Conference bookie::movies

    Does _The Magnificent Ambersons_ fall into this category?
    
      John

    No, I wouldn't call "Ambersons" Noir.  Too early, too high budget, too
    artsy, too nostalgic and safe (I'm speaking here of the studio release,
    not Welles's orginal film)...
    
    But recall that "Film Noir" is a category after the fact.  It was a
    term invented for polemic reasons by film historians who wanted to
    point out the beauty of certain films which had previously been noted
    solely as B-movies, or cheap commercialism, or sadistic detective
    movies...
    
    So arguments over taxonomy don't really have much to offer -- if such
    an argument has any meaning at all, it generally comes down to "This
    film does/doesn't help my particular flavor of manifesto and
    helps/hinders the particular line of influence I'm pretending exists."
    
    Ray

    
    Olivier's Hamlet absolutely reeks of noir. I also think that both
    'The Maltese Falcon' and 'The Big Sleep' are representative of the
    Spade/Marlowe gumshoe versions.
    
    What about 'Sunset Boulevard' ?
    
    - acp

    
    What about Jacob's Ladder?
    
                              Natalie

    Re .4: N-nooo, I think "Jacob's Ladder" had too noticeable a hint of
    possible redemption. [Or was that "Ghost"? "Always"? "Stairway to
    Heaven"?] Anyway, redemption this side of the grave is something of a
    contra-indicator for films noir, as is (usually) intervention from the
    other side; noir ghosts are usually the do-it-yourself kind.
    
    Speaking of clues: I believe that those "All You Need to Know To Fake
    Being a Film Savant" books suggest that any film that's not in black
    and white, or that was made after about 1962 (unless it was made by an
    independent filmmaker) cannot possibly be noir. This isn't true, but
    it's an OK rule of thumb, and if you say it convincingly you'll sound
    really, really cynical and pretentious, which is the whole point.
    
    "Out of the Past" summed up the genre/classification/ambiance/whatever
    for me; I suppose I reckon "noir-ness" by how much a film makes me feel
    the way that one did. ("In a Lonely Place" is bleak and wrenching and
    wonderful, and is in another league entirely. See them both. But not in
    one sitting, unless you're trying to recover from a severe fit of
    Pollyanna-hood.)
    
    -b

re .3

>   Olivier's Hamlet absolutely reeks of noir. I also think that both
>   'The Maltese Falcon' and 'The Big Sleep' are representative of the
>   Spade/Marlowe gumshoe versions.
>    
>  What about 'Sunset Boulevard' ?


_Sunset Boulevard_ is classic noir, _The Maltese Falcon_ could be considerd
early noir. _Hamlet_ and _The Big Sleep_ would be marginal at best, the
production of _Hamlet_ is very unnoir, _The Big Sleep_ has noir elements
but isn't a classic example, too upbeat an ending.

Two good examples of "modern" film noir would be _Chinatown_ and, to a lesser
degree, _Body Heat_ (remake of _Double Indemnity_). The remake of _Out of
the Past_, (the title escapes me at the moment) starred Jeff Bridges in the
Mitchum role, Rachel Ward in the Seymour role (Jane Seymour actually had
a small part in the remake) and James Woods in the Lloyd Bridges role, is
but a ghost of the original.


Randy

The Brattle Theater in Cambridge generally has a film noir series on Monday 
nights.  Right now they're not doing it - they're running a series of films for
a week at a time but in July they'll be starting it up again.

    Re. 6
    
    I think you mean "Against all odds".
    
    Andrea

    Re   "film noir is a category after the fact"
    
    I just read a book entitled "Teleliteracy", by David Bianculli, who is
    a TV critic for some newspaper, and for National Public Radio.
    
    In which, somewhere, he discusses "film noir", and even includes a quote
    from 1946 I believe, using the term. So I'm not so sure the term was
    created after the fact.
    
    When I read that section something seemed not right, but I couldn't
    place it. The not-rightness was the contradiction with what was stated
    here about the origin of the term.
    
    Sorry I can't give a proper quote from the book, it's already back at 
    the library. Maybe next time I'm there I'll take a peek.
    
    Neil

re .9

I would be interested in what was said and in the quote. Sounds like it
contradicts every book on fim noir and every film history I've ever read.
It seems pretty unlikely.


Randy

    ....hmmmm........has anyone ever seen the movie 'blood simple'??...i
    think that movie definitely fits the category of film noir ...and it was
    made after '62.....i don't think film types can be relegated to a
    certain time frame.....'blood simple' is one of my favorite 'dark'
    movies....you have to watch it frame by frame for fear of missing some
    pertinent info......the guy who plays 'carla on cheers' ex-husband
    'nick' is one of the main characters (whose name is escaping
    me)....along with several other characters that are highly visible in
    a variety of movies, but whose names are not household famous....if you're
    into 'noir'..i'd highly suggest checking this one out....../k

>>    ....hmmmm........has anyone ever seen the movie 'blood simple'??...

	Yes.  It's one of my favorites too.  Just love the Coen bros., 
	I do.  "Miller's Crossing" and "Blood Simple" especially..