I heard something today that really opened my eyes and made me wonder about film appreciation and film criticism. In my Film And Special Effects course, professor Ferraro stated that when he taught a film history class, all of the students would repeatedly ask in droning voices, "Is this gonna be in black and white again?" This issue has puzzled me for quite some time. What is it about many contemporary audiences that makes them believe that just because a film is in black and white, or just because a film was made in the earlier days of cinema that that ultimately means that the film represents everything that is old, slow-paced, dry, corny, and unentertaining? Professor Ferraro's disgust and response to this behavior was what really made me want to get past my fears (yes, I too realize that I can have these beliefs from time to time) and watch any film for what it is actually worth. Ferraro said that when he watches a film, he tries to not only engage himself and be entertained by the story line, but he also tries to learn something. Every film, no matter when it was made, reflects the cultural aspects of a particular time and place. Ferraro stated, "I like to see why a film was set up a particular way, what particular styles, designs, and objects were common at those times, and overall, I wonder why this information was chosen by the filmmakers to be portrayed in the form of motion pictures." Ferraro went on to state in regards to the acting of older films, "Those actors aren't acting for you! They're acting for their own time. And anyone that cannot attempt to see a film for it's worth in regards to the time period it was produced, then they just don't get it." Ferraro's statement made me immediately think of Double Indemnity, a gem of not only early American cinema but also of films as a whole.
I really enjoyed Double Indemnity. Like I was taken aback by how good the movie actually was. Here was a film that was made in the early 1940's, black and white, relatively slower-paced, and yet it intrigues and engages contemporary audiences, making them feel as though they aren't watching a film that is over 60 years old. The movie to me just seemed perfect. I'm not one to not seek out the flaws of a particular picture, and I honestly couldn't find anything wrong with Double Indemnity. Everything from the engaging story line, to the entertaining and memorable performances, to the interesting techniques that the filmmakers used to give it that classic film noir look, made Double Indemnity a treat to experience. It is so infrequent that an older film comes along and makes me think to myself, "Wow. If this movie came out today, it would be just as entertaining, engaging, and well made as any of the best films of the year." Very few movies, in my opinion break away and refuse to be restricted by their times and become motion picture classics, but Double Indemnity is without a doubt one of these cases.
The film's story line is what really intrigued me. Right from the start, when Walter Neff is first shown driving hysterically down the street and then shown getting out, revealing that he is injured, I felt like I was seeing something groundbreaking for its time. The way that the film immediately plunges us into the story and forces us to know bits of information before the real story begins was very successful. I couldn't help but think that many of the non-linear story lines of contemporary cinema had to have been influenced by movies such as this. Although I stated above that the film was relatively slower-paced in terms of external action, I really don't think there was a dull moment of the movie. This was to me a perfect example of a movie without any "fat" on it. Every scene and every line of dialogue contributed to and built up the film's suspense. After watching the film I couldn't help but think that the story was simply a great idea. Walter Neff (whom I now consider to be one of the most interesting heroes I've ever seen in a movie) drove the internal and external action of the plot. The actor's voice, which reminded me so much of the Humphrey Bogart-like characters of these types of films, was, for lack of a better word, perfect. His dark and gritty, yet suave and clever tone made me honestly want that man's voice. I'm sorry but I couldn't get the way he continued to say "baby" out of my head. It was both hilarious and interesting at the same time. I've never heard of Fred MacMurray before watching this and it really made me want to see more films of his. It's things like that that really make me realize how much I truly loved Double Indemnity. I never watch older films and am like, "Man I really want to see what else that actor has done."
In regards to the look of the film, the word "perfect" keeps coming to mind. Double Indemnity was so good that the black and white film seemed like it was strictly a stylistic choice rather than a necessity. The lighting of the film was worth noting as well. Talk about strong parallels to German Expressionist films such as Caligari and Nosferatu. The areas of light and shadow seemed to not only make individual frames interesting but also created an overall mood of the film, something that seemed to fit just right. Nearly every scene contained the shadows of blinds, as they projected thick black lines across the bodies of the characters. This, as stated in the reading, perfectly symbolized the ultimate fate of the main protagonist. A group of scenes that stand out to me are the scenes in the grocery store. I loved the repeated use of the same location. To me, it not only made the audience connect to the environment and realize what the nature of the particular scene was before it played out, but it also contributed to the very surreal world that the filmmakers created. There was something weird going on with the universal-ness of the store and yet the strangeness of both the mise en scene and the composition of the camera angles.
I watched a behind the scenes feature of Christopher Nolan's film Memento where the director made a point of addressing Double Indemnity. After seeing Double Indemnity I couldn't help but see the connections between the films in both style and content. Both films had similarly flawed protagonists and were relatively the same in their stories and outcomes. Nolan stated that he went for a similar look for his film as that of Double Indemnity. Nolan particularly addressed the fact that Double Indemnity focused on and built up that look of an everyday setting. There was nothing about it that made it seem restricted to a particular time or place. While watching the movie, you feel as though this could happen anywhere and at any time.
To me, Double Indemnity was a treat to watch. It wasn't just something that I was greatly entertained by. I also greatly appreciated the picture. In many ways it impacted and inspired me, teaching me how truly "perfect" a film can be in both style and story line. I can honestly say the Double Indemnity is one of my favorite films that I've watched since coming to school. I am genuinely thankful for being given the opportunity to see this classic.
Maybe this is where Quentin Tarantino was influenced. Starting with the end and then jumping back to the beginning to provide the story.
ReplyDeleteI think this is definitely the type of film that Tarantino has latched onto. In many of his films, there is the suave conversations, the immoral plot and the ending coming before the beginning.
ReplyDeleteVan Damn, I know what you mean about black and white films. Many people in our generation practically refuse to watch them because they are conceived as "boring and old". I am also trying to get myself over that because even just in our film class, I've really adored black and white films such as Stagecoach and My Man Godfrey.
I'm glad you liked it!
ReplyDeleteAnd yeah, it really is rather perfect. It's one of those movies that does so much with lighting, angles, etc than the storyline, that it's easy to see the cinematic craft _and_ be caught up in the story at the same time.
I think that getting past the alienation of watching old black and white movies might have to do with watching something more than once. I can't study movies the first time I see them, and there's a ton I don't notice, because I watch like a normal person instead of a professor, and let myself get caught up in the story.
But there's also just a certain prettiness to the old classic Hollywood movies that I like--the stylish clothes and over-the-top interiors. Everything is just a little larger than life, in silhouette.