Mjeteconer
Just perfect...
InformationRap
This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.
Portia Hilton
Blistering performances.
Councillor3004
"Double Indemnity" is a movie I cannot believe I haven't seen earlier: it needs to be counted among the best films ever created, in my humble opinion. The film's single flaw may lie in the way the romance was built up, which may appear to be rather abrupt at certain points of the movie, and I wouldn't even count that as a flaw, because as the story flows along, you will realize that every single moment of the dialogues, the movements, the actions makes total sense. And the film itself? It's absolutely brilliant. Perfection at its greatest level, an execution so sharp and thrilling and compelling that it will knock you off your feet, to speak openly. Barbara Stanwyck gives a flawless performance as the scheming Phyllis Dietrichson, accompanied by Fred MacMurray who may be the weaker actor of the pair, but has enough charisma to pull off working alongside someone like Stanwyck. Edward G. Robinson and Jean Heather do a great job in the supporting cast as well. There is nothing to complain about in this film; if every film-noir movie was like this, I would rush out to watch every single film ever created in this genre. For now and the future, "Double Indemnity" remains one of the best film-noirs I have ever seen, probably alongside the likes of "Sunset Boulevard" and "The Third Man" (both of which are movies I can only urge you to check out if you haven't seen them already).
John Brooks
Billy Wilder rhymes with quality film-noir by reputation. Snappy quick-witted dialog, a tumultuous introduction that forces the viewer right into the thick of the plot and action that often starts at the very end before recounting the story (as here), a femme fatale lead character along with a cynical blasé male lead who often switches between effective line delivery and narration in the background (as here), and a plot that is complex involving different parties that appreciates a psychological intrigue and insight into the protagonists' minds and motivations, the actors always top drawer with their individual performance and presence onscreen offering strong guarantee for the whole ride.The thing about this one is as often the dialog is too dense and too prolific imposing a solicitation of utter focus and attention from the viewer for the entire show and where it's interesting and effective in many parts, it's just too much effort for little reward: the actors just spew out a ton of lines with incredible cadence and this contributes to a feeling of prolonged length. Also strongly adding to the effect of distorted time, like the film is too long for its own good is how it runs out of puff at just about 30 minutes before the end. All of the wit and plot strong points and crux of the film are dispensed through the first hour plus, and just when the momentum appears to be at a peak the film aggressively maintains a suspended effort of keeping that high note going on, and on, where it feels artificially kept alive and can't seem to make itself as interesting as the first two thirds. There's a natural rhythm and momentum for any film but these crime film-noirs especially and the intrigue needs to be carefully conducted and evenly spread over whichever period of time. It just feels dead and drags on at the end here, the last half hour rather painful and with little reward as there's a strong feeling of inevitability that something fairly predictable and just about how we'd imagine it is about to happen, the film strips its own self of any element of surprise and spontaneity and denies its viewer a punchy ending which is disappointing after demanding such focus from the audience. Finally, there's also the fact this sort of film relies on details fulfilling the requirements of the plot and there's a dominant feeling of predictability and convenience to key characters with their resolving of the plot. This remains a top film-noir for what it is and lots of good work was also put into it, however there's no excuse for throwing off the pace and having a film end on a lackluster note, if you're the film-maker it's your number one duty.6.5/10.
Sameir Ali
There is no such thing called a perfect murder. The movie is based on a real story, and this story had been base for so many similar films.The movie begins with the confession of the hero. He has killed a man, as per the idea of his wife. The hero is an insurance agent and he knows the best to claim the policy in double; know as "Double Indemnity". It was a well planned and executed murder. They were able to convince most of the people. But, there is no such thing called a perfect murder.A very thrilling crime drama. Well directed, and perfect in all areas.Listed among the best movies. It was nominated for 7 Oscar, but won none.Do not miss this classic. Highly Recommended!#KiduMovie
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.
