Film noir

[Theli]

I saw that on the Criterion website and had considered ordering it. There's a few films in that same sort of genre, Bonnie & Clyde arguably the most famous (and possibly best). But if you do want to see one from the heyday of noir check out Gun Crazy, also the story of Bonnie & Clyde, though with the names changed. Or if you are willing to venture into the brave new world of colour, check out Badlands from 1973. It's an absolutely beautiful impressionist film. Emotional, believable and wonderfully shot.

[Tommy]

Love the packaging on that one. It's a very dark film indeed!

[bugen]

The Honeymoon Killers (1970) - Written and directed by Leonard Kastle

Lonely and self-conscious because of her weight, Martha Beck (Shirley Stoler) is talked into joining a Lonely Hearts correspondence club where she starts a pen pal relationship with Ray Fernandez (Tony Lo Bianco), a con man who makes his living seducing and swindling women. Martha's desperately in love with Ray, and when she becomes wise to his ways she decides to join the con. The two of them chase scores together, posing as brother and sister, but Martha's jealousy of the women Ray's seducing becomes an issue and things escalate from there.

The Honeymoon Killers is damn near perfectly perfect and a dark, dark true story. It's too late to be traditional noir, but I'm adding it anyway because...you'll see if you watch it. This is the movie Natural Born Killers aspired to be and failed.

5- (5) stars

vlcsnap-error985.png

*The video quality of the Criterion Blu-ray needs special mention. The picture is gloriously grainy, teasing so much detail out of the film source that some of the shots look almost 3D due to texture.

SAM_8158.jpg

SAM_8162.jpg

Untitled.png

[Tommy]

Sunset Boulevard is in my top ten favorite movies.

[bugen]

Really looking forward to Sunset Boulevard!

Just finished The Desperate Hours and loved it! 4+ (5-)

[Theli]

Well my friend, I have yet to see this one though from your arguments I tend to agree that at least the plot has a propensity towards the noir side. And I do believe film noir can have comedy, I mean many of the quips in Out of the Past, or from Marlowe in the Big Sleep had me chuckling to say the least. Sunset Boulevard also has quite a satirical element to it. So I wouldn't say a certain sense of humour automatically excludes a film from the noir category. However I do think the genre is more than just the plot and screenplay, or even the seedy characters, I think a large portion of what makes noir noir is the cinematography. The chiaroscuro lighting, the shadowy, smoky atmosphere, a ton of frickin' cigarettes.

[bugen]

Anatomy of a Murder - Directed by Otto Preminger, written by Wendell Mayes (screenplay), John D. Voelker (novel, as Robert Traver)

The People vs. Anatomy of a Murder

The People intend to argue in this review an unlikely inclusion into the film noir landscape. Anatomy of a Murder is a courtroom drama. It’s a procedural. It’s serious, but it's also funny. Anatomy of a Murder can even be said to take itself lightly, to take itself lightly, from time to time. Nevertheless, the people will prove the inclusion of said film as incontrovertible film noir by establishing the following, inarguable facts:

1. Murder is generally not funny. It’s not to be taken lightly. And it’s the central device to this story.
2. The wife of the accused is unquestionably a femme fatale.
3. The ambiguity, the necessary ambiguity, mind you, means we may be witnessing an attempted, brazen heist of the American legal system. Indeed, this very haziness, this lack of clarity, combined with the eventual outcome, may be the most important piece of information in determining noir.

Furthermore, the People would like to introduce the following 3 still photographs into evidence. Note the detachment. Note the forbidden flirtation. Note the use of shadow:

vlcsnap-error456.png

vlcsnap-error396.png

vlcsnap-error982.png

Now the defense attorneys for film noir will attempt to confuse you with arguments against the upstanding central character played by Stewart, with arguments of torrid affairs and of murder not even appearing onscreen. They’ll whittle you away with doubt and bamboozle you with the fear of the truth. They’ll lie to you. But the truth is, Anatomy of a Murder is guilty of being film noir.

Brilliant, broke defense attorney Paul Biegler (Jimmy Stewart) accepts the challenge of defending Lt. Frederick Manion (Ben Gazzara) for the murder of Barney Quill, who he admittedly killed after learning Barney raped his wife. Establishing a shaky case of temporary insanity, Biegler must both investigate the circumstances and defend the murderer. Muddying the water is the beautiful and sexually aggressive wife of the defendant, Laura Manion (wonderfully played by Lee Rimick), whose coquettish attitude relentlessly attracts men and who may have had a consensual sexual relationship with the deceased, negating the rape allegation.

The drama takes place over nearly three hours, yet it feels more like a quick two. Stewart is, as usual, unassailable, but the entire cast does a great job. George C. Scott, as the Assistant State Attorney, is particularly impressive, especially when he leaps into the driver’s seat to dismantle witnesses.

vlcsnap-error571.png

And this is yet another noirish element—the dismantling of witnesses. It seems nearly everyone who takes the stand is just one or two pointed questions away from revealing they’re lying or have been extensively coached to only reveal just the right kind of truth, the kind that help the prosecution, so watching them tiptoe around it is a kind of subversion lurking beneath the entire case.

Finally, we have the defendant himself, a man who despite his situation is still smug, arrogant and even combative. When a surprise witness is called against him near the end of the trial, you really have to wonder if he actually said the things being hurled up against him to damage his case. And if he did, well then you can throw the entire case of The People vs. Anatomy of a Murder right out the window, because there could no longer be any doubt the picture belongs in the realm of film noir—was born for it, even.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, as always, the final decision must come down to you. What do you believe is dark cinema? Does it have to be onscreen, or can it come between the lines? Can it be implied? We believe it can. We believe the idea of the thing, and the thing itself, fundamentally inseparable.

The prosecution rests.

5- stars

vlcsnap-error558.png

[Martin]

Though I haven't seen the version yet, they did release a B&W version of The Mist in some sort of special edition set. And I agree, I like the tone of B&W movies, very stark. That said some of the best colour films are the early ones, or ones that exaggerate colours, think about how Mario Bava really made colours pop off the screen, Corman's beautiful sets in Masque of the Red Death (and the Poe story lends itself to it as well) or Yimou Zhang's Hero. Some movies just need to have eye popping colour, some need stark black & white.



I actually happened to be referring to animation when I made that comment, specifically I was thinking of Hayao Miyazaki's and other Studio Ghibli films. They tend to be tough to find non-dubbed versions and the dubs are so good that it hardly matters. Though I think Tommy brings up a good point, sometimes it's not a matter of choice so much as necessity. I also sometimes watch films while doing other things, for example cooking, cleaning or doing laundry, though I wouldn't really do that for a first viewing or at least a film I take seriously, it can be hard to follow a subbed movie when you can't read all the lines.

My Blu Ray of The Mist has both the color and the Black and White versions.

[Theli]

Same here, some dubbing is not that bad but colorization is a big no no. However, I find myself strangely compelled by those colorized episodes of I Love Lucy that CBS has been broadcasting for the last few years.

I actually think making some films black and white from their original color would improve them in some instances. (I just prefer B&W is all).

I think I read somewhere that Darabont had intended for The Mist to be B&W and I do think that would have made it a better film.

Though I haven't seen the version yet, they did release a B&W version of The Mist in some sort of special edition set. And I agree, I like the tone of B&W movies, very stark. That said some of the best colour films are the early ones, or ones that exaggerate colours, think about how Mario Bava really made colours pop off the screen, Corman's beautiful sets in Masque of the Red Death (and the Poe story lends itself to it as well) or Yimou Zhang's Hero. Some movies just need to have eye popping colour, some need stark black & white.

I'll take you guys' word there are some acceptable dubs out there. Outside of animation I doubt I'll ever find out which ones.

One of the problems with colorization, and with dubs, and with cropping to change aspect ratio, is someone's taking what the director (presumably) was very careful with in its presentation and saying, 'nah, it's better this way.' Sometimes it is! I can think of a couple of movies where the studios interfered with the directors' visions and ended making better movies because of it. But usually I like to trust the captain to take me where he intended the voyage to go, sticking as closely as possible to the route he chose.

And The Woman in the Window was excellent, even on youtube!

I actually happened to be referring to animation when I made that comment, specifically I was thinking of Hayao Miyazaki's and other Studio Ghibli films. They tend to be tough to find non-dubbed versions and the dubs are so good that it hardly matters. Though I think Tommy brings up a good point, sometimes it's not a matter of choice so much as necessity. I also sometimes watch films while doing other things, for example cooking, cleaning or doing laundry, though I wouldn't really do that for a first viewing or at least a film I take seriously, it can be hard to follow a subbed movie when you can't read all the lines.

[bugen]

That's an excellent point, Tommy, and I'm ashamed to admit I've never thought of it that way.

[Tommy]

One last thing about dubbing. I would always prefer the subtitled version definitely. However since my eyesight is not so great with the subtitled films I found myself having to watch the movie twice, once just to read the subtitles and miss a lot of what was happening on the screen and the second time to basically catch everything I had missed the first go round. Dubbing is by no means ideal but rather sometimes just a convenience.

[bugen]

I'll take you guys' word there are some acceptable dubs out there. Outside of animation I doubt I'll ever find out which ones.

One of the problems with colorization, and with dubs, and with cropping to change aspect ratio, is someone's taking what the director (presumably) was very careful with in its presentation and saying, 'nah, it's better this way.' Sometimes it is! I can think of a couple of movies where the studios interfered with the directors' visions and ended making better movies because of it. But usually I like to trust the captain to take me where he intended the voyage to go, sticking as closely as possible to the route he chose.

And The Woman in the Window was excellent, even on youtube!

[Tommy]

Same here, some dubbing is not that bad but colorization is a big no no. However, I find myself strangely compelled by those colorized episodes of I Love Lucy that CBS has been broadcasting for the last few years.

I actually think making some films black and white from their original color would improve them in some instances. (I just prefer B&W is all).

I think I read somewhere that Darabont had intended for The Mist to be B&W and I do think that would have made it a better film.

[Martin]

Some dubbing is okay, most not. No colourizing of black and white films is okay. There oughta be a law...

I agree with you.

[Theli]

Some dubbing is okay, most not. No colourizing of black and white films is okay. There oughta be a law...