"I've learned one thing about life: we're a good deal like that ball dancing on the fountain. We know as little about the forces that move us and move the world around us as that empty ball does...about the water that pushes it into the air and lets it fall and catches it again." ---The killer in THE LEOPARD MAN (1943)
The threat of total helplessness permeates film noir, but it is in the narrow, restrictive range of individual action that the style is most truly represented. In these movies the world is a trap: We experience duplicity, corruption, and the triumph of the supernatural (whether real or faked) in dreams, drugs and alcohol. We cannot avoid moral ambiguity. (Shoud he kill for the sake of good? Should she sacrifice a compormised individual to protect the innocent?) Though seemingly overwhelmed by impersonal forces, a man's fate is in choices. For the noir hero, this requires action---even if there's no breathing space.
The spirtual darkness of these movies is most commonly rendered in terms of German expressionism, or in the hard American variation on this artistic form, with a lattice-work of distorted shadows that overlays the violent behavior.
In this style, our ultimate dread is confirmed: behind the vain yet vital social mask, there's a world devoid of human meaning. If there is transcendence in the universe of noir, it is into the realm of the dark gods, almost never into the light.
Since the only value in noir is generated by the individual, France's existential cineastes recoginized what we were doing first. Only after the films came back through the filter of Gallic perception did we begin to appreciate what the obsessions of the 1940s revealed about us.
The best way to find out about ourselves is to move from these generalizations to the specific examples in noir---the very grammar of noir---that helped define the style.
For me, the critic Myron Meisel summed it up nicely in a 1972 essay called Edgar G. Ulmer: The Primacy of the Visual. In it he wrote:
"Ulmer worked on the lowest depths of Poverty Row, far beyond the pale of the B film into the seventh circle of the Z picture, shooting his films in dingy studios on make-shift sets, on lightning swift schedules (Detour is rumored to have taken a mere four days). If it is possible that severe limitation of means can stimulate poetry, or that adversity might breed a tenacious reserve of inner feeling, to cite two assumptions common to critics who wouldn't give Ulmer the time of day; then neither Piet Mondarin nor Alexander Solzhenitsyn have anything on Edgar G. Ulmer. Ulmer transformed his camera into a precise instrument of feeling, and his convulsive abstractions of of screen space intensify that feeling by investing it with particular gestures of light, shadow, form and motion that define his own director's soul, and none other."
I hope this thread kicks off a lively fourm of discussion on what makes film noir work and why.
The Grammar of Noir
-
Mr. Arkadin
- Posts: 2645
- Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:00 pm
Great writing Dewey. 
I think like Jazz and early Rock and Roll, Americans tend to not realize the great art forms of their country until it is pointed out and recycled back to them by someone else.
Limitations are what create style. Many people think they have to have certain equipment, expertise, or talent to create art. This is completely untrue. If you have an idea, whatever skills, equipment, and ability you have is all you need to bring it to fruition. It's also what will make your work unique and different from others. Many times artists ideas to get around limitations, create entirely new styles that lesser people copy because they don't have the same imaginitive abilites.
Have to disagree with the Solzhenitsyn comment though. That man is as much of a genius as Ulmer ever was, if not more. Writing literature in your head while in a prison camp and using mathmatics to to remember it all, is one of the greatest examples of art combined with the indomitable human will.
I think like Jazz and early Rock and Roll, Americans tend to not realize the great art forms of their country until it is pointed out and recycled back to them by someone else.Limitations are what create style. Many people think they have to have certain equipment, expertise, or talent to create art. This is completely untrue. If you have an idea, whatever skills, equipment, and ability you have is all you need to bring it to fruition. It's also what will make your work unique and different from others. Many times artists ideas to get around limitations, create entirely new styles that lesser people copy because they don't have the same imaginitive abilites.
Have to disagree with the Solzhenitsyn comment though. That man is as much of a genius as Ulmer ever was, if not more. Writing literature in your head while in a prison camp and using mathmatics to to remember it all, is one of the greatest examples of art combined with the indomitable human will.
-
moira finnie
- Administrator
- Posts: 8024
- Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
- Location: Earth
- Contact:
Thanks so much for opening up this fascinating topic, Dewey.
If I understand a couple of your initial points, the view of American life through film noir was sometimes seen most sharply by foreign critics, especially the French guys at cahiers du cinema. I'd probably add that some of the best practitioners of the noir vision in American movies were often foreign born directors initially, especially the German émigrés such as Robert Siodmak, Billy Wilder and Fritz Lang--who knew first hand about the whims of fate.
One of the other aspects of noir movies that you touched on that is most interesting to me is that the visual effects such as emphasis on shadows and light that are characteristic of these movies were often created because of very small budgets. As Mr. Arkadin has said, "Limitations are what create style."
I read once that American director Edward Dmytryk felt that once larger budgets became standard for movies, the imagination used to create them suffered. Instead of concentrating on creating visuals that provided a visual shorthand for the characters' inner life, movies became more about action for the sake of action, though I realize that Dmytryk's comment seems to apply to many more films than simply those in film noir. Other than Edgar Ulmer's films, what movies do you think used what techniques best and cheaply to create noir effects?
Thanks in advance for any insights from anyone about this topic.
If I understand a couple of your initial points, the view of American life through film noir was sometimes seen most sharply by foreign critics, especially the French guys at cahiers du cinema. I'd probably add that some of the best practitioners of the noir vision in American movies were often foreign born directors initially, especially the German émigrés such as Robert Siodmak, Billy Wilder and Fritz Lang--who knew first hand about the whims of fate.
One of the other aspects of noir movies that you touched on that is most interesting to me is that the visual effects such as emphasis on shadows and light that are characteristic of these movies were often created because of very small budgets. As Mr. Arkadin has said, "Limitations are what create style."
I read once that American director Edward Dmytryk felt that once larger budgets became standard for movies, the imagination used to create them suffered. Instead of concentrating on creating visuals that provided a visual shorthand for the characters' inner life, movies became more about action for the sake of action, though I realize that Dmytryk's comment seems to apply to many more films than simply those in film noir. Other than Edgar Ulmer's films, what movies do you think used what techniques best and cheaply to create noir effects?
Thanks in advance for any insights from anyone about this topic.
Moira said: I'd probably add that some of the best practitioners of the noir vision in American movies were often foreign born directors initially, especially the German émigrés such as Robert Siodmak, Billy Wilder and Fritz Lang--who knew first hand about the whims of fate.
To that list you could add Fred Zinnemann, Otto Preminger, Edgar G. Ulmer and Boris Ingster. Ingster directed STRANGER ON THE THIRD FLOOR for RKO in 1940 and more or less stands responsible for being captain of the first US ship of noir. The style revolution about to take place in Hollywood in 1940---as chiefly practiced by some of Europe's most prominent directors but now working in America---and American geniuses (directors like Welles, Mann, Losey, Dassin, Ray; cinematographers like John Alton, Nick Musuraca and countless others) would become almost as one when speaking the language of noir.
Other than Edgar Ulmer's films, what movies do you think used what techniques best and cheaply to create noir effects?
Anthony Mann directed a great noir for lowly PRC called RAILROADED. It appeared (1948) at the same time as his Eagle-Lion films RAW DEAL and T-MEN came out. This trio (and his uncredited work on HE WALKED BY NIGHT) placed him (and his cinematographer of choice, John Alton) squarely in the forefront of this burgeoning style.
Another great figure in the world of B noir is William Castle. He did four WHISTLER films with Richard Dix at Columbia (just aired on TCM) and the mindblowing 1944 Monogram noir WHEN STRANGERS MARRY (aka BETRAYED). Plus dozens of other interesting low budget films during the 40s and into the early 50s. His later 50s and 60s exploitation shockers like THE TINGLER and I SAW WHAT YOU DID are latter day outgrowths of this uncanny ability to visualize in a compelling and provocative way---and for very little money.
I'd also toss in Jack Bernhard who directed DECOY (1946) and VIOLENCE (1947), both for Monogram and are terrific examples of Poverty Row at its subversive best.
And of course producer Val Lewton and his fledgling staff of young directors: Jacques Tourneur, Robert Wise and Mark Robson.
Mr. Ark said:
Have to disagree with the Solzhenitsyn comment though. That man is as much of a genius as Ulmer ever was, if not more. Writing literature in your head while in a prison camp and using mathmatics to to remember it all, is one of the greatest examples of art combined with the indomitable human will.
Meisel might have been overstating his case just a bit for dramatic effect, but maybe not by too much. Your comment reminded me of another genius who was forced to create art under horrible duress: jazz musician and composer Bud Powell was institutionalized for problems stemming from heroin addiction. At one point, while in a padded cell, he composed music on the wall by drawing a keyboard and creating the sound in his head. When he was released, he performed and recorded this music.
To that list you could add Fred Zinnemann, Otto Preminger, Edgar G. Ulmer and Boris Ingster. Ingster directed STRANGER ON THE THIRD FLOOR for RKO in 1940 and more or less stands responsible for being captain of the first US ship of noir. The style revolution about to take place in Hollywood in 1940---as chiefly practiced by some of Europe's most prominent directors but now working in America---and American geniuses (directors like Welles, Mann, Losey, Dassin, Ray; cinematographers like John Alton, Nick Musuraca and countless others) would become almost as one when speaking the language of noir.
Other than Edgar Ulmer's films, what movies do you think used what techniques best and cheaply to create noir effects?
Anthony Mann directed a great noir for lowly PRC called RAILROADED. It appeared (1948) at the same time as his Eagle-Lion films RAW DEAL and T-MEN came out. This trio (and his uncredited work on HE WALKED BY NIGHT) placed him (and his cinematographer of choice, John Alton) squarely in the forefront of this burgeoning style.
Another great figure in the world of B noir is William Castle. He did four WHISTLER films with Richard Dix at Columbia (just aired on TCM) and the mindblowing 1944 Monogram noir WHEN STRANGERS MARRY (aka BETRAYED). Plus dozens of other interesting low budget films during the 40s and into the early 50s. His later 50s and 60s exploitation shockers like THE TINGLER and I SAW WHAT YOU DID are latter day outgrowths of this uncanny ability to visualize in a compelling and provocative way---and for very little money.
I'd also toss in Jack Bernhard who directed DECOY (1946) and VIOLENCE (1947), both for Monogram and are terrific examples of Poverty Row at its subversive best.
And of course producer Val Lewton and his fledgling staff of young directors: Jacques Tourneur, Robert Wise and Mark Robson.
Mr. Ark said:
Have to disagree with the Solzhenitsyn comment though. That man is as much of a genius as Ulmer ever was, if not more. Writing literature in your head while in a prison camp and using mathmatics to to remember it all, is one of the greatest examples of art combined with the indomitable human will.
Meisel might have been overstating his case just a bit for dramatic effect, but maybe not by too much. Your comment reminded me of another genius who was forced to create art under horrible duress: jazz musician and composer Bud Powell was institutionalized for problems stemming from heroin addiction. At one point, while in a padded cell, he composed music on the wall by drawing a keyboard and creating the sound in his head. When he was released, he performed and recorded this music.
Last edited by Dewey1960 on November 12th, 2007, 10:15 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
Mr. Arkadin
- Posts: 2645
- Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:00 pm
Dewey,
Bud is one of my favorite piano players. The guy revolutionized Jazz with his left hand alone. If you've never read "Dance of the Infidels" about his relationship with Francis Paudras, you should. It's one of the best biographies I've ever read (and I've read a few).
Bud was never addicted to heroin though. He actually had severe mental problems that were made worse by a vicious nightstick beating by police. While institutionalized, he was also subjected to electro-shock treatments, compounding his mental fog. That music could come out of such a man is astounding, but that it could be composed without his primary instument is more amazing still.
Bud was one of those rare indidviduals who could write music that expressed his feelings of joy, pain, and sorrow. His tune Glass Enclosure dealt with his paranoia of being locked up, while I Want to be Happy holds all the promise of life and love.
Sorry to get off topic, we now return you to Noir Central.
Perhaps you could run through each decade from the thirties (foreshadowing) to today (Neo-Noir) and list maybe five or ten films from each decade and their importance?
Bud is one of my favorite piano players. The guy revolutionized Jazz with his left hand alone. If you've never read "Dance of the Infidels" about his relationship with Francis Paudras, you should. It's one of the best biographies I've ever read (and I've read a few).
Bud was never addicted to heroin though. He actually had severe mental problems that were made worse by a vicious nightstick beating by police. While institutionalized, he was also subjected to electro-shock treatments, compounding his mental fog. That music could come out of such a man is astounding, but that it could be composed without his primary instument is more amazing still.
Bud was one of those rare indidviduals who could write music that expressed his feelings of joy, pain, and sorrow. His tune Glass Enclosure dealt with his paranoia of being locked up, while I Want to be Happy holds all the promise of life and love.
Sorry to get off topic, we now return you to Noir Central.
Perhaps you could run through each decade from the thirties (foreshadowing) to today (Neo-Noir) and list maybe five or ten films from each decade and their importance?
-
moira finnie
- Administrator
- Posts: 8024
- Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
- Location: Earth
- Contact:
Do you think that Blues in the Night (1941) directed by Anatole Litvak qualifies as a proto-noir? I love this dark pot-boiler of a movie for the atmosphere of life on the road and on the fringes of society, the attention it shows to characters who are usually treated as annoying ciphers in most mainstream American movies, its use of music, and the hallucinatory montage sequences, (which remind me a lot of the one in The Stranger on the Thirteenth Floor).
I'm also mentioning this film because it's on TCM at 8PM ET on Wednesday, Nov. 14th, at 8:00 PM. If you could mention some salient things to look for, I'd be very appreciative.
I'm also mentioning this film because it's on TCM at 8PM ET on Wednesday, Nov. 14th, at 8:00 PM. If you could mention some salient things to look for, I'd be very appreciative.
-
Mr. Arkadin
- Posts: 2645
- Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:00 pm
Dewey, I would be interested in your thoughts on Tuesday's lineup. I do not know many of those films (except Kiss Me Deadly [1955]), but they sound good. Also I am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang (1932) shows Wednesday night.
Moira, Blues in the Night does indeed have it's share of dark moments (especially the car ride at the end). I am not that familar with it though, so I would be curious to know Dewey's thoughts as well.
Moira, Blues in the Night does indeed have it's share of dark moments (especially the car ride at the end). I am not that familar with it though, so I would be curious to know Dewey's thoughts as well.
BLUES IN THE NIGHT is a complete favorite of mine and I would agree with anyone who described it as proto-noir (I like that!) as it predates so many films that tried to incorporate a dark musical tableaux into a noirish melodramatic frame. Moira, you mentioned (I think) its montage sequence, which really rivals a similar conceit used in Ulmer's DETOUR seveal years later. This is an extremely dark film, despite Warner's attempts to have you think otherwise. Many of its more sinister trappings emerge later in the story (Lloyd Nolan's and Betty Field's gangster couple is as noir as it gets; Wallace Ford adds his share of erotic food for thought as the slave to both of them) taking it eventually into uncharted cosmic territory.
This type of florid drama was what its director, Anatole Litvak, was known best for. Films like THE AMAZING DR. CLITTERHOUSE, CASTLE ON THE HUDSON, CITY FOR CONQUEST, OUT OF THE FOG, SORRY WRONG NUMBER and THE SNAKE PIT are all prime examples of the high end stylizations of a director consumed by his visual and storytelling gifts.
And BLUES IN THE NIGHT really sizzles in ways very few Warner Bros films of the time did; much more expressionistic than better known Warner films of the same period, like THE MALTESE FALCON. The topline part of the cast does well too. Richard Whorf (later a director himself) as the driven but tortured band leader, the always-great Jack Carson as the egotistical horn player, Elia Kazan (!) as the intellectual who finds a place in the band, Priscilla Lane, never better as a hip little jazz singer married to Carson. Dead End Kid Billy Halop is their drummer. Even though it captured many of Warner Bros virtues it plays much darker, almost like an RKO picture. A serious---and seriously under-appreciated early noir classic.
I hope a lot of you catch it Wednesday!
This type of florid drama was what its director, Anatole Litvak, was known best for. Films like THE AMAZING DR. CLITTERHOUSE, CASTLE ON THE HUDSON, CITY FOR CONQUEST, OUT OF THE FOG, SORRY WRONG NUMBER and THE SNAKE PIT are all prime examples of the high end stylizations of a director consumed by his visual and storytelling gifts.
And BLUES IN THE NIGHT really sizzles in ways very few Warner Bros films of the time did; much more expressionistic than better known Warner films of the same period, like THE MALTESE FALCON. The topline part of the cast does well too. Richard Whorf (later a director himself) as the driven but tortured band leader, the always-great Jack Carson as the egotistical horn player, Elia Kazan (!) as the intellectual who finds a place in the band, Priscilla Lane, never better as a hip little jazz singer married to Carson. Dead End Kid Billy Halop is their drummer. Even though it captured many of Warner Bros virtues it plays much darker, almost like an RKO picture. A serious---and seriously under-appreciated early noir classic.
I hope a lot of you catch it Wednesday!
Last edited by Dewey1960 on November 13th, 2007, 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tuesday and Wednesday nights offer some interesting and unusual noir films.
Tues:
STAKEOUT ON DOPE STREET (1958) teen noir involving heroin and racketeers. Irvin Kershner, who would later do a James Bond film and the second Star Wars movie, directed. Fun if you like this sort of thing.
MURDER BY CONTRACT (1958) Not to be missed; this was the first feature directed by Irving Lerner (the second was CITY OF FEAR (1959) which Turner ran over the summer. This one’s even better: Vince Edwards plays a professional hit man dealing with the vagaries of everyday life. Absolutely great; a TCM Premiere.
THE LINE UP (1958) Exciting, well directed crime noir from Don Siegel. Good as it is, it has a flat, TV look common to these types of films from this period. Above average.
ARMORED CAR ROBBERY (1950) Terrific low-budget RKO noir. Charles McGraw is a cop this time and the always insane William Talman (THE HITCH HIKER) is on board as the main bad guy. Recommended!
FOLLOW ME QUIETLY (1949) This has its fans but I’m not one of them.
KISS ME DEADLY (1955) My personal favorite noir film of the fifties. This one has it all and then some. If you’ve seen it you either agree or disagree. If you haven’t seen it then it’s high time you went. An essential.
[youtube][/youtube]
Wed:
BLUES IN THE NIGHT (1941) Anatole Litvak’s brilliant musical drama comes very near the top of the list of the earliest examples of American studio noir. Great visual technique abounds and a catalogue full of noir elements in their most primative stage of development.
[youtube][/youtube]
I AM A FUGITIVE FROM A CHAIN GANG (1932) Technically not noir, but in so many ways this dark and dismal epic foretells many of the stylistic innovations associated with the style. Its crafty blend of neo-realism and, at times, crudely blatant expressionistic technique takes the Warner gangster concept to outrageously cynical depths.
Tues:
STAKEOUT ON DOPE STREET (1958) teen noir involving heroin and racketeers. Irvin Kershner, who would later do a James Bond film and the second Star Wars movie, directed. Fun if you like this sort of thing.
MURDER BY CONTRACT (1958) Not to be missed; this was the first feature directed by Irving Lerner (the second was CITY OF FEAR (1959) which Turner ran over the summer. This one’s even better: Vince Edwards plays a professional hit man dealing with the vagaries of everyday life. Absolutely great; a TCM Premiere.
THE LINE UP (1958) Exciting, well directed crime noir from Don Siegel. Good as it is, it has a flat, TV look common to these types of films from this period. Above average.
ARMORED CAR ROBBERY (1950) Terrific low-budget RKO noir. Charles McGraw is a cop this time and the always insane William Talman (THE HITCH HIKER) is on board as the main bad guy. Recommended!
FOLLOW ME QUIETLY (1949) This has its fans but I’m not one of them.
KISS ME DEADLY (1955) My personal favorite noir film of the fifties. This one has it all and then some. If you’ve seen it you either agree or disagree. If you haven’t seen it then it’s high time you went. An essential.
[youtube][/youtube]
Wed:
BLUES IN THE NIGHT (1941) Anatole Litvak’s brilliant musical drama comes very near the top of the list of the earliest examples of American studio noir. Great visual technique abounds and a catalogue full of noir elements in their most primative stage of development.
[youtube][/youtube]
I AM A FUGITIVE FROM A CHAIN GANG (1932) Technically not noir, but in so many ways this dark and dismal epic foretells many of the stylistic innovations associated with the style. Its crafty blend of neo-realism and, at times, crudely blatant expressionistic technique takes the Warner gangster concept to outrageously cynical depths.
In another post in the noir topic earlier today I mentioned the film STRANGER ON THE THIRD FLOOR, which airs on TCM Saturday morning, December 1. In any discussion about the so-called "grammar of film noir," this film is absolutely essential. Check out the visual dynamics of this short scene from the film.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]