Joaquim da Silva Fontes, Significação e Estabilidade do Género no ...
Joaquim da Silva Fontes, Significação e Estabilidade do Género no ... Joaquim da Silva Fontes, Significação e Estabilidade do Género no ...
criminal and libidinous behaviour, commonly found (but not exclusively) in the gangster and thriller genres. My critical approach throughout has been to consider film noir not so much from its (undeniable) sociological aspects (discussed in Part II), but rather for its artistic / formalist features, from an iconographic and visual point of view. From most contemporary linguistics and semiotics perspectives, the common assumption is that language, or any other system of transmitted signals (of which cinema is a part), is an instrument, a tool: “Language serves for the expression of ‘content’: that is, of the speaker’s expression of the real world, including the inner world of his own consciousness. We may call this the ideational function (…)” (Simpson 2004:61). Clearly this model of language rests on Peirce’s tripartite system (p. 260) for the study of signs, with its categories of meaning, which provide a much richer field for visual analysis, or on Christian Metz’s notion of visual representation (cinesemiotics, p. 264) leaning heavily on linguistic models. I therefore conclude that film noir’s difference does not lay so much in the inversion of Hollywood conventions and the development of different themes (as suggested in Part III) but rather in the slight but perceptible modification of the social and emotional atmosphere, the tone in dominant cinema forms. In this regard, film noir operates as a matter of mood, manner and, as Durgnat states, of tone. The semiotic analysis of the films in Part IV has enabled me to understand that tone or, more broadly, that style. Through the many recurrent symbols analysed in these films, I discovered that it is the application of a distinctive style with a consistent intentionality that best characterises the entire noir movement. The manipulation of all the elements – angle, framing, mise-enscène, camera movement, duration of shot, optical effects, and montage – made film noir a tight compendium of visual styles. From the use of staircases and handrails or banisters with their spokes (as metaphors of entrapment) to the prison bars (sometimes just reflected from the dark shadows of objects that enclose the noir protagonists), the bar motif and cage wire (both literal and metaphorical) are perhaps the most recurrent elements in many noir films. Even a relatively natural open-air environment such as the one found for example in Gun Crazy, with its enmeshment of the two characters by reeds and narrow paths, has the connotation of fatality, entrapment and isolation from each other (see fig. 116 on p. 388). Moreover, film noir is not defined in terms of its content, setting or plot, and one should not forget the ambiguity that exists in noir characters and iconography, a characteristic 408
which is normally not associated with genre productions (though I am aware that ambiguity itself (cf. opacity of motive) can be a genre feature itself). Durgnat’s discussion of genre and its application to film noir is thus an important touchstone for defining the problem this analysis seeks to address: Film noir is sometimes called a genre, but it’s a moot point whether it’s normally used for a perennial mood (a gloomy cynicism), or restricted to a particular historical epoch (around the Forties); whether it’s a certain kind of a thriller, or whether it includes Westerns, domestic dramas, and normally unclassified films (Citizen Kane). Thus noir could signify an attitude, or a cycle, or a subgenre, or a tonality. (Durgnat 1975:21) Thus, I believe that film noir was more of a “transgeneric” form, a set of stylistic innovations that influenced many studios genres or, as Andrew Spicer puts it, “a discursive critical construction that has evolved over time” (Spicer 2002:24). In other words, film noir is a concept that has emerged and developed as film theorists and critics wrote about the phenomenon, but the new perspectives on crime and violence and public morality implied by these noir productions also found an echo in many other (though related) genres. In this study, I have situated film noir within a group of films that share a variety of similar visual approaches, narrative strategies, subject matters and character types, underlining indeed that film noir draws on a “literary tradition”, yet this thesis has been questioning its place in a whole set of historical, social, and cultural frames. The critical concept of film noir, also through its hard-boiled school, managed to dramatically change the traditional narrative that Hollywood typically offered and that came to be marked as a rejection of the usual entertainment values by French film culture. Leading French directors such as François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, and Claude Chabrol singled out noir conventions as providing a new film-viewing experience, one that would follow the philosophy of a “cinematic modernism” and potentially as endorsing a liberal / leftist perspective. In other words, tone / style can also be a reflection of personality traits and of an individual approach. Auteurists have also frequently used the concept of tone to describe a director’s visible modifications of the institutional features he/she has had to comply with under the American system. For this reason, perhaps, Paul Schrader has never given much attention to theme in film noir as in his view it is not defined by content: “Like its protagonists, film noir is more interested in style than theme” (in Simpson 2004:158). And, as it has been made abundantly clear in this study, American critics have been 409
- Page 373 and 374: Figure 102. Out of the Past In this
- Page 375 and 376: Figure 104. The Lady from Shanghai
- Page 377 and 378: Jeff: Give him time. Kathie: You ar
- Page 379 and 380: Figure 106. Out of the Past The sce
- Page 381 and 382: Gun Crazy, a barrage of police gunf
- Page 383 and 384: 2.4 Joseph H. Lewis Considered as a
- Page 385 and 386: untold storied of ordinary men and
- Page 387 and 388: through windows, to provide the ind
- Page 389 and 390: 2.4.1 The Big Combo (1955) and the
- Page 391 and 392: of most noir films including The Bi
- Page 393 and 394: 2.4.1.1 “First is First and Secon
- Page 395 and 396: In The Big Combo the unconscious tr
- Page 397 and 398: It is not only in terms of narrativ
- Page 399 and 400: Although the idea is not to go into
- Page 401 and 402: Figure 113. Scarlet Street Neff’s
- Page 403 and 404: 2.4.1.2 The Big Combo and Generic T
- Page 405 and 406: and knowing they are both surrounde
- Page 407 and 408: As the noir movement entered the la
- Page 409 and 410: V. Conclusions: 1 Genre Revisited T
- Page 411 and 412: on social aspects through a dramati
- Page 413 and 414: Buscombe is right: if we take a gen
- Page 415 and 416: constructions that make it difficul
- Page 417 and 418: Such factors have been scrutinised
- Page 419 and 420: Thematically, noir films as a group
- Page 421 and 422: While enforcement of the Production
- Page 423: are “as often nihilistic, cynical
- Page 427 and 428: morality brought about by these noi
- Page 429 and 430: It is within this cinematic and cri
- Page 431 and 432: ____________ (1994). The Semiotic C
- Page 433 and 434: ____________ (1992b). Farewell, My
- Page 435 and 436: E Easthope, Antony (1993). Contempo
- Page 437 and 438: Greenberg, Joel & Higham, Charles (
- Page 439 and 440: James, David E. (2005). The Most Ty
- Page 441 and 442: Malkiewicz, Kris (1986). Film Light
- Page 443 and 444: N Naremore, James (1978). The Magic
- Page 445 and 446: Polan, Dana (1986). Power and Paran
- Page 447 and 448: ____________ (2006). Ava Gardner:
- Page 449 and 450: Sullivan, Ellie (1986). Jacques Lac
- Page 451 and 452: Wilson, Edmund (1962). Classics and
- Page 453 and 454: Appendix I: Annotated Filmography T
- Page 455 and 456: Beware, My Lovely RKO 1952. Prod: C
- Page 457 and 458: Christmas Holiday Univ 1944. Prod:
- Page 459 and 460: Dark Corner, The Fox 1946. Prod: Fr
- Page 461 and 462: Framed Col 1947. Prod: Jules Schern
- Page 463 and 464: House on 92 nd Street, The Fox 1945
- Page 465 and 466: Killing, The UA 1956. Prod: James B
- Page 467 and 468: Mildred Pierce WB 1945. Prod: Jerry
- Page 469 and 470: One Way Street Univ 1950. Prod: Leo
- Page 471 and 472: Repeat Performance EL 1947. Prod: A
- Page 473 and 474: Stranger, The RKO 1946. Prod: S.P.
which is <strong>no</strong>rmally <strong>no</strong>t associated with genre productions (though I am aware that<br />
ambiguity itself (cf. opacity of motive) can be a genre feature itself). Durgnat’s discussion<br />
of genre and its application to film <strong>no</strong>ir is thus an important touchstone for defining the<br />
problem this analysis seeks to address:<br />
Film <strong>no</strong>ir is sometimes called a genre, but it’s a moot point whether it’s <strong>no</strong>rmally<br />
used for a perennial mood (a gloomy cynicism), or restricted to a particular<br />
historical epoch (around the Forties); whether it’s a certain kind of a thriller, or<br />
whether it includes Westerns, <strong>do</strong>mestic dramas, and <strong>no</strong>rmally unclassified films<br />
(Citizen Kane). Thus <strong>no</strong>ir could signify an attitude, or a cycle, or a subgenre, or a<br />
tonality. (Durgnat 1975:21)<br />
Thus, I believe that film <strong>no</strong>ir was more of a “transgeneric” form, a set of stylistic<br />
in<strong>no</strong>vations that influenced many studios genres or, as Andrew Spicer puts it, “a discursive<br />
critical construction that has evolved over time” (Spicer 2002:24). In other words, film <strong>no</strong>ir<br />
is a concept that has emerged and developed as film theorists and critics wrote about the<br />
phe<strong>no</strong>me<strong>no</strong>n, but the new perspectives on crime and violence and public morality implied<br />
by these <strong>no</strong>ir productions also found an echo in many other (though related) genres. In this<br />
study, I have situated film <strong>no</strong>ir within a group of films that share a variety of similar visual<br />
approaches, narrative strategies, subject matters and character types, underlining indeed<br />
that film <strong>no</strong>ir draws on a “literary tradition”, yet this thesis has been questioning its place<br />
in a whole set of historical, social, and cultural frames. The critical concept of film <strong>no</strong>ir,<br />
also through its hard-boiled school, managed to dramatically change the traditional<br />
narrative that Hollywood typically offered and that came to be marked as a rejection of the<br />
usual entertainment values by French film culture. Leading French directors such as<br />
François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Go<strong>da</strong>rd, and Claude Chabrol singled out <strong>no</strong>ir conventions as<br />
providing a new film-viewing experience, one that would follow the philosophy of a<br />
“cinematic modernism” and potentially as en<strong>do</strong>rsing a liberal / leftist perspective.<br />
In other words, tone / style can also be a reflection of personality traits and of an<br />
individual approach. Auteurists have also frequently used the concept of tone to describe a<br />
director’s visible modifications of the institutional features he/she has had to comply with<br />
under the American system. For this reason, perhaps, Paul Schrader has never given much<br />
attention to theme in film <strong>no</strong>ir as in his view it is <strong>no</strong>t defined by content: “Like its<br />
protagonists, film <strong>no</strong>ir is more interested in style than theme” (in Simpson 2004:158). And,<br />
as it has been made abun<strong>da</strong>ntly clear in this study, American critics have been<br />
409