And maybe, in the end, defining noir is like that famous description of obscenity: "I can't describe it fully, but I know it when I see it!"Īdditional note: I have read the Film Noir Reader, edited by Silver and Ursini - which complicates things. So I include it, and will happily review and include the films I see without regard to anyone's accepted listing. it contains two murders, the first of which shows a lot of blood from a gunshot wound for a 1956 film, and a storyline that is commendably clever. That title alone would seem to put in the canon, but it seems way too good-natured to be noir.
I, personally, reject "Notorious." Some films, like "When Gangland Strikes," can be difficult calls. Carrolls," or the boldly noirish nightmare "Dementia," or the Ida Lupino-directed women's interest films which are mildly noir or newer foreign films such as "Insomnia" or "Following." The Lucille Ball film "Lured" certainly seems to fit - and yet appears nowhere that I could find. It does not include what to me are two obvious noirs, "Hoodlum Empire" or Bogie's "The Two Mrs. What constitutes a film noir, exactly? It seems every film critic has his own opinion, but many seem to agree that the book Film Noir : An Encyclopedia Reference to the American Style by Silver and Ward has about as representative a listing as any book. These assume you know something about the film. But mine are short, snappy and to the point, like the brisk patter in the best noirs. Yes, yes, another set of Internet film reviews.
0 kommentar(er)
