Devil in a “new” dress: film analysis of the quintessential film noir.
Film noir is the most compelling film genre of them all. Its aesthetics, conventions, and storylines, secure its spot ahead of other formulaic styles. It shares characteristics with romantic comedy, crime thriller, and others, but the combination and innovation truly make it one of a kind. Some argue that film noir is not a genre, but rather a style. According to Harry M. Benshoff, author of “Film and Television Analysis: An Introduction to Methods, Theories, and Approaches,” it was created by influential French critics, who gave the name to these “bleak and dark mysteries that Hollywood produced during and immediately after World War II” (86). Since that time, the genre has taken on a new life, and continues to transform today. “Noir” references the style and mood of the films, but Carl Franklin’s Devil in a Blue Dress (1995) added racial commentary to a genre historically exclusionary to Black people, making it the quintessential film noir.
Societal and racial ills are often addressed in films. Sometimes it is done deliberately, and with a heavy hand, like Spike Lee’s masterful Do The Right Thing (1989). But normally, people’s subconscious ideological subscriptions reveal themselves in their art. Nearly all of Lee’s films are misogynistic in some fashion, yet it reads as a blind spot for an otherwise socially aware artist. Our ideologies inform our every action without permission. Here we can find proof of the symbiotic relationship between art and life.
Benshoff echoes this sentiment, saying “Cultural artifacts always convey ideologies, whether they are consciously encoded into them by their producers or not, and whether their consumers are aware of them or not” (19). He defines ideology as the basic ideas and assumptions that help shape a given culture, and properly assesses it as the glue that holds culture together (Benshoff 19). Accepting these definitions as truth frees us to analyze the ways in which specific ideologies affect society and the films it produces.
Therefore, film noir is loaded with ideologies from its given time period. Although subtle in some places, Benshoff explains that they often focused on “displaced identities, troubled sex and gender relations, and inadequately repressed id urges like murder and lust” (118). This is a psychoanalysis that also reveals the ideological temperature of the post-World War II years. Even further, the absence of Black actors in primary roles in such a dynamic genre exposes the racist principles in Hollywood and America at large. Film noir overtly addresses sex and gender relations through the femme fatale character, and laments the hopeless identity crises present in the post-war male protagonists. But like most Hollywood films of the time, the producers whitewash a genre that actually celebrates black in its moniker.
Thankfully, enter Carl Franklin’s 1995 take on a film noir, the Denzel Washington-led Devil in a Blue Dress. Although black & white films were no longer the norm in the 1990s, Franklin’s use of color could be read as deliberate commentary. It broke the most primary convention; the dark and moody, high contrast, black and white image of the early films, and added a spectrum of color in its characters, storyline and art direction. Franklin used film noir to tell the story of a Black homeowner, who had just lost his job, and gets mixed up with a troublesome White man offering money in exchange for commitment to a mysterious mission. A mission that ultimately leads him to a tragic mulatto who is on the run from a sick political figure. This is ideology.
To that end, Benshoff’s musings on media representations of African Americans supports the idea of Carl Franklin’s layered political statement. He writes, “To give one basic historical example, if film and television texts only depict African Americans as butlers and maids (as they mostly did for many decades), those images are going to contribute to a very limited and limiting understanding of African Americans” (Benshoff 19). Devil in a Blue Dress is set in the 1940s, a time of racial violence against Black people, and also the era of the singular representation of butlers, maids and mammies in Hollywood films. Franklin’s piece portrays a new image of African Americans in the 40s, showing them as intelligent, tactful, and dedicated members of a vibrant community. Again, the use of the film noir style challenges Hollywood’s strict traditions concerning these cultures.
Also, it must be noted that Devil in a Blue Dress was released in the 1990s, when many Black films were of the hood gangster variety. Menace II Society (1993), Boyz in the Hood (1991), and South Central (1992) are just a few examples of bloody, inner-city tales set in Los Angeles. Devil also takes place in the City of Angels, yet Denzel Washington finesses his character, Easy Rawlins, as a more sophisticated gangster. His performance, along with all of the other actors, shatters one-dimensional stereotypes. Franklin contributed a unique story and image to the film cannon of the mid-90s era.
Respectfully, Devil in a Blue Dress is the epitome of film noir. Its layers, story, and political arguments are a lesson in refined presentation of ideology. The film is wholly unique. Unlike the classic film noirs of early Hollywood, Devil centralizes Black people in a way that honors their culture. As a result, Carl Franklin’s interrogation of race and film studies is quite a joy to watch.
