Film Noir?

[skyvue]

I like THE BIG SLEEP very much (though Mitchum's my preferred Marlowe), but I sometimes question whether it deserves the "film noir" designation. Hard-boiled, sure, but noir? Depends on which day you ask me. I go back and forth on it.

 

[Wally_Hood]

Although even Chandler himself was not sure who killed the chauffeur. Now *THAT* is what I'd call a convoluted plot.

Tony

Reportedly, when asked about who killed the chauffeur, Chandler responded with something like, How should I know?

The character's death is not a red herring, but just a completely random tragedy that does throw the viewer off, but does nothing to the plot, which in it's way is weird cool.

 

[Widebrim]

Reportedly, when asked about who killed the chauffeur, Chandler responded with something like, How should I know?

The character's death is not a red herring, but just a completely random tragedy that does throw the viewer off, but does nothing to the plot, which in it's way is weird cool.

I tend to think that Brody killed him, then snagged the film. (If not him, who else? Geiger's gunsel didn't do it, or else he wouldn't have killed Brody himself, thinking that the latter killed Gieger. Eddie Mars? I don't see any reason for that, particularly since he didn't seem to have been involved at all in Geiger's affairs with Carmen.) You're right, though, regarding the death doing nothing to the plot and yet being kind of cool. Usually if an action does nothing to further the plot, we consider it superflous and often poor writing, yet in this case it just is accepted as part of an already complicated, bewildering story...

 

[Widebrim]

I like THE BIG SLEEP very much (though Mitchum's my preferred Marlowe), but I sometimes question whether it deserves the "film noir" designation. Hard-boiled, sure, but noir? Depends on which day you ask me. I go back and forth on it.

Even though Noir experts definitely consider The Big Sleep as part of the "movement," I can understand where you're coming from. Director Huston doesn't rely much on the camera set-ups usually associated with Noir, altough there is some of the lighting we've come to associate with such works. I suppose that it stands out as Noir mainly due to Marlowe being caught in a complicated web of intrigue that he not only doesn't understand at first, but from which he can't mentally/morally extricate himself, even though he is ostensibly urged to do so several times. One might also make a point about General Sternwood representing the decay of the pre-WWII way of life, and his daughters symbolizing the soon-to-be post-war shift of values (the film was actually shot while the war was still on). And there is a femme fatale present, in the likes of Carmen Sternwood, although she comes off even more so in the novel.

I think, though, that we should question the validity of some of the movies included in the Film Noir cannon. Is Kansas City Confidential, for example, really Noir, or simply a Crime drama about a man trying to clear his name? And how about The High Wall? Does the fact that Robert Taylor's character is a veteran and has brain damage (caused after the war) cement its place in the ranks of Noir? I'm not judging these two, just asking. Of course, I realize that Film Noir is noted not only for its plot elements, but for its use of camera and lighting. (In fact, the former often take a back seat to the latter in Noir.) At any rate, I think that most of us who contribute to this thread would agree that some of what is peddled as Noir simply ain't.

 

[Effingham]

I tend to agree -- I think the marketers like to have their product identified as a popular genre, and thus force a stretching of the definition of noir.

That said -- is noir still being made today? Can it *be* a color film and still noir (not counting remakes of classics, or recasting of Hammer or so on)? I think it probably can, but I require a lot more attention to the traditions. That is to say, is there any *new* noir?

 

[Mahagonny Bill]

The character's death is not a red herring, but just a completely random tragedy that does throw the viewer off, but does nothing to the plot, which in it's way is weird cool.

Isn't that the very definition of a red herring?
Something that draws attention away from the central issue - www.thefreedictionary.com

 

[Widebrim]

Isn't that the very definition of a red herring?
Something that draws attention away from the central issue - www.thefreedictionary.com

To be honest, I'm not sure about that, Bill. His death doesn't really draw attention away from the central issue at that point--the shooting of Geiger and the removal of the film--and no suspects are even seriously considered. What it does do is show that he didn't have the film in question, and in that way it actually moves the plot along. I'd have to think more about it, though.

 

[John in Covina]

I like THE BIG SLEEP very much (though Mitchum's my preferred Marlowe), but I sometimes question whether it deserves the "film noir" designation. Hard-boiled, sure, but noir? Depends on which day you ask me. I go back and forth on it.

I wish they had done Mitchum's "The Big Sleep" in the period like they did the "Farewell My Lovely" which is a fine version and works well as a comparison to the "Murder My Sweet" version with Dick Powell.

 

[Effingham]

The sales point (for me, lech that I am) for Mitchum's "Big Sleep" is all those scenes of Sarah Miles in see-through blouses. Ah, the seventies...

 

[Widebrim]

I wish they had done Mitchum's "The Big Sleep" in the period like they did the "Farewell My Lovely" which is a fine version and works well as a comparison to the "Murder My Sweet" version with Dick Powell.

Definitely, and I think we'd agree that it would have been great if Mitchum had essayed Marlowe around '47, when he was 30 years of age.

 

[Effingham]

Definitely. Marlowe was not that long in the tooth; Mitchum was.

 

[skyvue]

I wish they had done Mitchum's "The Big Sleep" in the period like they did the "Farewell My Lovely

And set it in LA, not London. That movie's truly a disaster.

 

[martinsantos]

I think the answer is "no". Sometimes can appear a "tribute" or something like that - more or less what happened in 70s.

But the "real thing" probably no more.

About colors... I think that a trully noir must be in black and white. "noir" is a whole serie of caracteristics. The caracters, the story, the pessimism, the expressionism. Colors don't get well with this. Tend to be so distracting. And black and white has a very particular and strong power about suggesting moods.

I tend to agree -- I think the marketers like to have their product identified as a popular genre, and thus force a stretching of the definition of noir.

That said -- is noir still being made today? Can it *be* a color film and still noir (not counting remakes of classics, or recasting of Hammer or so on)? I think it probably can, but I require a lot more attention to the traditions. That is to say, is there any *new* noir?

 

[Widebrim]

I think the answer is "no". Sometimes can appear a "tribute" or something like that - more or less what happened in 70s.

But the "real thing" probably no more.

About colors... I think that a trully noir must be in black and white. "noir" is a whole serie of caracteristics. The caracters, the story, the pessimism, the expressionism. Colors don't get well with this. Tend to be so distracting. And black and white has a very particular and strong power about suggesting moods.

I tend to agree with you on both counts, especially the first. Film Noir is a reflection of the times in which it was first produced, times of uncertainty and social change greatly brought on by WWII.

None-the-less...how about a movie set in the past that not only has the technical aspects down, but includes in its storyline some of those elements for which Noir is known? For example, a WWII veteran who can't adjust to a middle-class existence with his wife and children, and takes up with the wife of his workmate, only to find that she wants him to bump off her husband or she'll spill the beans? Or a late-40s P.I. who finds himself embroiled in a case involving a sexy femme fatale who causes him to go against his principles? Would you consider Chinatown as Noir, or is it more of (as you term it) a tribute? And how about L.A. Confidential?

 

[Atomic Age]

I think all these "rules of noir" are a bunch of nonsense. The fact of the mater is , the guys who were making what became known as film noir, had no idea they were making noir. They just thought they were making a crime drama. There were no rules that say the film must include this and can't have that! To say that noir shouldn't be in color would be to exclude an excellent film like Slightly Scarlet. Its a wonderful Technicolor, SuperScope film staring John Payne and Rhonda Fleming. Photographed by the amazing John Alton! It is a quintessential film noir, and should be on the short list of everyone's noir collection. You would also have to leave out "Leave Her To Heaven", another Technicolor noir.

Other films that would have to be left out because they don't include the elements that purists feel must be in noir would be the likes of, "The Big Sleep" and "Murder, My Sweet". Neither of which included a "doomed" hero, yet most people include these films in the "noir cannon".

Many people say that Chinatown or L. A. Confidential are "neo-noir". But to my mind its all just noir. And frankly I'd throw Blade Runner into the noir heap too.

Doug

 

[Effingham]

I think that a trully noir must be in black and white. "noir" is a whole serie of caracteristics. The caracters, the story, the pessimism, the expressionism. Colors don't get well with this. Tend to be so distracting. And black and white has a very particular and strong power about suggesting moods.

I think I agree.

I have a friend from grad school of whom I greatly despaired. She would NOT watch a black-and-white movie. No matter what it was. Wouldn't do it. Said she didn't like it.

Imagine a life with no Maltese Falcon, no Casablanca, no Captain Blood, no Birds, no Metropolis, no Seven Samurai, no It's a Wonderful Life, no Sunset Boulevard, no Psycho, no Thin Man, no To Kill a Mockingbird... no Citizen Kane, heck, no Schindler's List, either.

Pathetic.

 

[Unique Tales Of Intrigue]

I tend to agree -- I think the marketers like to have their product identified as a popular genre, and thus force a stretching of the definition of noir.

That said -- is noir still being made today? Can it *be* a color film and still noir (not counting remakes of classics, or recasting of Hammer or so on)? I think it probably can, but I require a lot more attention to the traditions. That is to say, is there any *new* noir?

Dear Effingham,

I hold to the standards that a color-film can never be a film-noire. There are just some things that can only be accomplished in black and white, and two of those things are certain shadows and elements of cinematography.

Also, I believe that you would lose many aspects of the genre if you allowed modern technologies to be available in the plot, therefore I would say that film-noire is restricted to pre-1960s.

I think a more provoking question may be: "Can there be a pre-(rather than post)1940s/1950s film-noire?"

After all, I can say that "Yes", there can be new film-noires.

May JESUS CHRIST THE MIGHTY LORD GOD and SAVIOR Bless you, yours, and these United States Of America!

Sincerely,

Daniel Benjamin Orris

 

[Unique Tales Of Intrigue]

And welcome to the Fedora Lounge, Unique!

Pleasured to be here, Widebrim!

You seem to be a big film-noire fan, have you ever thought about writing stories like those many film-noires were based off of?

May JESUS CHRIST THE ALMIGHTY LORD GOD and SAVIOR, Bless you, yours, and these United States Of America!

Sincerely,

Daniel Benjamin Orris

 

[Widebrim]

I think all these "rules of noir" are a bunch of nonsense. The fact of the mater is , the guys who were making what became known as film noir, had no idea they were making noir. They just thought they were making a crime drama. There were no rules that say the film must include this and can't have that! To say that noir shouldn't be in color would be to exclude an excellent film like Slightly Scarlet. Its a wonderful Technicolor, SuperScope film staring John Payne and Rhonda Fleming. Photographed by the amazing John Alton! It is a quintessential film noir, and should be on the short list of everyone's noir collection. You would also have to leave out "Leave Her To Heaven", another Technicolor noir.

Other films that would have to be left out because they don't include the elements that purists feel must be in noir would be the likes of, "The Big Sleep" and "Murder, My Sweet". Neither of which included a "doomed" hero, yet most people include these films in the "noir cannon".

Many people say that Chinatown or L. A. Confidential are "neo-noir". But to my mind its all just noir. And frankly I'd throw Blade Runner into the noir heap too.

Doug

I partly agree with you, Doug, and have even mentioned Murder, My Sweet and The Big Sleep on this thread. You're correct in implying that there doesn't have to be a doomed hero in every Noir, as some purists would insist. A cynical private dick who simply finds himself embroiled in a complicated mess that he can't seem to extricate himself from is sufficient. Of course, the addition of a femme fatale does help...

Regarding Slightly Scarlet, though, while the cinematography is excellent, I found that the bright Technicolor hues actually distracted me from what was transpiring. The use of black and white film stock, high contrast, and chiaroscuro are common denominators that help to single out certain films from the '40s and '50s as "Noir." Could a color film still be considered Noir? Of course, as you've pointed out; but I think that it can convincingly be argued that those photographic techniques which help to underline the "dark" themes present in Films Noir can best be implemented with b/w film.

You're also right about there being no hardfast "rules," and yet you'd probably agree that there are certain elements which, when combined in a particular fashion, help to separate a crime drama from a Film Noir crime drama. Do the lines of dilineation sometimes get blurry? I think so, and that is why critics do disagree on the subject. Yes, those who were making crime dramas in the '40s and '50s did not consciously go out to make a "Film Noir;" even when the term was coined by a Frenchman in 1946, Americans were generally ignorant of the apellation. Yet just because those who wrote, produced, and directed what is now called Film Noir were, in their minds, simply making crime film melodramas, that doesn't negate the fact that there are certain elements which need to be present to some degree in a film in order for it to be considered Noir. These elements can include German Expressionism-influenced camera angles, the use of high contrast, a docu-drama approach a' la Italian Neo Realism, the focus on a femme fatale, convoluted and often dream-like flashbacks, one often innocent "mistake" on the part of the anti-hero that seems to seal his fate, the feeling of alienation on the part of the protagonist (often brought on by a post-WWII society), and other devices/themes.

Regarding the debate as to whether or not place "modern" films like Chinatown and L.A. Confidential into the canon, I think that it is important to remember that Film Noir is not considered a genre. Rather, it was a trend which greatly reflected the times in which it was produced, and just as Italian Neo Realism and French New Wave are rooted in their respective time periods, I believe that the same applies to Film Noir.

Lee

 

[skyvue]

I think all these "rules of noir" are a bunch of nonsense. The fact of the mater is , the guys who were making what became known as film noir, had no idea they were making noir. They just thought they were making a crime drama.

It's true that the filmmakers didn't know they were making noirs at the time, as it is a genre tag that wasn't coined until 1948 (and it didn't come into wide usage until later). But that doesn't mean that just any crime story of the era is noir, given that the term was coined to describe films that shared certain characteristics, just as not all comedies of the Thirties could accurately be described as "screwball." If the term "Film Noir" applied to all crime films of the era, there would have been no need to coin the term in the first place.