For scenes, I found it fascinating in Touch of Evil, how many cuts their were in the specific scene we analyzed in class. The quick cuts led the scene to be extremely chaotic and really grabbed my attention as the audience. While the were fighting, the dark lighting added to the suspense as well. We discussed this in class and counted how many cuts this short clip had and I found it to be quite shocking because while watching it the first time, I was unaware there was that many.

 

I am actually pretty excited about this Compare/Contrast assignment! For this project, I would like to compare the Film Noir–Gilda and two other films that are outside the screenings assigned for our class. These two films will be between Goldeneye and the Godfather. I’m intrigued by the movie Goldeneye because of the femme fatale character, Xena, who much like Gilda uses her sexuality and looks to manipulate the men around her and get what she wants. Both films have scenes from casinos to ignite their stories which I found interesting. The lighting in both films and camera angles interest me through their sequences and styles. The corruption that exists in both films is comparable to one another and it’s definitely something I would like to touch on.  For this assignment, I plan on creating an in-class timed presentation of which I can give a detailed textual analysis where I can compare the films and their characters as well as styles.

If I am to use the Godfather, I will have to rent the movie and watch it. I’ve always wanted to see it and from what I’ve heard it draws many comparisons to film noir. I will watch the movie over the break and if it is appropriate for comparison with Gilda, then I will further explore that route in my presentation while still including major comparisons and contrasts of both Gilda and Goldeneye.

 

 

Notes:

Each student will submit a Proposal in which they provide the following: the two films you would like to compare and contrast; what interests you about them both, and why you feel the second film (that is, the film we did not watch in class) is relevant in an analysis of characteristics of film noir.

The Touch of Evil is definitely quite different than the other films of noir that we’ve  watched. It’s much more lively and not nearly as dark and ‘noir-ish’ as the other films. There’s a lot more characters, both men and women, and the music is often upbeat. The story centers around an investigation of the carbomb murder of Rudy Linnekar and his mistress at the beginning of the movie. Mr. Vargas who is a very well respected narcotics officer from Mexico witnesses the murder with his newlywed wife Susie and begins to suspect that the bombing involved a gang from the Mexican side of the border. Vargas is really just in the beginning of his troubles with this investigation. The plot takes a big turn once he realizes that Captain Hank Quinlan and his partner are corrupt when they took an empty shoebox and implanted evidence of dynamite sticks to accuse Mr. Sanchez of the murder. Things get even crazier when Vargas is alerted at the 1:18:30 minute mark that his wife Susie has not only been found, but she’s been arrested for drug possession (she was heavily drugged when Grandi was killed right in front of her while she was on the bed) and Grandi’s murder of which she was framed by Captain Quinlan.

The article by Place & Peterson makes note of different camera angles and lighting of typical noir films. For about the first 20+ minutes of Touch of Evil, the lighting was incredibly subpar with all of these scenes being pretty dark which is typical of film noir. The key lighting was decent in these first 20+ minutes, but the light filling and back lighting was not very good. This establishes somewhat of the darkness of the film as the majority of the rest of the film transitions into much more lighting. The darker lighting doesn’t start back up until about the 1:13:00 minute mark when Captain Hank begins his attempt to kill Grandi before finally strangling him at the 1:14:30 minute mark.

One thing I found very interesting was that there were many more female characters than previous noir films that we’ve watched. His wife who is the main female character in the film lacks the femme fatale attributes that I otherwise would have assumed beforehand given the previous screening experiences.

Orson Welles’s Touch of Evil uses many of the lighting and camera angles that Place and Peterson point out in the article “Some Visual Motifs of Film Noir.” At the beginning of the film, Susie and Vargas are standing in front of the burning car and we can see the fire behind them but the faces are shadowed (4 minutes 58 seconds). The fire makes a sort of back light onto the actors “which has the effect of giving [the actors] form by differentiating [them] from the background” (66). Many shots in this movie have the characters at different places around the shot but everyone is in focus, such as when Vargas is on the phone in the store and we can see Joe Grandi and Pete in the street (42 minutes 15 seconds). As we saw in Citizen Kane, this allows the audience to focus anywhere on the screen seeing multiple parts of the story at once. When Susie walks out of her first encounter with the Grandi family, some of the boys are hidden by the shadows but appear when an unknown light from across the street lights up (13 minutes). Similarly when Joe Grandi and Hank are in the room with Susie, when Hank murders Grandi to blame it on Susie he turns off the light and the entire room is completely dark except when there are flashes from some light coming from the outside (1 hour 20 minutes). The audience and the characters both have a limited view of what is happening, making the scene disoriented and unsettling. It is also interesting to see how angles effect character development. Whenever we see Hank, it is always from an angle looking up to him, making him seem domineering and powerful (7 minutes 52 seconds). The one time we see Hank looking down at him is when he has his first drink, when he starts to loose his stability and power (58 minutes 29 seconds). Film noir uses angles to “create a world that is never stable or safe, that is always threatening to change drastically and un expectedly” (68). As with many film noir, “right and wrong become relative, subject to the same distortions and disruptions created in the lighting and camera work” (69).

Orson Welles’ Touch of Evil is a rather unique movie compared to the other film noirs we have seen so far. Although it has a significant basis in noir, it also extends above and beyond the traditional noir plot to include other elements which the audience would find intriguing. As we discussed in class, Touch of Evil was one of the last film noirs to be made, in 1958, so most everyone already was familiar with the genre and they were able to build on the audience’s expectations. For example, Touch of Evil deals significantly with corruption in the police force, with Captain Quinlan’s chronic planting of evidence. Once Vargas figures out Quinlan has been doing this for a long time, he becomes one of the driving antagonists of the film. We haven’t seen any other film noirs deal so heavily with this inside corruption. There is also a fair bit of tension between the Mexican and American characters in the film, as the film takes place on the border and they are pitted against each other. Namely, the American police (and Vargas) are in a struggle against the Mexican Grandi and his nefarious gang. This type of racial tension isn’t very prominent in the other film noirs we’ve seen. Since Touch of Evil was made so late, I think Welles chose to focus on issues (such as police corruption and Mexican/American tension) that were more prevalent and pressing in 1958 rather than make another film noir that hearkened back to the early 40’s.

While comparing Touch of Evil to previously seen film noirs, it is easy to see how this one seems a little more intense. This film, having to do with a lot of drugs, alcohol, and sex, relies heavily on the idea that this is a criminal set movie. It seems as though at the time that this movie went above and beyond the drug and alcohol use of other movies at this time. This could be solely on the fact that majority of this film had to do with drugs in Mexico but as well that this film tried pushing the boundaries at this time. As well, I have mentioned in previous posts how things are often implied but maybe not understood. In this film this occurs again when Susan is lying in bed, obviously naked, but with blankets covering her. This supports the idea of modesty at the time in the sense that women were to be viewed either fully clothed or show little skin. This allowed the woman to be viewed in a sexual way just as the rest of the film seemed to push the boundaries. Along with the drugs and alcohol, this film really expands on the extreme violence. This is seen throughout the film with the car blowing up and the constant fighting. Overall, this film does a nice job of pushing the boundaries of other films at the time with the extreme violence, sex, and drugs.

In Andrew Dickos’ article “Women As Seen in the Film Noir,” he describes the femme fatale as using their power for “disorientating the male object (156). Furthermore, he elaborates on their characteristics as perhaps being “wicked, but she is also fascinating, because she does not (or does not easily) acquiesce or suffer the traditionally imposed travails of her subordinated function in a male dominated society.” During this time period, it’s interesting to see how this Film Noir gives Gilda more power than would be expected in reality. The comparison from the article to Gilda depicts the femme fatale as very manipulative and flirtatious to get what she wants and it even drives me insane!!! Dickos even denotes a brief characteristic of Cora Smith from another Film Noir that is so similar to Gilda in that “she will give herself, but only if she gets what she wants in return.” In Gilda, there is definitely a bit of tension if not sexual tension throughout the film from Gilda and Johnny beginning with the 18:00 minute and 26:00 minute mark in the film when Mr. Munson first introduces Johnny to her. From the moment Johnny and Gilda meet, there was tension. It was very easy to notice that he didn’t trust her intentions for marrying Mr. Munson and hated her for it. Mr. Munson and Gilda denote twice throughout the film that “hate is a very exciting emotion.” It is this emotion that drives the manipulation from Gilda to intentionally and sarcastically make Johnny jealous. At the 28:00 minute mark, Gilda is asked for a dance and Johnny denies the gentlemen of it in respect for his friend and Gilda’s husband Mr. Munson. Gilda vetoes his regard and accepts the gentlemen of his offer for the dance and stating that Johnny would “love it, but can’t afford it.” At around the 29:15 minute mark when she is dancing with the gentlemen, she continues to look sarcastically at Johnny sitting at the booth to make him  jealous, but really it’s just making him hate her even more. Later on at the 51:30 minute mark, Johnny is startled when he hears Gilda singing and playing the guitar serenading the bathroom attendant. This is just another characteristic of the clever charisma and manipulation of the femme fatale.

As previously mentioned in an earlier post, it is apparent that women play a key role in noir films. Not only do they supply a spark to the cast due to their usual prominent attitude, but as well they support the idea in this era that women are their to support a male figure. Females are seen to the public as Dicos mentioned as they are only after three things: sex, power, or wealth. Because control over men was often hard to come by, they would use jealousy to get them. This jealousy brings an extreme form of sexual tension. Sexual tension can often be shown in many ways but culturally at the time it was frowned upon. These ways portrayed women to be weak and again, their for a man. I found it fascinating that at the time, you often did not see a man or women sleeping in the same bed. If they were to have sexual tension before bed, they would speak and the scene would cut until the next day. This left the audience to conclude what the couple must have done that night. In today’s media, very little things go unseen in films. This progress may seem extreme to many but it has become the norm to see couples interacting today. whether it may be in the bedroom or just simple sexual tension anywhere else, very little things need to be assumed today.

Bridget/Wendy fits the ‘femme fatale’ category effortlessly. As a woman who takes no orders from anyone, cares about no one’s feelings or motives other than her own, and does not mind stepping on any one’s toes in order to get what she wants. As Christopher defines it a ‘femme fatale’ character must desire 1 in 3 (or in this case all three) things: “lust for exciting sex, a desire for wealth and the power it brings, and a need to control everything and everyone around her” (162). We see this with Bridget in her sex scenes with Mike, her need to keep the money stole, and her endless manipulation with the men in her life. The Last Seduction is obviously similar to Double Indemnity in the way the main female character manipulates men to do her bidding however unaware of her ulterior motives. The differences in these films as well as the main female characters in my opinion is that the set up for the storyline develops much quicker in Double Indemnity while in The Last Seduction she doesn’t convince Mike to commit murder for her until almost the end of the film (85:00), however in the beginning of the film her husband has just sold drugs for a large amount of money of which we are led to believe was her plan all along. Both films also have the male characters go over the plan in a car before they attempt to commit murder. By the end however is one where both films go in opposite directions, where one ends in the mastermind woman getting away with everything, and the other ends in death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Asphalt Jungle is a film that includes classic elements of film noir. It includes robbery, deception, and even murder. It also has Angela and Doll, the only female characters in the film yet neither really belong to the ‘femme fatale’ category. Angela is presented as the sexual object of one of the main male character’s affection. In the Into the Labyrinth article Christopher describes at first glance “a sleek young woman with long dark hair, a cream-colored dress, low-cut and sashed”(1) which also describes our introduction to Angela in The Asphalt Jungle. Doll isn’t a part of the ‘femme fatale’ category either but falls into Christopher’s description of another kind of female representation in noir, of which can also be seen in Into the Labyrinth. He says that women are critical in the field of noir, just as men, and that for this particular type (the “Beatrice-type”) she is “almost too good to be true. Nurturing to a fault, loyal beyond the bounds of common sense, she is like the faithful guide who appears suddenly in a nightmare” (20). Doll follows Dix faithfully until his demise. Even though he treats her carelessly, she still insists on loving him and that she can be of use to him in his time of need; for example during 1:33:02 “What can you do?” (Dix) “I can drive!” (Doll). I love that part, even though the character personally annoys me, because it’s a feminine character sticking up for herself and her man, even though he’s in denial of not needing medical help.

*Late