PROJEKT iVIEW : NOIR’S ARC
iVIEW AUTHOR:
K.A. (Bombay, India)
email:
filmrepublic[at]gmail.com
This piece arose out of a series of conversations with friends and colleagues in Delhi and Bombay but the catalyst proved to be Anurag Kashyap’s post ‘Hard-boiled Bollywood’ on PFC. Let me at the very beginning state that I am a fan of most things noir and the intention of this post is not only to provoke others but as Lars von Trier would put it, “declare war on yourself”. Also, as those who have tried it will attest, there is a certain undeniable joy in playing the devil’s advocate. So here it is to strike a note of caution, a statutory warning.
So quickly, some basics and only for those who came in late: the term film noir (French for ‘black film’) was coined for a specific type of Hollywood movies by French critic Nino Frank just after the Second World War. Most American and German film professionals who worked in that era were completely unaware of the term and the canon for film noir was defined by film academics and critics only a couple of decades later. Obviously, most people in the American film industry who were actively involved in the making of these classic noirs later declared that they had little idea they were creating a distinctive type of film at the time.
It is absolutely crucial to remember this because film noir is arguably the most lionised and beloved of all genres anywhere in the world. The sheer glut of films influenced by its visual and narrative hallmarks after the ‘classic noir period’ (1940 – 1958) is astounding.However, it is vital to understand the distinction between the ‘classic noir’ films (in their time many were categorised as ‘B movies’) and those that came after: the deliberate, studied, sometimes self-conscious films that fall into the category of ‘neo-noir’ or noir tributes.These are replete with all or some of the standard noir flourishes in terms of: 1) mise-en-scene( low-key lighting schemes, high-contrast sometimes-monochrome palettes,dramatic shadow patterning,dense claustrophobic spaces full of Venetian blinds and banister rods; Dutch and low-angle shots and wide angle lenses, shooting through glass and water, distorted reflections etc) 2) narrative devices ( flashbacks, flash forwards and of course, the sardonic voice over) not to mention adultery, double-crosses, amnesia, chain-smoking and the now infamous innuendo-laced repartee.The atmosphere in these films is one of paranoia and pessimism; stories of ” doom and gloom” and as Paul Schrader said in his seminal essay ‘Notes on Film Noir’ (1972) “film noir is defined by tone….the tone more hopeless.”
So why this rather unnecessary and totally inadequate summation? Only because I sense an unabashed collective enthusiasm for the genre among young film practitioners in our country today. As an entire hyper-film-literate generation is poised on the brink of its career, in a charged atmosphere where people constantly talk about the kind of films they want to make or are about to make and their corresponding strategies to bring down the old feudal guard, I think we can take a moment to consider this ‘anxiety of influence’. It is almost certain that we live in strangely paradoxical times: in the history of the Indian film industry, it has never been easier to make a film and yet, never been tougher to make the film you want to make.
So what exactly worries me and how is film noir central to my uneasiness? The words ‘homage’,'tribute’,'inspiration’ and ‘plagiarism’ trouble me, specifically, by virtue of how interchangeable as terms they have become.In the near future, i suspect that noir because it is so distinctive a genre will bring forth the most voluble,uninspired and slapdash acts of plagiarism masquerading as homages or tributes.[ It is not that I see every act of plagiarism as detrimental to cinematic storytelling. I'm all for value-added re imaginings and reinventions but to smugly assume that everyone in our country is willing to sit through a shoddy remake of a movie they are already familiar with because it has a star in it, is one of the most vicious forms of condescension.More on the history of plagiarism and its relationship to art later.] In the coming years, we will see a whole slew of films by film makers whose idol by popular vote is a certain QT, a man who has carved a throne for himself on account of his sheer adroitness with dialogue and craft but more importantly, because he has been at the forefront of the new revival of frenzied ‘referencing’ in films. This i feel has been a double-edged sword: on the one hand, he has taken the guilt out of watching all things low-brow but he has created a model that has attracted hordes of lazy and incompetent imitators across the world.
Yet even with the remarkable QT i suspect a certain ‘piranha effect’: when the feeding frenzy on past films is over, he might well turn on himself. ‘Grindhouse‘ and its multiple versions(one for Cannes, the other with Rodriguez) is possibly a step in that direction. A marked symptom is his tendency to fracture and splice his movies because they are either too long ( Kill Bill ) or too short (‘Death Proof’ in Grindhouse) or worse, can be lengthened and shortened at will to cater to to the whims and specifications of famous film festivals. This is nowhere on the same scale as the marked megalomania of Vidhu Vinod Chopra who has a character in ‘Eklavya’ watch a clip from ‘Parinda’; a kind of self-cannibalisation that can only spiral downwards.”Steal from everybody but yourself.” Picasso said.
In terms of cinematic evolution, I fear we are about to witness that rising wave of imitations whose sources are slightly trickier to find. With the deluge of subtitled movies on DVDs entering our lives, the imminent cut-and-paste jobs are going to get tougher to spot. My guess is that film noir will provide the deepest pool of ‘inspiration’ because as a genre it lends easily to adaptations, it can be shorn quickly of its original cultural context and supplanted unlike war films or comedies which require that much more planning in their adaptations.( Case in point: ‘The Postman Always Rings Twice’ is perhaps the most remade movie in the world.) Also there is a double standard at play here: when we come across scenes in a romantic comedy or drama that is startlingly reminiscent of some other movie it is invariably looked upon as an act of ‘blatant copying’ but thrillers/noirs can usually get away with pleading ‘tribute’ or ‘inspiration’ if the film maker possesses a rudimentary competence of craft and promises a certain pace to the narrative. This is because noir has always accommodated imitation in the form of homage without guilt, which leads me to its present crisis.
The idea of homage should be an embellishment to the narrative, a point of quick departure for the sake of cinematic mischief if nothing more profound but it can never stand wholly in place of plot and visual metaphor. I agree, there is no such thing as a truly original story.( Nietzche said ” Many a man fails as an original thinker because his memory is too good.”) There are only that many variations to plots but metaphors are infinite and we have only had a little over a hundred years of cinema. The point is to render old conflicts in new strange and unfamiliar ways so that the components don’t show, what is frequently referred to as ‘defamiliarization’ in literary circles.
To fully grapple with the problems with noir tributes we must return briefly to the circumstances that gave rise to the classical noir genre itself. Although Schrader is reluctant to define film noir as a genre in his Notes he later realises that that is the crux of the problem: “Almost every critic has his own definition of film noir, and a personal list of film titles…. How many noir elements does it take to make a film noir noir?” And this was just in 1972 before Chinatown(1974) Taxi driver (1976) Bladerunner (1982) exploded the category beyond recognition. Yet for each one of these films there were a whole host of banal imitators who thought that hipness was the only criteria for qualification. Yet Schrader establishes a historical context and mentions 4 “causes” for the initial noir films of the 40s and 50s: 1) The Second World War and post-War disillusionment 2) Cold War paranoia 3) The German (Expressionist) influence and 4) the hard-boiled literary tradition of Hammet and Chandler.
So apart from the radical departures in form, the content of these movies spoke in a variety of ways to its audience at the time. These origins today lie completely forgotten and herein lies much of the problem . Today, noir tropes have become cliches fit for TV and print commercials, music videos and for dull yet stylised retreads devoid of emotional content ( Rodriguez’s Sin City and Brian De Palma’s The Black Dahlia). Yet the doomed, luckless sensibility and the desperate attempts to fight it which was equally resonant an archetype of noir as the chiaroscuro lighting, has been hijacked by the criss-cross melodramas of say Inarritu and Arriaga ( Amores Perros, 21 grams, The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada and Babel ).
For noir to work in today’s day and age, for the movie to last in memory beyond its box-office or DVD run it cannot run merely on the fuel of nostalgia and retro-hipness. In most noir tributes that fail, the angst is all second-hand, the horror of the protagonist’s plight is enjoyed at an ironic distance. You can appreciate cleverness and homage-giri for only so long. The past is another country, they do things differently there. We must look to the present, our lives and its attendant miseries and of those around us if we are to hope to be remembered in the future.
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
Thought provoking!!! Thank you for this!
K.A: Terrific piece. Thanks for this.
Hey are you really opposite name of A.K, Your gyan of world cinema matches with his.
So you both will make a wonderful Jugalbandi here and we all will enjoy.
”
The Postman Always Rings Twice
This paying tribute business is all crap. It is like having a conversation for conversation sake by dropping names here and there. You can just feel good about it. It is more like an intellectual masturbation. It serves no purpose otherwise, and certainly adds nothing to anyone’s Gyan (experience) in true sense. I agree fully with the author. One also wonders if the genre came first or films. This much loved word of the marketing wizards of big studios and smart talkers, came in vogue thanks to volubale film critics, and researchers, and bacame popular as the western mind developed academic inclinations and started to classify and categoriese their art, exactly the way ancient Indians had done thousands of years ago. This is how decadence sets in when words and classifications and lables and brands become more important than actual human experience. Our filmmakers are doing exactly that. They classify themselves and their films first and then get down to making it, borrowing or stealing styles, idioms, ideas,and vision in the name of paying tribute to some classical genre or a filmmaker. They have very little of their own to offer. What can be more chutiapatic than this?
RKS.. i always thought i was the most cynical there is.. you make me feel like a very positive man.. my friend we pay tribute to what we love.. it doesn’t mean that we steal all the time.. yes nomenclature makes it easier to identify and understand.. exactly like your name.. you being singh means you are either a rajput or a sikh.. both means you are hindu.. now i ask whether the human came first or the hindu.. try moving around without a name and face and and a classification and believe me you will be the most desperate to find identity.. like you constantly blog wanting to be heard like most of us.. you need voice.. every man and his creation or any artform looks to be understood, or identified either as great art, bad art or shit or absurd or just too indulgent or ignored.. and ignored is the last thing anyone wants.. i went on your blog and i saw whenever anyone has anything of their own to offer you disagree because it doesn’t say what you say.. and in your review of ek chaalis you are a complete contradiction to your own comment here.. i suggest you read your comment here and follow it up by reading your own review of the film.. contradictions are good and doing that exercise makes you a very interesting case study for me.. i am curious of your agenda or lack of it.. is Gadar your favourite film?
I think the tribute thing comes from the schoolboy love for cinema…and which according to me is the purest
OOPSIE>…forgot to say……Loved the post KA.
K.A., good informative post about one of the most criminally misused terms in the domain of cinema.
But I would disagree with you on the constant attack on artists who love to pay a creative tribute. Excuse me for I am a sucker for tributes, be it blatant shop-lifting or licensed inspirations, I cant have enough of cinematic salutes, be it Woody Allen’s Play it Again, Sam, or Scorsese’s self-referential paeans.
On the obsession about QT, I would say if you want to do it with all your heart, why not?! There are enough followers of the cult for the argument to be true, the one where you termed it “dull yet stylised retreads devoid of emotional content “.
Again, IMO, films are a panorama of thoughts and imagination, it can fly anywhere, your imagination can conflict with mine, and that is perfectly fine, because when you discuss something, you cant not theoritize it. But the sad irony of this medium is this very conflict gives way to more and more arguments, never ending ones. And the same happens to be the case here as well.
To me, a true tribute would be a spontaneous flow of ideas that bleed in to the script without any overt attempts, that is when it takes form of magic, that is what I would call Pulp Fiction, the differences stated in this theory can be seen in his other tribute, Kill Bill, which is still fine by any cinematic standards(shit, I hate that term!), but would still look pale in comparison to a PF.
You almost sound preachy towards the end , perfectly fine if that is what you truly believe, but I felt somehow this kind of an approach doesnt apply to a medium as diverse as films.
I appreciate your love of having philosophical explanations for discontinuation or extinction of some film trends, but brother, tell me, if Nietzsche or Picasso were to make films, who would we quote?
Hope you take all this in a positive spirit, keep writing! Great to have you here
clinically said and well said…
i for one would be interested in you list of ‘desi noir’ (the harped about ones and otherwise)- failed or otherwise
anurag, whts the link to KA’s bolg? i cant see any links here…
Possible desi noir films. You can’t classify them as pure noir by any stretch, but these all have plenty of noir elements in them.
CID (1956) – Directed by Raj Khosla
Kohraa (1964) – Directed by Biren Nag (Remake of Hitchcock’s Rebecca)
Howrah Bridge (1958) – Directed by Shakti Samanta
Kalapaani (1958) – Directed by Raj Khosla (Based on A.J.Cronin’s ‘Beyond This Place’)
Paanch (2003) – Directed by Anurag Kashyap
Ittefaq (1969) – Directed by Yash Chopra
Kaun (1999) – Directed by Ramgopal Varma
Achanak (1973) – Directed by Gulzar
Dhund (1973) – Directed by BR Chopra
Khamosh (1985) – Directed by Vidhu Vinod Chopra
Jism (2003) – Directed by Amit Saxena (scene by scene rip off of Body Heat which itself was a remake of Double Indemnity)
I’m sure there are many more.
Sorry I would take KAUN off that list. Now that I think of it…nah.
There was a AMol Palekar Shabana Azmi film shott in PAHALGAM (Kashmir). I forgot the name. It was shot in Pahalgam hotel. I lived there for 11 days. They played it 24 hrs. It was a great film.
It was about murder in a film crew.
anyone remember name?
Khamosh by Vidhu Vinod Chopra, his second movie after Sazaye Maut
Good list Vijay, I reckon I’ll add the following to your list:
- Pehla Nasha (body double)
- Aar ya paar (chase’s novella)
- Satya
- Gangster
- Being Cyrus
Dpac..i asn’t talking about KA’s blog.. Rajesh Kr Singh’s blog..
By the way great piece KA.. i agree with you whole heartedly but its the greedy, cheesy, noir sucker in me… can’t help falling in love with it all the time
Sorry RKS”s blog is www.khullamkhulla.net ..
Hey anurag sir,we all are suckers that
ohh he is K.A..not ak…
I would not call Satya noir at all. Gangster films can be noir but for me, Satya is too fast and raw to fall into noir. Gangster on the other hand has a lot of noir elements to it. Can’t comment on Aar Ya Paar and Pehla Nasha as I have not seen either. Being Cyrus…maybe. I can see why you would put it on that list.
yeap got it Anurag, thru a divine rejoinder from Orange country..
vijay // if rififi is noir then satya is too. personally, i think satya is as noir as mumbai cinema can ever get.
Matter of perception I guess. Maqbool I felt had a lot of noir elements. Macbeth itself has all the elements that make up noir. Deciet, femme fatale, anti-hero etc. The way Vishal and Hemant Chaturvedi shot the film was quite reminiscent of classic noir.
‘Hazaaron Khwaishein…’ anybody?
‘Satya’ defnitely (inspite of a couple of songs diluting it)
‘Maranasimhasanam’ undoubtedly
I cannot see HKA or Maranasimhasanam as noir from any angle. HKA is a drama. A love story set against a political activist backdrop. I’m very interested in your reasoning for viewing HKA as noir. Maranasimhasanam is a brilliant satire. One of the most brilliant films I have ever seen. Dark, but not noir. Again, very interested in your reasoning for it.
DROHKAAL???????????Om puri and Naseer sir
GUESS ALL FORGOT ABT IT…..
saw one pallavi joshi and parsh rawal movie on DD long bak…
paresh rawal plays politician, and pallavi joshi his daughter…i guess paresh ralaws first movie…dont remeber the name
Kafir, tht films name is “Wo Chhokri”
i know of six existing versions of “The Postman Always Rings Twice”: three American versions ( the 1946 film starring Lana Turner, the 1981 version directed by David Mamet and ‘U turn’ directed by Oliver Stone) one French version (’The Last Turn’ directed by Pierre Chenal in 1939) one Italian version (’Ossessione’ directed by Luchino Visconti in 1942) and of course hamara apna pyaara sa nanha sa ‘Musafir’ by Sanjay Gupta. There’s a Russian, German and Japanese yakuza version that i have not been able to trace. That makes nine.
K.A:
Thanks for this info. 1981 version was directed written by David Mamet. It weas directed by Bob Rafelson.
Yet to see U Turn by O.stone.
I cant recall completely Musafir, But was it really based on this film
Let me again clarify: i have not a thing against movies with tributes. They are essential because they acknowledge a tradition and recognize work that has come before them. My piece was drawing attention to the execution of these ‘homages’. When you replicate a famous scene in another language with different actors and similar mise-en-scene does that stand as doffing your hat in respect or being a lazy screenwrite? Given the long history of cinematic plagiarism in our country i am not willing to give the benefit of the doubt to these film makers. Especially if they are young, claim to be radical, angry with the world and want to bring down those who have survived using these very techniques.
Too often,we have an excess of awe and worship in our collective psyches whether it be for film stars or classical movies. This is what Harold Bloom has called in an altogether different context ‘the anxiety of influence’. We could cut back on the doffing of hats and do with a bit more iconoclasm.
A lot of people who feel worried that they have no stories to tell hide behind tributes. We leave in tumultous times in every sense of the word, we could definitely leave a lasting legacy of work for those who come after us.
Imagine a scenario, where our generation spends its time paying tributes to those that have come before us. What then shall we leave those who come after?
Yes it is important to stand on the shoulder of giants but we ourselves must dream of being giants someday. it is absolutely irrelevant if we become so or not, but the aspiration must definitely exist.
There are various ways to pay tributes: put up posters, print T shirts, open websites, build a shrine whatever but to use film and more importantly, precious money which could go to someone else who has a story to tell, a new original, unfamiliar story that will make us sit up and understand something new about our world; then that is truly unfair. Anurag will vouch for this there are many people waiting quietly in queue for this people to get out of the way.
So don’t blow your chance on a shoddy remake masquerading as a homage.
Any screenwriter who has tried to pitch a slightly different kind of story in our industry has been asked to provide pedigree. What do i mean by this? Before he or she is asked to pitch the plot they are invariably asked to list the the number of films it resembles (e.g. ” Sir its Godfather meets Umrao Jaan!”" Sir its Pyaasa meets Old Boy!” ” Sir the first half is like Parinda thesecond half is like Notting Huill and the songs will be shot like Tarkovsky, i promise you….”)
If you are unable to provide a pedigree and if you tell them you actually thought of the script yourself then you are immediately a pariah.
They won’t say ‘no’ directly but will ask you to get stars to agree first, assuming secretly that there is little chance of that happening. All the big banners proclaim they are making ‘hatke’ films(Yashraj regularly touts ‘Kabul Express’ to gain this kind of cheap street cred) so no one will actually admit that all they are doing is upgrading their formulas, spending obscene amounts on ’styling’ the film and ossasionally taking pity to distribute a small-budget harmless film while they prepare their next monstrosity. Then that struggling film amker feels grateful for life and will sell his soul to Yashraj, secretly hoping to break away and making radical films in the future.
There can be no rules to paying tribute but we can always learn from films that have done it well. Someone just mentioned Murali Nair’s ‘Marana Simhasanam’(Throne of Death)which is just an astounding film. Its under 60 minutes and just fantastic one of the greatest Indian films in the last ten years. It won the Camera D’or at Cannes in 1999 i think but no one knows this because they are busy following red carpet photo-ops. That, by the way, was the last Indian film to win a prize as part of the OFFICIAL SELECTION OF THE CANNES FILM FESTIVAL. Murali Nair has been there after but no other feature length film has been part of the OFFICIAL SELECTION, this is so crucial to remember because our media never talks about this. Aishwariya walks the red carpet because L’Oreal(along with Volkswagen and Kodak) is one of the biggest officail sponsors. That’s how she got on the jury some years back as well. She’s undetr contract to preen on the red carpet. All these big films starting from Devdas onward were part of unofficial, informal market screenings.
and yet no one talks about this! I can make a movie on my cellphone and if i have enough money i can ‘take it to Cannes’ and ’showcase’ it and no one will care. This is what happens to most of our films. Even this year, ‘The Cinema of the World’ section which is showing 7fims rom India is NOT part of the OFFICIAL SELECTION! Close to 4000 films are screened in tents and buildings, ostensibly as market screenings.
But coming back to Murali Nair’s ‘Marana Simhasanam’: it blends the best elements of Kafka(’the Hunger Artist’ and ‘In the Penal Colony’) and the Theatre of the Absurd but creates an unforgettable narrative rooted in the socio-political circumstances of turn-of-the-century Kerala. Its a surreal film (and the ghost of Bunuel sits beautifully on it) but its resonant and relevant because it could so easily happen in our ocuntry
oz! KHAMOSH KHAMOSH all the way! having read so much about it, i am finally getting to watch it this sat at a screening
looking forward to write about it..
CANNES 2007: OFFICIAL SELECTION
OPENER
“My Blueberry Nights,” Hong Kong-France-China, Wong Kar Wai
CLOSER
“The Age of Darkness,” Canada, Denys Arcand
IN COMPETITION
“4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days,” Romania, Cristian Mungiu
“Alexandra,” Russia, Alexander Sokurov
“Auf der anderen Seite des Lebens,” Germany-Turkey, Fatih Akin
“The Banishment,” Russia-Belgium, Andrey Zvyagintsev
“Breath,” South Korea, Kim Ki-duk
“Les Chansons d’amour,” France, Christophe Honore
“Death Proof,” U.S., Quentin Tarantino
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly,” France, Julian Schnabel
“Import/Export,” Austria, Ulrich Seidl
“The Man From London,” Germany-France-U.K.-Hungary, Bela Tarr
“Mogari No Mor,” Japan, Naomi Kawase
“No Country For Old Men,” U.S., The Coen Brothers
“Paranoid Park,” France-U.S., Gus Van Sant
“Persepolis,” [Animated], France-U.S., Marjane Satrapi & Vincent Paronnaud
“Promise Me This,” France-Serbia, Emir Kusturica
“Secret Sunshine,” South Korea, Lee Chang-dong
“Silent Light,” Mexico-France-Netherlands, Carlos Reygadas
“Tehilim,” France, Raphael Nadjari
“Une Vieille Maitresse,” France, Catherine Breillat
“We Own the Night,” U.S., James Gray
“Zodiac,” U.S., David Fincher
OUT OF COMPETITION
GALA SCREENINGS
“A Mighty Heart,” U.K., Michael Winterbottom
“Ocean’s Thirteen,” U.S., Steven Soderbergh
“Sicko,” U.S., Michael Moore
MIDNIGHT SCREENINGS
“Boarding Gate,” France, Olivier Assayas
“Go Go Tales,” U.S., Abel Ferrara
“U2 3D,” U.S., Catherine Owens and Mark Pellington
UN CERTAIN REGARD
“Am ende kommen touristen,” Germany, Robert Thalheim
“L’Avocat de la terreur,” France, Barbet Schroeder
“El Bano del papa,” Uruguay, Enrique Fernandez and Cesar Charlone
“Bikur Hatizmoret,” Israel, Eran Kolirin
“California Dreamin’,” Romania, Cristian Nemescu
“Calle Santa Fe,” Chile, Carmen Castillo
“Et toi, t’es sur qui?,” France, Lola Doillon
“Kuaile Gongchang,” Thailand, Ekachai Uekrongtham
“Magnus,” Estonia-U.K., Kadri Kousaar
“Mang Shan,” China, Li Yang
“Mio fratello e figlio unico,” Italy, Daniele Luchetti
“Mister Lonely,” U.S., Harmony Korine
“Munyurangabo,” U.S., Lee Isaac Chung
“Night Train,” China, Diao Yi’nan
“Les Pieuvres,” France, Celine Sciamma
“Le Reve de la nuit d’avant,” France, Valeria Bruni-Tedeschi
“La Soledad,” Spain, Jaime Rosales
SPECIAL SCREENINGS
“11th Hour,” U.S., Leila Conners Petersen and Nadia Conners
“He Fengming,” China, Wang Bing
“Retour en Normandie,” France, Nicolas Philibert
“The War,” U.S., Ken Burns
60th ANNIVERSARY TRIBUTES
“Boxes,” France, Jane Birkin
“One Hundred Nails,” Italy, Ermanno Olmi
“Roman de gare,” France, Claude Lelouch
“Ulzhan,” Germany, Volker Schlondorff
CANNES CLASSICS
K.A:
A suggestion if you like. Rather than to post long list of films, it will be more feasible to paste the link from where you have picked up the films. In this case perhaps official website of Cannes. Your post will attract many comments and this long list will produce some hurdle in scrolling down.
Thanks
Its always unfortunate to be prophetic but this morning’s HINDUSTAN TIMES has published an article commissioned from THE GUARDIAN titled “GRINDHOUSE TO BE SPLIT INTO TWO?” Due to its poor box-office run, Harvey Weinstein the producer now plans to separate, elongate and re-release Tarantino’s DEATH PROOF and Robert Rodriguez’s PLANET TERROR.
There was major confusion at the Cannes press conference because actors had little clue of what was going on. Many claimed to have little idea of the new version, some had no idea of the festival version and Weinstein had to abruptly step in to curb the collective derision of the international press.
The Grindhouse double bill planned by Tarantino and Rodriguez was initially meant to recapture a lost era in American movie history. It was a three and a half hour extravaganza, complete with fake trailers for other imaginary Grindhouse films. Now because it didn’t work, its being led to the slaughterhouse to be sliced at diced at the producer’s whim.
This is what Harvey Weinstein said in defence:
“What you see when you see the new Planet Terror and Death Proof is Robert Rodriguez making a pure Robert Rodriguez movie and Quentin Tarantino making a pure Quentin Tarantino movie. What they did in cutting those films down for Grindhouse was a MISTAKE. It removed the very essence of those two films.”
Let us hope our beloved QT doesn’t take this betrayal of his and Rodriguez’s original vision by his own producer quietly. He certainly possesses the clout to throw a tantrum or disown the new two hour version being planned by Weinstein for re-release in September. That film is now a piece of meat which is ironic given its title.
@vijay,
calling HKA noir might be stretching it a bit. but i dont mean ‘classic noir’. it doesn’t have most of the noir traits. but it certainly is not a love story set with a political activism backdrop.
but putting HKA here was more of a query, what can u list in the indian context which can be classified as ‘neo noir’ (dark social/political… commentaries)
agreed Maranasimhasanam is a dark satire. again going back to the previous reason i gave u. ‘neo noir’ definitions are somewhat blurry.
I’m not saying either of these are in any way ‘classic noir’ but it certainly does have enough ‘darkness’ in them to push into the other bracket, Maranasimhasanam more than HKA
a case of something more in the classic noir shtyle of things, eventhough i havent seen it, is Ek chalis…. at least by the sound of it.
U-turn was based on john Ridley’s novel , i m forgetting the name
another version of “postman..” is Ju Dou..
and the john ridley’s novel is “stray dogs”
Is ‘Waisa Bhi Hota Hein Part II’ noirish? I loved the film.
guys my knowledge of noir or anything similar(neo, classical etc.)especially the defination etc. is limited to this post and wikipedia…
do ‘Teesri Manzil’ and probably ‘Jewel Theif’ come under this? also to lesser extent ‘Johny Mera Naam’
especially the non-romantic stuff from them…
and also the T.V. series Tehqiqaat…?
another thing guys, why did u take Kaun off the list? coz 4m the looks of it i do think that it would probably be under that genre… just some explaination needed for us lesser mortals…
Waisa Bhi Hota Hai Part 2 was total pulp! It was awesome! Wouldn’t call it noir.
Last night I saw HOLLYWOODLAND. It is shot in Noir style. I have a problem with all these new Noir Homages. Noir originally was about crime & things happened very fast in the film. The look(Low Key Lighting) was the main feature of such films.
Nowadays every film that tries to be Noir is spinning it in a completely opposite direction. Everything is slow. Characters speak slowly. Ok they are trying to stylize it & give something new to noir. But they are doing a very bad job of it. I saw 10 minutes of that Black Dahlia & last night fell asleep atleast 10 times during HollywoodLand. The writing is so horrible. I dunno man this whole slow noir style has not been working for me man.
BRICK is the only movie in last year that I can say got it right. It is more like teen noir(if there is such a genre). There are girls with questionable morals. Bad guys. Murder of the girl. Everything happens fast. It has a very surreal feel to it also.
LA Confidential must be the last great NOIR film.
mAINAK
Last movie watched – HOLLYWOODLAND (3/10)
Album in my car – LCD SOUNDSYSTEM (8/10)
Book – CALIBRE by KEN BRUEN
Kamal Hasan’s shite Aalavandhan or Abhay :-?
ka, do u have any idea where I can get ‘Marana Simhasanam’.
By the way, have any of you seen Saurabh Shukla’s Snip? It sounds like a Noir, no?
You mean the film by Sunhil Sippy?
It was a fun film. Makrand & his eggs.
Sophiya is as usual being the sexiest ever.
Sunhil needs to make more films. He is much better than his cousin Rohan.
Watch a telugu movie called ” A Film By Arvind”, false under Noir…i guess
yup, that one, Mainak.
john ridley’s book is “stray dogs”
I loved Snip! probably if i see it now, i might not like it that much, as i guess it was those days. i recently saw bombay boys and didnt like it much except for the ultracool MASTANA.
Last movie watched : Vertigo(7.5/10 – jeez! i havent seen any film for 4 days now!!)
Last book: Tropic of Cancer(still reading)
Music: hooked currently to Jhoom barabar jhoom, awaarapan, fool n final(ya ya ya)
Tushar
Tropic of Cancer is one of the best books ever written. Read it years & years back.
Vertigo is one of my least liked Hitchcock films.
Yeah I loved SNIP & Bombay Boys. I bet i would still love Bombay Boys. It has a special place in Indian Indie film scene. It showed a lot of people what is possible.
“All I want is to make a bad philum…. Am I asking too much?”
“What you need to direct? A loudspeaker…A Loudspeaker, Thats all!”
Last Film Watched – HolywoodLand(3/10)
Would 88 Antop Hill be considered noir?
You know, when I first saw the posters for “36 China Town”, the design, the b&w and of course Akshaye Khanna’s detective look, I was excited by the prospects of Abbas-Mustan going full out noir… lets not even talk about what it actually turned out to be…
Mainak, yup, Miller is simply magic, gives depression a new dimension, much unlike some of the contemporary writers. I have also read crazy cock and quiet days in clichy by him, all of his remaining works would be on my wishlist till i gulp em all, rosy crusifixion et al.
may be vertigo was a bad choice for me to start hitchcock, need to see secret window, birds, psycho and rebecca now.
those bombay boys comments remind me of bollywood calling, NK’s best to date, IMO.
last film watched:the squid and the whale
One of the noir masters that hasn’t yet been mentioned – Kurosawa. He was influenced by noir and American fiction in some of his films. High and Low (Heaven and Hell) was just one of the few noir inspired films he made, based on an Ed McBain pulp fiction novel…
KA, I love the conversation that this post inspired! But, after using so many quotes and citations, you quote the great line, “The past is another country, they do things differently there” from L.P. Hartley’s good story The Go-Between – later turned into an awesome movie starring Julie Christie. In a post about great movies and books, you can’t overlook citing this…
Last film watched: The Curse of Lizzie Borden (do NOT watch this at home (if you can even find it), I only did because I have friends associated with the film)
Reading: The latest issue of Granta
Listening to: Kirsty MacColl
@ K.A.
since I have very wag idea
few more desi noir(ish) flicks that made an impression…
- samay (loved it – not sure why it never clicked..)
- CID, Jaal, Kaala Bazaar (and most of the old Dev saab, Guru Dutt mysteries)
- raakh, baazi
- haadsaa
- aakarshan
- ittefaq (rajesh khanna)
- hulchul (mahesh jaitley walah)
- gumnaam
{
and for hamara nanhasa munnasa chottasa maniak… oops, mainak -
tome: vivekananda, a biography (nikhilananda)
sound: jotheyali jothejotheyali iruvenu heege endu (geetha/kannada)
scene: spider-man 3 (yaaaawn!)
}