Best and Most Difficult To Classify.

The best example of noir in "The Golden Cost" section would have to be "The Girl Who Kissed Barnaby Jones", for a number of reasons. First it was the most interesting story of the four. It keeps me reading. In this story we see a protagonist and femme fatale that fit the definition of noir. The femme fatale in this story, we can say is Cherie, a crazy lady who won't stop until she gets the job done right. Then we have Tate, who is the protagonist in this story. The one who knows most of Cherie's story and is seduced in to try to be an accomplish of a murder. "The Girl Who Kissed Barnaby Jones", fits noir best because from the beginning of the story we have a solid voice narrative, like in common noir. We get a good walk by of the whole story step by step, in orderly fashion that's understandable, in contrast to other stories. Tate gives us a good description of Cherie, the femme fatale to classify it as noir. In this we don't see Tate as an accomplish or in the killer's corner as in classic film noir, we see different; we see an approach to flee and not be illuminated or secured in. This quote showed how the story best fit the bill of noir, "I can feel the tension start to drain from my shoulders, and I put my weight back onto my feet just as I catch sight of a vaguely familiar, battered red corolla pulling into the lot and heading toward me, the face behind the wheel bearing down on mine, jaws clenched so tight they're bulging, and all I can think is how pretty she still looks"(298). Crazy lady!

The story that did not hit me as noir was "Kinship" because I did not find many elements of classic noir or neo-noir as described by given information. It was more of a story of someone just talking, telling a story. "Kinship" was a good story no questions asked, but this story had a plot that fit a description associated with something else; in a different categories. Or film.

Blog Entry #9

Option Two :
How do both of these writers use the landscape of Los Angeles in their stories? Both writers use the landscape of Los Angeles very well, and in depth, in The Kidnapper Bell, by Jim Pascoe, I did not truly see Los Angles, may be because I did not know the area, or the story did not provide a certain locations with more detail. Thus, toward he end of the story the writer did use a landscape that I felt was part of Los Angeles. The one quote that graved my attention was as follows, "He turns onto San Fernando Road...He puts his window down, even though the late-night air is cool. He wants to drive forever"(266). Yet, the writer does use the Los Angeles River most. Neal Pollack, writer of City of Commerce, gave me a perfect example of Los Angeles, because the narrations always illustrated its surroundings, by giving the name of different cities, the descriptions of a location and how you would feel if you happened to be there. It remind me of the city of angels. One perfect description that Pollack gave was in page 233, as he wrote, "Still, I'd drawn the perfect table mix of sour middle-aged Korean ladies, old dudes who bore the perfume and hairstyle of late-era William S. Burroughs, a couple of Persian frat boys from UCLA, and a pockmarked chole who leaned so far onto a cane when he stood  that he fell to a sixty-five-degree angle"(233). Here, Pollack showed the diverse culture that L.A. has, and from there we can imagine a part of the city. The other part I thought was interesting was how he used the freeways' to name major parts of Los Angeles: like Glassell Park, Downtown, and Gardena. The writers' in these two stories, depict L.A. due to the fact that we see lonely dark streets in one and a fast moving environment in the other, making the reader feel parts of Los Angeles we all can recognize. I can clearly feel like am in L.A. at a certain point in both stories. These two stories illustrate parts that can only be found in L.A. not anywhere else I've been-in.

Entry 8 Option Three:

"If you had to recommend one of these two stories to a friend, which on would you choose? Explain your reason for recommending one work over the other." If I had to recommend one of the to two stories, them being "The Method", by Janet Fitch, and Morocco Junction 90210, by Patt Morrison, I would recommend story one. Story one for the shared reason that I loved the narrative, the story flowed smoothly, and clear. This was the first time reading a story written by a woman, and having a female narrative, the story was long enough to make clear sense. The Method  is a trilling story in associations of noir, depicting a side of Los Angeles. I would recommend this story over the other because the story starts of in a normal fashion, and little by little you start to see elements and styles of noir. It really gives a three-sixty view of whats exactly going on when reading the story. It has a smilier plot like in Sunset Blvd. talking about once famous people, and so-on, it shows language not expose in other noir by a woman, that I have seen. This was something new? This story had lust, revenge, ambiguity by the narrator that keep me reading. This had to be my favorite quote, "At about 11:00 the phone rang...It was Richard. I imagined how shocked he must be, hearing my voice, that son of a b****"(117). It was interesting to hear this female talk this way and in this tone throughout the story. The female in this case was seduction, into trying to kill, by a man, in opposite to classic film noir one example would be Double Indemnity the male is the ambiguous protagonist. Here [ The Method ] it's the other way around. The male pays with his life. This story is dark and Methodist. A good read.       

Blog Entry seven. Option one

First, let me state that Dangerous Days and Midnight in Silicon Alley were very good stories in the collection Los Angeles Noir. They illustrates certain parts of Los Angeles, the first story was an excellent description associated with film noir because all of the characters talked in contexts to the Mexican-African-American street style of the 1940s, 1950, and so on. For those that don't know, they were talking in talk that ain't herd no more. This story had a detective figure, and corruption, greed and a femme fatale character. The story is clearly narrated by the starting role. The second, storie is a good story because it has murder and betrayal. The two stories show a perfect example of old Los Angeles in modern times, that's what makes them neo-noir. We see characters of old styles in a new world still going, if you know what i mean. Most of them loners, with a corrupt past. What makes this  neo-noir is that the famme fatales goes on punished, in the sense they are not murdered. We see seduction as major role associated with neo-noir. It has a verity of film noir, and results of neo-noir. The most important part i found was in both stories money was the reason in why every thing took place [murder]. And, the locations in which the were narrated were in place very familiar to me. Some place i did not know by name, yet the way in which they were described rang a bell. This stories fit to Heather Fireman's article, reason's of seduction, masculinity, and the resulting endings. These stories come ambiguous to the reader, untill the ending.           

Blog #6

What are the contrast of film noir and neo-noir? In other words what are the shared difference between old noir and neo-noir (new)? According to the this article film noir "externalized fears and anxieties of American society of the time, generating a dark feeling or mood to accompany its visual style". We know that the a contrast between the two is the different time line the two share. Film noir around the time of the Great Depression, neo-noir illustrates now; deference ones in black and white the other in visual color. Another in the language that is used. For example, "the 'languege' of noir is used to express anxieties belonging to modern times". Noir had a old accustom in culture to then, that of it's time, where neo-noir is more part of today, new America, and Hollywood. "In neo-noir, crime isn't always punished, and neither is the femme fatale". In neo-noir crime doesn't pay, the femme fatale is not murder like in old noir. And so on. What are the connections between noir and neo-noir? Some of the connections shared between the two are very common if your a fan of the noir genre? We find in noir the basics, femme fatales, detective eye, the ambiguous protagonist and so many other topics to cover. But what they have in common? What do they share? According to this very long article, some common connections share "is to express the anxieties of modern conditions".  We can call this Postmodernism. They depict the dark shadows of the grimmy streets as an example. Postmodernism is "too warped and incomprehensible, and our access to it is so flawed that we cannot make sense of it". Other connections between the two is shared in is the male role. Him being alone and uncertain, but with a 21st century twist to it. It has the same image, just in more style. Both have the same ideology with a different out come or ending. Article "The Dark Past Keeps Returning: Gender theme in Neo-Noir" give a good  example of the to genres, informs us of neo-noir, by using great film discussing masculinity and seduction.  

Blog Entry Five

Hi, after viewing many film reviews, and critical articles on film noir and Double Indemnity, relating to the movie. I stumbled on a perfect film review covering the making and changes in the script, from the book, Double Indemnity, by film noir author, James M. Cain. I found this article on "EBSCOhost.com." Title: Multiple Indemnity: Film Noir, James M. Cain, and Adaptation of a Tabliod Case. This small, but informative article, reviews Double Indemnity in the making. It covers the main plot of the movie, and the changes that were made to the movie script. In order for Hollywood to film. According, to the article, movie was released by Paramount Pictures. Double Indemnity, according to the article, comment about, "Walter Neff, having helped his lover Phyllis Dietrichson kill her husband for insurance money". The film review goes on to explain why, Paramount made so many changes to the shoot script, from the original novel. For example, the ending, which we have all seen in the novel that we all enjoyed. According to the films box office, it states, "Released with an ending that shows Neff dying from a gunshot inflicted by Phyllis, 'is a lighter entertainment than the original and a much easier product for Hollywood to market'." The insight I will comment on is that this review is informative in gaining extra or additional information on Double Indemnity. Because, after viewing the movie in Mr. Toth's English 101 class, and reading the novel; "We all know the novel and the movie aren't exactly the same". This article covers the main point, and the making in the film shooting. I feel the changes that were made to the script to fit the studio shootings were necessary. And the best thing to do. After reading the novel, i felt the ending wasn't what the reader expected, or to what we imagined it to be. "Really, we all know the whole 'moon' part, made no sense". Yet, the ending in the movie was more understandable to the rest of the story. It was clear. It made more sense. Made it more reasonable in the viewer's eyes.