Joaquim da Silva Fontes, Significação e Estabilidade do Género no ...
Joaquim da Silva Fontes, Significação e Estabilidade do Género no ... Joaquim da Silva Fontes, Significação e Estabilidade do Género no ...
to these specific restrictions and see more clearly how they were observed and applied in certain cases. Billy Wilder’s Double Indemnity may be taken as a fairly representative example to describe the practical effects of censorship. In the first version of the movie, insurance agent Neff (Fred MacMurray) was featured as being sent to a gas chamber which created some uneasiness among the members of the Breen office. It was declared that both the novel and its cinematic treatment were most unsuitable 44 and so Wilder had to come up with a new ending. According to the director, Neff’s death was among “two of the best scenes I’ve ever shot in my whole life [the other being the original opening to Sunset Boulevard]”. It did not take too long for Wilder to consider that an execution was perhaps “unnecessary” and so apart from a different ending, Billy Wilder was also obliged to take into account some other points and softened them to pass the sieve of censorship. For example, Neff does not commit suicide and only dies after confessing to a Dictaphone that he was the one who set up the whole scheme. Regarding the love scenes, as I have already mentioned elsewhere, directors had to camouflage them through the art of omission or recur to suggestive camera movements to ascribe certain meanings. In the case of Double Indemnity, the adulterous sequences had to be disguised so, for instance, when Phyllis visits Walter’s apartment and kisses him for the first time, he instantly lights up a cigarette, and gets ready to discuss the murder plan. The audience gets to infer, however, that they do go to bed with each other while the rain falls on the bedroom windows. These scenes were then developed to ensure that the rule from the Code would be followed: “The sanctity of the institution of marriage and the home shall be upheld. Pictures shall not infer that low forms of sex relationship are the accepted or common thing” (see p. 465). Adultery and illicit sex, although recognized as sometimes necessary to the plot, could not be explicit or justified and were not supposed to be presented as an attractive option. Cain’s quote from the introduction seems to make much sense here: “A studio can obey every one and be salacious” since by means of symbolism and ellipsis (we know that time has passed when Walter and Phyllis get together again after that scene back in the living room where he is seated at one end of the sofa smoking a cigarette, and she is retouching her makeup), Hollywood’s enforced morals could be preserved. 44 The PCA established that the “whole sequence in the death chamber to be very questionable in its present form (…) specifically the details of the execution (…) are unduly gruesome to the Code.” 140
In this particular case, one can see that studios were mindful of these issues. Billy Wilder’s adaptation was sent to several studios, but it was only Paramount which showed the interest and the courage to produce it. The studio was aware that Cain’s novel violated the Production Code in many aspects, and effectively Breen’s response to the script emphasised that it showed too many “details of the vicious cold-blooded murder” and that, globally speaking, “the low tone and sordid flavour” was “thoroughly unacceptable” (Scheuer 1944:3). As Cain explained his story, “it is about a married woman who falls in love with another man, kills her husband, fraudulently attempts to collect insurance, attempts to kill her lover and gets killed by him for selfish motives.” Yet, it “presents these people with compassion and understanding.” Just a couple of days later, on September 24, 1943, Breen agreed that “the basic story seems to meet the requirements of the Production Code.” However, another couple of changes would have to be taken into account, namely the ones involving “Phyllis’s erotic entrance and the murder of her husband” while taking him to the train station: page 6 The towel must properly cover Phyllis (…) below the knees with no unacceptable exposure. page 8 The flimsy house pajamas must be adequate. page 43 Omit “And listen, don’t handle the policy without putting your gloves on.” page 47 Omit “to park your south end.” page 62 Omit details on disposing of the corpse and explicit details of the crime (…) delete the whole scene/sequence (…) therefore, fade out after they take the body from the car – let the dialogue explain what they did. page 74 Delete specific poisons in Keye’s speech sequences. 141 (Biesen 2005:101) Scenes as the ones described above evoke the “peculiarity of censorship”, as Christian Metz notes, adding that “things are always managing to get past it”, and that they operate “like the sluices you sometimes see at the mouths of rivers, where the water gets through one way or another” (Metz 1982:254). That is basically what happened with Double Indemnity after Wilder complied with and undertook minor changes to the film, as a way of manoeuvring around the Code to make sure that the film would get approved. The
- Page 105 and 106: titlecard when the film opens alert
- Page 107 and 108: In Rebecca the beautiful, desirable
- Page 109 and 110: forties. Thematically, the represen
- Page 111 and 112: To complicate this matter further,
- Page 113 and 114: trampled under by war and revolutio
- Page 115 and 116: he says, when Expressionism ended,
- Page 117 and 118: These early Expressionist films, wi
- Page 119 and 120: student, Balduin (Paul Wegener hims
- Page 121 and 122: (Tragedy of the Street, 1927, aka W
- Page 123 and 124: plots with calculating precision. G
- Page 125 and 126: perverted and neurotic sex murderer
- Page 127 and 128: 1.5 French Poetic Realism Poetic Re
- Page 129 and 130: (Michèle Morgan), whose godfather
- Page 131 and 132: strikingly atmospheric view of the
- Page 133 and 134: Jean Paulhan, editor of La Nouvelle
- Page 135 and 136: Julien Duvivier’s Pépé Le Moko
- Page 137 and 138: the combination of lighting effects
- Page 139 and 140: peculiar expressionistic lighting a
- Page 141 and 142: Figure 28. Son of Frankenstein This
- Page 143 and 144: Figure 29. Murders in the Rue Morgu
- Page 145 and 146: alienation mixed with nuanced perfo
- Page 147 and 148: 2 Social and Political Influences o
- Page 149 and 150: Liberal reforms soon became a spuri
- Page 151 and 152: Polonsky, Jules Dassin, and Edward
- Page 153 and 154: which are themselves historical eve
- Page 155: Production Code Administration. Thi
- Page 159 and 160: Neff: Will you be here too? Phyllis
- Page 161 and 162: against any possible theft of groce
- Page 163 and 164: 2.3 Postwar Readjustment If the moo
- Page 165 and 166: In this group of films, the bleak a
- Page 167 and 168: explain, these noir heroes of the f
- Page 169 and 170: (Gilda, White Heat, Scarlet Street,
- Page 171 and 172: seething excitations” and adds th
- Page 173 and 174: Romanticism present at the very hea
- Page 175 and 176: to persist and overcome difficultie
- Page 177 and 178: III. Noir Thematics 1 Essential Ele
- Page 179 and 180: its modernist sensibility, enabled
- Page 181 and 182: Wyatt), cooks breakfast, domestic r
- Page 183 and 184: structures of constituted authority
- Page 185 and 186: 1.2 Space and the Noir City Film no
- Page 187 and 188: other people and developing a calcu
- Page 189 and 190: I am the city. Hub and heart of Ame
- Page 191 and 192: 1.3 Trouble With Girls: The Femme F
- Page 193 and 194: intelligent and powerful, if destru
- Page 195 and 196: significant discussion of film noir
- Page 197 and 198: Nevertheless, the message is quite
- Page 199 and 200: Another example of the evolution of
- Page 201 and 202: deceiving women. Like many of their
- Page 203 and 204: Either as a femme fatale or an homm
- Page 205 and 206: 1.5 Dazed and Confused: The Voiceov
In this particular case, one can see that studios were mindful of these issues. Billy<br />
Wilder’s a<strong>da</strong>ptation was sent to several studios, but it was only Paramount which showed<br />
the interest and the courage to produce it. The studio was aware that Cain’s <strong>no</strong>vel violated<br />
the Production Code in many aspects, and effectively Breen’s response to the script<br />
emphasised that it showed too many “details of the vicious cold-blooded murder” and that,<br />
globally speaking, “the low tone and sordid flavour” was “thoroughly unacceptable”<br />
(Scheuer 1944:3).<br />
As Cain explained his story, “it is about a married woman who falls in love with<br />
a<strong>no</strong>ther man, kills her husband, fraudulently attempts to collect insurance, attempts to kill<br />
her lover and gets killed by him for selfish motives.” Yet, it “presents these people with<br />
compassion and understanding.” Just a couple of <strong>da</strong>ys later, on September 24, 1943, Breen<br />
agreed that “the basic story seems to meet the requirements of the Production Code.”<br />
However, a<strong>no</strong>ther couple of changes would have to be taken into account, namely the ones<br />
involving “Phyllis’s erotic entrance and the murder of her husband” while taking him to<br />
the train station:<br />
page 6 The towel must properly cover Phyllis (…) below the knees with <strong>no</strong><br />
unacceptable exposure.<br />
page 8 The flimsy house pajamas must be adequate.<br />
page 43 Omit “And listen, <strong>do</strong>n’t handle the policy without putting your gloves on.”<br />
page 47 Omit “to park your south end.”<br />
page 62 Omit details on disposing of the corpse and explicit details of the crime (…)<br />
delete the whole scene/sequence (…) therefore, fade out after they take the<br />
body from the car – let the dialogue explain what they did.<br />
page 74 Delete specific poisons in Keye’s speech sequences.<br />
141<br />
(Biesen 2005:101)<br />
Scenes as the ones described above evoke the “peculiarity of censorship”, as<br />
Christian Metz <strong>no</strong>tes, adding that “things are always managing to get past it”, and that they<br />
operate “like the sluices you sometimes see at the mouths of rivers, where the water gets<br />
through one way or a<strong>no</strong>ther” (Metz 1982:254). That is basically what happened with<br />
Double Indemnity after Wilder complied with and undertook mi<strong>no</strong>r changes to the film, as<br />
a way of ma<strong>no</strong>euvring around the Code to make sure that the film would get approved. The