pride and manhood to curtail to the
aggressive and upfront Alice. She represents a woman that should not be
prevalent in 1930’s society, her aggressive
ways have caused doubt and insecurity in the male who cannot appropriately
express himself. The movie seemingly
hints that a woman should be silent and rather allow the man to take charge and a woman should not be a strong
voice in any particular reason. On the opposite end we have Katherine Hepburn’s
character Susan who represents another ideal that woman should not strive
after. Her character wild, loose and
with no interest towards settling down
and helping raise a family is not a model society would reflect. Her character
needs to be reigned in, slowly by the male who is starting to become the
ideal. She must curtail herself and give up her independent ways in order to
support the nuclear family model. Thus in the end she becomes totally satisfied
and requires nothing else in life, hence the title bringing up Baby, it is a slow realization that these people
are projecting the thoughts and desires for the audience to have a child and be
a positive family. This must have been an integral component considering
spirits and hopes where down in the 1930s and people could have barely afforded
children. This would jeopardize the capitalist system, so “Bringing Up Baby”
was an effective nudge towards child rearing and starting up the familiar family
structure that we know and love. However, “Bringing Up Baby is not typical: the
film resulted from a special set of circumstances which enabled its director to
control the picture more completely than would normally had been the case.”[1].
This film ironically was about child rearing too, David becomes Howard Hawks, a
man at the mercy of a bigger presence and ultimately rebelling against it
finding his manhood and establishing himself. In the end, this example becomes
ahead of its time. He establishes a system of less studio control, which we see
now in some independent markets and the auteur driven movies of the 1970's.
“Touch of Evil” by
Orson Welles attacks some gender norms, however it is more of a sly dig at the
1950s studio system and rampant McCarthyism. The titular antagonist
Quinlan is an embodiment of McCarthy,
who is extremely corrupt, plants evidence and tries to suppress any opposition.
Like McCarthy, Quinlan has many allies who help him become nearly invincible.
These allies are the representations of the people like Eli Kazan who ratted out
and turned on their friends throughout the film making industry. Vargas however becomes the crusader
against this rampant corruption, helping
stop Quinlan and restoring balance towards the police force and helping them
become respectable once more. Again the tactics used in “Bringing Up Baby”
are found again in “Touch of Evil”, both
movies have an agenda they present in palatable ways. One in the 1930s
depression for people not to give up hope and start a family one more, through
a screwball heartwarming story and “Touch Of Evil” represents its message
through a gritty 1950’s film noir which however has more of an optimistic note
then other film noirs. Orson Welles
becomes an independent message for the film makers who are trapped and attacked
by the system to not give up hope and that they can strive towards artistic and
political independence.
However , “Touch of
Evil” also has the representations of an
independent woman who is increasingly being hounded and belittled by a
patriarchal society. In the scene where Susan
confronts Grande, his phallic cigarette gets so much into her face that
she has to push it away and confront him
as an equal. The encroaching mentality of the male sex is the reactionary
attack that happened in the post WW2 society. The male dominated society was
left bare as men went to fight and woman took the role of the controller and
leader in their own lives. 1940-1950’s film noirs help spread the message against this
independent woman and how it is a corruptible influence and danger to males and
a male run society, look at the film “Double Indemnity”. In “Touch of Evil”, the femme fatale has been on
the large part been eroded out of the concept but rather Marlene Deitrich has
assumed a more passive and less conniving role, giving the female gender a
positive and confidence character on the screen.
In the end the studio system that manufactured
these movies and countless others would
fall, some part due to T.V, some to the shifting demographics and the film
makers that came afterwards. “..through four decades to provide a consistent
system of production and consumption, a set of formalized creative practices
and constraints, and thus a body of works with a uniform style- a standard way
of telling stories, from camera work and
cutting to plot structure and thematic.”[2]
This studio system would change and evolve however the studio system is key and
still dominating over the movie making
industry. Films like “Bringing Up Baby”
and “Touch of Evil” however different in regards of story content and how they
were told still where conceived upon this stage. The same is applied for the
independent 1970s director/auteur driven films and modern day quirky
independent “art house” cinema. Ultimately the Studio system will survive and
thrive, until a strong enough replacement is viable.
