Noir is a term that gets thrown around a lot, but I think that it has a very specific, detailed definition.

Go for it.

Well, so is OUT OF THE PAST, isn't it? Isn't the Kirk Douglas character a gangster?

Tsk, just because there are gangsters in it, doesn't make it a gangster movie. Gangster movies are filled with anxiety about incursions of new ethnic groups, and always comment specifically as a black mirror on capitalism. "He had the American dream...with a vengeance." The DePalma Scarface is very conscious about all these elements and hits every genre element for a gangster film. It was a popular genre in the thirties and has been a source for many movies (and series) since. But it is very distinct from Noir.

Gangster movies are always concerned with dynamics and relations within the gang. Noir movies almost always isolate the protagonist, and pull them out of their social stratum, pulling them down generally because of one stupid mistake (generally sex) or often random fate.

You can have a Noir without a crime. You can't have a Gangster movie without it.

INterrupting the noir talk to say that Shirley Henderson (Moaning Myrtle) is in Marie Antoinette and gods, was it hard to get past that voice and not be waiting for to strip naked and jump in the bath with Marie.

I didn't write this, and I don't remember exactly where I got this from.

Elements of Film Noir:

• Dark settings, night scenes, a sense that we aren't watching quite the same world we live in.

• Shady or disturbed characters or outright criminals.

• A sense of alienation or isolation in the main characters. They can't seek help where others might.

• Society seen from the underside, where hypocrisy shows best. Institutions fail on individuals. Officials are corrupt. Cops are crooked.

• A true femme fatale, a woman who primes the pump for fatal things to happen.

• A sense of fate or even predestination that transcends mere contrivance. Film noir characters exist in a closed world, even if they are fleeing cops over hundreds of miles. Their options are very limited.

• Implicit social protest. If people and institutions did what they were supposed to, we wouldn't have these problems.

• Perverse sexuality or obsessive relationships. An ordinary family relationship or romance would be bizarre in a film noir, except as subsidiary contrast to a central relationship.

• No happy ending. If characters seek redemption, they either don't find it or find it only in death.

The DePalma Scarface is very conscious about all these elements and hits every genre element for a ganster film. It was a popular genre in the thirties and has been a source for many movies (and series) since. But it is very distinct from Noir.

When I was making gangster movies, we didn't even HAVE chainsaws!

I also dislike Lebowski. On viewing one I was underwhelmed. On viewing two, I was also underwhelmed. The humor makes me laugh some, but not in a way that makes me care as much as everybody else seems to care.

Gangster movies are always concerned with dynamics and relations within the gang. Noir movies almost always isolate the protagonist, and pull them out of their social stratum, pulling them down generally because of one stupid mistake (generally sex) or often random fate.

So why limit one of these types of film to a specific time period?

If the definition of genre is "A category of artistic composition, as in music or literature, marked by a distinctive style, form, or content," how is noir not a genre? Especially with all of the common elements that Tom listed.

Elements of Film Noir:

Yeah, I would dispute this list. This is exactly why you can't call Noir a genre. These are all stylistic elements that have accrued to Neo-Noir, but you can find many, many instances where canonical Noir movies don't exhibit key elements of this laundry list.

A true femme fatale, a woman who primes the pump for fatal things to happen.

Not every noir has a femme fatale. Not even close. Neo-Noirs almost always do.

A sense of fate or even predestination that transcends mere contrivance. Film noir characters exist in a closed world, even if they are fleeing cops over hundreds of miles. Their options are very limited.

This is hardly a description of a genre convention. It does get after a major defining aspect of Noir, but that sense of Fate is just as applicable to Tragedy. And not every Noir takes place in a closed world. The Kansas City Story or Ace in the Hole depend on a larger social context.

Implicit social protest. If people and institutions did what they were supposed to, we wouldn't have these problems.

This is true of any movie that has any kind of subtext.

xpost--

ITA with Megan. If "cycle" is distinct from "genre" because the former has a specific time period associated with it, I cry foul.

Noir aspects aside, LEBOWSKI is one of those movies like REPO MAN or THE PRINCESS BRIDE or tons of MONTY PYTHON where a line will pop into my head due to what's going on at the moment, and I won't be able to refrain from quoting it aloud (although I'm a bit more circumspect with the more profane bits). I've had entire conversations that way with certain friends.