<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting Detours
Review: I liked this book, although it seemed that half the time I disagreed with Hirsch on the film he was discussing. For example, he found a lot more to like the the Lumet-Fonda "The Morning After" than I did. Curiously enough, even when Hirsch criticized a film I liked, I didn't find him annoying.The book begins very well, with a discussion of "Odds Against Tomorrow," a film noir that came out after "Touch of Evil," the last "official" noir. This leads Hirsch, after a discussion of noir in French cinema, into looking at neo-noir. Hirsch organizes his material by subgenre or archetype, such as private eye films. My serious problem with the book was that it covers so much, from 1959 to the late 90s. That is much longer than the original noir era (1941-59). Thus it seems odd to have films like "Shock Corridor" and "The Long Goodbye" discussed with "Reservoir Dogs" and "Basic Instinct," as if they were part of the same era. I think Spicer in his new book on film noir treats neo-noir better by splitting it in two (Sixties and Seventies vs. Eighties and Nineties). However, Hirsch discusses a large number of films in detail and it is always interesting to see what he has to say, even when you disagree.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Detours
Review: I liked this book, although it seemed that half the time I disagreed with Hirsch on the film he was discussing. For example, he found a lot more to like the the Lumet-Fonda "The Morning After" than I did. Curiously enough, even when Hirsch criticized a film I liked, I didn't find him annoying. The book begins very well, with a discussion of "Odds Against Tomorrow," a film noir that came out after "Touch of Evil," the last "official" noir. This leads Hirsch, after a discussion of noir in French cinema, into looking at neo-noir. Hirsch organizes his material by subgenre or archetype, such as private eye films. My serious problem with the book was that it covers so much, from 1959 to the late 90s. That is much longer than the original noir era (1941-59). Thus it seems odd to have films like "Shock Corridor" and "The Long Goodbye" discussed with "Reservoir Dogs" and "Basic Instinct," as if they were part of the same era. I think Spicer in his new book on film noir treats neo-noir better by splitting it in two (Sixties and Seventies vs. Eighties and Nineties). However, Hirsch discusses a large number of films in detail and it is always interesting to see what he has to say, even when you disagree.
Rating:
Summary: Great examination of Modern Noir
Review: With roots reaching deep into film history, the stylistic conventions of film noir have been present throughout the history of cinema. Moreover, the hardboiled tales that lent themselves to noir's stylistics that reached their heyday in the 1940s have never fully disappeared from the silver screen. In Detours and Lost Highways, Foster Hirsch examines classic noir films and their influence on later films. Primarily focusing on original works and their later remakes, Hirsch places the films into cultural and historical perspective, noting the necessity for change in the films according to their era and how they work (or, more often, don't). Hirsch's book is right up my alley. I'm a big fan of noir and am always curious about how films change going from their original concepts to the screen and to their subsequent remakes and/or influences. Detours and Lost Highways is an exhaustive work whose only fault may lie in its curious omission of key noirs and neo-noirs such as WHITE SANDS, PALMETTO, and DETOUR (and its remake). Likewise, while Hirsch provides a terrific history of noir in pre- and post-war France, he unfortunately misses out on discussing the great noirs of Japan. These points notwithstanding, Detours and Lost Highways is necessary reading for noir fans and students of film history. (ISBN: 0879102888)
<< 1 >>
| 
