Schrader and Film Nor

I like most everybody who posted, enjoyed the articles of Film Noir as well as Double Indemnity. Lighting and the use of lighting in films was something that stood out to me and something that I found intriguing. It wasn’t until taking the class did I realize how important the element and impact of lighting in films has. I also agree with what Kelly posted in saying how she couldn’t understand why Phyllis Dietrichson didn’t appear to be that attractive in the film. Most of the time when I think of a mistress, I think of a woman who is very attractive and someone who every man dreams to be with. In the beginning scenes she is shown as being flirtatious and to me the CU/MS of Phyllis were to compensate for her not being attractive. I also found what Palace and Peterson talked about concerning lighting and female heroines. Before I hadn’t really seen a lot of black/white films and didn’t have to much care for them. For the most part I’ve enjoyed the movies that we’ve watched. If it weren’t for lighting I don’t think that black/white movies would have the same effect on viewers and would make understanding somewhat different. To compensate for not being in color, lighting is the closest thing filmmakers have to color.
I also loved the way that Schrader helped to better explain what film noir is. What she talks about as being qualities of moods and how those are emphasized in films. From there he goes on to break down further the historical context and categorizes what he labels as the 4 major conditions in American society that helped lead up to the “birth” of this particular style