In Paul Schrader’s Notes on Film Noir, pessimism, cynicism, and darkness were the terms used to describe a new mood that had crept into American cinema in the late 1940s. This “tone” became quite popular during the time period, but yet Raymond Durgnat points out that “Film noir is not a genre.” Though subjective, I would argue that the noir was a specific kind of sub-genre of film in its own right and that noir cannot be replicated purely anymore.
The term genre is defined as a category of artistic composition, as in music, film, or literature, characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter. The definition is very loose in its interpretation. Most films today easily fall into one of the broad genres: comedy, horror, drama, action/adventure etc. Within these genres there are more specific labels for movies, which better describe films. For instance, today movies are specifically labeled romantic comedies, romantic dramas, etc. The drama genre is very broad. Noir is a form of drama having a unique, dark, pessimistic, and crime-based composition. So given the dictionary definition of genre it is fair to say that noir could at least be called a sub-genre. However, noir still separates itself.
Roman Polanski’s 1974 Chinatown does an exceptional job integrating noir elements. For the most part Chinatown has that dark pessimistic feel throughout. The shadows were always very noticeable, and the music was always eerie, dark, and suspenseful. A vast majority of the scenes take place at night. The film centers on the heated topic of water that dives into this mysterious investigation and involves crime and corruption. The topic of water is particularly interesting, giving its controversial and heated tension between opposing sides in the state of California. In the end, viewers are not left with a happy ending. All these components fall under noir.
So what is Chinatown lacking to be truly categorized as a noir film? Chinatown’s time period hinders it from truly being noir. Schrader states, “Film noir is an extremely unwieldy period.” In other words, noir’s same effects were very difficult to replicate or transfer in later time periods. The mentality of filmmakers and audiences in the noir period cannot be translated to the future. Because we as viewers are not in the immediate post World War II era we do not have the proper conditions or mind set to truly grasp the effects of a noir film. Watching noir films today does not give us the true taste the film had in its hay day. This time-correlated relationship between film and society in 1941-1953 cannot be duplicated.
Whether the noir is a subgenre or not is debatable. But, it can be more commonly agreed that noir cannot be purely replicated in present day form. Unlike broad genres, noir is directly time specific. Though elements of noir exist in some films today, its pure form and effects only existed in the 1940s and early 50s.
Really interesting to think of a sytle of film at least partially constructed by the mind-set of the spectators in a given period. This moves us out of a formalist analysis of genre into a definition that includes the relationship between spectator and text. This is more challenging to traditional film theory than you might realize.
ReplyDeleteBrady,
ReplyDeleteThat was a great analysis of Schrader's Notes on Film Noir. I enjoyed that you pulled out only the important aspects so I got a good review of the piece. In terms of your discussion on Chinatown, I was wondering if you felt very strongly that Chinatown wasn't a film noir. I was a little on the fence; I can see reasons it is a film noir and it isn't. Did you think there might be other reasons that it didn't fulfill the criteria? I just feel that just because the film wasn't quite in the correct time period was a bit scant... Going back to our arguments on whether films are "classic" or not, do you think Schrader wants film noir films to fulfill each and every expectation or is there a little bit of wiggle room...
You definitely showed how well you understand the ideas behind film noir. I think using Chinatown was a great way to present Schrader's ideas and also your own opinions. I really liked how you focused on the concern with time period because I also think that is a defining characteristic of film noir set out by the people who developed it.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! It was interesting how you said noir cannot be purely replicated in present day form because it is directly time specific. Even though Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is a perfect example as to not being able to replicate film noir because one cannot say that it is truly noir, I do not know if I can make the broad statement that noir cannot be replicated. There are many more elements that could make a film noir not including the era it was made in.
ReplyDeleteNice post! I agree with you on the point that Chinatown does a good job of incorporating noir elements, but isn't quite a classic noir in the true sense. I also agree with your definition of noir as a sub-genre, as I feel that it implies too many specific filmic elements to be called "not a genre."
ReplyDelete