Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

A Question About Noir:


Palmerin
 Share

Recommended Posts

do the gangster films of such as Ford Coppola and Scorsese qualify as noir?

A complaint about DOUBLE INDEMNITY: what's with Stanwyck's wig? Anybody can see that is not real hair!

Gangster films of the '30s and '40s are generally not classified as noir. They have a different sensibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gangster films of the '30s and '40s are generally not classified as noir. They have a different sensibility.

 

Yes, but Palmerin's question was not about those gangster movies, but the more recent ones of the 70s and up. His op was:

 

" do the gangster films of such as Ford Coppola and Scorsese qualify as noir? "   to which I say,no. Just because a film features gangsters and crime and themes of darkness does not necessarily mean it's a noir.

 

The films he refers to are great movies, I love 'em. But I don't think of them as film noirs.

 

Not to open the floodgates yet again  - the floodgates that roar open after anyone starts talking about defining film noir - but I think sometimes people apply too broad an application to that term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A complaint about DOUBLE INDEMNITY: what's with Stanwyck's wig? Anybody can see that is not real hair!

The director purposefully chose for her to wear a "cheap" wig to reinforce her tawdry character.  It was supposed to be obvious.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palmerin's post was twofold. Yes, he did comment on Stanwyck's tawdry blonde look. But he also asked if anyone considered the post-studio era "gangster" films of directors such as Coppola and Scorsese as film noirs.

I said no, just because they're about crime and have dark themes does not necessarily make them film noirs.

 

I thought of his two remarks in his original post, the one about 70s crime movies and noir was much more interesting than his random observation of Phyllis Dietrichson's hair.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palmerin's post was twofold. Yes, he did comment on Stanwyck's tawdry blonde look. But he also asked if anyone considered the post-studio era "gangster" films of directors such as Coppola and Scorsese as film noirs.

I said no, just because they're about crime and have dark themes does not necessarily make them film noirs.

 

I thought of his two remarks in his original post, the one about 70s crime movies and noir was much more interesting than his random observation of Phyllis Dietrichson's hair.

 

I agree that the gangster type films by Coppola and Scorsese are not 'noir' as I define noir.   But I feel they are closer to noir (i.e. have additional noir aspects) than the gangster films of the 30s because more time is spent on the internal conflicts of the criminal.      We see something similar when one compares Cagney's 30s criminal films like Public Enemy with his post war noir criminal films like White Heat.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...