The term classic, by definition, implies its longevity and its everlasting mark on culture and society. I agree with this statement, and I thoroughly enjoy a good Austen novel or Hitchcock film. But after watching the handful of assigned, classic movies thus far, I can’t help but strongly feel the generation gap. For example, I really liked D.O.A. , and even as a contemporary viewer with a generation Y-er lack of patience, the movie kept my attention. But there were certain parts where I found myself laughing at the dramatic shots, or the way Paula, Frank’s girlfriend, says “I’m gonna get a permanent to make myself all pretty for you.” Or, my favorite line of the movie, “If I wear a man, I’d punch your dirty face in,” spoken by Marla Rakubian, the infamous “femme fatale.” (It’s funny how she can be one of the movies villains but can’t punch a man). Yes, after reading Schrader on Film Noir I have a deeper understanding of the style-genre-time period (whatever it may be) and the themes- crime, psychosis, murder, backstabbing, etc. of Film Noir transcend time, but I must admit there is an aspect of movies made over 50 years ago that is unreachable to the modern audience.
I was doing some research on Film Noir online, as I was curious to see what films today can be classified as such, and I came upon a critic that was bold enough as to characterize one of my favorite movies, Memento, as a current Film Noir. For those that don’t know, Memento, directed by Christopher Nolan, is a modern masterpiece about a man with a memory disorder that is on a quest to find his wife’s killer. The genius of the movie lies not in its plot but in its composition- the scenes work backwards, playing on the audiences’ memories. A second or third viewing of the film is not even sufficient to fully grasp its hints and clues splattered throughout. I would give a spoiler to the film but its too good of a movie to ruin : ) So here’s the trailer for those not familiar.
[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/0vS0E9bBSL0" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
Even from the trailer, you can see there are aspects of the film that are synonymous with Schrader’s definitions of Noir- the dark scene in the beginning, feelings of psychosis (not knowing where he is, his memory loss), even the running around, trying to find the killer, is very similar to the action in D.O.A. I think classifying Memento as a modern-day Film Noir is a pretty accurate description, and perhaps one that today’s audiences can relate to more easily.
*I really do love old movies! I was just observing that there are really differences in movies made for a contemporary audience. Just putting that out there.
Memento is a great example of what some folks have called “Neo Noir,” a movie that updates and plays with the themes, style, settings, and character types of the noirs of the 1940s and 1950s. Some good recent examples are:
Blade Runner
Memento
Chinatown
Black Dahlia
Sin City
L.A. Confidential
Fargo
I’d even argue that The Big Lebowski is an example of neo noir since the story is one not so far removed from those of classic noirs (though sillier for sure) and that the main character is a very noirish one, give his relationship to the world around him and the events in the story.
Other examples?
Am I being really general and over-reaching if I say that possibly all modern crime/mystery dramas have some form of “noir”in them? Whether its the female character, the “noir ” like chase to find the truth behind the mystery, or the dark, shadowy lighting, I feel any crime movie pays some homage to noir. Maybe because noir was the beginning of the American crime film, setting the standard for the “genre.”
I don’t think you’re over-reaching at all, Miriam. The filmmakers whom we now associate with film noir developed and explored approaches to storytelling in the cinema which became common in later films that explore the same sorts of themes and topics. They established a certain way of “doing crime” in movies that has stuck. The visual and narrative techniques they adapted to stories of crime and moral corruption made a certain, practically unconscious sense for representing doom, gloom and moral decay and have become quite common probably for that reason. (We’ll explore some of that stuff when we get to what Monaco says about metaphor and metonymy.)
On the other hand, some filmmakers very consciously draw on classic noir as we have seen in Chinatown and will see next week in a number of other more recent movies. Naremore covers this pretty well in his chapter 5. I am sure all this will come up in discussion on Tuesday.
Se7en has quite a few noir trademarks as well. Most prominent is the fact that it’s almost always raining and pretty heavily at that. And the majority of scenes are very dark and gloomy looking. With that hat and trench coat, Morgan Freeman’s character even seems to be dressed as many of the protagonists of these movies are.
And based on the trailers and reviews thus far, the upcoming Shutter Island also looks to be very noir-like. Interestingly, I just read that Scorsese actually screened Laura for everyone involved before they began filming.
Lynch’s Mulholland Drive is another movie many have put in the “neo-noir” category. I’m not sure it has a whole lot in common with the genre stylistically but nearly all of the themes it’s known for are featured in some way and the plot of the first half or so also has quite a bit in common with film noir. And it’s a movie like this in addition to Memento, Se7en, and others that have updated the genre so brilliantly which help the point Miriam makes here resonate so greatly with me. The movies we’re currently watching definitely lack something in comparison. For one thing, I feel a bit detached from what’s going on. To compare it to TV, they’re more Law and Order than Damages which is to say the mysteries aren’t as compelling or engrossing, the story not as personal or daring, and the acting and dialogue not as nuanced or realistic.
Schrader’s point that “picked at random, a film noir is likely to be a better made film than a randomly selected silent comedy, musical, western, and so on” is one I can definitely buy. These movies have held my interest pretty well and I wouldn’t call any of them poor. But there’s not a greatness or, as Miriam puts it, timelessness to them, at least in my mind. The limitations are apparent. Even forgetting the black and white, the dialogue, and the acting, the plots generally have a lack of unpredictability and ambition to them as well.
One specific example where I found myself disappointed was midway through Laura and this might help highlight what I’m trying to say. McPherson developed a bit of an obsession with Laura through his investigation of her apparent murder. That was an interesting angle to me. But then she turned up alive, that thread went away, and it was again just about discovering who the murderer is.
Seven is going to come up in our discussions of the “urban fear” film. David Fincher does a really nice job of presenting the decaying city as a metaphor for a decaying social fabric. It is often discussed in that context. I’m looking forward to talking about that with you all in class.
Scorsese is a very literate filmmaker who knows where he came from, in a manner of speaking, so it makes a lot of sense that he would rely on films like Laura as source material. From what I’ve read, Leonardo DeCaprio’s character’s motivation parallels Dana Andrews’ in Laura. I’d be curious to know which other films Scorsese drew on. Several folks in this class have suggested that it is a perfect complement to the movies we’ve been talking about. I may need to make the time to go see it.
I must agree about the discrepancy between the classic noir films and the more contemporary neo noir genre. I feel there is a great more depth and intricateness to the more modern films and a much greater psychological character development. Those features allow us to understand the protagonists in a more sophisticated manner and result in a more sincere immersion in the film.