Palmerin Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownGoesFrazier Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 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 More sharing options...
misswonderly3 Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 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 More sharing options...
misswonderly3 Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElCid Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
film lover 293 Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 Just as with her anklet--to show Phyllis was "available"; Neffs' use of the word "cut" when he's talking about the anklet brings up other was to bring up an aspect of Neffs' (Fred MacMurray) character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misswonderly3 Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesJazGuitar Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 The director purposefully chose for her to wear a "cheap" wig to reinforce her tawdry character. It was supposed to be obvious. Yes it was obvious but I was told her husband didn't notice. Not paying much attention to her was his downfall. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesJazGuitar Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 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 More sharing options...
MovieMadness Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 If they can make money selling it as noir then it will be. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts