Review of Double Indemnity (1944) by Kenneth L — 09 Feb 2011

This is certainly a worthy film and an archetypal film noir, but I can't help but compare it to the novel that it is based on and be a little disappointed. In a lot of ways, the film cannot really be blamed for lacking some of what the novel has; the Production Code of 1944 Hollywood simply would not allow much of the novel's dark content to be put on screen. Still, though, watching this movie today is not nearly as electrifying an experience as reading the James M. Cain novel is.

The core of the plot, the scheme by an insurance agent and a seductive woman to murder the woman's husband and collect the insurance money, does remain intact, and it's still a compelling story. Much of what happens after the central murder, however, is condensed, erased, or otherwise sanitized. Without wishing to reveal the ending of either work, I'll say that the movie's ending feels much more conventional, whereas the book's ending goes to some truly dark and shocking places. The characters have also lost some depth and intensity in the transition to film.

All that being said, it is still a good movie. Fred MacMurray's performance is nicely understated. Barbara Stanwyck, in an Oscar-nominated role, does do a good job with the relatively limited scenes she is given, and does have one perverse shot of one of the more disturbing facial expressions I've seen in a movie. Edward G. Robinson makes quite an impression in the smaller role of a suspicious insurance claims adjuster. The movie is well-made, with lots of the stark shadows typical of a good 1940s noir. It's really interesting to consider that, after this, director Billy Wilder went on to make some of the funniest comedies ever, such as Some Like It Hot and The Seven-Year Itch. This movie is worth watching for noir fans, but don't let it replace the experience of reading the book for you.