Blog #7

I have to say I LOVED reading "The Method" it was so good, and to be honest I hate reading. The Method I found to have a much more interesting storyline than Morocco Junction 90210. I would recommend The Method any day, the female narrative seemed to captivate me from the beginning. I found the female narrator easier to follow, perhaps it was cause I'm a girl and girls do it better LOL. Right away I thought finally a girl this is going to be good. I think I prefer to read a novel with a female narrator. Even though both stories had a female narrator I felt like I related better to Holly in The Method, she had a kick ass attitude. I liked how Holly didn't allow herself to be played for a fool and took matters into her own hands. From the beginning I knew the Holly had a don't mess with me attitude by the way she answered "Richard" in the restaurant. It might have been her personality or choice of words that helped me follow the story better than Morocco Junction 90210, but there was something about Morocco Junction that wasn't as captivating. I found myself questioning what I had just read, I still am a little confused with the beginning pages of the novel. I understood the ending but overall I wasn't very interested as I was reading, I actually couldn't wait to be done. The ending was good and I didn't see it coming but still I think The Method was much better.

As I started reading The Method I had feeling Richard was up to no good, I got a bad vibe from him. He was creepy and his description didn't help much either , the way he spoke alone was enough to make me roll my eyes. I didn't think Holly would give him the time of day unfortunately she did,and he played her for a little bit. Once she found out the truth about him she acted out at gave him hat he deserved. I was happy to read that I expected to act like a typical girl and stick by his side. I think the fact that he went with her gut instinct and decided to kill him was my favorite part. I think that is why I chose to recommend this novel over Morocco Junction 90210. I was happy to read that a female won over a male. I feel like most films or novels that involve a male playing a female end in the male succeeding.  This may sound weird or creepy but as Richard was dying and Holly was pretending to get him help I couldn't help but laugh and cheer her on, I was proud of her. I know I know twisted thing to say. Overall I enjoyed reading these two novels over last weeks but The Method by far is my favorite. Don't under estimate a short 5'2 small town girl, Holly was small but no one to be messed with.

Blog #6

So I found the article to be confusing and messy in a way, it jumped around a lot from film to film. I had a hard time keeping up with the article but overall I learned a few things about the differences between film noir and neo-noir. A few of the differences I noticed were regarding the femme fatale in classic noir her ending is normally tragic as she pays for her crime as for modern noir the femme fatale gets away with what ever crime she has committed, she actually is the victorious one in the end. I also noticed how the description of the femme fatale is not mentioned and as important as it is in classic noir, in neo noir the focus was more on why the female was known to be bad and dangerous versus her sexual description. Also the language is very different as far as the profanity, classic noir uses the lighting and shadowing to express the scenery to where neo -noir language and surroundings is what describes the ambiance.  Another major difference is the protagonist in film noir he realizes hes been manipulated and is trying to find an escape route to where in modern noir the protagonist is not so much a hero and he normally ends up getting screwed, sorry that's the best way I could describe it. Overall I noticed that classic noir has more of a realistic feel due to the first person narrative and description of the characters which I prefer because it helps visualize better, neo- noir is more distracting to me due to the language which I feel is the main way the scene and atmosphere is described. The story line for both is related to crime and desperation but neo- noir seems to have more going on as far the characters, there is more to the story then a bad guy and a good guy and a femme fatale manipulating the ambiguous protagonist.  I think reading a classic noir novel is easier to understand but watching a modern noir is more interesting due to graphics. The article had alot of useful information and it really gave me some new insight on the difference between the two noirs that I was not aware of. I feel like now I could tell the two apart more easily. I feel like the two are similar as far as tragedy , death and someone ends up taking the blame, but at the same time classic noir we know it will end and tragedy as the person narrating the story is already dead. Modern noir doesn't have a narrator and it is unknown as to where the story is going and who will end up dead. Like stated at the beginning the article was a bit confusing to me so I hope I have the differences correct, if anyone has anything to add to help me better understand please feel free to share info with me.

Blog #5 article review

In Cinema Autopsy Notes on film : Double Indemnity by Thomas Caldwell the author references how some thought film noir to be a stylistic genre and others a stylistic movement that defined 1930's and 40's America. Since it was a type of film that became fairly popular after the World War II, I could see where the confusion could come in, personally I think its a little of both  but mainly inspired by the war. Another thing I had no idea about is how the French film makers were the ones to come up with the term film noir well actually they referred to it as "black film",the name originating from the dim low key lighting. I really find it interesting how the name originated from the dark lighting, kind of a unique inspiration. Based on the article the dark set lighting was first seen in German films in the 1910's to early 1930's, seems like the more I read about film noir the further back we go in time. Also the one thing I noticed about all film noir articles is how they mention the importance of the femme fatale, I guess with out her the film wouldn't be what it is, there would be no murder scheme, no weak man to manipulate, basically no tragic ending. The article states how the femme fatale is responsible for the downfall of the hero for most of the film, this is also another point most people argue, is she really? or is the protagonist just making himself seem that way? maybe he always had an urge to kill and enjoys being told what to do and so happens to meet the right women at the right time and tries to blame the women for the downfall, I guess well never know that's the mystery of film noir.  Based on the article the femme fatale is the key element of film noir, and that Barbara Stanwyck's portroyal of Phyllis Dietrichsonn is considered one of the all time great femme fatales. The novel does provide a good description of phyllis so when I saw the film I saw exactly who I had imagined, Phyllis embodies all the characteristics from sexy to devious with an awesome shape. I found this article to be very interesting as it taught me a few things I didn't know regarding film noir. I also found myself agreeing with the points the author pointed out most of all how the femme fatale is the key element of film noir , I could see how back in the 40's this type of film must have been amusing to watch especially by women, being how women back then were not so outspoken and sat back in the shadows while the men made all the decisions. Like stated in the article it is not easy to define film noir but it it is easy to point out the characteristics, I'm still shocked I like it because its in black and white but I am glad I have been introduced to it.

Blog #4 zero draft questions for Double Indemnity

1. Discuss the contrasts between the endings of the novel and the film. Which ending seems more appropriate for film noir? Why?

The film and the novel have very different endings, personally I prefer the novel ending but as far as a film noir ending I think the movie fits better. The novel leaves you guessing what happened? Are they dead? Together? It's not very clear . They both end up in an unhappy state alone with each other on a boat headed to Mexico . We know there future is soon coming to an end but when and how and that I think is what doesn't really fit into film noir . It's a little to dramatic. The ending of  the novel was more about Phyllis trying to kill Walter and getting away with it, and the film is more about Phyllis and Walter planning a murder then Walter trying to make it all go away by getting rid of his accomplice Phyllis. In the film Phyllis shoots Walter in the shoulder then Walter kills Phyllis as she confesses her love for him  , he seems to not even be phased by her confession as he shoots. Walter then is left bleeding out as he confesses the truth seems like a much better noir ending. As we know Phyllis is dead and Walter is wounded and will be paying for what he has done. I like the fact that we aren't left guessing what happened and we know everyone got what they deserved.

6. Raymond Borde and Etienne Chaumeton in their work " Towards a definition of film noir" describe the qualities of film noir as " nightmarish, weird, , erotic, ambivalent, and cruel." Select one quality and discuss how it relates to the film version of Double Indemnity.

Weird .... There's was a lot of weirdness in the film and the novel actually , but the film I felt had more weirdness then the novel. The first thing I noticed was how Walter always lit Keyes cigar , normally you see men lighting cigars for women. Another weird moment was  Lola asking Walter for a ride , he's a complete stranger but yet she's sitting in his car like she's catching a ride from a friend. I think the ultimate weird scene would be how Lola decides to appear in Walters office and confess her suspicions about Phyllis, she basically breaks down and tells all to an Insurance agent she's met once. Not only that but it's not like he's a detective or anything and unbeknown to her he's the man who killed her father,Then to see them hanging out was odd too. I have to say through out the entire film I kept saying WHAT that's weird , like Sachetti for example dating Lola Phyllis bad mouthing him then all the sudden Lola gets dumped and Phyllis has herself a new lover. Overall I thought the film was full of weirdness, every scene got weirder and weirder. From the beginning  the mood was set an insurance agent in lust with a women wrapped in a towel soon to be his murder accomplice. It was just all to much but at the same time all the weirdness made it just that much more interesting.