*** Official Film Noir Discussion Thread - Page 12

Count me as another who does not think the thread is dead. In fact, I was inspired to watch Out of the Past again, as I read the discussion.

I really felt unable to join in the discussion without a recent viewing and was out of the country for a couple of weeks, so I got a bit behind in everything (and the thread passed me by).

In catch-up mode now…

Just want to say how lucky you guys are to live in a place where TCM is available. Unfortunately here up north, we cannot recieve this channel (or any other similar), so count yer blessings, while I count my pennies to buy some of the lessers that will never get shown on TV here.

I should add that late night TV used to be decent up here playing the occasional noir, but by the mid-nineties even that had pretty much faded with the advent of infomercial and the sheer amount of syndicated television.

if you're realy desperate to get noirs, noirfilm.com

they have pretty good transfers of noirs for sale and trade (some from off air US TV).

I just got:

Woman In The Window
Killer is Loose
Born to Kill
Angel Face and
99 River Street

from them. I watched Woman In The Window, and found it great (although the ending was a kind of a jip.) Dan Duyea is in everything I watch lately.

Well the digital tracking on my S-VHS unit is all screwed up which means no TCM noirs until I fix it or decide to buy another.

I did rent Too Late For Tears starring Dangerous Dan Duryea.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Oh & Port of Shadows finally shipped from Netflix so I should get to it this week to see what all the fuss is about.

Dial 1119

Is this noir? I can see why some people would think so, but it doesn't make the cut for me. Regardless of whether it's noir or not, it's not a very good movie. It does raise one intriguing question though.

Did they really have tv sets that large back then (apparently 60 inches!)?

I just watched This Gun For Hire yesterday. It left me rather unimpressed. Not that the movie is bad (far from it), but it lacks a somber tone I expected:
The good guys (V.Lake and her boyfriend cop) lacked a "dark side".
Veronica is gorgeous but is not a femme fatale, she's just Ladd's partner, he does what he does independantly of Lake's influence...

Am I the only one to consider Léon (aka "The Professional") as a film noir?
It has many "noir" elements (corrupt "hero", dirty cops, even a femme fatale in Nathalie Portman's character).

Cheers,

Vincent

Railroaded

I know some people think this is noir, and while I'm not really certain whether I agree or not, I can certainly see that it's a valid point of view for someone to have.

Apparently some people think this is good noir. There I have to disagree. Whether or not this is noir, it's a pretty mediocre film, which I think would really only be of interest to Leave it to Beaver fanatics.

Vincent: Leon is really one of my all-time favorites, and I'm hoping the 10th anniversary special edition is worth it (see separate thread). Your question helps test our respective definitions of noir, and Leon doesn't meet mine. I like corrupt heroes, but for instance Casablanca's Rick isn't noir. I like [to watch] dirty cops, but for instance Casablanca's Captain Renault (Claude Rains) isn't noir. I'm not pinning everything on Casablanca because the point is that there are many corrupt hero and dirty cop movies that aren't noir.

Having a femme fatale is indeed noirsh, but I don't consider Mathilda as Leon's femme fatale:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

And consider eifert's noir insights: "Noir is a movie that makes you feel black – that is you get a sinking feeling in your gut. The feeling is a combination of loneliness, frustration and guilt. You watch the movie and you identify with the main character. He or she is usually a good person that makes a bad decision – like we all have done in a smaller scale in our lives. The decision is usually driven by greed, lust or power. The decision – to embezzle, rob, commit murder… is wrong and the main character ALWAYS knows this but does it anyway because they think they can get away with it. That leads to more problems – more lying, cheating, stealing and possibly murder. The character ends up digging themselves into a deeper hole."

Far from black, sinking, lonely, frustrated, and guilt-ridden, to me Leon is:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Rather than noir, I'd put Leon closer to Casablanca – an obvious compliment. Just my 2 cents.

As far as Railroaded goes, I couldn't even get through watching it. It may be considered noir, but it's not a good movie. And I enjoyed 'Raw Deal' and 'T-Men.'

Leon AKA The Professional: Is that the one with the guy running around with his plant? Good movie, but not noir.


Here's one for you: The Big Lebowski! The movie plays like 'The Big Sleep' and it has many noir elements - poor average guy against rich.. complicated crime... sharp dialog. It certanly has noir elements to it. Doesn't it?

While it does have some ‘noir’ elements,most especially the story, which as been described as ‘Chanderlesque’ (your choice of The Big Sleep is appropriate), I think that the Coens have far too much fun with everything that is going on, for this to be a real (or neo) noir film.

Watched Port of Shadows the other day. Very good film & an excellent example of French Poetic Realism. While I don't consider it Noir (I also don't consider pure German Expressionism as Noir i.e. M, etc,) one can see the influence this style had on films such as Out of the Past & a host of other noirs.

Also watched the rather mundane Suddenly which has Frank Sinatra Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I just got through listening to Roger Ebert's commentary on Dark City, and that's relevant for this thread only in that I think he most likely views film noir very much as I do. He spent the vast majority of the time commenting on the noir elements of the film. He never came out and called Dark City a noir film, but it's clear that he sees lots and lots of noir elements in it, which is basically how I view it. He did come right on out and call Body Heat a film noir (not neo-noir, but good old plain film noir), so I know that he agrees with me on that one.

Jim, I would have to agree with your view on Suddenly. After a few viewings though, I started excusing much of the stock acting. Some of the dialog is quite good and there are some real domestic situations. I'm being purposely vague here, but some of the subjects must have been taboo.

Just got Port of Shadows, it's in the on-deck circle.

Watched Sudden Fear starring Joan Crawford & Jack Palance last night. Pretty good suspense yarn though Joan's performance walks that thin line verging on camp.

Interested in your thoughts on Port of Shadows Zen. That is if you got around to watching it.

"Zed's This thread's dead, baby"


Watched 2 more noir films for the first time.

Kiss Tomorrow Goodbye - pretty good Cagney gangster opus which I'd rank it right behind White Heat, Public Enemy, Roaring Twenties & Angels with Dirty Faces. Makes me long for that elusive Warner Cagney box set.

He Walked By Night - Up until the final act I didn't think this was anything above average.
However..........
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I just rewatched The Killing, which is one of my favorites. However, I think this was the first time I had watched the trailer which is on the DVD. I just want to warn anyone who is going to watch this movie for the first time to stay away from the trailer until you have seen the movie. It gives away just about everything, completely spoiling the whole movie.

I kinda like the coldness of it, but you're right the final scenes elevate it.

And I second what Gabe said. Although it's great to watch after you've seen the movie.

How about MULLHOLLAND DRIVE? That's pretty neo-noir, no?

Mulholland Drive has a lot of noir elements, but too much Lynch weirdness to qualify (IMO).

Mullholland Drive is one of a handful of David Lynch films that have a lot of the trappings of film noir. (I mentioned MD in a previous post, along with Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart and Lost Highway.) The hidden dark sides or subcultures hidden behind a respectable, wholesome facade in modern America is certainly one of Lynch's main recurring themes. Characters who appear to be upstanding members of society but are revealed to have more sinister sides are a staple of film noir, and they are Lynch's bread and butter. I think george is right, though, that the essential Lynchian weirdness is what keeps his films from being routinely lumped in with other neo noir. The primary impact of a David Lynch film usually comes from the superficial bizarre qualities, where he seems to be more interested in experimentation and manipulating the audience's expectations than in coherent storytelling. His noirish leanings are easier to grasp in the relatively conventional Blue Velvet than in his other movies, but taken as a group the Lynch-noir films are easy to identify. However, the noir elements are just the backbone that hold up his experiments in technique, rather than being the raison d'etre. (I feel so pretentious using all of this French.)

The Killing is also one of my favorites. The only thing I don't quite like is the use of voiceover. Though this is a personal preference & not really a criticism.


Odds Against Tomorrow – Average character drama with the trappings of a Noir/Caper film. This is a mild disappointment coming from Robert Wise & poor Robert Ryan gets typecast yet again as a bigot. The ending Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Pauline Kael is one of my least favorite critics of all time, because she seems to have a negative opinion about every movie she ever saw. Apparently film noir doesn't fare any better with her. Here are a couple of snippets from a review of hers I ran across for Out of the Past:

Hey Gordy:

Three of the titles you list are out in R2 if you're interested:

- They Live By Night (1949, Nicholas Ray, RKO) - Manga Films (Spain)
- On Dangerous Ground (1952, Nicholas Ray, RKO) - Editions Montparnasse (France)
- Secret Beyond the Door (1948, Fritz Lang, Republic Pictures) - Wild Side (France)

I have the first two and I'm more than pleased with the quality of the presentations. I've held off on the SBtD as the Wild Side discs from what I've heard, contain forced French subs.

Herb.

New vs. Old Strangers on a Train?

Anyone in a position to comment on the 9/7 release? Especially regarding picture/sound quality compared to the 1998 release? Of couse, the older release has both the US and UK versions while the new release has the documentaries. For those of us with the earlier version, is a 2nd dip recommended?

Glenn... the new release is astounding - it's breathtaking. Both versions appear on both releases, but the new SE obviously is loaded with features.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...19#post2360735

Comparing the two, I didn't notice much difference in audio but it is an improved picture, no doubt.

I haven't watched the featurettes so I can't comment on them nor the feature length commentary.

I think double-dipping gets down to personal preference in most cases. If you are a huge fan of Hitchcock or Strangers on a Train, it might be worth it. When in doubt, I think purchasing first-time DVDs is a smarter move than double-dipping - particularly if the video didn't distract you when watching the earlier release (it didn't bother me much).

In my case, I'm a big Hitch fan, so I double-dipped on both Strangers and North by Northwest. I felt that at @ 63 dollars delivered for the 7 films I don't own on DVD, worked out to $9 per DVD. Of course, I'll trade/sell the two I own to recoup some of it.

Of course, it is just a matter of time before North by Northwest gets a truly special edition and then ...

Thanks, but sorry about not first checking for the other thread (excellent review!)