MovieChat Forums > The House on Telegraph Hill (1951) Discussion > NOT a film noir

NOT a film noir

posted 14 years ago by cbrylla
38 replies | jump to latest

Just to clarify: this is definitely not a film noir, according to the definition of the film noir genre. It is clearly a "thriller" a la Rebecca, Gaslight and Notorious (none of them are film noir). The fact that Fox markets it as a film noir is obviously a marketing gimmick. Here are some examples why it is not a film noir (not in any particular order):

- hardly and use of chiaroscuro light (harsh light/dark contrasts)

- hardly any night scene and the lighting is fairly high-key

- no flashbacks

- very little subjective storytelling (we only hear her mental voice-over twice, and it is only for exposition, not to describe a psychological state)

- the narrative is plot, rather than character-driven

- the main character's morale is not ambiguous, nor twisted (she is a heroin, not an anti-heroin; true, she forged her identity, but a) it is not an important plot point b) it does not make us like her less and c) she admits it to redeem herself)

So, Film Noir is quite an elusive genre, and it is not always easy to identify one (e.g. Last Weekend). Story elements and style play an important role. However, it is easy to recognise a film that is definitely not Film Noir, especially since it has the clear elements of a thriller.

It is still a great film, though. Excellent acting.

[–] m-j-mooney 14 years ago

Heroine, not heroin. Very different meaning!

[–] jrhpax 13 years ago

I don't know where you got your "definition," but this film is a film noir by my definition.

I won't argue, though, that some other supposed Fox Film Noirs -- including "House of Bamboo" and "Black Widow," which are both in color! -- aren't film noirs.

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 13 years ago

Actually, film noir can be in color as the word noir means black as in dark. One of the greatest noirs ever made is "Chinatown". This mistake happens all the time. So sorry to burst your theory.

Let it be unsaid: insignificance is the locus of true increpation.

[–] the_toucan_kid 12 years ago

I don't think Chinatown is a noir at all. Why would you say it is?

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 12 years ago

Why would U say otherwise? Whether you think so or not it is. But I would still like to know why U think it isn't.

To understand is the opposite of existing.

[–] the_toucan_kid 12 years ago

Because, while it's a great film, it has none of the visual elements that define film noir. You will get a good deal of debate as to whether film noir was a specific movement from a specific time, and often modern noir like films are referred to as "neo-noirs", but irrespective of that fact, I don't think Chinatown is even a neo-noir.

The visual style is not shadowy at all, and I think a big part of the film is that there is a lot of menace underneath the California sparkle and sunshine. It's a different approach to subject matter often seen in noir filmmaking, but it's not in the noir style. I don't think all hardboiled detective films are necessairly film noirs, for example, and many of the best noirs are not about private eyes.

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 12 years ago

I was prepared to write a lengthy treatise, but why bother? You will always see it as NOT and I will see it as NOIR. Darker than dark and that is the way it will be for me and many, many other cinema miscreants. And I leave it at that.

Decent clothes...a car, but what's it all about?

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] canuckteach 11 years ago

I don't think Chinatown is a noir at all. Why would you say it is?

Chinatown has the classic rogue detective battling larger elements (powerful enemies, corruption, greed). Many of the shots occur at night (when Jake is assaulted by the thug played by Polanski, Jake's visit to the nursing home, Jake following the Faye Dunaway character in her car after they make love, and the gripping climax). The themes are dark (add incest to elements cited above). It may not have been shot in the classic 'noir' style, but the gloomy driving force puts it in that category. I would call it neo-noir.

Anyway, I love the scene when Giddes asks Noah why he is doing the financial swindling (since he is already rich).. 'For the future, Mr Giddes--for the future.' Cynical, dark - that's how we like 'em.

House of Tel-Graph Hill is too light & syrupy to be a 'noir' - it's a decent film despite that.

:-) canuckteach (--:

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] baran_erik 8 years ago

Body Heat.

Life is pain. Anyone who says differently is selling something.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Chinatown is neo-noir, not true period film noir.

[–] preciouschristy 12 years ago

I'm not sure where you're getting your "definition" of what Film Noir is, but as far as I know, there is no one definition. In particular, what do flashbacks have to do with Noir? I've never heard that one. I take your point with the lighting and the morality of the characters, but some of your points (like the flashbacks and subjective storytelling) aren't really criteria I've ever heard of. If you look at The Maltese Falcon, it has neither of those, but I defy you to claim it is not Noir.

The criteria that I have come to understand that Noir films should have are an element of crime (particularly murder), a femme fatale, and as you pointed out: ambiguous morality of the main characters and the use of chiaroscuro lighting. This movie had the first two, and less of the other two. So, while I agree that it may not be pure Noir, it does have some elements of Noir, so some may consider it a Noir movie.

[–] Dejael 12 years ago

I am inclined to agree with the first person's analysis about this film, it is a "romantic thriller" like REBECCA (1940) and NOT "film noir" although it certainly does have elements of "noir" in it. And I don't think it is necessary for flashbacks to be in a "film noir" picture to make it one.

Dejael

[–] PussyCrusher_Principal 12 years ago

I don't think a noir has to have all of the elements that are used to "define" noir, just some of them. Since preciouschristy brought up The Maltese Falcon - which is most definitely a noir, arguably the first in what is generally considered the classic noir period (roughly 1941 through late '50s) - that is a movie that is plot driven, not character driven, which would seem to refute the OP's definition of Film Noir.

I think we get too strict with our definition of Film Noir. In the case of Chinatown, while it was made well past the classic noir period, it certainly contains many of the elements used to define Film Noir. If you want to call it Noir, Neo-noir...these are just labels. I wouldn't argue with anyone who wanted to call Chinatown a Film Noir, and the same goes for anyone who wanted to call it Neo-Noir (since it harkens back to other classic early Noirs such as The Maltese Falcon and The Big Sleep). Let's not forget that "Film Noir" is a label applied after the fact - it was coined by French film fans who loved the post-WWII style of many of what are now considered Films Noir. These filmmakers weren't consciously making Films Noir, they were just making films. The cynicism that came from a wartime economy, etc., just made its way into these films. In fact, maybe the fact that a filmmaker is consciously making a Film Noir would automatically make it a Neo Noir? Which is possibly why there is a "classic" noir period in the first place...once the term was coined (in the late '50s), and the "genre" defined, it was impossible to make a Film Noir without being conscious of it? I don't know, these are just ideas/opinions of mine...

I would also say the The House On Telegraph Hill IS a Film Noir.

"Love has got to stop some place short of suicide."

[–] Dejael 12 years ago

This film was a great effort by Fox and director Robert Wise, but it pales by comparison to the other movie he directed at Fox in 1951 - THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL - a masterpiece. And, to top it all off, DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL has many elements of Film Noir in it, which make it much more interesting. I consider it to be Sci-Fi Film Noir. Imagine a science fiction Film Noir movie - there were three others: TARGET EARTH (1954), KISS ME DEADLY (1955) and INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1956).

Dejael

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 12 years ago

I am back again to insist "Telegraph Hill House" is most definitely a film Noir, but it is one which borders the gothic. The cinematography was done by Lucien Ballard and is highly atmospheric; there is a fatalistic narration by Ms. Cortesa, who tells Victoria's story in flashback; the characterization of an almost manical Alan Spender by Mr. Basehart; and the freezing cold performance of Fay Baker as the governess. Also the main character is definitely a Noir persona who follows the formula of alienation and obsession. Go on arguing, but those who know know and those who don't don't and never will.

"Beware of the waiting room."

[–] sametic 12 years ago

There's an ongoing hotly contested debate about the "true definition" of film noir. At best, this film intentionally utilizes elements of noir without being arguably noir, if such a thing is even definable beyond its hallmarks. But then, half of every film made now contains elements of the noir style.

I must admit, if someone asked me to recommend some noirs, I would sooner recommend Stranger on the Third Floor, Detour, The Big Combo, The Killers, etc. before even considering this movie, which wouldn't even crack a top 100 noirs in my book.

Incidentally, for a chuckle, check out The Naked Gun scene wherein the 'beam of light across the eyes of a darkened face' bit is inverted to depict a thick shadow across the eyes of a well lit face.

[–] defiant-10 12 years ago

I'd tend to agree that while tHoTH may not be specifically noir, I suspect trying to say what is noir could be like defining what weather constitutes "nice". I don't know that much of an encompassing consensus could ever be attained.
Just for myself, a "film noir" should have suits, hats, handguns, and heavy heroes who aren't necessarily well-intentioned. And sorry to be a curmudgeon, but black-and-white seems to help, as well.
I guess I don't know what it is, but when I see it....

What I had in mind was boxing the compass.

[–] jbuckets 10 years ago

DITTO!

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 12 years ago

Well, whatever the genre, it sure is an excellent movie!

Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 12 years ago

Most who come here and to all the other Noir pages think Noir is a genre, but it is not. It is a style. Noir is actually made up of many different genres all using the Noir style.

Reference is inscrutable because there is nothing to scrute.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 11 years ago

Well, whatever it is, I'll be watching it tonight and enjoying it.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

[–] gerrywos 12 years ago

How can you say there are no flashbacks?What about the scenes in the concentration camp?
How is she not morally ambigous?She steals a dead friends indentity and lies to her family,lies to achild saying she is his mother for God's sake,how can that not be an important plot point,that is the whole film,jeeez

[–] marbleann 12 years ago

This movie reminds of Dragonwyke. Just the time period is different. But it also reminds me of No Man of Her Own was more film noir. I mention that because the lead character takes on the character of a dead person no one sees and with her new identity it allows her in a prominent family, like this movie. But No Man of her Own involved blackmail, the lead character past life being pretty seedy and murder. So maybe it is a hybrid movie. LOL because it reminds me of both.