The world of cinema has always admired the film noir movies, and always looks back to them for inspiration. Double Indemnity is cited as one of the 4 prime examples of film noir and is always looked at to express and demonstrate what a classic film noir movie looks like. The male protagonist, Walter Neff, is merely going about his job when he runs into the femme fatale, Phyllis Dietrichson. The mystery begins when she talks about purchasing accident insurance for her husband, without his knowledge of it. The story continues on from there with Neff in a bind due to his obvious attraction for this sweet and innocent woman who is wooing him and simultaneously trying to kill off her husband. In the meantime, there is Keyes, the hard-boiled claims representative and Neff’s good friend in the office. Once Mr. Dietrichson is killed off, Keyes begins to realize that this was a set up by the wife and he will stop at nothing to figure out who helped her. In the end, Keyes figures everything out, but it’s too late for Walter and Phyllis.

This film cannot get any clearer in its demonstration. The slang and demeanor of Walter Neff is precise and entertaining. The way Keyes is constantly smoking his cigars and rambling on about his theories and his “little man” is both comical and believable. Let us not forget Phyllis’ conniving and seductive ways of getting Walter to fall in love with her just so she can try to kill him in the end. Her classic rendition of the femme fatale is poignant and delivering. It is the characters that make up the film and leave the audience laughing along with them and sitting anxiously awaiting to see their fate.

Besides the unmistakable characters in film noir, there is also a setting that takes place in every film: dark, rainy streets, large homes, cramped rooms, low lighting, etc. Most of the film takes place in the dark and at night, even the scenes during the day. The day scenes are mostly in the beginning of the film, and do not come back again for the remainder of it. The rest of the scenes that take place during the day are in a building so the lighting has to be artificial. The fact that the lighting in the sequence of events in the film starts happy in the daylight and then fades to dark and gloomy with the death of Phyllis and poor health of Walter is indicative of the theme. The only times there are bright lit scenes are when there is no mystery or deceit. As both grow, the lighting gets darker, and the only time there is light is on someone’s face, usually Walter’s. 

Double Indemnity is definitely deserving of being one of the top four “textbook” film noir films. It is full of dramatics, comedy, and entertainment. The classic characters are played out to perfection, as if they read straight from Spicer’s book before filming.

This film is very post modern in its narrative and aspects of time. The narrative begins with a bunch of different characters and their different stories being mixed together. There were also a couple scenes which seemed to be pointless (ex: the two men in Winkie’s  and the scary ‘thing’ they encounter in the back & the guy who kills the man at the office and his secretary and the janitor). Lynch was trying to confuse the audience by mixing all these things together, and he did a very good job. Once the story seemed to be making sense and coming to a close, it completely turned around and became something else.

As soon as the actress opened the blue box and it fell to the floor, the audience was introduced to a completely different movie. Here, we see the same characters in Betty and “Rita”, but they are not Betty and Rita. Instead they are Diane and Camilla, but Camilla was someone else in the beginning of the movie. The director is still the same, but the waitress is now Betty. Also, the cowboy is seen at the party scene, and so is the original Camilla we met earlier in the film. It’s here where I completely lost all insight to the film. As soon as this part of the movie began, I was thrown off and confused. This part of the movie was so different, but had its similarities. The characters were all mixed up, but Diane still lived in the same apartment and resurfaced after being gone for 3 weeks as her neighbor previously told the two women. Diane and Camilla were in a sexual relationship as they had begun earlier in the film when they were Rita and Betty, but then Camilla leaves her and it starts a whole different fiasco. The audience also sees the scene where the limo is driving up Mulholland Drive and it stops where it shouldn’t, but instead Diane is in the back and the driver doesn’t pull out a gun, he tells her its a surprise and there is Camilla. At the party, the viewer is reintroduced to Coco, who happens to be the directors mother. We are also reintroduced to the relationship between Camilla and the director which drives Diane’s rage.

From looking at this again, I can guess that perhaps the ending is the beginning, but then there is the whole confusion with identity. Everyone becomes someone else at the end of the film, except for a very few number of people (the director, Coco). It seems obvious that Diane set up Camilla’s murder and paid the murderer from the beginning of the film to do it, but it still does not explain how all these people changed identity. I honestly do not know what happened at the end of this movie, but I would love to find out. All in all it was a well put together film and I enjoyed it, until the end.

I found it very interesting how the director goes from showing scenes of Lola the person running through the house and down the stairs and through the streets and then counteracts that by showing the same scenes of Lola the cartoon running. This gives the film a very formalist feel. The way the film shows the same scene shot in two different ways is very confusing. This is a post modernist technique of not having the film in order from start to finish with all of its counterparts put together correctly. Example is how Lola passes several people while running through the streets and the viewer can see what happens to these people after (ex: the first time she passes the woman with the baby it shows the woman going crazy and stealing babies, the second time after Lola is shot on the street, it shows the woman happy and hitting the jackpot). This is the same for the man on the bike who gets jumped and then the woman in the hallway. The scenes with her father are also like this. The first time he confesses she’s not his child and he’s leaving her and her mother and the second time he is fighting with the woman and then she takes a gun and tries to rob the bank he works in.

Tykwer plays with time, space, and narrative throughout the film in the above stated ways. He confuses the audience with the way he plays with the scenes, making them happen in different ways. The viewer is also uncertain of where the film may begin: does it begin when Manni calls Lola or does it begin when Manni and Lola are in bed together? Does it end when Lola is shot on the street or do we follow the scene where she is mistaken for being an innocent bystander in the bank?

I was very confused by this film, but also impressed at the different ideas and angles that Tykwer gave the viewer. I also appreciated how he added to the fast paced feel for the movie with the fast techno music.

Tarantino has been quoted as saying some of his favorite filmmakers are Jean-Luc Goddard and Martin Scorsese. I see this influence, especially Scorsese’s , throughout this film. Scorsese’s films have a lot of violence and vulgarity (The Godfather, Goodfellas) and so do Tarantino’s. I have not seen any Goddard films to see the influence, but I have read up on a quote by Goddard that I can see being part of Tarantino’s influence: “All you need to make a movie is a girl and a gun.” Tarantino surely uses both these things in most of his films, and it is seen in the very beginning scene in the diner with Honey Bunny (Yolanda) and Pumpkin (Ringo). They decide to rob the diner and she stands up screaming with a gun in her hand.

Tarantino is well known for showing issues of violence and violent acts in his films; many of his films surround this (Grindhouse, Kill Bill Vol. 1 & Vol.2). He almost always at some point shows 2 characters at a standoff and eventually one kills the other in a brutal and obvious way so we know the other character is dead. One example of this is when Butch (Bruce Willis) goes back to his apartment to get his gold watch and Vince (John Travolta) comes out of the bathroom. The two stand there and look at each other until Butch pulls the trigger and shoots and kills Vince. Tarantino likes to leave a lot of things up to the audience, but the violence is never one of them.

Pulp Fiction is filled with all sorts of humor, from the serious and biblical conversations that Jules (Samuel L. Jackson) tries to have with Vince, to the witty joke that Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) was supposed to tell in her pilot. Tarantino cast some wonderful and very talented actors in this film that are wonderful at being serious and violent as well as funny and relaxed. The scene when Mia overdoses and Vince drives her to Lance’s house is not supposed to be something that people laugh at because there is a woman practically dying; Tarantino finds a way to make it serious, but have the audience chuckling at the dialogue as well.

I thought it was a bold move for Spike Lee to use certain music in the film, especially with Radio’s character. Throughout the film he walked around with his boom box blasting Public Enemy, which makes sense since it was a popular musical group at the time this movie takes place. Lee was trying to cater the music to the types of groups portrayed in the movie. He used Public Enemy for Radio and his friends, upbeat spanish music for the group that Mookie’s girlfriend was probably a part of, and then there was everything in between when Samuel L. Jackson’s character of the radio host was shown.

The editing throughout the film was also interesting. I think Lee was trying to show you a story about a young man & his surrounding neighborhood, almost as though you were watching a storybook unfold. I enjoyed his different point of view shots when he went back and forth to the different types of people: from Sal, to Mookie’s friend, to the cop, to the koreans.

Spike Lee was trying to show how life in Bedstuy, Brooklyn during this time was a difficult one since all these different groups of people were combined and forced to live and interact with each other. This cause a lot of tension and Lee wanted to show this real life tension to the world to see that it is not easy for any of these groups to live together. Although he obviously favored his own cultural group, he did his best to show the other sides as well.

Throughout this film there is a strong sense of eroticism and it is vividly shown when Jan and Bess first get married. They are a new couple who can’t keep their hands off each other, although it seems that something is not right with Bess, especially when she wants their first time together to happen in the bathroom of their reception. It continues on getting more and more dramatic and uncomfortable or taboo to see since Jan gets hurt and becomes paralyzed and cannot make love to her anymore. His sick mind-set tells her that he will survive and keep on living as long as she can live her life and get a lover so he can hear all about them making love and imagine that it is them together. When she first listens, it is a failed attempt with Dr. Richardson, and then later succeeds with a stranger on the bus and then one from a bar. This is uncomfortable and almost taboo for an audience to see because it isn’t appropriate for anyone to have relations with anyone other than their spouse.

Bess clearly has something wrong with her mentally. It is obvious that she is co-dependent and suffered depression and hysteria after Sam died, and it continues on again when Jan leaves her to go to work and progresses when he gets hurt. She does not know how to properly function without him and it gets to the point where he can make her do whatever he wants, like have sex with other men so he can hear about it. Bess’ character clearly suffers with identity and know who she is and how to act. She has been medicated and seen doctors yet always seem to regress back to some unstable state of mind. It is obvious when she is in church praying to God, she speaks to him then closes her eyes and speaks with a deeper more demanding voice, as if God is speaking through her. This is similarly seen in The Shining with Danny. Jan is also messed up in the head. He has a sick twisted idea about staying alive which he puts on her because he knows she loves him and will be obsessed with the idea of trying to save him.

It seems like Kubrick was influenced by the French New Wave movement with the identity crisis and also when he is showing the car on its way to the Hotel, going through the mountains and the way the people in the hotel are walking around and minding their own business going about their lives. However, it’s clear that he doesn’t play so much on it because the movie is not very realistic, although it tries to be, the ideas behind it are basically impossible.

Kubrick builds up suspense easily with random flashes to scenes which have not happened, or flashbacks to the last people that watched the hotel. The idea behind the title is “shining” which we learn from the cook’s character is talking without speaking, something both he and Danny can do. This is a scary aspect which continues throughout the film and eventually tries to save Danny and Wendy. The scenes where Jack is at the bar alone and then people show up out of nowhere and then theres a party, is scary and confusing to the audience. The sharp notes of the string instruments also add to the suspense. The sharp pitched, loud music is always on queue with Jack’s scenes of terror.

The movement of the camera is something that helped with the film. The camera seems to follow wherever a certain character is looking. In particular, when Danny gets up and writes MURDER (half backwards) on the door, and then Wendy hugs him and looks in the mirror to see it written, the camera moves to look at her then the mirror image which she’s seeing. Another example is the end when Jack is chasing Danny through the labyrinth, the camera goes back and forth from looking at Jack to seeing Danny’s feet running ahead of him. The camera does a great job of showing movement. A prime example, in contrast to a similar scene in Psycho, is when Jack falls down the stairs after being hit in the head by Wendy: Jack falls down backwards and it seems very realistic, it is actually happening, unlike in Psycho when Orbogast is stabbed by Norman and he falls down the stairs, its almost as if the camera is attached to him or he’s on a track just sliding back down to make it look like he’s falling. Here, the camera is distant and watching with the audience.

The mise en scene was very articulated and precise. It’s almost as though, since the movie was so realistic and had to do a lot with moving around and changing scenery, Truffaut made sure you saw exactly what he wanted you to see in the shot. The schoolhouse scene was very precise in how everything was arranged in front of the camera: the front of the room with the teacher’s desk and the corner where Antoine Doinel was forced to stand in, the students desks, even the door and how you could see out into the hallway. There was also a strong lighting distinction between dark and light (chiaroscuro) and the camera had a lot of different shots (bird’s eye, wide angle, low, close up, medium). I think Truffaut did a good job in making this film realistic. It was easy to feel as though you were a passerby in the film just watching everything going on, mostly in the end when Doinel is running to the sea from the detention center. I thoroughly enjoyed this film and its humor especially.

The criminal is first introduced to us at the Bates Motel. At first he seems like a normal guy working at a family run motel. It isn’t until after he heads back to the house that we realize there is something wrong. He is heard talking to his mother about inviting Marian to dinner, quite loudly, and she over hears it. When the scene pans back into the parlor of the office we can see that Normal has a strange habit of stuffing birds. He mentions having chemicals to do so (probably the same chemicals he used on his dead mother). He also mentions in his conversation with Marian that his mother is “harmless as one of those stuffed birds”, because, as we learn later, she is dead. It is here also that we hear the infamous phrase, “We all go a little mad sometimes.” In the end we learn that Norman goes a little mad all the time.

It seems to me that he has a psychological disorder known as dissociative identity disorder. This disorder is basically when a person consumes two identities: one being their true born one and the other being a completely different person. This is commonly seen in cinema, specifically and most recently in the film :Hide and Seek” with Robert DeNiro. DeNiro’s character is a psychologist and widowed father to Dakota Fanning. We later learn that he is both himself and a murderer named Charlie, which eventually takes over for good. Norman Bates has the identity of himself and his dead mother, unfortunately his dead mother’s identity is the one that prevails.

Although this is a very prominent theme in the beginning, it seems to fade away throughout the film,  in my opinion. Waldo begins to become completely obsessed with Laura and cannot seem to drag himself away from her or the idea of her, which lessens this theme of homosexuality. He gets insanely jealous, to the point of murder (almost twice) when he learns she has feelings for another man. He tries incessantly to sabotage this relationship while it is going on, and later when it isn’t. Waldo seems to be the only character that I would classify as delusional and basically insane, which explains why he would kill the girl mistaken to be Laura, and Laura herself (or attempt to).

During the film, specifically when Waldo is out to dinner with the detective, there are flashbacks to earlier in the relationship of Waldo and Laura, when she appreciated him and his presence and did not resent a thing about their relationship. It is clear here that the director wanted us to see into the psychology of Waldo. The director wanted to show that here was a man who was not psychologically well, since Laura was all he could/would talk about. It also wanted to call attention to the idea of Waldo’s sabotaging Shelby and Laura’s relationship. It was almost as though Waldo thought he owned Laura, she was dehumanized into an item rather than a person.

The director also plays with the ideas of sound and light. Sound in the scenes where the detective walks into the cottage behind Shelby and startling him, when the detective breaks into the clock at Waldo’s, when Waldo sneaks into Laura’s, and in the beginning of the film when the detective is touching things on the shelf in Waldo’s. These scenes indicate sound or silence which catches the viewers attention and tries to tell them that something important is happening here, or something is being revealed. The lighting is being played with specifically in the end when Laura turns off all the lights in her apartment and then turns on the one light in her bedroom, before Waldo comes in. Also in the scene just before this when Waldo left, he disappeared into the shadows of the stairwell before the detective left Laura’s apartment. This sense of darkness is showing that something bad is about to happen, the bad guy just disappeared and she just turned off all the lights; nothing good is going to come out of darkness between an innocent and a predator.