THINQon : Film Noir

THINQon is a platform for a more intelligent web. It aims to replace the ruling paradigm of the web – that of sharing and gathering information – with a sharing and achieving of understanding. Instead of the Q&A model it offers an experience. A platform for discovery of ideas, people, and yourself. Continue >

Robin Layter, I qualify as a youth. I have long hair and it...

Film Noir

Latest Post: March 17, 2012 at 3:44 AM

21 followers

I don't understand Film Noirs. But I guess that is an intended component of the genre. I'm wondering though, why Film Noirs were born when they were and if/how they might exist today.

From my research (gathered from nights and nights of strenuous google searches) I found that the term Film Noir means Black Film. And I wish we could keep the definition there. It seems to convey most, if not all, of the characteristic elements of the genre. Film Noirs, the ones I've seen, deal almost entirely in blackness. The characters are shadows, the sets are shadows, and the universe in which the film takes place is unpenetratably black. From the opening dark screen to the closing credits, the audience is invited into a world through another pair of eyes. And the sign of a good noir is an audience member who leaves not knowing what to think. Did I like the protagonist? Was he a hero? Did he do the right thing? Did anything change?

And no. Nothing changes in a noir. Blackness is all there is. There are no answers because our human brains and moral systems can't pose a question. And even if there were a question, we learn from Noir that the universe is resoundingly silent.

But does Film Noir merit its own genre? Just because they are morally uncompromising and generally dark do they deserve a specific classification? It's such a blanket term that I think really epitomizes the difficulties of allowing a movie or any piece of artwork as a specific genre. With the right argument almost any movie that takes on the theme of human morality could be termed as a Noir. So how do we know if a movie really is a Noir or something else? And should it matter at all? A movie should just be good or bad. Does the terminology we use to describe it make it something else? Once a movie ceases being just a movie and is now a Film Noir it's as if it is expected "to say something." But why can't we just leave it alone with the word 'movie'?

I think it's because Humans love to classify. We put words onto things and subwords on to words and folders inside subfolders in order to assert some sort of measure of control onto the universe around us. It's funny that this is the case with Film Noir, because it is the film noir that proposes humans have no measure of control. One day you're there, the next you're belly up in a river over a card game that went fantastically ill.

So let's leave it there, leave it off with that not-so-pleasant fact of life. Classifications aren't real and neither are morals. So instead of labeling something just enjoy it for what it is: Unique.

Reply to:

Wesley Allen

November 2, 2009 at 6:47 PM

0 followers

I think you doth protest too much. I saw Chinatown on the big screen last week, and I can say there are a few elements which make it a Noir. The trouble you're having, I think, stems from your historical perspective. Before the first Noirs, dark themes accompanied by dark cityscapes and moral ambiguity were not common. After a few major Noirs, such as Chinatown, however, many subsequent films adopted adages of the genre. Historically, it's important to know that these themes which you now associate as general characteristics of many movies, were born from a special wave of films in the seventies which have been termed "Noir". To take a nietzschean view, we might invoke his quip that "what is present in language is only what we have gotten over" (my paraphrase). In this way, once upon a time, the Noir film was novel, but now has become part of the normal conceptual constellation of modern cinema.

Reply to: or

Luis Colon

March 17, 2012 at 3:44 AM

3 followers

Nice post Robin. Certainly I agree with Wesley that 'thou doth protest too much' but hey a little ranting on the subject was just spice for the many good points you bring up.

The central idea I extracted from your post was that one should just enjoy (or not) a film without adding sacredness to it some some label. In other words, that somehow the label elevates the movie to something we SHOULD like because it is 'good'. Balderdash. I agree with you, the thing is either enjoyable or not. Movie theaters are not churches! Film study nerds are not one iota holier than computer nerds. One watches movies, the other plays with computers, no holiness conferred by either.

Yet, as you say, humans like to classify. It serves purposes. I've just started watching Noirs as a study. It helps to have the classification if only to get a list of 'similar' movies and to have a point of comparison. It is also fun to recognize some of the techniques and methods of the Noir in other genre. Sometimes such things carry a underlying story line. Little signals from the director, 'inside' jokes in a way. In the past I've missed quite a lot by not recognizing patterns from the past.

I agree that Film Noir does not deserve it's own genre just because it presents a pretty dour, pessimistic, and dark view of life. However, its technical tricks of camera angle, dark and light, settings, characterization, and so on do add up. There IS pattern to it. You know, if it walks like a duck, acts like a duck, and quacks it's probably a duck and not a platypus, but hmm maybe... do platypi quack? I don't know. But I do know this, I have heard your warning and I promise I will not let the fancy classification scheme sway me when it comes to deciding whether I liked the movie or not. That call doesn't belong to anyone but me. I don't care if it quacks, if its only a platypus so be it.