The Mystery, Crime, and Thriller Group discussion

I am a big fan of Winter's Bone, & its author Daniel Woodrell, the film introduces us to Jennifer Lawrence in her first role and I spent a few months reading everything he wrote.
(Actually not her first role, just the first one people took notice of .)

I'm going to read this one. You should have nominated it for the winter-themed read.

Sometimes I am not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Stephen wrote: "Sometimes I am not the sharpest tool in the shed."

Next year!

Nancy wrote: "Thanks, Feliks! Missed your post earlier."

You're very welcome, a pleasure.

p.s. brief comment on 'Nightmare Alley'. Tyrone Power bought the rights to the book personally because he was trying to break out of his matinee-idol image. He saw the real power in the weird narrative, and wanted to use it as a vehicle to show he could genuinely act. And he did a great job.

Thus it is one of the very rare, very few noir movies which benefited from a big budget and an all-star cast. Of course the plot is not a precise noir --point for point with most of its peers--but it does certainly show a dark and seamy underbelly of American culture.

The movie pulls only one punch: giving a faintly hopeful upturn to the final scene, not as completely black as the ending painted by the author. It just goes to show how much guts it took to do true noir. Financially the pic was only a moderate success; not a wild success by any stretch.

Can you imagine a movie culture where a flick like this is considered a 'dog'? Today, it is one of the few films in American film history which seems to garner universal acclaim.

Feliks wrote: "Nancy wrote: "Thanks, Feliks! Missed your post earlier."

You're very welcome, a pleasure.

p.s. brief comment on 'Nightmare Alley'. Tyrone Power bought the rights to the book personally because he..."

No. Absolutely not. I saw this movie after I read the novel and was blown away. If you haven't read the book, I would urge you to do so ASAP.

(confused) May I ask what are you saying 'absolutely not' to? The fact that it was a lower-tier film for its release year? I could only *yearn* to be a moviegoer in a year like that. I assume you were assenting to this.. :D

I first saw it years ago and loved it. I didn't know there was a book until this thread. I haven't found it yet.

Feliks wrote: "What are you saying 'absolutely not' to? The fact that it was a lower-tier film for its release year? I could only *yearn* to be a moviegoer in a year like that. I assume you were assenting to this..."

I'm saying I can't imagine someone thinking it was a dog.

Jan C wrote: "I first saw it years ago and loved it. I didn't know there was a book until this thread. I haven't found it yet."

I have an original hardcover edition, but NYRB has also published this book.

Nancy wrote: "Jan C wrote: "I first saw it years ago and loved it. I didn't know there was a book until this thread. I haven't found it yet."

I have an original hardcover edition, but NYRB has also published ..."

I didn't realize that it was on kindle.

I may nominate it. It probably won't win, but I'm going to throw it out there. This book is too good to go by the wayside.

For those of you who, like myself, are avid noir fans, I have posted a new thread under "buddy reads" for a noir read of the month. We'll start with Nightfall by David Goodis for January, and afterwards, someone can recommend a new book each month. I hope you'll want to read along -- there's so much to discover in this gem of a genre.

Nancy wrote: "Reva wrote: "I think you two scared everyone away."

As my husband always tells me: I'm small but I'm a feisty little broad. I need to apologize -- I don't normally get that out of control. But aargh"

It's easy to get hung up about what Noir is or isn't. I've read a number of heated discussions on-line & had a few with friends. I don't think it's a genera that should be frozen in time.
There's a trend now with the likes of movies like 'Sin City' (1 & 2), referring to them as Neo-Noir. I don't have a problem with this type of 'elastic classification' of a much beloved genera of crime writing.

To paraphrase a famous court ruling "I know noir when I see it." Or read it in this case.

Paul wrote: "It's easy to get hung up about what Noir is or isn't. I've read a number of heated discussions on-line & had a few with friends. I don't think it's a genera that should be frozen in time.
There's a trend now with the likes of movies like 'Sin City' (1 & 2), referring to them as Neo-Noir. I don't have a problem with this type of 'elastic classification' of a much beloved genera of crime writing. ..."

The debate is a healthy one. There's a lot of those kind of debates because there's a lot of works which are falsely masqueraded as noir. Why does it matter? Because labels are valuable. The reason for mis-tagging something as noir helps marketing and revenue. Plain and simple. 'Noir' is a marketing label which helps sales.

So I think there's good, two-fold reason to have a root-level understanding of what noir is--rather than just going on one's surficial reaction/impression.

First, its being properly respectful to our cultural history to not simply regard everything as something just for one's daily consumption. There's a vast industry which runs on the 'recycling' of our past but its an ethic-less and indiscriminate one. We ought not necessarily go along with it. This industry is often stealing credit from authors or innovators and giving it to someone else. The entertainment industry routinely steals and re-packages artist's works without giving them proper credit.

Nor does this business give any fairness to us (the audience). We are not treated equitably when advertisers play upon our cultural ignorance. They make hay by telling us something is an 'homage' (when it is really just thievery); they gain unfair advantage when they can gull us into believing a new movie is 'based on' (something it is not); or 'done in the style of' (something it isn't). Books and movies galore are continually hyped in this slimy manner, we are told a new release is a 'new classic' or 'worthy of Hammett'..its up to audiences to be as best-informed as we can to avoid being duped.

Feliks wrote: "Paul wrote: "It's easy to get hung up about what Noir is or isn't. I've read a number of heated discussions on-line & had a few with friends. I don't think it's a genera that should be frozen in ti..."

Frankly, people, I don't want to come off as rude, but I don't want to go here again. We can agree to disagree. No heated arguments, please - let's focus on the works themselves.

Feliks wrote: "Paul wrote: "It's easy to get hung up about what Noir is or isn't. I've read a number of heated discussions on-line & had a few with friends. I don't think it's a genera that should be frozen in ti..."

Oh sorry. This threads about 'marketing' then. Count me out. Cheers.

Paul wrote: "Feliks wrote: "Paul wrote: "It's easy to get hung up about what Noir is or isn't. I've read a number of heated discussions on-line & had a few with friends. I don't think it's a genera that should ..."

Jeez, Feliks. It's one thing to have an opinion, but I don't see why you have to be so negative.

You are really coming across as a know-it-all, and frankly, that just gets old.

Paul wrote: "Oh sorry. This threads about 'marketing' then. Count me out. Cheers...."

The thread is mostly about books recs, from what I see. Whats the matter with making an occasional, broader observation?

Paul wrote: "It's easy to get hung up about what Noir is or isn't. I've read a number of heated discussions on-line & had a few with friends. I don't think it's a general..."

Paul, in this case you raised up a spectre we had put to rest. I was keeping mum!

Nancy wrote: "Jeez, Feliks. It's one thing to have an opinion, but I don't see why you have to be so negative. ..."

I'm sorry! I'm actually a cheerful individual. I just abhor injustice and unfairness. Its my training (& my career) to dissect and analyze; to weed out scams & cheaters, and clear up confusions.

I'm not always calling out negatives around Goodreads. I think I've just been caught out here randomly, offering some unpalatable truths. But did you read my review of Hammett's 'Red Harvest'? Brimming over with praise, there. When I'm positive, I'm as positive as an Easter Parade. Most of my GR books reviews are gushing.

But, Feliks, it is so rare that anyone here ever sees you being positive.

Feliks wrote: "Paul wrote: "Oh sorry. This threads about 'marketing' then. Count me out. Cheers...."

The thread is mostly about books recs, from what I see. Whats the matter with making an occasional observation..."

It isn't about your positive reviews. It's about other people and showing respect. My idea of a discussion thread is that everyone should have a space where respectful dialogue can go on. When the dialogue becomes diatribe, it is no longer a shared learning experience and it's no longer fun.

I just don't see how offering my opinion--to contrast with Paul's--showed disrespect to him. I simply expanded on what he started out to say. Added on to it. I treated the topic at the broadest scale possible, not singling out any individual. I was polite.

If I happen to have two large paragraphs to contribute to his one..I dont know why that makes me an enemy of polite discourse..I'm a writer--and I provided some food-for-thought. Is a thread at its best when its simply "here's a title I liked...here's another title I liked.."? Are we so afraid to speak these days? Should I take some Percosets before logging in to Goodreads?

Feliks wrote: "I just don't see how offering an opinion to contrast with someone else's opinion (as I did with Paul) showed any disrespect to him. I simply expanded on what he started out to say. Added on to it. ..."


I'm not going to go there. I've said what I needed to say.

Tell ya what. Sincere offer of goodwill here. I will make restitution! I can pick out some title from my bookshelf which is noir-ish, come back in thirty minutes with a gushy, upbeat, giddy review. Is that what is needed to get the zip back in this thread? I've never done this before, but I certainly can do so. I've got a lot of fave detective books in my shelves, I just didn't realize that I was raining on people's parades as I apparently am. I can write 'exuberantly' on command..just say the word..

Again. Not going there.

Okay but I am taking note--I am a 'Debbie Downer' and so, I will try to write more upbeat-ly. Point taken. Can do. Wait and see how cheery I can be. May be I can bring up some real obscure names and really turn some folks on to some not-so-familiar titles. I got this.

How many sub genres are there to the "noir" classification? I've heard of tartan noir (Scotland), Nordic noir (Sandanavia), and narco noir (Mexico). Any others?

Carmen wrote: "How many sub genres are there to the "noir" classification? I've heard of tartan noir (Scotland), Nordic noir (Sandanavia), and narco noir (Mexico). Any others?"

I know there's "Irish noir."

Darker than dark, more than deserving of being labeled noir is Pop. 1280, by Jim Thompson.

All Chandler and Hammett... Gorki Park and the rest of the series are a special kind of Soviet noir. Mosley. Ellory, who's incendiary noir--technicolor black. The Berlin trilogy by Philip Kerr.

Well, I just finished a novel (The House of Wolfe: A Border Noir) that called itself "Border Noir," and had nothing to do with either the border or noir. It was more a revenge, frontier/family-justice sort of thriller rather than what I'd consider noir. I think people tend to stick that label on too many books these days.

Then again, a blurb by another author I'd never heard of likened the author of this book to Cormac McCarthy and Faulkner, which made me choke.

from Feliks (thanks -- I may do this myself!)

(weblink = https://www.canvas.net/browse/bsu/tcm...)

Inviting movie fans from around the world to join in a multimedia investigation and celebration of film noir!

Sign up now for this free, flexible online course from Ball State University, taught by film noir expert Richard Edwards. It includes a special video series, “The Case of Film Noir,” plus social sharing and other features that make the course fun and easy to enjoy on any computer or mobile device.

The course runs concurrently with the Turner Classic Movies "Summer of Darkness” programming event—airing 24 hours of films noir every Friday in June and July. This is the deepest catalog of film noir every presented by TCM (and perhaps any network), and provides an unprecedented opportunity for those interested in learning more to watch over 100 classic movies as they investigate “The Case of Film Noir.”

The course will deepen your understanding of the film noir phenomenon—from the earliest noir precursors to recent experiments in neo-noir—and enables you to share thoughts online and test your movie knowledge with a worldwide community of film noir students and fans.

Enrollment is open at Canvas Network, and you may join the course as late as July 19. You’ll have the opportunity to work through videos, podcasts and other interesting materials at your own pace. The course concludes with a live video conference with Richard Edwards and TCM on-air “Summer of Darkness” host Eddie Muller, and course participants who complete all assignments will earn a customized certificate of completion.

Becoming a noir expert has never been this much fun! Enroll today, or you’ll find yourself saying, “I did something wrong, once.”

I'm going to restart the monthly noir reads in September, with The Postman Always Rings Twice by James M. Cain. Be there.

Excellent choice Nancy I have always wanted to read that I look forward to September!

Awesome. I love that book... and the movie. Excited to join in on this later.

Justin wrote: "Awesome. I love that book... and the movie. Excited to join in on this later."

We'll start around September 15th. I haven't read it in eons so it will be like new to me. I love Cain. He is another one who outdarks dark.

I'm a huge fan of Jim Thompson - The Killer Inside Me, A Hell of a Woman, Pop.1280, The Grifters, The Getaway - all excellent noir novels.

Me too. I haven't read many of them but I loved Pop. 1280. One of the best books I've read.

I am a go. How did everyone like the Summer of Noir. My DVR is filled. Finished all my tests and even joined Twitter to experience the whole effect of the classroom experience, even to the flask of bourbon. Great way to spend the summer, but I have fallen behind in my TBR pile which is slowly turning into a monument to my infantile time management skills.

I didn't take the tests, going with the no certificate of completion option. Oh my god. I STILL haven't watched over half of the films, but my tbr pile has grown exponentially with all of the books of which several of the movies were taken from. I bought so many I haven't even gone through them yet; they're still sitting on the floor in a giant stack.

Glad you'll be joining us for The Postman Always Rings Twice.

I realize I'm late to the party, but the best definition of noir I've seen was from James Ellroy who is interviewed as part of bonus feature for a noir movie (sorry I forget which one, but it should be easy to find).

He gave an interesting take on noir by saying that Hitchcock's Psycho is the last noir movie (before it was revived in color with Point Blank and Chinatown) because if she hadn't missed the turn-off to the new highway, she would have brought the $10,000 to her boyfriend and he would have died so she'd get away with the theft. Instead, she drives into a horror movie and that was the last noir flick for a decade.

I just listened to Postman on audiobook and it holds up because it's so brilliant. I also listened to Double Indemnity, also brilliant.

Double Indemnity is a work of art. That ending -- oh my god. I'm sorry we have wait until September for The Postman Always Rings Twice, but I need to whittle down the TBR pile as much as possible over August.

Magnolias in Paradise is kind of a noir.

Just started The Killer Inside Me. Wow.

Tom wrote: "He gave an interesting take on noir ..."

I can't make much sense out of these paraphrased remarks unless you're just rattling them off in a bit of a jumble due to over-fast typing. Is the gist of his comment that all it takes is an unfortunate slip-up to provide a noir? Like the mugging in 'Killer's Kiss' and the concussion in 'Detour'? But since the 'mishap' in 'Psycho' didn't lead to a noir plot, that turned people away from interest in seeing more of them? Or, turned filmmakers away from making anymore for the rest of the 60s? Well it's one way to look at it, I guess. But its overlooking that a) the studio system ended and so b) the economic reason for (as well as the benefit of) making noir disappeared.

BTW, 'Carnival of Souls' and 'Manchurian Candidate' both came out in the 60s; neither of which are noir but both of which have that 'b&w doomed feeling' which noir audiences tend to seek out.

Feliks wrote: "Tom wrote: "He gave an interesting take on noir ..."

I can't make much sense out of these paraphrased remarks unless you're just rattling them off in a bit of a jumble due to over-fast typing. Is ..."

Carnival of Souls has that "doomed" feeling for a reason -- I recently watched it, and to me it's way more of a slow-burning horror film. I'm not sure about the correlation between noir film audiences and those who enjoy watching that sort of horror, but that might be an interesting project for someone.

And I'll add that I do love those old, bizarre B&W films like Carnival of Souls, and Hulu has 927 Criterion films available with many of those same sort of movies. Another great crime film that's very "doomed" laden: Peeping Tom (1960). If doomed is your thing, well, Peeping Tom is a doomfest and a half.

Richard wrote: "Magnolias in Paradise is kind of a noir.

"

I'll have to check that out. Thanks, Richard!