In a message dated 2/9/07 11:16:37 AM,
matrxtech@yahoo.com writes:
> I think the winks, unless they are the touches of a
real master, tend to
> spoil the effect of the
> story. Also, there should not be too many winks. In
fact, I manage a
> hardboiled or noir story
> quite well without any winks whatever. Jason Starr
doesn´t wink. Richard
> Stark doesn´t wink.
> Hammett didn´t wink.
>
> In film, the winks are even worse, in fact, they can
be destructive. After
> all, one has seen
> plenty of the real article not to need any
reminders. If the new article
> comes up in quality to
> the real old article, the viewer knows.
>
> Perhaps we should just banish nostalgia, of which
the wink is a giveaway
> sign. What good is
> nostalgia? To have the entire past ahead of one? If
you will forgive the
> harsh pronouncement,
> I think nostalgia is a sign of decadence. I think
history backs me up in
> this harsh
> pronouncement.
>
BRICK was one big wink. I hated it. KISS KISS BANG BANG is as
much a nod to screenwriting and filmmaking as it is to the
genre. I loved it.
I believe if noir is to continue to be relevent, it has to
evolve and reflect its times. We have authors who do it well
on the page. Sadly, there are fewer filmmakers who understand
that noir at its core is about desperation, and instead focus
solely on stylistic trappings like dark and sinister
atmosphere. Or terse, snappy patter.
John Lau
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 10 Feb 2007 EST