7/10
This early and influential film noir is good, but it's not the best of the genre...
2 October 2023
As is often the case, the reputation of something can be so great, that it becomes difficult in reality to meet the expectations such regard can create. Perhaps this was a factor that shaped my opinion about 'Double Indemnity', and I therefore should be mindful of that when judging this movie. I liked and enjoyed it, which my rating intends to convey. But there were a couple of aspects that slightly disappointed me as well.

Modern viewers probably need to recognise and keep in mind, a couple of important contextual points regarding this movie. Firstly, its subject material, plot and characters - particularly the portrayal of a woman of questionable virtue - had become rare for an A-level feature film in the United States, after the enforcement of the Production Code in 1934. Secondly, its commercial success proved that the movie-going public had an appetite for the genre, encouraging the industry to create the numerous imitators which soon followed.

One could draw a parallel that this movie did in 1944, what Pulp Fiction (1994) did fifty years later. They both pushed the boundaries of what was palatable subject material, introducing new edgy dialogue and interactions between the characters, creating a new kind of "Cool" for their respective eras.

I was disappointed with Fred MacMurray's lead performance, but it should be noted that my opinion here is definitely in the minority. I felt his efforts weren't very natural, especially in his scenes with Barbara Stanwyck, who came across as more comfortable in her role. Edward G. Robinson was unsurprisingly brilliant, and of these three mentioned stood out the most.

Most people will enjoy this movie, and plenty will go much further with their praise. I personally rate it a fair way short of the greatest films noir, but of course, that is a very high bar indeed.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed