The Two Best Noir Movies According To Rotten Tomatoes

Movies Drama Movies

When it comes to getting into noir films, it's always worth asking, "Where should I start?" After all, the genre is so time-specific — it existed in its purest form only in the 1940s and early '50s — and so full of familiar signifiers — dame with a secret, jaded investigator, corrupt systems — that it can sometimes be tough to tell noir titles apart. Start digging into the best the genre has to offer, though, and you'll discover that film noir encompasses much more than the striking style choices and cynicism that have become its cultural shorthand over the years.

Take the two highest-rated noir films on Rotten Tomatoes, for example. According to the aggregate site, only two film noirs have a 100% score on the website, meaning that every single critic included in the site's tally reviewed the movie positively. The first, "Shadow of a Doubt," is an early, death-obsessed Alfred Hitchcock classic that's more dark family drama than hard-boiled mystery. The second, Otto Preminger's "Laura," has all the hallmarks of a classic film noir, from a murder mystery that takes an investigator into the seedy world of his victim to complex portrayals of female desire to an impressively twisted ending.

Laura and Shadow of a Doubt are at the top of the heap

Despite their differences, both movies do what film noir does best by telling a story that skirts potential censorship while still artfully tackling serious, often grim topics. "Laura" tells the story of Laura Hunt (Gene Tierney), who detective Mark McPherson (Dana Andrews) is told was killed with a shotgun at the film's beginning, primarily through the lens of the men who knew and exploited her. The film is interested in the patriarchal desire to control the eponymous character, and the obsessive ends to which that urge will drive each man in the movie, no matter how "clean" he may have initially seemed.

"Shadow of a Doubt," meanwhile, tells the story of a young woman named Charlie (Teresa Wright) whose dull but nice family life is interrupted by the arrival of her possibly murderous uncle, also named Charlie (Joseph Cotten). Hitchcock, too, prods at the edges of what would be considered suitable for a movie of the era, touching on topics of familicide, coloring the two Charlies' relationship with an unorthodox closeness, and coding Uncle Charlie as a potentially queer villain with a shocking nihilistic streak. Plus, the movie takes a jokey approach to true crime, with characters brainstorming ways to commit the perfect murder.

Critics loved the films' complexity, acting, and sharp scripts

These transgressive qualities were right at home in the noir genre, where the underbelly of the world was often exposed for all to see. While Rotten Tomatoes sometimes doesn't seem to account for older print reviews, it appears that in this case, both of its top-rated noir movies were well-received upon release. Writing for the Evening Star in 1944, Jay Carmody praised the film's writing, setting, and casting, noting particularly that "Mr. [Clifton] Webb is one of the slickest performers the movies have laid their hands on in seasons, a thing that Broadway would have been glad to tell the movies years ago." The New York Times' review of the film, meanwhile, called Tierney a disappointment, but praised the movie's "sustained suspense, good acting and caustically brittle dialogue."

Alfred Hitchcock had already made a name for himself by the time "Shadow of a Doubt" hit the scene in 1943, and while several modern critics have called the film his first masterpiece, initial reviews spoke positively about "Rebecca" and "Suspicion," indicating that Hitch was already a director to watch. (1940's "Rebecca" marked the only time a Hitchcock movie won Best Picture at the Oscars, although he never won the trophy for Best Director.) A review of "Shadow of a Doubt" from The Evening Standard began by noting that "an Alfred Hitchcock picture is something of an event," while The Sydney Morning Herald's review at the time called the director a "master of suspense drama," applauding the film's ending as a "glorious piece of cynicism." Variety's review concluded that "Hitchcock deftly etches his small-town characters and homey surroundings," while The New York Times, which otherwise enjoyed the movie, said that its ending was anticlimactic, and the film's "moral is either anti-social or, at best, obscure." At least two of these early reviews, interestingly, lightly accuse Hitchcock of cribbing some ideas from Orson Welles.

As always, there's a complexity behind the Rotten Tomatoes scores for both "Laura" and "Shadow of a Doubt," but both are undeniably great. Both films received Oscar nods (five for "Laura," one for "Shadow of a Doubt"), and both have been added to the National Film Registry at the Library of Congress. Hitchcock himself called "Shadow of a Doubt" his favorite of his own films. But are these two really the best of a genre that also includes such wide-ranging classics as "Sunset Boulevard," "The Maltese Falcon," "Double Indemnity," and "The Third Man"? It's tough to say, but if you're looking to dip your toes into noir, you can't go wrong with either option, and both are likely to leave you hungry for more stylish, complex 20th century thrills. Luckily, fantastic noir films aren't in short supply.