I First Assignment:

Both writers in "The Kidnapper Bell" and "City of Commerce" use the Los Angeles landscape in their stories to give a real sense of space to their readers.  In his story "The Kidnapper Bell," Jim Pascoe surrounds his story at the Los Angeles river. Similarly in "City of Commerce," Neal Pollack steers us through the city streets of Los Angeles referencing the 110, the 5, and the 101; he also references Chinatown, Echo Park and familiar Los Angeles streets such as Riverside Drive. Pollack also has a lot of detail that brings a sense of space, that if you weren't familiar with LA you might not catch, including Nick's Dodgers baseball cap, and the variety of people sitting at the poker "Korean ladies, old dudes who bore the perfume and hairstyle of late-era William S. Burroughs, a couple of Persian frat boys from UCLA and a pockmarked cholo..." perfectly engulfing the melting pot LA is known as. Though the "The Kidnapper Bell" does focus on a prime LA location, I feel "City of Commerce" is more detailed and really allows the reader to distinguish exactly where the story is taking place.  I think both writers do a good job on allowing the audience to picture LA.


Second Assignment:

In "The Gold Coast" section, I feel the story that would best classify as noir would be "The Girl Who Kissed Barnaby Jones" by Scott Phillips.  Tate would be the protagonist lusting after our Femme Fatale Cherie.  Cherie is the classic Femme Fatale, beautiful, seductive, all the guys want her, "we get guys all the time with crushes on her." (289)  She lures Tate in with sex and then reveals to him her dirty little secret and makes him do the clean-up. Good thing he is smart enough not to completely fall into her trap.  The story that I found most challenging to classify as noir would be "What You See" by Diana Wagman.  I felt Gabe was very odd and creepy in the way he kept fantasizing and talking to himself about Terrell.  I didn't really feel like this story would classify as noir at all except in the fact it had a guy and girl main character which sort of fits with noir fashion, however Terrell would not classify as the Femme Fatale type and Gabe, although he is smitten with Terrell, is no way seduced by her to commit a crime.  He actually sort of persuades her to their demise, though he is oblivious to the danger at first. 

Blog 7

If I had to select one of these two stories to recommend to a friend, I would definitely say "The Method."  I feel I can relate to these stories more than I did to Double Indemnity. I really liked the female narration in both stories, and the fact I live in Los Angeles, and these stories are more modern, I felt like they were real, like I was watching a news segment.  I really liked the intenseness of "The Method," I was very interested the entire story.  The female protagonist, Holly, was a badass! (sorry there is really no other word to describe her) She was cut-throat, and was not about to let some scum bag walk all over her!  I liked how she figured out she was being used by Richard, went and used him one last time, and them killed him.  She basically got revenge before anything really happened to her. I like the realness of the story line: a young girl struggling to make it in hollywood, waiting tables, renting a room with an old woma, tangled up with a bad guy. This is a story that frequents LA.  I felt there as never a dull moment in "The Method," so I would absolutely recommend that to a friend. 

As for "Morocco Junction," it was a little more difficult to follow and I got bored throughout.  I felt like the ending was just kind of thrown together, like maybe the wirter didn't quite know how to tell the audience why the Eloise committed suicide.  It felt very rushed and unrealistic that just by looking at a piece of jewelry Minerva would unravel the entire mystery. It felt sort of like a cheesy lifetime movie, but less appealing.  Basically, the only things I liked about this story is the fact there was a character named "Meghan" (lol) and that the author referenced Jamba Juice! I also thoght it was somewhat interesting that this is the first noir story I have read that has suicide vs. murder, and the woman who killed herself was really the only "bad guy," aside from the theives. That being said, I felt it was mostly dull and the most interesting part, the ending, felt like the author was late for a deadline.  I would most likely not recommend this story to a friend.

Blog 6

This article gave a great in depth insight into the differences and likeness of the two.  Where classic noir has a femme fatale, an ambiguous protagonist detective type male, crime and black and white setting, neo-noir is not so cookie-cutter.  Because it has been said before that noir is hard to define, neo-noir is no differentm they are difficult to pin point.  Neo-noir is typically graphic with the use of strong language and vulgarity to display emotion and characters' thoughts, where in a classic noir language is insinuative but never blatantly said, these thoughts and emotions are usually depicted by shadows and scenes, refelective of the inward character.  The femme fatale is not emphasized and usually gets away with whatever deviant crime she has conjured up.  The poor sap who is caught in her trap realizes he has been taken for a fool probably just as it's too late and is at the will of the femme fatale.  Neo-noir is violent and gruesome, which I am certain has a lot to do with society and how we are so desensitized to these sorts of things now.  Classic-Noir was considered outrageous for its time, where watching a Classic-Noir film now, it is so innocent and mild compared to a Neo-Noir or any other film of our time for that matter.  Classic-noir told by a voice over, and as a flash back feels as though you are listening to a story from the past, where as it seems most neo-noirs are told in a first person narrative and feel as though it is in real time. Neo-noir and classic-noir are similar in that they still revolve around a crime scene and they both address current social anxities.

Blog 5

In the freelance article "Notes on film: Double Indemnity" by Thomas Caldwell, he proposes the film "is regarded by many as the first true film noir...[and] is also one of the best." Caldwell does a great job breaking down elements of film noir, that would be easily understood by a first time reader who has no idea what film noir is about.  He touches on several qualities of film noir such as the femme fatale, the detective type leading male, the darkness and venetian blinds, and provides detailed examples on how Double Indemnity incorporates each. He also goes on to describe the background and history of film noir and how it came to be known in American film genre to"...reflect both the post World War II survival at all cost mentality plus the ruthless desire to overcome any obstacle by any means necessary."  Caldwell has a great way of explaining the relation of the film's characters and roles to the era of the film and what was taking place at that time in history, what with the war, and role reversal of women in power.  He states "The women in these films were tough, independent, intelligent and cunning. They used their sexuality to their advantage and often wielded considerable power over men. Although the femme fatales often met their doom at the end of these films (thus restoring perceived social order) they were powerful and empowered for the other 95% of the film."  This was very true to the times post World War II with the women having to do a lot of work in place of the men at war, when the men returned, they found women were no longer just a 'Susie home-maker' and no longer wanted to be treated as such.  Although I have become familiar with the elements of film noir, this article clarified some relations of the genre to the era and why it was so relevant and popular at the time.  It almost makes me wonder if men were not fans of this type of film in that time period. I wonder if the men thought that this type of film would encourage women to strive for power. Even though in the end, as stated by Caldwell, the women often got what they deserved, "thus restoring perceived social order," I feel as though men would be opposed to the films message portraying women as having the upper hand.  Or maybe, because in the end the femme fatales were defeated, the directors and writers did this intentionally as a way to discourage women; kind of portraying the message to them of "if you try to stay in power, bad things will happen." So many elements and qualities of film noir have deeper meaning than what is originally perceived, it really makes me think: what is the true moral of the story, what is the underlying message they really are trying to get across?

Blog 4 (Q.5, Q.1)

As the shadow of a man on crutches hobbles toward the camera, a suspenseful tune plays, introducing the emotion of the film.  The man on crutches represents more than just Mr. Walter Neff, he represents his struggle versus evil, with what is morally correct versus corrupt. Shadows play a huge role in the film, they are displayed in nearly every scene from beginning to end.  Some more noticeable than others, but watching the film closely, they are present primarily when depicting some sort of evilness or evil thought lurking within a character. I really appreciate the low-key lighting and use of shadowing in the film; when the malevolence of a character overpowers the good, the directors have darkness overpowering the light.  The use of shadows in Double Indemnity represents danger, evil, and moral corruption.  This was an appropriate opening scene because it foreshadows the man Mr. Neff becomes.  From the start of the film, you know there is darkness in him.  It is apparent in the first few minutes of the film where he is the shown only from the back, clothed in darkness, a view often given to deranged characters.  We do not actually see his face until he flips on the light in the office to record his confession, even then his face is covered in the shadow from his hat, suggesting the darkness within Mr. Neff in the first couple minutes of the film.  The opening scene later plays a greater significance to the story as we learn Mr. Neff is on crutches only to portray to onlookers that Mr. Diethrichson had indeed, boarded the train, all the while knowing he murdered the man not ten minutes prior.

The contrast between the ending of the film versus the novel is evident.  The film ends with a much more abrupt, straight to the point death for Phyllis, and a lingering bullet wound to the chest for Walter; which we know by his collapse at the end, does him in.  Whereas in the novel, the ending is more devious, a little more criminal minds type.  Keyes sends Phyllis and Walter away to be the jury in their own trial so to speak, and decide their own sentencing.  They either can chose a life of guilt, in fear and on the run, or death.  The film, they just die which is kind of predictable and boring, which are not qualities of film noir.  Because the novel ends leaving it's audience questioning their fate, it is a more appropriate ending for the genre of film noir.  It is mysterious, cruel and devious all at once, which definitely stereotypes film noir.  It keeps the heir of suspense even after we have finished reading.

Blog Entry Three: Double Indemnity

Though the story is very fast paced, I thoroughly enjoyed it.  I felt the beginning of the book was too unrealistic in that Mr. Huff fell in love with Phyllis so quickly and was so easily persuaded to murder a man.  The first half of the novel did not really catch my attention.  However, the second half was so very intriguing; I could not put the book down!  I was on pins and needles waiting to find out the twists and turns of what would happen next.

 I feel the ending of the novel was satisfying and appropriate.  As soon as Mr. Huff turned and saw Phyllis there, I started laughing.  The almost satirical, revengeful nature of Keyes!  He never let's anyone pull a fast one on him.  When he learns of what Huff has done, he offers him a proposition.  Huff takes it thinking he is basically getting a "get out of jail free" card.  Little does he know, he will wind up on ship with the one person who wants him dead.  It was a very ironic thing to do.  I liked the way the novel ended because now they really have a choice: they live with the guilt and shame, day in and day out of what they have done; allowing the agony of guilt eat away at them (Mr. Huff at least; Phyllis doesn't really seem to have a conscience); they live in constant fear one another will try to kill them; or they do themselves in.  It is a lose, lose, lose scenarios any way you slice it.

I think perhaps the screenwriters Raymond Chandler and Billy Wilder changed Cin’s ending for a few reasons. I feel they didn't want to portray to the audience that murder is something you can get away with scot free.  I also think, that they wanted to leave an heir of suspense in the end of what happened to Phyllis?  I admit, I watched the rest of the movie on Netflix, and I felt that ending was unsatisfying!  You can sort of guess what happens, Mr. Huff goes to trial and is found guilty, but it really is not a conclusion to the story.  They should have kept the ending of the film aligned with the novel.  The ending in the novel is at least interesting, whereas I found the ending in the film dull.  I really did not care for it at all.  I much preferred the ending in the novel over the ending in the film.

Entry 2: Double Indemnity

The novel Double Indemnity by James M. Cain, definitely fits the genre of film noir.  Almost all characteristics we covered in describing film noir in class, show up in the first eight chapters of the book.  From the main character Walter as the noir protagonist, the rural Los Angeles setting, to the hat emphasized in the murder scene.

Although I found the story extreme and unrealistic, in that the two, Walter and Phyllis, met once and the next time they were kissing and planning a murder, I see how it is a classic example of film noir. "I knew then what I had done.  I had killed a man.  I had killed  man to get a woman.  I had put myself in her power..." (Cain pg. 54)  This quote, to me, really is the identity of film noir.  A man struggling with his morals of what is right and what is wrong vs. what he wants over what he can not have.  Of course, other identifiers come into play in pinpointing this novel as film noir, though I feel that this line solely can classify Double Indemnity as such.

Walter Huff falls in love with Phyllis Nirdlinger, who is married to a man she wants dead.  Mrs. Nirdlinger plays the role of the femme fatale in this story. She is manipulative and desperate as she lures Mr. Huff in, and almost at once has him plotting and scheming to kill Mr. Nirdlinger for love and for love of money.  Though Mr. Huff seems to be a good guy, he is tired of being the good guy, and wants his slice of the pie.  He is really and truly the mastermind behind the whole thing.  He knows the ins and outs of the insurance business and just how to get them to pay.   As he puts it: "You think I'm nuts? All right, maybe I am.  But you spend fifteen years in the business I'm in, maybe you'll go nuts yourself... I know all their tricks, I lie awake at night thinking up tricks so I'll be ready for them when they come at me. And then one night I think up a trick, and get to thinking I could crook the wheel myself..." (Cain pg.24)   Mr. Huff fits perfectly in the description of the "passive hero who allows himself to be dragged across the line into the gray area between legal and criminal behavior." (Notes on film noir)

After the murder, guilt and paranoia start to sink in; Mr. Huff saying "...everything cracked.  I dived for the bathroom, I was sicker than I had ever been before.  It was a long time before I could turn out the light." (Cain pg.54) setting a primary mood of film noir.  The novel is absolutely intriguing, it is dark and seductive, and incredibly complex. Mr. Huff narrorating the story, really gives a feeling I am watching the crime take place.

What defines Film Noir

From the excerpt "A Bright and Guilty Place," I gather film noir focuses primarily on crime and passion.  Literally speaking, film noir translates to "black film," which, taking an educated guess, leads me to believe majority of these films are in black and white. Black and white films set the tone for an eery and suspenseful sort of plot, which I suspect are key ingredient in film noir.  Knowing very little thus far, when I imagine what film noir might focus on, The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald comes to mind.  Though this may be off entirely, being as how this story is set shortly after World War I, roughly 1922, I can see the relevance in the characteristics of Nick Carraway being that he is honest, and often a confidant for those in trouble, and Jay Gatsby, the protagonist of the story, who is willing to do whatever it takes, even murder, to achieve his ultimate goals: wealth and love.  Nick would be the "detective" so to speak, seeking truth and rescuing Daisy Buchanan, who has Gatsby's affection, whereas Gatsby would be the shady character who is suspicious and underhanded, overtaken by his need for power, wealth, admiration, and love from Daisy.  Film noir seems to have similar characters and story lines: a leading man of integrity, a villain who is usually obsessed with greed, lust, power, or something of the like, and leading lady who is somehow conflicted between the two.  As pieces fall together and new information comes to light, the climax of the story comes to a resolve as the entwined characters unravel the mystery and tragedies to ultimately reveal the truth.