CRIME AND MYSTERY FILMS

EARLY FILMS

Great Train Robbery (1903)

Musketeers of Pig Alley (1912)

The Jade Mask (1945)

Problems of Genre

Definitions are made up by people and usually come in three kinds:

Technical definitions are often highly restricted and used by people in specific areas of expertise. The term "myth" for example, in a usage definition might says "Something that is false" and cite phrases like "Oh, that's just a myth". For folklorists and anthropologists myths are defined technically as "Those stories believed to be true and sacred". Thus the usage definition and technical definitions are almost opposites.

Similarly people who study the arts often define graphic plastic and performing arts in a way that makes graphic arts mean all the 2 dimensional arts, plastic arts (painting, drawing, etching); graphic arts as the three dimensional ones (scultpture) and performing arts as those where an interpreter in needed to mediate between the artist and the audience. One generally hears a Beethovan symphony played by performers and does not look directly at the musical score.

Operational definitions are often transitory. They are definitions made while attempting t deal with a problem and have not yet crystallized.

Definitions are usually made in order to shed light on some topic. They are constructed to help solve a problem and hence may be in a state of flux while the problem is being examined. The definitions used during this period of research or analysis are often called "operational definitions",

In attempting to deal with something like "mysteries" and "crime films" we need first to think about what the word genre means – basically a kind of film – but based on what? - Generally not on something like film stock. One can classify films by whether they are color or black and white, but these are not considered genres.

Definitions of genre deal with text, subtext and film techniques (mise en scene, camera position, camera movement, editing, lighting sound, music). Some definitions indicate the emotion the film maker hopes to produce in the audience (comedy, horror, suspense, etc.) others genres based on content (Westerns, science fiction). Each genre usually has a defining characteristic which is what appeals to the people who like that genre and which is the reason they go to see it. "set pieces" are often the sequences in the film where the viewer gets to see the thing they came to the film to see – e.g. the appearance of the monster in monster films and so on.

One of the problems is that film analyst have, in a sense been using usage definitions, rather than operational ones in an attempt to make technical ones. In part this is not unreasonable since the linguistic field of semantics deals with usage definitions. What people perceive as genres may have a huge impact on how a film is marked. Many people took The Exorcism of Emily Rose as a horror film because the title reminded them of The Exorcist. As a result they avoided the film. When they finally saw it, they were surprised that it was not what they thought at all. The makers of the film may have thought they could increase the audience if people thought of it as a horror film.

The result of this is that usage definitions are often rather sloppy and there is a greater problem in using them than if the film were classified to solve some specific problem. The very fact that a film like King Kong is classified variously as an adventure film, a fantasy, a monster movie and a horror film, indicates that different people focus on different aspects of a film differently.

Once the concept of genre is defined it becomes clear that each individual genre would also have to have specific criteria by which it too could be defined. Since many genres are classified by different characteristics (emotion to be produced, content, the "look of the film") confusion is bound to result.

Some genres like crime and mystery may be linked. Many crime films are also "Who dunnits" in which the film maker challenges the members of the audience to solve the mystery before the film reveals the culprit. But there are also crime films which are not "whodunits" in which the audience knows all along who the perpetrator is. In the gangster films of the 30's (White Heat, Little Caesar, The Roaring Twenties, etc.), there is no doubt who the criminal is.

There are also mystery films in which no crime is committed, but something has to be solves. These may be in the science fiction genre (Andromeda Strain)

Both crime and mystery films are closely tied to another genre called "suspense" or its allied genre "thriller".

As a result, some (if not all) films are potentially classified as "mixed genre films" Some monster movies are horror films, others are not.

Oklahoma is definitely a musical which is often defined by the appearance of diegetic music in places where it does not occur in real life. A film about a singer in which all the performance of music takes place on stages and so on, is not considered (perhaps in this case "technically") a musical. So Oklahoma is definitely a musical. But is it a Western? That would depend on the definition of western. Westerns don't seem to have to happen in the West. Drums Along the Mohawk seems a typical Western even though it happens in upstate New York. Psycho, which takes place in the West is not considered a Western by anyone. Outland seems to be an outer space Western! Westerns are generally looked upon as stories in which the main theme is the taming of the frontier or perhaps about the transformation of the frontier and the problems relating to that. Shane is a classic example. The "wilderness both in the land and the people needs to be brought under control" – a very Apollonian approach. In High Noon, the town alrea

dy exists but one begins to have doubts about whether it should have happened and in the Wild Bunch one tends to hope for its destruction. Perhaps it would be better to call such films "Frontier Films" when the frontier can be New York, the West, or outer space. The taming of the west as a theme might give problems to the inclusion of the classic John Ford film Stagecoach as a Western.

Crime and Mystery Films

Crime films are not simply films in which a crime happens. Crimes happen in many films which are not thought of as crime films. Most mystery films have the solution to a crime as the basis for the mystery (the "whodunit"), but some films, like Psycho which have a theft of $40,000, and two murders take place in the film itself (and others alluded too outside of the film) is rarely if ever considered a crime film.

One of the questions then, is what is required to classify a films as a "Crime film" or as a "mystery film".

Mixed Genres

Some genres however defined seem to co-occur well with other genres. Horror and comedy often go together well perhaps because sub-textually they both often deal with tabooed subjects. Crime and Comedy also make a good link since both deal with surprise. Often comedy rooted in something unexpected and may deal with released tension. Mysteries and crime films often build tension as well. And hence the release is potentially comedic.

Approaches throuigh Content

Although not all films with crimes are thought of as crime films, all crime films do have a crime. As a result, the participants and the acts and events which define crimes are necessary for the film to be classified as a crime film.

People and Events

Approaches through Subtexts

The subtext of the films may be a marker of their genre. Sorror films are often defined by the "eruption of the repressed". Do crime films have some common subtext about the destruction pf social order and its re-establishment?

Film Techniques

Horror films typically have many markers in their film techniques such as off screen sounds.Mysteries, often through their camera use and other techniques often reveal and conceal information to build tension. Watch for these in these films

THE FILMS

The Great Train Robbery

One of the first narrative films with edits and story line is a film about a crime The Great Train Robbery.

Things to notice:

Things to notice

Although not an "early film" it is a film which deals with some of the famous writers who created detectives in fiction that became film detectives. These include Charlie Chan, Miss Jane Marple, Hercule Poirot and of course, Sherlock Holmes among other.

Charlie Chan is created by Earl Derr Biggers in 1923. Biggers conceived of the pleasant and talented Chan as a result of his reading about 2 Chinese-Americans who were detectives on the Honolulu Police Force Chang Apana and Lee Fook. He did this to combat the Yellow Peril stereotypes which were being shown in characters like Fu Manchu.

There are more that 40 films with Chan as a character. The first is in 1926. Asian actors originally played the detective George Kuwa Sooin and E.L. Park all played Chan with little success Then in 1931, Fox Film Corporation hired Warner Oland a Swedish actor (with a Mongoloian grandmather) to play Chan in Charlie Chan Carries On. This time the film was a success. Fox made 15 more Chan films starring Oland as Chan When Oland died , Scottish American actor Sidney Toler replaced him. Toler appears in 22 Chan films. His early films were for Fox and later Monogram Studios. Toler died and and Roland Winters replaced him

There have been several problems about the Chan films which have to do with racism and ethnicity. Because Chan is shown as intelligent, benevolent, and honorable, in contrast to most depictions of Chinese at the time the character was created many people applaud the character . Others argue that Chan, despite his good qualities, reinforces Chinese stereotypes such as poor English grammar, and is overly subservient in nature.

Interestingly enough the films were well liked in China and Keye Luke (also an extremely talented artist) who played Chan's son in a number of the films remembered Toler fondly and had nothing but good things to say about him.

Additional problems were seen in the Mantan Moreland character of Birmingham Brown.

Ethnic humor had been common in those days and many people did stereotypical ethnic humor. There were Jewish comics, Scottish comics, Irish comics and so on. Moreland himself did vaudeville with the same kind of character which he also played in all Black films that were made to be shown to only Black audiences . For and example of his vaudeville act see the Charlie Chan film The Scarlet Clue

There are two distinct problems involved here. The first is whether an actor has to have the same background as the person they are playing or not? In effect do we have to have a king of Siam to play the King of Siam in The King and I? Do we need John Wayne Gacy to play Hannibal Lechter? Do we have to have an Asian to play an Asian? Or does this fly in the face of what acting is about. Actors portray people they are not.

In many instances it is possible for a character to be unmarked for race or ethnicty. In the early Dr. Gillespie's Criminal Case 1943, Keye Luke appears as a medical doctor with no particular reason for him to be Chinese or Chinese American. In other instances, race/ethnicity can be pivotal. Could African American actor Brock Peters replaced Spencer Tracey in Guess Who is Coming to Dinner with the plot being damaged or altered dramatically?

In fact the appearance of a character is often crucial to the performance. Would anyone believe a 60 year old 300 pound actress playing the lead ballerina of a major ballet company? On the radio maybe, on screen never.

So while there is something to be said for ignoring certain aspects of a person's looks in some roles, certainly not in all.

This raises the second. More economical question and that has to do with roles available for Asian actors and actors of Asian descent. Since it is rare that they are cast in racially or ethnically neutral parts (as has become far more common for African American and Hispanic actors), why are they being blocked from playing definitively .Asian/Asian American characters so that NON Asian performers get to play them. The argument here is not about the ability for actors to play what they are not, but rather if you restrict actors to playing what they are, then it is problematic to block minorities from playing themselves. If this is more of a problem for Asian/Asian American actors than it is for Black and Hispanic actors nowadays, , the problem is probably more intense for American Indian (Native American) performers.

The major early Chan films were made by Fox. One should not underestimate the importance of the studio making the film. Studios are usually as recognizable as directors. Fox was a major studio that spent about $200,000 on the Chan films. It is important to remember that these B movies were generally money makers for the companies. They cost little and made a lot.more than they cost. B Westerns (including many of the singing cowboy films which are generally ignored in film studies) were enormously popular for instance.

Later the Chan movies were made by Monogram a cheap studio that spent about $75,000. on them and the production value differences are obvious.

The Jade Mask

1. Note the production values. Compare the Monogram films with the low budget films of Val Lewton and Jacques Tourneur (Cat People. I Walked with a Zombie and Leopard Man) and see what happens when talent meets low budget. Sometimes a low budget stimulates creativity.

2. Note the ethnic humor. Who has humor in the film? Do people in the audience laugh with or at Birmingham? What does it mean that the jokes are directed against Edward Chan's bookishness.and not against his father, Charlie Chan's deductive powers?

3. Watch for logical inconsistencies and well as holes in the plot.