Plantiana Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Maleeha Vincent It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Antonio Kowatsch The movie tells the story of an insurance representative (Walter Neff) who embarked on a crazy mission of insurance fraud after he fell in love with a married woman. Thinking that he could get away with it because he knows all the tricks in the book he devised a special plan for an insurance scam. Blinded by love he implicated himself in many ways to make the plan work. And he also became quite greedy as he aimed for the "double indemnity clause" to extract the most money possible. But in the end it all came to shambles as he realized that Mr. Keyes was far more clever (and perceptive) than he initially assumed. It didn't help much that his accomplice wasn't quite the person that he thought she was. As the movie progresses towards the finale his relationship with Phyllis is starting to corrode. What I found interesting was the way in which the movie was shot. The movie starts out with Walter rushing into Mr. Keyes office to record a voice memo. He seemed visibly distraught and appeared to be bleeding out of a gunshot wound in his left shoulder. This hasty beginning automatically arouses the interest of the viewer. What happened?; we find ourselves asking. And as Walter begins to record the voice memo we get to see the story as he recollects it. Throughout the movie he's narrating his own actions by means of that voice memo and as the story ends we finally arrive at the present moment; the story comes full circle so to speak. Storytelling-wise that's really clever.I also really enjoyed the dialogues in the first half of the movie. They were very witty and had character. Style-wise the movie is a classic "Film Noir" movie.

Spikeopath Double Indemnity is directed by Billy Wilder and Wilder co-adapts the screenplay with Raymond Chandler from the novella written by James M. Cain. It stars Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck and Edward G. Robinson. Music is by Miklos Rozsa and cinematography by John F. Seitz.For a film lover such as myself it feels redundant writing a review for Double Indemnity, because quite simply there's nothing to say that hasn't been said already. The esteem it is held in is justified, it's a razor sharp noir across the board and can be put up as one of the classic noir era pictures that got lovers of the form interested in the first place.Based around the infamous Snyder/Gray case of 1927, Wilder and Chandler fill the story with a sinister cynicism that is palpable in the extreme. With a script positively pumped with hard boiled dialogue, a simple case of murder becomes so much more, a labyrinth of devious cunning and foolishness, with a trio of top performances crowning this topper.Technically via aural and visual work the story gains extra spice. Rosza provides a score that frays the nerves, imbuing the sense of doom and edginess required for plotting. Seitz excels, the photography a trademark for noir, heavy shadows, abrupt camera angles and menacing shards of light come to the fore.And to top it all off, it gets away with so much, a real censorship baiter. The story takes a journey to the dark side of morality, and the makers, bless them for they know what they do, gleefully tease the production code to give film noir fans a reason to rejoice.Quintessential stuff. 10/10

LenaAndBarry Finally! I've stumbled upon a film noir, in an admittedly short journey, that I can safely say is Great!It'd be easy to assume that the stupendous Billy Wilder, who is currently batting 1.000 for me, is to blame, but it *may just be* the much-publicized Raymond Chandler, who I had not previously had the pleasure of coming into contact with, who deserves the credit. Who am I kidding; of course shared with Billy.Who I *have* seen from before, are the three main actors - in three separate films - all making improvements here ranging from meh to good (MacMurray), okay to really good (Stanwyk), and really good to great (Robinson).To give brief thoughts on the two making changes that I found to be the most eye- catching - Fred & Edward (sorry Barbara, you still killed it) - : Fred's stiff presence is *far* better suited for a 40s noir than a 60s Romantic Dramedy ('The Apartment'), where he was noticeably out-of-place when next to the natural Shirley MacClaine and the vibrant Jack Lemmon. There *are* some issues present, minor however, in that some of the emotions he claims to be feeling don't always seep through his often emotionless exterior. I say minor as this isn't always the case, ultimately he's one smooth momma- poppa.As for Edward G. Robinson, his performance here *was* better, in my opinion, but not vastly so than his one in 'Scarlet Street'. Why I bring him up is to point out his superb range, visible when contrasted with his performance in said other film. His ability to convincingly go from frail and pathetic to dominant and relentless is beyond impressive. What a talent he was.Of course they alone (the fantastic Barbara included) are not what make the picture great. No, not by a long shot. They are but enhancing the on-its-own entrancing tale. To slightly change the film's tagline, which speaks on the centered immoral lovers, to express my views: From the moment they met it was GOLD!Something I found strange in retrospect, was that I was subtlety rooting for the aforementioned lovers - strange, considering I'd never advocate for the things they were doing. My way of discovering this was due to me feeling the impact of the "Oh no" moments - if I wouldn't be slightly on their side I would actually be hoping for their demise. Instead, I was nervous, almost as much as MacMurray, whenever they hit a bump in the road during their *impressively* calculated trip; singularly when that bump came in the form of Robinson's character, the short and aggressive ("Like a little Chihuahua") Keyes. I have a couple of theories as to why this is, but nothing concrete. A second watch is required, because at the moment, I just don't know.What I do know is that every new road the film took me down, with the regretful voice narrating our journey, was better than the last. And even having known where it would eventually land, due to this being produced during the Hays Code, I still was enamored, up to the last second. That takes skill. Though they may have intensely disliked one another (which makes the success of the story all the more impressive), Billy and Raymond sure were one helluva duo.

utgard14 Film noir classic, directed by Billy Wilder, about an insurance salesman (Fred MacMurray) who falls for a married woman (Barbara Stanwyck). She uses him to help her get rid of her husband problem. It's a firecracker of a film that moves quickly, with hard-bitten characters and snappy dialogue brought to life by a great cast and a legendary director. Easily MacMurray's best role on the big screen. Wonderful supporting work from Edward G. Robinson. Stanwyck is terrific, as well, although selling her as the kind of woman a man could fall in lust with at first sight is one of the film's only flaws. Beautifully shot by John Seitz. The incredible score is courtesy of Miklós Rózsa. A lot of top talent worked on this. Nominated for seven Oscars, it took home zero. Which is a crying shame, especially with regard to the screenplay written by Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler, adapted from a novel by James M. Cain. I like Going My Way as much as the next person but, come on now, this script has quite possibly the best dialogue in movie history. It's on my list of top ten favorite movies of all time so obviously I recommend it.