(oversized pb; 1999: nonfiction/essay
collection)
From the back cover
“In the wake of the remarkable
success of Film Noir Reader, this new collection further explores a
genre of limitless fascination—and one that continues to inspire and galvanize
the latest generation of film makers.
“Again heavily illustrated,
with close to 150 stills, Film Noir Reader 2 is organized much like the
earlier volume. It begins with more ‘More Seminal Essays,’ including a New
York Times attack on crime pictures, written more than half a century ago,
before the French had even given the genre a name; a look at its early
development by the noted French director Claude Chabrol; and an analysis, by
the American critic Stephen Farber, of how film noir reflects the
violence and ‘Bitch Goddess’ values of contemporary society.
“Part Two, ‘Case Studies,’
covered specific films, with Robert G. Porfirio comparing the 1946 and 1981
versions of The Postman Always Rings Twice, editor Alain Silver
exploring ‘Hitchcock’s Noir Landscape,’ Grant Tracey’s reading of ‘Samuel
Fuller’s Tabloid Cinema,’ and Francis m. Nevins tracing the transformation
of Cornell Woolrich’s fiction into such movie classics as Rear Window
and Phantom Lady.
“‘The Evolution of Noir,’
the book’s final section, focuses on the neo-noir of our own time: ‘Son of
Noir’ (Richard Jameson), and such timely subjects as ‘Noir Science’ (editor
James Ursini) and ‘Girl Power: Female Centered Neo-Noir’ (William
Covey). It also considers British film noir (Tony Williams) and the
cross-cultural movement of ‘Abstract Expressionism and Film Noir’ (Kent
Minturn). . .”
Review
This multiauthor essay
collection, like many anthologies, is hit-and-miss, depending on who’s writing
and what they’re writing about. The essays I didn’t enjoy were largely über-academic
and pedantic, as if written to impress (hoped for) peers rather than edutain/educate
laymen readers like myself (which is fine, if that was their intent; that said,
this is a volume largely intended for the public at large, not an purely academic
journal).
Also, some of the essayists seem perfectionist, almost snide in their
assessments/tones (e.g., Claude Chabrol, who’s made some good films, but has
his fair share of less-than-stellar works). Some readers may well disagree with
my reaction to those oh so lofty, high on intellectualistic language
writers, and that’s fine—I’m guess that’s why Silver and Ursini included such a
mix, to appeal to a wider audience. At any rate, the following essays stood out
in their overall, straightforward excellence, relative conciseness, lack of five-dollar words (when fifty-cent words would do the trick), and worthwhile observations:
“Three Faces of Noir” –
Tom Flinn (1972)
“Violence and the B**ch
Goddess” – Stephen Farber (1974)
“Whatever Happened to Film
Noir? The Postman Always Rings Twice (1946-1981)” – Robert G.
Porfirio (1981)
“Creativity and Evaluation:
Two Film Noirs of the Fifties” – Robin Wood
“Translate and Transform:
from Cornell Woolrich to Film Noir” – Francis M. Nevins
“Film Noir and Samuel
Fuller’s Tabloid Cinema: Red (Action), White (Exposition) and Blue (Romance)”
– Grant Tracey
“Son of Noir”
– Robert T. Jameson
“Writing the New Noir Film”
– Sharon Y. Cobb
“Girl Power: Female-Centered
Neo-Noir” – William Covey
“Noir 101” – Philip
Gaines
Ultimately, Film Noir
Reader 2 has enough interesting, generally worthwhile essays in it to make
it worth reading and buying, particularly if you’re not familiar with the genre
and looking to fix that—even its bordering-on-obscurantist works are an
educational, in the sense that it warns film noir neophytes the kinds of
[censored] they might have to deal with while wading through the murky shadows
of noir cinema.
