There was a time when most film reviews in America didn't mention the director's name and filmgoers hadn't heard of Alfred Hitchcock, though they had seen his movies. That was before Andrew Sarris, CC'51, began writing for Film Comment and the Village Voice in the 1960s and before the publication of his revolutionary book "The American Cinema: Directors and Directions 1929-1968."

Sarris became the leading voice for the auteur theory—the idea that some film directors are the authors of their works. Today the School of the Arts professor is identified by many as the most influential critic in American film history, responsible for changing the way we look at movies and for gaining widespread appreciation of many previously overlooked film artists.

"I consider Andrew Sarris to be one of the most fundamental and valued teachers," writes Martin Scorsese in a new book that pays tribute to Sarris, entitled "Citizen Sarris: Essays in Honor of Andrew Sarris," edited by Emmanuel Levy (PhD'77) and published by Scarecrow Press.

Scorsese continues: "His writings led me to see the genius in American movies at a time when the cinema was considered a mindless form of entertainment, worthy of serious attention only if it came from Europe or Asia."

Scorsese is one of 39 contributors to the book, which also includes critics Roger Ebert, Molly Haskell (Sarris's wife), Richard Corliss and Richard Schickel and filmmakers John Sayles and Curtis Hanson.

Sarris Receives Award

Sarris was recently recognized for his outstanding contributions as a teacher and critic by the graduate film students of Columbia, who awarded him the first inaugural Andrew Sarris Award. At a celebratory reception he was feted by more than 150 current and former students, faculty, journalists and fans, including filmmaker Paul Schrader.

Sarris, who currently writes a column for the New York Observer, said, "My job is to communicate to people what I see in film." He was one of the first to analyze films by identifying their visual language and style.

"I love Columbia and appreciate the education I got there," said Sarris, who received his undergraduate and graduate education at Columbia and has taught at the University since 1969. "I enjoy bringing films to Columbia as repayment for what Columbia has done for me."

Sarris Reflects on Cinema

"The first review I wrote for the Village Voice on June 11, 1960 was a rave for Hitchcock's 'Psycho,' long before the auteur controversy," said Sarris. "I got so much angry mail that the editors were very impressed with me. At that time people who could arouse controversy were very valuable."

When asked how he came to be identified as the leading proponent of the auteur theory, Sarris said, "You might say it started in a very strange way." During a sojourn in Paris in 1961 he read an article by François Truffaut, "Certain Tendencies in the French Cinema" that made a distinction between film directors who were auteurs and those who were metteurs en scene (directors)—the auteurs expressed their own personality in their work. Other French filmmakers and theorists joined in the discussion and Sarris was inspired to respond to the commentary of critic Andre´ Bazin with his own "Notes on the Auteur Theory," published in Film Culture. Sarris proposed that some directors are the most important things in a film.

"The article got Pauline Kael very angry," said Sarris. (Kael, not a personal acquaintance of Sarris's and not well known at the time, went on to become the highly influential film critic for The New Yorker.) "I was nonplussed. She attacked my use of the term 'interior meanings.' I suppose I should have used the term subtext, but didn't have it at my beck and call."

Attacks by Kael and her followers escalated when Sarris published his book "The American Cinema," in which he indexed and categorized directors according to their merit.

"If I hadn't been misunderstood, or the case against me hadn't been exaggerated, I wouldn't be where I am today," said Sarris. "So I have mixed feelings about that, because no one likes to be attacked and treated as a threat. It's better than being ignored, I guess."

Today, the auteur theory has become absorbed into the mainstream. Sarris notes that " 'auteur' is now used ironically—a 19-year-old kid calls himself an auteur."

Asked whether critics have an influence on the development of the medium, Sarris replied, "I think some critics, like Roger Ebert and his partner, with their 'thumbs-up and thumbs down,' can have an impact—as well as the critics for the big papers, like the Times. Critics may have influence but they don't have power...as a critic I never had any illusions that I could change things.

"Mainstream filmmaking is not on the upswing. The level of the so-called teenage market is lower than it's ever been, it's just awful, but every now and then something good comes along, like 'Tootsie' or 'Groundhog Day.' I'm not nostalgic for any golden age, because the golden age was not that golden. There was a lot of brass. Movies constantly renew themselves. I'm still always looking for things. The one thing I do believe in is a kind of pluralism."

Ironically, the critic who was considered a champion of American film now has this advice for the filmgoer: "Keep up with foreign films—they're some of the most interesting works that are being done. One of the best movies I've seen all year is 'The Road Home' by Zhang Yimou. It's a defense of education and features a wonderful new actress, Zhang Ziyi."