Laura’s visual realization and quirky characters are as puzzling and mysterious as the plot itself. I’ll be honest, I’ve seen a handful of film noirs and they all seem to have certain things in common, but this was unlike anything I’ve seen before. Watching Laura is like watching The Third Man or Double Indemnity mixed with Bringing Up Baby, with all of its ridiculous and often confusing behavior coming from the enigmatic characters themselves.It was mentioned at the end of class that this film is about three men who are obsessed with a woman. However, the men seem to be more interested in the image of Laura rather than her actual self. Furthermore, the three main male characters come across at many times as if they have no sexual drive whatsoever (at least not in the masculine sense that we are used to), and rather than being sexually interested in Laura seem to almost flirt with each other. In the first scene of the film we are introduced to Waldo Lydecker. We first discover him, to our and Detective McPherson’s great surprise, lying naked in his bathtub writing his most recent column. Apparently feeling very comfortable with the situation, Waldo eventually gets out of the bathtub, dripping wet off camera, and asks McPherson if he can hand him his robe. While this action is puzzling in itself, it’s strange to see the detective’s reaction as he suspiciously looks downward at Lydecker, forming a slight grin on his face. Now, it was also mentioned that director Otto Preminger often incorporated controversial elements and subjects such as homosexuality into his films, and this series of actions seem to be directly acknowledging that sexual orientation.
Just as a quick note, Laura won the Academy Award for Best Cinematography (black and white) in 1944. This film has some of the most subtle camerawork I’ve seen. It’s lighting is genius, especially on Laura played by Gene Tierney who, when we finally see her for the first time is lit softly but with overall high illumination, making her appear to be the precious star that we’ve been waiting for and anticipating based on her portrait. The camera movements, as I said before, are subtle, it’s tracking very smooth and precise. This is of course contradicted however by various shots such as Waldo Lydecker’s introduction who Joseph LaShelle decided to reveal with a swish pan which comes across as unique and quirky as the character himself. This swish pan is used at the end of the film as well, when Waldo attempts to sneak into Laura’s home to murder her. By using this same camera movement a second time, we subconsciously connect his character with the two actions, an example of how camera angles and movement can establish characterization.
In his review, Nick Shager states that Laura is Preminger’s “critique of high society” and that Laura is “an affirmation of a traditional, hard-working, middle-American lifestyle.” But as it was proposed in class, while these statements may not be wrong, I don’t think that this is Preminger’s goal. It appears that Preminger uses certain accepted characteristics of film noir while filling his story with memorable and in many ways complicated characters that demand much more attention than the plot. In doing this, he allows us to keep coming back to this film and wonder what exactly is going on. And with the sheer ambiguity of the characters and overall purpose of the film, one could study this unique piece of cinema for quite some time.
You're language and critiquing ability is excellent. Felt like I was reading a review. I enjoyed the section about the cinematography I did not know that it won that award and the association aspect was conveyed very well.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a really good job and look forward to reading the rest of your comments this semester.
I enjoyed reading this post-- I am an English major and have never had a film class so it's easy for me to view these films in terms of story and character but when it comes to camerawork, lighting, etc. I sometimes am oblivious to how they work in order to add layers to the narrative. The lighting was definitely key in this film-- I found Laura often looking soft and angelic, almost surreal-- especially in the "dream sequence"-like scene we discussed in class. The lighting worked to intensify her beauty and I think it truly helped the viewer see Laura as these men did-- a perfect object, almost like a porcelain doll. Very good job with your post!
ReplyDeleteIt's funny I never really saw the smirk on the detective's face as waldo first got out of the tub. I guess when I look back at how the men in the story treated each other, one would think that it does resemble at times couples bickering. I really enjoyed how you talked about the cinematography and formality of the film. Coming from someone who has only taken one formal class on camera work, I really appreciated the fact that you disscused the different terms and how they were used throughout the film.
ReplyDeleteThe last thing was that I found it great when you talked about the way the light portrayed the different characters. Laura with soft, Waldo with quirky,two perfect descriptions.
You asked me some questions on my blog and i would like to answer them:
ReplyDeleteI think that Preminger did that close up and then zoom out quickly to get us to think that he fell asleep. I think he pulled back to have the portrait of laura in the shot while he is sleeping to give us the idea that he is dreaming about Laura.
I also think that having McPhearson dreaming just adds the disbelief to the viewer when Laura just casually walks in. We think it is a fantasy at first, but i think it was just Preminger's attempt to keep us on our toes. I think that having McPhearson dreaming is the best way (cinematically) to make us as suprised as McPhearson.
Really nice work, everybody involved in this discussion! It's fascinating to see what happens when you put your different perspectives together, and just what I was hoping for.
ReplyDeleteAnd Jon, you do a really, really good job of spelling out why it is that some critics analyze this movie as being more about the men than about Laura at all, and why some really note what seems to be a gay subtext. I wasn't entirely getting that before you described some of what the camera, blocking, etc, actually does. So, it's as if the image of Laura, a safe and safely inert representation of a woman, is a sort of catalyst and substitute for what turns out to be really a complex and deadly flirtation between three men. Very, very interesting. The movie makes sense to me in a way that it didn't quite, before.