Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Barton_Keyes

Noir Alley

Recommended Posts

Another thought Joanne Woodward should have ditched the Harpo Marx wig. Mary Astor's wig looks terrible also, she just should have played it bald. 😎

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cigarjoe said:

Another thought Joanne Woodward should have ditched the Harpo Marx wig. Mary Astor's wig looks terrible also, she just should have played it bald. 😎

.... with the same results 🤪

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

come on..... nobody is watchin' this live?

Here is an Idea for a Neo Noir remake based on this with a twist. 

A guy  flying through the air in Slo Mo. Wind blowing through his hair, his tie look like a kite tail. His mouth is open in surprise. His just lost cigarette an inch away. his voice over triggers his flashback. Its Bud Corliss. So we get the Kiss Before Dying story. We get an elaboration on the various ways Bud tries to unsuccessfully murder Dorothy with diegetic 50s music.  At the end of the flashback Bud looks at us and says "and what about Dorothy? Well there she is right over there...." cut to a plummeting screaming Dorothy then intermediately show anther short, few second flashback of when Bud tries to push Dorothy off the building she grabs him and they both go over. Fade to black but we hear the sound of two watermelons hitting the pave. The End

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice little noir-ish sequence out side the bar, enjoying Lucien Ballard's cinematography.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a waste of Joanne Woodward's talent.  I think they updated the film with David Caruso (not sure).  I prefer my noir, with rare exceptions, in black and white with shades of gray (literally and figuratively).  As for your idea about two watermelons, sounds like something David Letterman would do on his show.  Imagine if what you said happened in North by Northwest (on Mt. Rushmore).  Since they just showed the movie, I was very disappointed with the choice.  I'm still hoping for I Married a Shadow (or other interpretation of Cornell W.'s story).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was pretty good. It reminded me of A PLACE IN THE SUN.  I think it is the only time Robert Wagner played a villain . I agree that Joann Woodward was wasted and like Eddie said Jeff Hunter seemed out of place at times. Also, like many of you; I prefer B&W noirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Hoganman1 said:

It was pretty good. It reminded me of A PLACE IN THE SUN.  I think it is the only time Robert Wagner played a villain . I agree that Joann Woodward was wasted and like Eddie said Jeff Hunter seemed out of place at times. Also, like many of you; I prefer B&W noirs.

Yea,   the Dorothy Kingship character  was almost as annoying as the Alice Tripp character in A Place in the Sun.   Of course no one does annoying better than Shelley Winters,  but Joanna Woodward does her best.     When she talks about love,,,love,,, and being free in her love,,,, love,,,,  I want to throw her off a roof!  

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never understood why Dory's father treated her so shabbily.  In the beginning  I got the implication that he'd ended his marriage because he learned  his wife had  been unfaithful.  If so, did he suspect Dory was not his daughter?  That's the only reason I can see.

I've never read the book but I think three sisters with two getting totaled sounds like a bit much.  This version told the tale neatly and without being overlong.  The only part that doesn't ring true is the Wagner/Quarry murder scene.  I can't believe the DJ wouldn't have put up a fight.  Otherwise I like the movie.

 Damn right Thelma Ritter was robbed for Pickup on South Street.   No matter how often I see it that final scene chokes me up.  But then when did she ever not come through on screen?  Her talent was never wasted.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I again watched A Kiss Before Dying (suggested alternate title: Boy, Those Kingship Girls Sure Know How To Pick 'Em, Don't They?!) last night, and I think Eddie was once again attempting a stretch of what constitutes film noir. 

Nope, personally I wouldn't call it anything like a "proto neo noir", either. And no, it's not just because it was filmed in color. Other than the idea that its storyline is "dark" because of the murders, its whole visual look never has me thinking "noir" as I watch it. I'd call the story and the film itself more of a "psychological thriller" than anything else.

Nope, to me anyway, I feel "noir" films should primarily take place in the more seedier sides of towns and contain many more "dark" or lost souls than just a one lone killer, and that a college campus where much of the action takes place in this film and a cast of characters consisting of the middle class, doesn't ring as true film noir, and no matter if shown in glorious Color by Deluxe of sunbaked Tucson Arizona or not.

(...and now I sure hope I haven't again started up that old and reoccurring debate around here of "what is film noir", but I'll bet I have)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Yeah, I again watched A Kiss Before Dying (suggested alternate title: Boy, Those Kingship Girls Sure Know How To Pick 'Em, Don't They?!) last night, and I think Eddie was once again attempting a stretch of what constitutes film noir. 

Nope, personally I wouldn't call it anything like a "proto neo noir", either. And no, it's not just because it was filmed in color. Other than the idea that its storyline is "dark" because of the murders, its whole visual look never has me thinking "noir" as I watch it. I'd call the story and the film itself more of a "psychological thriller" than anything else.

Nope, to me anyway, I feel "noir" films should primarily take place in the more seedier sides of towns and contain many more "dark" or lost souls than just a one lone killer, and that a college campus where much of the action takes place in this film, doesn't ring as true film noir, and no matter if shown in glorious Color by Deluxe of sunbaked Tucson Arizona or not.

(...and now I sure hope I haven't again started up that old and reoccurring debate around here of "what is film noir", but I'll bet I have)

Of course Eddie was attempting a stretch and he was very open about that.       E.g. when he said something like "don't worry,  next week the film is black and white".

As Joe has said 'what is noir' is based on what one finds as 'noir'.      The film had some noir themes,,,,,,    but if I was writing a book on noir I wouldn't include it,,,,  but if I had a T.V. show on noir films and I was running out of films and wanted to avoid repeats,,,,,  well,    I might throw it in!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Dargo said:

Yeah, I again watched A Kiss Before Dying (suggested alternate title: Boy, Those Kingship Girls Sure Know How To Pick 'Em, Don't They?!) last night, and I think Eddie was once again attempting a stretch of what constitutes film noir. 

Nope, personally I wouldn't call it anything like a "proto neo noir", either. And no, it's not just because it was filmed in color. Other than the idea that its storyline is "dark" because of the murders, its whole visual look never has me thinking "noir" as I watch it. I'd call the story and the film itself more of a "psychological thriller" than anything else.

(...and now I sure hope I haven't again started up that old and reoccurring debate around here of "what is film noir", but I'll bet I have)

Yea, you did and I thank you for it. Noir is subjective what tips Noir for someone else may not tip Noir for you. I also didn't get a whole lot of Noir out of my first couple of viewings until I watched it this morning. Those night time sequences outside the bar clicked this go round. Its more a Film Soleil Noir those sun baked desert or tropical set Noir.

As far as what is Film Noir........ 

Just the Facts.


1.) Film Noir literally means Dark Film it was originally used to describe films about dark subject matter, not just chiaroscuro films shot with a a lot of style. Film Noir is bigger than just Classic Film Noir (CFN) which is what this Facebook page is about (originally posted on FB )_. CFN is generally considered Hollywood Productions made between 1940 and 1959. What is interesting is, the two French critics upon seeing a backlog of Hollywood films hit Paris after the liberation subjectively wrote that these films reminded them of what they used to call Film Noir. So obviously Noir was around before 1940.
2.) Films Noir are still being made. What happened was that during 1950s Hollywood was loosing their audiences to competition with TV. Previously the pool of dark themes and subject matter that Noir forged into stylish films, were held in check by a voluntary Motion Picture Production Code. Think of Hollywood productions under the Code as having a guardrail of violence on one side and a guardrail of sex and taboo subjects on the other.  When the Big Studio motion picture companies began to get serious competition from television, they needed an edge to get butts out of the living rooms and into the theaters they began to no longer enforce the code and to explore more previous banned subject matter. The guardrails disappeared. Then independent producers in competition with the Hollywood Studios tried to out do them by being the avaunt guard of exploiting the new freedoms. The legal challenges of, and ever changing benchmarks to the obscenity laws and the old taboo themes weakened the bulwarks of the pool and that arbitrary "dam" holding back all creativity burst out with predictable results.  
3.) So those Film Noir that went too far over the line depicting violence started getting classified as Horror, Thriller (even though they were just say, showing the effects of a gunshot wound, or dealing with weird serial killers, maniacs, and psychotics, etc.). Those that went too far depicting sexual, drug, torture, etc., situations were being lumped into or classed as various Exploitation flicks, (even though they are relatively tame comparably to today's films). The the noir-ish films that dealt with everything else, except Crime, concerning the human condition were labeled Dramas and Suspense. Those that tried new techniques, lenses, etc., were labeled Experimental. Some films are so so bad in all aspects that they acquire the "so bad it's good" Cult status. These Film Noir I label the Transitional Noir.
4.) Since the 1970's all of the above in various forms and intensities can typically be part of the creative tool box used in what we call Neo Noirs. Also note that Neo Noirs have been made for roughly fifty years easily eclipsing Classic Film Noir. 
5.) Since the entire Noir phenomena was subjective in the first place, there is going to be a whole spectrum of opinions. What tips a film noir for you may not be enough tip noir for somebody else.
6.) Visually, "dark subject matter" films or Films Noir are recognized now as having a sort of Ying-Yang thing going on. Originally the first studio bound films tended to be made on low budgets using expressionistic lighting and camera techniques to hide cheap sets and back-lots. Post war films using the lighter cameras developed for newsreel productions were able to make use of outdoor locations, not only real cites but now bleak deserts, and tropical locations were also the settings for these dark stories. The French coined these sun baked desert and tropical set Film Noir, Films Soleil.

Edited by cigarjoe
clarifying
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Of course Eddie was attempting a stretch and he was very open about that.       E.g. when he said something like "don't worry,  next week the film is black and white".

As Joe as said 'what is noir' is based on what one finds as 'noir'.      The film had some noir themes,,,,,,    but if I was writing a book on noir I wouldn't include it,,,,  but if I had a T.V. show on noir films and I was running out of films and wanted to avoid repeats,,,,,  well,    I might throw it in!

 

The only "noir" aspect to this film in my view is that it has a killer. It really has nothing at all to do if a film is shot in color or not, James.

And yes, I know why Eddie said the "don't worry" thing, as I also know that there are many people who believe only a B&W film can be a true noir.

(...but once again I'm not one of them)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was surprised Joanne considered this her worst film. She must've forgotten about A New Kind of Love and From The  Terrace.....

Also surprised Eddie didnt mention the Sean Young remake..........

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hibi said:

Also surprised Eddie didnt mention the Sean Young remake..........

Any good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was the elected official or judge that said " I cannot define obscenity, but I know it when I see it"? I feel the same way about Film Noir.  Like I've said here before, I'm still a novice and I learn something every time I visit this site. 

Now, what was the Sean Young remake? You've peaked my curiosity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dargo said:

The only "noir" aspect to this film in my view is that it has a killer. It really has nothing at all to do if a film is shot in color or not, James.

And yes, I know why Eddie said the "don't worry" thing, as I also know that there are many people who believe only a B&W film can be a true noir.

(...but once again I'm not one of them)

One noir aspect is obsession;    the guy was obsessed with making it big so he could get his mother a new wig.    If that isn't dark I don't know what is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

One noir aspect is obsession;    the guy was obsessed with making it big so he could get his mother a new wig.    If that isn't dark I don't know what is.

 

Yeah, "obsession"...a word which is found in many a Psychology text book, and thus making the film more of a psychological thriller as I stated earlier than any kind of "noir".

And because once again in my view, the only character WITH psychological issues was the lead character, and who was surrounded by ordinary and fairly well-adjusted characters within his anything BUT "dark" environment...both visually or in any other manner the word "dark" could be applied,

(...sorry James, but I'm gonna stick to my guns here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, cigarjoe said:

Any good?

I've heard it was pretty bad, but I've never seen it. She played both sisters! (twins).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hoganman1 said:

Who was the elected official or judge that said " I cannot define obscenity, but I know it when I see it"? I feel the same way about Film Noir.  Like I've said here before, I'm still a novice and I learn something every time I visit this site. 

Now, what was the Sean Young remake? You've peaked my curiosity. 

I can't remember the title, Lorna would know, he saw it. LORNA, YOU THERE???

I went to imdb and looked it up. It's the same title, released in 1991.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Yea,   the Dorothy Kingship character  was almost as annoying as the Alice Tripp character in A Place in the Sun.   Of course no one does annoying better than Shelley Winters,  but Joanna Woodward does her best.     When she talks about love,,,love,,, and being free in her love,,,, love,,,,  I want to throw her off a roof!  

 

I really think it's unfair to say Joanne Woodward's character ("Dorrie") was "annoying".  In fact,  she was just a young woman  who found herself in a scary situation:  to be pregnant outside of wedlock in 1956 was  a frightening experience.  It is true, that she,  (like  the hapless Alice in A Place in the Sun ),  expects the man who got her pregnant to marry her.  And yes, it's also true that both she and Alice  more or less nag and pester the men who are the fathers of their babies to "do something about it" -- ie, marry them.  Both women feel that they truly love these men, and both also refuse to read the signs the men are clearly giving them that they do not want to marry.  So I can see the "annoying" aspect to that behaviour.  

But keep in mind that , as stated above, both Alice and Dorrie were in a very difficult situation, and to them, the solution was marriage to the fathers of their unborn babies.  I think sometimes we tend to forget nowadays what it was like for women before, say, 1970  (an arbitrary date), who found themselves pregnant and unwed.

In  every other way, Dorrie was a sweet young woman, who in no way deserved the horrible end her supposed fiance gave her.  

As for her terrible hairdo, poor Joanne  !  I know that kind of "do" was in style in the mid-50s,  but it's too bad some poor actresses were stuck with it.  Poor Mary Astor, too.

Actually, other than another version of that awful short "do" so apparently popular in the 50s,  Mary Astor looks pretty good, and does a good job, as always.  I wonder if she had more scenes  in the film that maybe were edited out?  Because she's in it so little,  you have to wonder why they bother with her character at all...except,  one of the few scenes she's in does show that she dotes on her son, thinks he can "do anything he puts his mind to"  ( but probably not including murder ), and perhaps filled him with an inflated sense of his own ego and importance.  Kind of unfair to imply blame to the mother when the son turns out to be a psycho, but not uncommon back then, at least in movies.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe me, Joanne has worn worse wigs in films. Check out From the Terrace and A New Kind of Love! I thought her wig was natural looking here.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hoganman1 said:

Who was the elected official or judge that said " I cannot define obscenity, but I know it when I see it"? I feel the same way about Film Noir.  Like I've said here before, I'm still a novice and I learn something every time I visit this site. 

Now, what was the Sean Young remake? You've peaked my curiosity. 

Sean Young won 2 RAZZIES for the film! Worst Actress and Worst Supporting Actress! I wonder if that's ever been done before??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

I really think it's unfair to say Joanne Woodward's character ("Dorrie") was "annoying".  In fact,  she was just a young woman  who found herself in a scary situation:  to be pregnant outside of wedlock in 1956 was  a frightening experience.  It is true, that she,  (like  the hapless Alice in A Place in the Sun ),  expects the man who got her pregnant to marry her.  And yes, it's also true that both she and Alice  more or less nag and pester the men who are the fathers of their babies to "do something about it" -- ie, marry them.  Both women feel that they truly love these men, and both also refuse to read the signs the men are clearly giving them that they do not want to marry.  So I can see the "annoying" aspect to that behaviour.  

But keep in mind that , as stated above, both Alice and Dorrie were in a very difficult situation, and to them, the solution was marriage to the fathers of their unborn babies.  I think sometimes we tend to forget nowadays what it was like for women before, say, 1970  (an arbitrary date), who found themselves pregnant and unwed.

In  every other way, Dorrie was a sweet young woman, who in no way deserved the horrible end her supposed fiance gave her.  

As for her terrible hairdo, poor Joanne  !  I know that kind of "do" was in style in the mid-50s,  but it's too bad some poor actresses were stuck with it.  Poor Mary Astor, too.

Actually, other than another version of that awful short "do" so apparently popular in the 50s,  Mary Astor looks pretty good, and does a good job, as always.  I wonder if she had more scenes  in the film that maybe were edited out?  Because she's in it so little,  you have to wonder why they bother with her character at all...except,  one of the few scenes she's in does show that she dotes on her son, thinks he can "do anything he puts his mind to"  ( but probably not including murder ), and perhaps filled him with an inflated sense of his own ego and importance.  Kind of unfair to imply blame to the mother when the son turns out to be a psycho, but not uncommon back then, at least in movies.

Yes, I wondered, too, if Mary's part was cut down in the editing room. She's only in a few scenes. George Macready doesn't have much to do either. It's never explained very well why he treated Dorrie so badly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Hoganman1 said:

It was pretty good. It reminded me of A PLACE IN THE SUN.  I think it is the only time Robert Wagner played a villain . I agree that Joann Woodward was wasted and like Eddie said Jeff Hunter seemed out of place at times. Also, like many of you; I prefer B&W noirs.

Nope Hogan, RJ also played a villain about ten years later in the 1966 Paul Newman-starring and REAL (neo) noir film Harper...

harper.jpg

  • Thanks 1

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

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...