Summary:
A violent yet romanticised account of the career of the notorious bank-robbing couple who meet and embark on their spree amidst the poverty of the Great Depression in 1920s USA.
Analysis:
When first released in 1967, Bonnie and Clyde was a critical failure and achieved only mediocre box office sales. Even then, however, it appealed to those who embraced 1960s counter-culture in the wake of post-war social conformity and political unrest sparked by the conflict in Vietnam which cast a cloud over the entire decade. The following year, Penn’s film was reassessed for its aesthetic and thematic innovations, and went on to achieve great critical acclaim and commercial success. Reappraised by most as a work of groundbreaking importance, it was also nominated for ten Academy Awards, winning for best supporting actress (Parsons as Blanche) and best cinematography for Guffey. It is now widely regarded as one of a handful of films that marked a significant turning point in US cinema’s approach to form and content, at a time when the control of the Hollywood industry began to shift from producers to directors.
Working at a time of renewal in US narrative filmmaking, Penn was looked upon as one of those: “young, wilful and maverick [US] directors having their own way and making fresh pictures that entertained millions while whispering to them about the true state of the nation.” (David Thomson in Williams and Hammond 2006: 252) However, while Bonnie and Clyde is now valued for having heralded a ‘Renaissance’ (King 2002: 12) period for Hollywood cinema as an art form, harking back to the pre-studio days of innovation, it struggled in its initial stages to attract funding. Indeed, Warner Brothers – perhaps recognising its potential as a gangster movie – only came on board when Warren Beatty became involved as its star and producer.1
The film’s status as a gangster movie is worth considering as, like many belonging to that genre, it is loosely based on the true story of a villainous gang and used events of the past to set up a critique of the present. The real criminals were more brutal than their screen counterparts, but they became legendary nevertheless and much of the area where the film was shot was still known 30 years later as Barrow County. The gang became famous for rampaging through the Midwest, looting banks and causing havoc. The terrible effects of the Wall Street Crash (1929) and Great Depression that ensued were made more acute in this region by famine. Many families saw their homes and farms repossessed by banks, and the smaller banks were then forced to close. While the movie’s references to the 1930s are explicitly made, an investigation of similar concerns regarding the oppression by the establishment of the poor and otherwise marginalised of the 1960s is implied. Moreover, if the protagonists are taken as representing the romantic but doomed heroes who claim to act on behalf of all society’s outcasts, their tragic demise confirms the film’s ideological stance, indicating ‘a recognition of the dark forces that threaten the more utopian or idealistic aspirations of 1960s social movements’ (King 2002: 18).
Bonnie and Clyde perplexed some and delighted others for its constantly surprising shifts of tone, from light-hearted banter, domestic squabbles and intimate moments, to shocking and apparently heartless acts of intense and aestheticised violence. It fascinated many for daring to draw inspiration as much from the stylistic experimentation of European cinema as from its own Hollywood predecessors. The influence of the Italian neo-realist movement of the late 1940s and 1950s, for example, is confirmed by the choice of ‘real’ locations, the use of local people as cast members, a predilection for handheld camerawork and point-of-view shots, and an overall emphasis on manufacturing an ‘authentic’ look via naturalistic lighting strategies. Perhaps even more obvious is the impact of the French New Wave on this film, as Penn draws upon that movement’s innovations with shooting, editing and mise en scène. Indeed, an overt homage is paid early on to Jean-Paul Belmondo’s iconic character, Michel, from Godard’s À Bout de Souffle (1959) via the costume, posture and props adopted by Beatty as Clyde Barrow in his first main scene with Dunaway and Pollard at the gas station.2
The use of the jump cut device that was key to the New Wave style is noticeable from the very opening when Bonnie is introduced in her small and cluttered bedroom, preparing herself for yet another dull stint working as a waitress. Here, the fragmentary editing technique seems to suggest ‘restlessness, edginess and a palpable sense of sexual hunger or longing’ (King 2002: 12). Bonnie is clearly desperate to escape her humdrum life, and the frosted windows, bars on the bedstead, shadows across her face, all serve as symbols of the entrapment she feels.3 Later on, in particular during the adrenaline-fuelled shoot-out sequences between the Barrow gang and the police, an even more disruptive cutting style is used that is reminiscent of the Soviet montage techniques of the 1920s. With close-up shots of blood-sullied bespectacled victims, an explicit reference is made to Eisenstein’s powerful Battleship Potemkin (1925), another important film about resisting authoritarian oppression.
Thematically, the film offers a bold critique of the manipulation of reality by the mass media, alongside a concern for the dangers of celebrity culture. We see how the drama of their life on the run is heightened for Bonnie and Clyde by reading reports of their supposed deeds in newspapers. The pair, with their fellow misfits, are given new meaning and motivation when they see that they have been labelled the ‘Barrow gang’ by the press, and then feel it their duty to live up to that name. The tragedy of this situation is emphasised towards the end when Clyde shows genuine contentment after Bonnie has immortalised him through her poem about their adventures together, which is published by the papers.
Further debate was provoked by the film’s vivid portrayal of apparently pointless acts of violence (at a time when sensitivities about the Vietnam War were particularly acute), and for its depiction of villains as romantic heroes to be commended for taking the side of the impoverished victims of the corporate priorities of the banking system. The film suggests that neither protagonist is really involved in armed robbery for the money itself, but that both are instead caught up in a rebellious struggle against alienation and conformity, and motivated by a desire for freedom and respect. In order to strengthen this position of sympathy, the popular Robin Hood myth is referenced by making it clear that the primary targets of their attacks are the banks that are repossessing the homes and businesses of the poor farmers and their (black) workers. Meanwhile, the irreverent depiction of the authorities (the police in particular) as incompetent and cowardly, at one point turning back from a car chase when the gang cross into another county, prevents the audience from taking their side too easily. The vengeful Sheriff Hamer, desperate to regain respect after being taunted and tortured by the gang, comes under particular attack for his obsession with status and pride.
The film highlights a concern for the complexities of identity formation in several ways. The opening scene begins with close-ups of Bonnie pouting at and preening herself in the mirror, and she quickly and carefully reinvents herself as the gangster’s moll. Meanwhile, frequent references are made to the importance of photography in the modern world as a way of constructing and responding to a sense of self that is constructed largely by others. As Liora Moriel has suggested, this film is important not just for its approach to violence and society but also for its concerns with the ‘fluidity of social constructions such as identity, family and race’ (Friedman 2000: 148). The protagonists’ shared yearning for a strong family unit of their own elicits further sympathy for their situation. This is emphasised by the brotherly bond between Clyde and Buck (more a father figure), the warmth they show towards the youngest member of their gang, C. W. Moss (as if their child), and the touching scene during which Bonnie is briefly reunited with her beloved mother.
The film uses its articulation of violence as a means to develop the identities of its main characters. It takes quite a complex approach to the relationship between violence, gender and sexuality. For example, it highlights and then distorts the meaning of the quite obvious phallic symbols (matchstick, bottle, gun) that Clyde uses to seduce Bonnie when he first meets her, confusing her shortly afterwards by declaring himself to be useless as a ‘lover boy’ and hinting at an ambiguous sexuality. Throughout, Clyde seems desperate to prove his status as a macho man, and uses his gun to do so, but even his efforts to become the fearless armed robber are often thwarted in almost ridiculous ways.
Bonnie is also complex as the main female character: sexually provocative and aware of her own power over men, she is at the same time vulnerable, childlike and desperate to be loved. She appears deeply hurt by Clyde’s initial lack of interest in her sexually, and also by his reluctance to share any intimate moments with her. She is contrasted with Blanche, the shrill-voiced, self-righteous preacher’s daughter (Clyde’s sister-in-law), who is scared of everything and demands protection. Their differences are first made clear when Blanche shies away from being photographed, while Bonnie poses with excessive confidence in front of one of their stolen cars, holding a gun and pretending to smoke Clyde’s cigar. By the end, however, Bonnie has largely renounced her more ‘masculine’ traits. In the final scene, her fascination with a delicate porcelain figure distances her from the gun-toting criminal of old and instead ‘speaks to her growing domestication and desire for a new identity, one in accord with more traditional female roles’ (Friedman 2000: 72).
The film of Bonnie and Clyde both reflected and played its part in shaping the cultural, social and political unrest of the time. It crossed boundaries and broke new ground from a stylistic and an ideological point of view, forcing its spectator to question the usual patterns of identification with its murderous (anti-)heroes. While its sexual politics may resort to a position that reifies the structures of patriarchy, it is fair to assert that this film deserves its place in cinema history for changing the shape of Hollywood forever; as Carr reminds us, ‘Few movies since Bonnie and Clyde have had such a profound impact on [mainstream popular] culture or have generated as intense and passionate a debate’ (in Friedman 2000: 72).
Sarah Barrow
Notes
1. When the genre system was first established and studios began to specialise in niche areas, Warner Brothers developed its reputation as a producer of high-quality, crowd-pleasing gangster movies, such as those starring James Cagney.
2. The film was first considered by both JeanLuc Godard and François Truffaut before being offered to Penn.
3. Geoff King does argue, however, that this is still very much a film in the Hollywood mould in which style, however innovative, is subordinate to narrative, and which draws on the old frontier mythology that was central to movies of the classical Western genre.
Cast and Crew:
[Country: USA. Production Company: Warner Brothers. Director: Arthur Penn. Screenwriters: David Newman and Robert Benton. Cinematographer: Burnett Guffey. Music: Charles Strouse. Editor: Dede Allen. Cast: Warren Beatty (Clyde Barrow), Faye Dunaway (Bonnie Parker), Michael J. Pollard (C. W. Moss), Gene Hackman (Buck Barrow), Estelle Parsons (Blanche Barrow), Denver Pyle (Sheriff Frank Hamer).]
Further Reading:
Steven Alan Carr, ‘From “Fucking Cops!” to “Fucking Media!”: Bonnie and Clyde for a Sixties America’, in Lester D. Friedman, ed., Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 70–100.
Lester D. Friedman, Bonnie and Clyde, London, BFI, 2000.
Geoff King, New Hollywood Cinema: An Introduction, London and New York, I.B. Tauris, 2002.
Liora Moriel, ‘Erasure and Taboo: A Queer Reading of Bonnie and Clyde’, in Lester D. Friedman, ed., Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 148–76.
Linda Ruth Williams and Michael Hammond, eds, Contemporary American Cinema, New York, McGraw-Hill, 2006.
Source Credits:
The Routledge Encyclopedia of Films, Edited by Sarah Barrow, Sabine Haenni and John White, first published in 2015.