|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 8, 2020 12:54:49 GMT
I'd say it sounds viable if, indeed, you decide to make your definition that strict/narrow, but I don't see why you'd do this. Noir was never an official genre; it's not like filmmakers in the 40s were going "I'm making/going to make a noir film!" That only happened much later when critics and filmmakers looked back on the 40s and 50s and noticed that there were these rather dark films, both stylistically and thematically, that were a pretty stark contrast to most mainstream, Hollywood cinema of the time. However, the exact nature of the genres used to make noirs, specifics of the styles or themes, was never something that was strict or set. About the only thing most films we call "noirs" have in common is that aforementioned darkness.
However, I'm guessing that if you did want to create a strict definition, it would be something like: lots of chiaroscuro, low-key lighting (bonus if you get a shot of light filtering through blinds); a hard-boiled detective story with a femme-fatale; voiceover narration; unhappy or ambiguous ending. Not sure what films would still apply off the top of my head (Out of the Past is one that comes to mind), but I know this would rule out many films classically considered noirs like The Third Man, The Big Sleep, and Touch of Evil. Even Double Indemnity, typically considered the first noir, wouldn't really fit because it's not a detective story.
|
|
Raxivace
New Member
@raxivace
Posts: 40
Likes: 19
 
|
Post by Raxivace on Jun 8, 2020 13:20:08 GMT
I'd say it sounds viable if, indeed, you decide to make your definition that strict/narrow, but I don't see why you'd do this. Noir was never an official genre; it's not like filmmakers in the 40s were going "I'm making/going to make a noir film!" That only happened much later when critics and filmmakers looked back on the 40s and 50s and noticed that there were these rather dark films, both stylistically and thematically, that were a pretty stark contrast to most mainstream, Hollywood cinema of the time. However, the exact nature of the genres used to make noirs, specifics of the styles or themes, was never something that was strict or set. About the only thing most films we call "noirs" have in common is that aforementioned darkness. However, I'm guessing that if you did want to create a strict definition, it would be something like: lots of chiaroscuro, low-key lighting (bonus if you get a shot of light filtering through blinds); a hard-boiled detective story with a femme-fatale; voiceover narration; unhappy or ambiguous ending. Not sure what films would still apply off the top of my head (Out of the Past is one that comes to mind), but I know this would rule out many films classically considered noirs like The Third Man, The Big Sleep, and Touch of Evil. Even Double Indemnity, typically considered the first noir, wouldn't really fit because it's not a detective story. There are some other weird qualifiers people throw onto noir as well when trying to create a strict defintion. Like that noir class I took in college had a professor that tried to stress that noir MUST be American or it isn't noir, which is still the most arbitrary thing to me and would also be a mark against a film like The Third Man that everyone else already considers part of the "genre".
|
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jun 9, 2020 1:06:39 GMT
The undisputed God of everything noir is Eddie Muller. Go worship at his site and he will show you the way. Film Noir God |
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jun 9, 2020 2:07:04 GMT
I'd say it sounds viable if, indeed, you decide to make your definition that strict/narrow, but I don't see why you'd do this. Noir was never an official genre; it's not like filmmakers in the 40s were going "I'm making/going to make a noir film!" That only happened much later when critics and filmmakers looked back on the 40s and 50s and noticed that there were these rather dark films, both stylistically and thematically, that were a pretty stark contrast to most mainstream, Hollywood cinema of the time. However, the exact nature of the genres used to make noirs, specifics of the styles or themes, was never something that was strict or set. About the only thing most films we call "noirs" have in common is that aforementioned darkness. However, I'm guessing that if you did want to create a strict definition, it would be something like: lots of chiaroscuro, low-key lighting (bonus if you get a shot of light filtering through blinds); a hard-boiled detective story with a femme-fatale; voiceover narration; unhappy or ambiguous ending. Not sure what films would still apply off the top of my head (Out of the Past is one that comes to mind), but I know this would rule out many films classically considered noirs like The Third Man, The Big Sleep, and Touch of Evil. Even Double Indemnity, typically considered the first noir, wouldn't really fit because it's not a detective story. There are some other weird qualifiers people throw onto noir as well when trying to create a strict defintion. Like that noir class I took in college had a professor that tried to stress that noir MUST be American or it isn't noir, which is still the most arbitrary thing to me and would also be a mark against a film like The Third Man that everyone else already considers part of the "genre".
The term film noir was originally coined and applied by French film critics to AMERICAN thriller or detective films that fit certain qualities. How do you somehow think the AMERICAN part is arbitrary?!! I'm guessing you were playing with your phone a lot during that class and don't understand why you failed, right?  Do you also think film noirs don't need to be films? Just kidding but damn. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 9, 2020 2:09:42 GMT
I'd say it sounds viable if, indeed, you decide to make your definition that strict/narrow, but I don't see why you'd do this. Noir was never an official genre; it's not like filmmakers in the 40s were going "I'm making/going to make a noir film!" That only happened much later when critics and filmmakers looked back on the 40s and 50s and noticed that there were these rather dark films, both stylistically and thematically, that were a pretty stark contrast to most mainstream, Hollywood cinema of the time. However, the exact nature of the genres used to make noirs, specifics of the styles or themes, was never something that was strict or set. About the only thing most films we call "noirs" have in common is that aforementioned darkness. However, I'm guessing that if you did want to create a strict definition, it would be something like: lots of chiaroscuro, low-key lighting (bonus if you get a shot of light filtering through blinds); a hard-boiled detective story with a femme-fatale; voiceover narration; unhappy or ambiguous ending. Not sure what films would still apply off the top of my head (Out of the Past is one that comes to mind), but I know this would rule out many films classically considered noirs like The Third Man, The Big Sleep, and Touch of Evil. Even Double Indemnity, typically considered the first noir, wouldn't really fit because it's not a detective story. There are some other weird qualifiers people throw onto noir as well when trying to create a strict defintion. Like that noir class I took in college had a professor that tried to stress that noir MUST be American or it isn't noir, which is still the most arbitrary thing to me and would also be a mark against a film like The Third Man that everyone else already considers part of the "genre". It's also odd considering that the most obvious influence on noir was German expressionism. I'm guessing the American qualifier might've had something to do with the thought that noir was partly a reaction to post-war America, but it's not as if America was the only country dealing with that! The Third Man is even good proof that some had it far worse! |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 11, 2020 5:40:43 GMT
There are some other weird qualifiers people throw onto noir as well when trying to create a strict defintion. Like that noir class I took in college had a professor that tried to stress that noir MUST be American or it isn't noir, which is still the most arbitrary thing to me and would also be a mark against a film like The Third Man that everyone else already considers part of the "genre".
The term film noir was originally coined and applied by French film critics to AMERICAN thriller or detective films that fit certain qualities. How do you somehow think the AMERICAN part is arbitrary?!! I'm guessing you were playing with your phone a lot during that class and don't understand why you failed, right? Do you also think film noirs don't need to be films? Just kidding but damn. First, way to sound like a complete asshole. Second, this is a blatant genetic fallacy. The same "French critics" that first defined noir also listed criteria that almost nobody today would use, and the fact that they were discussing American films in no way means non-American films couldn't possess those same qualities. So what is it about being "American" makes that qualifier essential for noirs? The answer is "almost nothing beyond the fact that's where most of them were made." Pretty much everyone calls The Third Man a noir, and it's British, not American. Besides, just because they "coined the term" doesn't mean that a ton of academics haven't weighed in on the discussion since. There's not even a consensus as to whether to call noir a genre, a style, or something else. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 11, 2020 5:43:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jun 11, 2020 8:51:58 GMT
The term film noir was originally coined and applied by French film critics to AMERICAN thriller or detective films that fit certain qualities. How do you somehow think the AMERICAN part is arbitrary?!! I'm guessing you were playing with your phone a lot during that class and don't understand why you failed, right? Do you also think film noirs don't need to be films? Just kidding but damn. First, way to sound like a complete asshole. Second, this is a blatant genetic fallacy. The same "French critics" that first defined noir also listed criteria that almost nobody today would use, and the fact that they were discussing American films in no way means non-American films couldn't possess those same qualities. So what is it about being "American" makes that qualifier essential for noirs? The answer is "almost nothing beyond the fact that's where most of them were made." Pretty much everyone calls The Third Man a noir, and it's British, not American. Besides, just because they "coined the term" doesn't mean that a ton of academics haven't weighed in on the discussion since. There's not even a consensus as to whether to call noir a genre, a style, or something else. I'm really impressed with how you play at being both a tough guy and knowledgeable. So so scary and smart Eva. I didn't use a hateful pejorative against Rax and I didn't address you at all so again congratulations for showing what an angry little boy you are. I never said noir had to be American. I never said The Third Man wasn't a noir and certainly didn't need to read your cut and paste comments about it twice. I just found it amusing that Rax took a class on film noir but somehow still thinks the term being applied mainly to American films is the MOST arbitrary thing about it. I even included Just Kidding so all the eager to be offended kids would know I was being flippant but you still were determined to be a petulant child I guess. Way to go Eva. Feel free to spew some more hateful vitriol tho and by all means enlighten everyone with more of your copy and paste information. Keep showing everyone your true character and lack of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 11, 2020 9:21:43 GMT
First, way to sound like a complete asshole. Second, this is a blatant genetic fallacy. The same "French critics" that first defined noir also listed criteria that almost nobody today would use, and the fact that they were discussing American films in no way means non-American films couldn't possess those same qualities. So what is it about being "American" makes that qualifier essential for noirs? The answer is "almost nothing beyond the fact that's where most of them were made." Pretty much everyone calls The Third Man a noir, and it's British, not American. Besides, just because they "coined the term" doesn't mean that a ton of academics haven't weighed in on the discussion since. There's not even a consensus as to whether to call noir a genre, a style, or something else. I'm really impressed with how you play at being both a tough guy and knowledgeable. So so scary and smart Eva. I didn't use a hateful pejorative against Rax and I didn't address you at all so again congratulations for showing what an angry little boy you are. I never said noir had to be American. I never said The Third Man wasn't a noir and certainly didn't need to read your cut and paste comments about it twice. I just found it amusing that Rax took a class on film noir but somehow still thinks the term being applied mainly to American films is the MOST arbitrary thing about it. I even included Just Kidding so all the eager to be offended kids would know I was being flippant but you still were determined to be a petulant child I guess. Way to go Eva. Feel free to spew some more hateful vitriol tho and by all means enlighten everyone with more of your copy and paste information. Keep showing everyone your true character and lack of it. So now you've doubled down on your assholishness while failing to address a single point I made and failing support your original claim that the criterion for noirs being American wasn't arbitrary. I don't care that you "didn't use a hateful pejorative," you still came off as an asshole ("Just kidding" or not), and you still are now. Nobody cares what you find amusing, or your infantile realization that being an asshole might make people angry. Rax's post was a perfectly reasonable contribution to the thread; yours was a complete waste of text. "Copy/paste information?" Son, I've been studying film in some form for over 20 years now and have a library of resources; I don't need to copy/paste shit, and I didn't. |
|
Raxivace
New Member
@raxivace
Posts: 40
Likes: 19
|
Post by Raxivace on Jun 11, 2020 14:46:38 GMT
I just found it amusing that Rax took a class on film noir but somehow still thinks the term being applied mainly to American films is the MOST arbitrary thing about it. Not that its mainly applied to American films- that statement I wouldn't even disagree with, but what was said by my professor was that it only applies to American films. If you disagree with my old professor and believe that non-American films like The Third Man count as film noir then I'm still not sure what the point of contention with my initial post was tbh.
|
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jun 11, 2020 21:11:36 GMT
I'm really impressed with how you play at being both a tough guy and knowledgeable. So so scary and smart Eva. I didn't use a hateful pejorative against Rax and I didn't address you at all so again congratulations for showing what an angry little boy you are. I never said noir had to be American. I never said The Third Man wasn't a noir and certainly didn't need to read your cut and paste comments about it twice. I just found it amusing that Rax took a class on film noir but somehow still thinks the term being applied mainly to American films is the MOST arbitrary thing about it. I even included Just Kidding so all the eager to be offended kids would know I was being flippant but you still were determined to be a petulant child I guess. Way to go Eva. Feel free to spew some more hateful vitriol tho and by all means enlighten everyone with more of your copy and paste information. Keep showing everyone your true character and lack of it. So now you've doubled down on your assholishness while failing to address a single point I made and failing support your original claim that the criterion for noirs being American wasn't arbitrary. I don't care that you "didn't use a hateful pejorative," you still came off as an asshole ("Just kidding" or not), and you still are now. Nobody cares what you find amusing, or your infantile realization that being an asshole might make people angry. Rax's post was a perfectly reasonable contribution to the thread; yours was a complete waste of text. "Copy/paste information?" Son, I've been studying film in some form for over 20 years now and have a library of resources; I don't need to copy/paste shit, and I didn't. You obviously have a problem with a black guy daring to question your copy and paste abilities. The only thing you seem to be even slightly competent at is spewing vitriol at black guys. Maybe you will get some free drinks when you brag about this story at the next cross burning. Have a blessed day Yojimbob. |
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jun 11, 2020 22:30:28 GMT
I just found it amusing that Rax took a class on film noir but somehow still thinks the term being applied mainly to American films is the MOST arbitrary thing about it. Not that its mainly applied to American films- that statement I wouldn't even disagree with, but what was said by my professor was that it only applies to American films. If you disagree with my old professor and believe that non-American films like The Third Man count as film noir then I'm still not sure what the point of contention with my initial post was tbh.
To be honest I never thought of The Third Man as a film noir per se. It's a great movie and one I've watched numerous times but it seems more like a crime thriller. I can see it being a Euro noir as well. I think we can all agree that zither theme is fire tho, right? |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 12, 2020 2:45:48 GMT
So now you've doubled down on your assholishness while failing to address a single point I made and failing support your original claim that the criterion for noirs being American wasn't arbitrary. I don't care that you "didn't use a hateful pejorative," you still came off as an asshole ("Just kidding" or not), and you still are now. Nobody cares what you find amusing, or your infantile realization that being an asshole might make people angry. Rax's post was a perfectly reasonable contribution to the thread; yours was a complete waste of text. "Copy/paste information?" Son, I've been studying film in some form for over 20 years now and have a library of resources; I don't need to copy/paste shit, and I didn't. You obviously have a problem with a black guy daring to question your copy and paste abilities. The only thing you seem to be even slightly competent at is spewing vitriol at black guys. Maybe you will get some free drinks when you brag about this story at the next cross burning. Have a blessed day Yojimbob. OK, you have to be trolling now. The only blackness that matters here is the genre itself. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jun 25, 2020 12:54:39 GMT
I am not a qualified Noir expert, by any means. And here are for six for to consider.
1. "Double Indemnity"
2. "Mildred Pierce"
3. "Possessed" (1947)
4. "The Postman always Rings Twice"
5. "Sudden Fear"
6. "The Big Heat"
That's what I came with for my list.
|
|
