MovieChat Forums > The Naked City (1948) Discussion > Film noir?

Film noir?

posted 16 years ago by hoffmanswaldau
6 replies | jump to latest

Recently, I watch many films in noir style - classical, neo-noir and cyberpunk. So I also became familiar with this one. But in my opinion, it has nothing to do with film noir. It's a simple thriller.
The film tries to be a documentary about NYC, too. It's a wonderful idea for a film noir, especially to establish a classical noir feeling. But instead of depicting the "dark side" of the city (rain, night, lonesome streets etc.), they show a vital city in summer, mostly by day. It's impossible to create light effects as in other classical films noirs. So, the ambiance is in contrary to the topic. There was no psychology behind the characters. The policemen were rather funny than pessimistic. The characters lived in perfect families and showed practically no emotions.
I don't know if I'm the only one who think this way. Maybe I didn't understand the film. Could you possibly explain?

reply

[–] JohnnyStaccato 16 years ago

I'd have to agree with you; far too often all black and white crime films from the 40s and 50s are regarded as "film noirs" in fact this film has also been sub-categorized as the seminal film in "docu-noir" style, but as you've said the square characters and mood don't fit the M.O. The excessive daylight of the movie is most likely a symptom of the filmmaker's inability to manipulate lighting while shooting on location (which has since been remedied)--moreover I think but I'm not sure that Dassin even uses the "day for night/nuit americaine" technique in the opening cityscape montage.

Similarly, Henry Hathaway's films and his signature style are also dubbed "docu-noir," like "Call Northside 777" or "Kiss of Death" which take place in "real" (as in "shot on location in") Chicago and New York, respectively. "Call Northside 777" is pretty much the same type of film as "The Naked City" while "Kiss of Death" is a much better example of "docu-noir," mostly because of its story and main character.

reply

[–] superstitions 16 years ago

You have to understand that film noir was not identified as a stylistic moment in American films until the the cycle was more than half way over. Even then the term film noir didn't make its way to Hollywood until the middle 60's. So the people who were making these films had no idea they were making a film noir. As far as they were concerned they were just making a melodrama or a crime thriller.

Lots of thrillers were made in many different styles. I too would agree that The Naked City doesn't meet all of the classical criteria identified as film noir, as the film makers were deliberately trying to make the film as realistic as possible. Having said that it is after all a film about a beautiful woman who is murdered and the underworld figures who are involved.

Interesting your comments on "docu-noir". Eddie Muller in his commentary on Crime Wave, reference the docu-noir films as "public service noir".

Doug

reply

[–] jic-1 16 years ago

the people who were making these films had no idea they were making a film noir. As far as they were concerned they were just making a melodrama or a crime thriller.

That's a point that most people just don't seem to understand. The time when people started to say 'I'm making a film noir' was effectively when that kind of moviemaking died. After that, they were all pastiche, parody, or tribute. I've always thought that those French film critics and academics did a disservice to the very movies they were celebrating; reducing them in most people's eyes to nothing but a collection of themes, character archetypes, and stylistic tics.

Movies I've Seen: http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=25003655

reply

[–] DC-Tiki 12 years ago

I would have to agree even though the title of the film sounds very pulp-y and noir-ish. But this film doesn't seem to play with light and shadow all that much and it's actually quite jovial in places rather than the usual down-pat sentiment or cynical humour one might usually find in a noir piece.

reply

[–] nycruise-1 11 years ago

Have to agree with everyone else on this film: NOT "film noir."

I edited a book on the subject and the components of "film noir" are not present: a sexy woman who is not to be trusted, a damsel in distress (who might also not be trustworthy), a slightly shady guy who falls for her, plot twists and turns that reek of betrayal, a supporting cast of both comic and unsavory characters, etc.

The lighting has little to do with it, albeit such lighting is what came to distinguish "film noir."

Back then, when they were making movies, productions were described as a "musical," a "western," a "weeper" (women's picture), or - a "murder mystery." But no one ever set out to make a "film noir" movie - which is why that term is French, because French film critics thought it up after the fact.

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

reply

[–] udippel 9 years ago

No. But you are right, too. It could have become a film noir pretty easily, the plot could deliver that type as well. At least on the side of the early suspects, there was a huge potential with all the hidden connections, various agenda.
Also the narration doesn't actually help with the film noir. Plus too much of comedy.
But true, film noir could have been a possible result.

reply