New titles from others and research in progress
June 16, 2012
July 3, 2012 10:47 AM EDTvery interesting-- will have to check this book out, thanks for highlighting it. Noir is such a slippery genre to define since it seemed to come into existence (or I should say, awareness of it as a "genre" came) mainly in retrospect! Always fascinated to read good discussions on "what is noir" which is a subject for both buff and newbie--and being inspired to rethink and watch old favorites again is always a good thing. Also very much looking forward to your Andrews bio! Glad I found your blog, will be checking it often, Thanks & best
July 3, 2012 10:56 AM EDTThanks Kristina. I think you'll find Luhr's book stimulating. His discussions of individual films are perceptive, but I especially like just what you said about noir: it was defined in retrospect. He deals with that issue quite well. And I'm happy to hear you want to read my Dana Andrews biography. It will be out soon. I try to post or respond to comments nearly every day on my blog, so I welcome return visitors. Also--please do not hesitate in your comments to introduce other topics that I or others might want to comment on.
July 8, 2012 10:53 PM EDTCarl, Do you believe that discussions of what is noir can sometimes go too far afield? As an example, the "Pottersville" sequence of "It's A Wonderful Life" has been referred to as noir. Do you see it as a genre or as a style that cuts across genres? Louis
July 9, 2012 6:28 AM EDTA genre or a style? I think the reason I can't just say one or the other is because film noir is a term applied by critics after the fact. To those first critics, film noir was a genre that occurred during a very specific moment in history. To later critics, film noir can also be a style that other kinds of films can adapt to their own purposes.