Sign in to follow this  
FredCDobbs

Black Widow (1954), beginning of the end of the classic era

298 posts in this topic

I don't think Fred means it really was a noir, it's just what they were morphing noir into, given that B&W was fading away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Fred, I have never subscribed to BLACK WIDOW being a noir, just a run of the mill murder mystery

 

That is correct. That is my point.

 

It uses old noir actors, but no one knew in 1954 how to stage them for Cinemascope or how to light them for Technicolor, so they couldn't make a noir out of this film. That's what the "crossover" means: old noir actors, but new modern technology, They "crossed over" from the 1940s to the future, and, in fact, films are still using that same technology today, and some directors have learned to make noirish films using color and wide screen, but it helps them to put some old cars and old clothes in the film. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I don't think Fred means it really was a noir, it's just what they were morphing noir into, given that B&W was fading away.

 

Correct. In fact "morphing" is a good word to use.

 

It's sort of like the way Hitchcock morphed from silent into sound with "Blackmail", with Annie Ondra saying very little in the movie and doing a lot of silent acting in it. Yet it was a pretty good sound film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like the way C.B. Demille morphed into color with his Biblical film Samson and Delilah, and then The Robe morphed further into color and Cinemascope. But that is a two-film morph. Black Widow is a one-film morph.

 

The Biblical films do look much better in color and wide screen, except Samson and Delilah looks better on TV because of its 4:3 format. It still has some of the best special effects of any movie in any era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred, another tasty neo-noir you might want to check out is *Bound*. It's very good, and also a bit kinky... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=ValentineXavier wrote:}{quote}Fred, another tasty neo-noir you might want to check out is *Bound*. It's very good, and also a bit kinky... :)

You gonna give that man a heart attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>With 4:3, if you divide the 4 by 3, you get 1.33, and the 3 represents 1, and that gives you 1.33:1 :)

 

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_ratio

 

Fred,

 

I have to tell you, in a nice way of course, that sometimes I get private messages from people who alert me when you have begun to quote wikipedia again. Of course, we do know that journalists consider wikipedia to be an unreliable source and it is not to be cited in professional articles or stories.

 

I understand you are just trying to make a quick point and refer folks to further information, but again wikipedia is not always reliable. I think I may start citing ProQuest, which has a collection of academic-related articles about the film industry, to try and set an example of how we can decrease our dependence on wiki and increase authenticity in discussions. I hope that sounds good to you (and others).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I get private messages from people who alert me when you have begun to quote wikipedia again.

 

That's amazing. I didn't realize that many people paid attention to my posts! :)

 

What do you call such messages, "FRED ALERTS", "FREDWIKIS"? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, they apparently read you like the morning paper. We save the term 'Fred Alert' as in 'Amber Alert' in the event that you have not posted in awhile and seem to have gone missing. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree that one should only quote the wikipedia if one is familiar enough with the subject to know that it is accurate. In this case, it, and Fred, are accurate about academy ratio. So, using it as a quick and easy source seems quite acceptable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't you excited that BLACK WIDOW is coming back to TCM? I know it's one of your favorites, Fred! Seriously, it is one of mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad You are watching it. :) I refuse to watch it again !

 

....well, maybe I will ;)...just as a reminder as to how Awful this movie really is !

 

Twink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The girl on the telephone says:

 

"Hey! It's me! Over here! I'm way over here on the

left side of the screen. How are you girls doing over

there on the right side of the screen? Is it raining over

there where you are?"

 

blackwidow2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion is that this could have been a pretty good noir movie, with this cast and screenplay, if it had been made about 5 or 6 years earlier, in B&W and in 4:3 (not Cinemascope).

 

The Cinemascope might have been fun to see in 1954, but it seems too wide now, and all the actors are spread out left to right to fill up the wide screen. Bright even front lighting for both Technicolor and Cinemascope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps , but not a true Noir. For starters, the movie is 'too pretty' to be a noir, it is more like a play. It is also too slow moving . There would have been more intensity if it had been made in black & white as well as the special lighting that is often used in B&W movies.

 

Unfortunately, all the actors/actresses are has beens and too old to be in a True Noir, not enough action!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Van, Gene and Reginard were fine but the rest of the cast did poorly. Now some like Raft had limited ability but Ginger is a fine actress so I don't know what caused such a poor performance.

 

Now I just saw the ending and it doesn't make add up that Ginger's character could kill that younger girl. To kill someone with one's bare hards is very difficult. One has to be a lot stronger than the victim. Well I assume the younger women was at least as strong as Ginger's character. There is no way she would be able to kill that girl using her bare hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right james. She killed that girl with her bare hands and 'not a hair' out of place, you can be sure there was one big 'cat fight' !

 

There is just so much about that movie that does not make sense. Too much about fashions (which has no place in a True Noir), too slow moving , the screen is way too wide, the characters are spread out all over the place and the acting , with the exception of Van Heflin, maybe, Sucks!

 

Twink

 

Edited by: twinkeee on Sep 24, 2013 7:11 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us