1. Discuss the contrasts between the endings of the novel and the film. Which ending seems more appropriate for film noir? Why?
The film and the novel have very different endings, personally I prefer the novel ending but as far as a film noir ending I think the movie fits better. The novel leaves you guessing what happened? Are they dead? Together? It's not very clear . They both end up in an unhappy state alone with each other on a boat headed to Mexico . We know there future is soon coming to an end but when and how and that I think is what doesn't really fit into film noir . It's a little to dramatic. The ending of the novel was more about Phyllis trying to kill Walter and getting away with it, and the film is more about Phyllis and Walter planning a murder then Walter trying to make it all go away by getting rid of his accomplice Phyllis. In the film Phyllis shoots Walter in the shoulder then Walter kills Phyllis as she confesses her love for him , he seems to not even be phased by her confession as he shoots. Walter then is left bleeding out as he confesses the truth seems like a much better noir ending. As we know Phyllis is dead and Walter is wounded and will be paying for what he has done. I like the fact that we aren't left guessing what happened and we know everyone got what they deserved.
6. Raymond Borde and Etienne Chaumeton in their work " Towards a definition of film noir" describe the qualities of film noir as " nightmarish, weird, , erotic, ambivalent, and cruel." Select one quality and discuss how it relates to the film version of Double Indemnity.
Weird .... There's was a lot of weirdness in the film and the novel actually , but the film I felt had more weirdness then the novel. The first thing I noticed was how Walter always lit Keyes cigar , normally you see men lighting cigars for women. Another weird moment was Lola asking Walter for a ride , he's a complete stranger but yet she's sitting in his car like she's catching a ride from a friend. I think the ultimate weird scene would be how Lola decides to appear in Walters office and confess her suspicions about Phyllis, she basically breaks down and tells all to an Insurance agent she's met once. Not only that but it's not like he's a detective or anything and unbeknown to her he's the man who killed her father,Then to see them hanging out was odd too. I have to say through out the entire film I kept saying WHAT that's weird , like Sachetti for example dating Lola Phyllis bad mouthing him then all the sudden Lola gets dumped and Phyllis has herself a new lover. Overall I thought the film was full of weirdness, every scene got weirder and weirder. From the beginning the mood was set an insurance agent in lust with a women wrapped in a towel soon to be his murder accomplice. It was just all to much but at the same time all the weirdness made it just that much more interesting.
I think "weird" is a great way to describe it! lol. That and after Phyllis shoots Walter, she then confesses her love, I mean what!?!
ReplyDeleteI also preferred the novel ending, but I think both fit noir quite well. In my opinion, the novel just left what was yet to happen, to our imagination. But not having to guess, and knowing Phyllis is dead is also a good thought to have. But I felt like both endings had a sense of hopelessness to them. It seemed to me that both were going to die either way. So that’s why I felt they both fit in as noir. Enjoyed the read nevertheless, great job!
Weird works for this. I agree that everything seems weird to us from Walter's point of view. I think he was just so confused and mystified as to haw he even really ended up in the position he did, that his telling of the story left us just as confused as him. Everything, from the way he ended murdering Mr. Nirdlinger to the way he felt about Lola at the end seemed to leave Walter in a sense of confusion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you for the most part on what you said about the film endings. The film ending does seem a bit better for me also for similar reasons to yours, being that it is left more clear to us what happens, while the novel is more obscure. But precisely that is what makes the novel's ending suited for film noir is that it expresses ambiguity and mystery, something that film noir is characterized for. Alas both endings are good I think, nice points.
ReplyDeleteAnd weird is a good way to describe the film haha You're right a lot of the things that happen in the film in particular are very strange.
I actually also find the novel ending more satisfying than the films ending. The novel's ending gets a little tricky and you sort of have to read it twice to get what's happening. I believe that they do indeed both die on that boat together. It's not as satisfying as seeing phyllis get murdered or something but they both spent their last breaths alone with the one person that caused their death and they hated the other person. So in that way its an unfortunate ending for the both of them.
ReplyDeleteI think that the films ending seemed a little rushed and lola and walters relationship was not as important in the film, the only thing that I liked about it was Phyllis dying in an ironic fashion. I;m not sure if she was trying to play off saying that she couldn't shoot him because she loved him, but in the end she really did get what she deserved.