'Shutter Island' review

“Which would be worse: to live as a monster, or to die as a good man?”

-Teddy Daniels

In the 2010 film Shutter Island, directed by Martin Scorsese and starring Leonardo DiCaprio, it tells the entrancing, yet also very confusing story of a deputy marshal who travels to the titular island to find a deranged woman who escaped the facility, while also trying to find the man that caused a fire, that killed his wife.

The film consists of many flashbacks to Teddy Daniel’s experience during World War II, his wife Dolores, hallucinations of dead children and memories of events that affects Teddy in a drastic way. Shutter Island shares many qualities with another film noir, Memento, that was released only 10 years prior. They both deal with a main character who tries to repress memories that involve the death of their wife. One of the main things that the film is controversial for, is the ending and how it is interpreted. I might be echoing a lot of things that other people have already mentioned in their own analysis, but I have my own theory of what really happened at the end.

Although the end of Shutter Island is open-ended and does not immediately reveal what really happens and if Teddy is mentally ill and imagining everything or are the men that work there and everyone else against him? When the audience has their first glance at Teddy, he is in a bathroom on a boat, and is sea sick. He looks at the mirror in front of him and tells himself to get over it and to calm down. It becomes quite obvious at this point that something about water, not sea sickness, is the main factor that bothers him. He explains to his new partner, Chuck Aule, that being on the sea felt like it was surrounding him and suffocating him. The mirror scene reminds me so much of another famous Martin Scorsese film… any guesses? Taxi Driver. Actually, Scorsese uses this motif in almost every single one of his films (watch them and you’ll see).

When Scorsese uses the motif of the main character talking to himself in the mirror, it usually means that he is trying to connect with reality or make sure that he is there. This idea of a moment being real and fictional is played out often in his films because in Taxi Driver, Travis talks to himself, making it appear that he is a tough guy, even though he isn’t. He uses the persona of someone else to keep him at ease, which is exactly what Teddy is doing in Shutter Island. A line that the lead psychiatrist, Dr. John Cawley says in the film is “Sanity's not a choice, Marshall. You can't just choose to get over it” which goes along with how Teddy is dealing with his situation.

At the end, it is determined that Teddy is actually Andrew Laeddis, the man who he claimed killed his wife in a fire. However Teddy is the one who killed his wife, by shooting her after she drowned and killed their children. There are many other things that are revealed to the audience, and let me be clear: they make sense. Though, what bothers me are the unanswered questions. Such as, what is real and what are memories? Teddy is publicly known to be an unreliable character at the end, because of the revelation that he is mentally ill and projected his inner feelings onto someone else and create a lie about how his wife was killed. Though, with Memento, I pity the main character and am on “his side” in Shutter Island. Both Leonard and Teddy kill their wives and project the experience onto someone else, because they are unable to come to terms with what they have done. They both love their wives so much and they did what they had to do, but it does not mean that they enjoyed it, because it took a major toll on them and it brought them to a never-ending cycle where they are hopeless and are desperately trying to make themselves sane. George Noyce, another patient at the asylum, whom Teddy knows from a previous work related situation, confronts him and tells him something that the audience most likely overlooked because George was the one in the mental institution and not Teddy, who was the one investigating, “This is a game. All of this is for you. You're not investigating anything. You're a fucking rat in a maze.” When this line is said and it is connected to everything Teddy is told at the conclusion, it becomes known that he is not really trying to find anything, but he is trying to forget something and bury it deep in his mind.

So when Teddy appears to “relapse” and I write that in quotation marks, because I personally believe that he is finally at a stage in which he knows that he is mentally ill and that he knows everything that is going on; he comes to the realization that he is done pretending. Teddy retreating back to his old ways, allows him to commit suicide (in a way), even though he knows what is real, he cannot truly accept the fact that he killed his wife. The look he gives Chuck Aule, is a strange one, when he says, “Which would be worse: to live as a monster, or to die as a good man?” indicates that he knows what is happening, and that he is okay with it. He is okay with dying, as a clueless, sad man who lost his wife, who is a good man… instead of dying as a monster who killed his wife and did not save his children from being murdered by their mother because he was a drunk. He is also the same man that may or may not have killed thousands of people in the second World War.

There are some instances in which the audience is not sure if it is “just my own imagination” or was it an editing error? The audience, like in Taxi Driver and Memento, are experiencing everything through the main character, so when things happen out of the blue, it seems out of place. Such as, when Teddy arrives on the island and the security guards are very on edge and intense, because a madwoman is on the loose, though when they are later shown, they appear to be bored and just sitting around. No one gives Teddy a straight answer or seem to be very interested in finding the missing patient. When Teddy interviews a patient, she reaches out for a glass of water, and there is nothing there. However, when she is shown again, the glass appears in her hand as she sets it down. I’m not sure if it was an editing mistake or something wrong with the continuity, but when it comes to Martin Scorsese and his films, nothing done without a reason. This editing technique shows that Teddy might not be functioning correctly and that he is already off balance with reality. He is already seeing hallucinations, so this plays along with that idea as well.

What Martin Scorsese perfects, once again, in Shutter Island is the use of motifs. However, his frequent use of characters talking to themselves will only set me off, the next time I watch another one of his films. I will now, forever, connect that image with the character having a split personality or fearing reality. Much like his other films, Teddy exits the movie as a hero. Though, how he becomes a hero is questionable.

Shutter Island

Shot Her Island

'Memento' review

“We all need mirrors to remind ourselves who we are.”

Leonard Shelby (Guy Pearce) says this line in the 2000 film Memento directed by Christopher Nolan. In the film, a man who suffers from anterograde amnesia goes on a mission to find the man that raped and killed his wife. The only things that he remembers, is his life before the accident and his wife. The idea for Memento came from Christopher Nolan’s brother Jonathan, who wrote a short story called “Memento Mori” about a man who has short term memory and uses polaroids and tattoos to help him figure out who raped and killed his wife, which is much like the film.

When watching the film for the first time, it is obviously very confusing. There are two different things going on: the scenes that are in black and white are in chronological order (but is in the past) and the scenes that are in color are in reverse order (but is in the present). After watching Memento, I read an article “Everything You Wanted to Know About ‘Memento’” by a film critic, Andy Klein, who dissected everything in the film and made it so much easier to understand. He basically created a way to watch the film in its right order. He explained that when watching the movie, to watch the black and white scenes in  chronological order, but to list every scene 1 through 21. However, there is a “special” scene at the end of the film, where it starts off in black and white, but transitions into color; this specific scene would be 22/A. Then, the color scenes would have to be watched in reverse order, or backwards, and those scenes would be B through V. In all, the complete order of how the film would be viewed, in a chronological order, would be:
1, 2, 3 ,4 ,5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22/A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V.

One of the main themes for the film is memory. The entire film consists of the idea of whether or not Leonard, the main character, is searching for the right man who killed his wife or not. For starters, Leonard is an unreliable narrator because of his short term memory, the audience is unable to determine if his memories and his flashbacks are real or if they are fabricated. What is clever about this film is that the director, Christopher Nolan, has a man who is damaged and his short term memory is his weakness. Leonard is easily deceived by people who learn of his “condition” and they use it to their advantage, like Natalie, who has him kill her boyfriend’s drug dealer boss. Natalie and her manipulative ways definitely makes her the film’s femme fatale because she seduces Leonard and makes him trust her, only for her to use him in the end and have him kill someone for her. There are other film noir characteristics that fit with other characters, like Teddy, who resembles a rogue cop. The audience does not find out that Teddy is a cop and is the one who Leonard has been giving information to one the phone, until towards the end of the film. Teddy is taking advantage of Leonard as well, he helped him find the guy who got away from the assault, but because Leonard does not remember, he uses him to kill other men and collects money from them. This leaves Leonard… who is he? I came to the conclusion that Leonard is a homme fatale, because he is an attractive man, who is going through a rough time in his life and he can’t make any sense of what is really going on, but he is very determined and sticks to his mission.

The use of voice-over is an important device in the film as well because there are also two different types of it. For the black and white scenes, Leonard’s voice-over is more like him being interviewed, which in many cases, he already is because of the phone call that he has. The audience and Leonard are unaware, until the end of the film, of who is on the other line. The voice-over for the color scenes are more investigative, because he is trying to figure things out in his mind, as they are happening. His voice-over is his inner thoughts. The color scenes are probably my favorite ones, because the audience is just as clueless as Leonard is and we are both trying to figure out what is happening and we both get frustrated when he forgets. What Leonard knows, is what the viewers know.

The ending of the film might come as a shock for many people, but there are little clues throughout the film. One of the major clues is the “Remember Sammy Jankis” tattoo on his hand. This was most likely a way for Leonard to remember who he really is, the person that reminds him most of himself. He created Sammy to repress his guilt over accidentally killing his wife. Not only is Leonard being used by people in the film, but he, himself, is using a fictional person to carry the weight of his issue.

When Leonard remarks, “We all need mirrors to remind ourselves who we are” I believe that this means that he needs to be reminded of who he is, because he doesn’t really know himself. When Teddy asks him if he knows who he (Leonard) is, he goes on to recite real facts, but Teddy wants him to know “what he has become” which is something that Leonard will not know, and probably will never know. He is on a never-ending tunnel that leads him to kill men with the name John G. and his mission to avenge his wife’s death, becomes meaningless.

One of the last lines that Leonard says at the end of the film is, “Do I lie to myself to make myself happy?” It is one of my favorite quotes because it is something that I think everyone can relate to. The line itself is pitiful and makes the viewer feel somewhat bad for Leonard, but then you remember all the things he’s done, and you don’t feel so bad anymore. He can’t help that he has a condition and this bothers him. So when he finally learns the truth, he chooses to ignore it, because at this point in his life, he is not living his life for himself but for his dead wife. His only goal is to repeatedly get vengeance. This connects with everyone else in the world, because with little things such as makeup and cosmetics, help women feel confident and beautiful. We make up excuses and lies to help us with daily life situations. Is it a good thing? No. Though we choose to do it anyway.

'Fargo' review

5 Reasons Why “Fargo” Wasn’t Funny

A woman is cheerfully knitting and watching a morning show, when she notices a man wearing a black ski mask and holding a crowbar, approaching her back door. She watches the man with curiosity, as he peers into her house through the glass door. She continues to watch him as he breaks the glass door open with the crowbar. She jumps out of her chair and runs towards her front door, where she encounters another man identically dressed as the first one. He grabs her and she bites him, running up the stairs to the second floor. Upstairs, the second man is aiding his hand in the bathroom when the woman, who is hiding in the shower, leaps out and is completely covered by the shower curtain. In her frenzy, she tumbles down the stairs and is momentarily unconscious. The second man is shocked, as he pokes her still body.

In this film called “Fargo” (1996), directed by Joel Coen, while his brother, Ethan, co-wrote the screenplay with him, many people think that this scene is humorous. However, it was one of the many scenes that I did not laugh at. I felt very uncomfortable and I pitied the poor woman, who was not given much of a character description other than being called “Jean” and she is the wife of Jerry Lundegaard (William H. Macy) and the daughter of a wealthy family. In the film, a man hires two men to kidnap his wife and then ask for ransom money from his in-laws, who are wealthy. When the plan goes wrong, a pregnant police chief tries to solve the murder of three people that were killed, among other situations that occur in the film.

Before watching the film, I had no clue what it was about. I watched the film with brand new eyes and I believe that is the best way to watch a movie. Due to this, I had no reason to instantly dislike the movie because of the plot, actors or time period. After I finished watching the film, I looked it up online and Google told me that it is a “dark comedy, crime thriller”. This is something that I disagreed with. I felt as if the internet, the Coen brothers and everyone else in the world was playing a cruel joke on me. This movie was neither a comedy, nor a thriller; in this case, it brings me to a countdown of the reasons why I think “Fargo” is not funny.

Reason #5: Although “Fargo” is classified as a “dark comedy and crime thriller”, it is not funny because of just… that. It does not take much for me, personally, to laugh at something, but because I was not aware that this film was “dark” and “comedic”, I ignored the fact that the film was intended for me to laugh at some of the parts. Such as, Jean falling down the stairs because she got caught in her shower curtain. The reason why she is caught in the shower curtain is disturbing. She is running away from men that are there to kidnap her, an order given by her pathetic husband.

Reason #4: Mental issues and physical problems are joked about. There is a long running, belittling joke about one of the kidnapper’s, Carl (Steve Buscemi), height and appearance. He evidently appears differently than his accomplice, Gaear, who is taller, blond, quiet and seems more intimidating than Carl. Besides Carl’s height and looks being made fun of, another character, Mike, who is an old high school classmate of Marge, the pregnant police chief, has bigger issues. It was obvious to me that he had some type of issue, because not only did he call her home in the middle of the night, but he sounded extremely jittery on the phone call and was very eager to meet her in person. When they finally met for dinner, he told her details about his life that she was not expecting, not that she even wanted to know about it. He cried in front of her, as he poured his heart out to her. Many people would find this hilarious, but it worried me. Marge is a pregnant woman dealing with a mentally ill person, but she appeared calm in front of him and did not show any signs of fear. Soon after that scene, she finds out that Mike lied to her about everything, and the truth is that he is just very ill. The Coen brothers did a bad job of trying to make Mike’s situation funny, but they did a great job of creating mystery and building up Marge’s role of a “mother figure”.

Reason 3: Gore is not funny; it is gross. Not much to say about this theme of the film. There are many scenes where people get killed and they are not pretty or funny sights. I am not sure if the Coen brothers tried to make the death scenes appear “light”, but they did the complete opposite. Usually when I watch death scenes, I feel uneasy about them and it makes me physically sick. In one scene particular, a classmate of mine said that the part when Gaear is seen putting Carl’s body parts into a wood-chipper, that it was one of the best and funniest scenes in the film. Well, I don’t think so. All the viewer sees is literally, Gaear putting body parts in a wood-chipper. There is nothing funny about it, but disturbing and weird. It is weird, because it’s a WOOD-CHIPPER of all things.

Reason 2: The characters, Carl and Jerry and the situations that they’re put in are not funny. I will admit now, I was incredibly happy and excited to see William H. Macy in the film. He is one of my favorite actors, which is ironic because I KNOW that he is a funny person and actor in general. Macy is currently starring in a show called “Shameless” on Showtime and it is so amazing and odd to see him portray a character like Frank Gallagher and then see him play an almost equally pathetic, terrible, and manipulative character such as Jerry Lundegaard. However, what Jerry lacks is humor. If Jerry and Frank met in a jail cell or randomly in a restaurant in Chicago, Jerry could definitely learn a few things. Due to his character being a complete slimeball, this made him less funny and less intriguing. That goes the same for Carl as well. The actions that he carries out, killing multiple people because they “got in the way” was completely unnecessary.

Reason 1: And finally… their accents are not funny. They are very, very annoying. The film was set in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and if you didn’t know already, people who are native Minnesotans have very strong accents. Their accents sound almost Scottish or Irish, but like… worse. The characters say “Oh yeah?” in every single scene and their accents became so bothersome to me that it came to the point where I wasn’t even watching the film, I was paying more attention to what they were saying and how they were saying it. I can’t even begin to imagine why the Coen brothers chose this specific state and to actually have their actors speak in the accent for the film. I believe it’s because they think the accent sound funny, so it makes the “crime thriller” aspect of the film sound silly and ridiculous. Not only is the film not funny, but it’s ridiculous to the point of “why am I watching this?” to “what is this even really about?” The ending, just ends with Marge in bed with her husband, pretending like everything's okay, as if she did not just almost die.

I’m not sure about everyone else who has seen the film, but this is not what I signed up for.

'Blue Velvet' Review

Imagine this: Sauntering to the melodic, haunting voice of Lana Del Rey’s cover of “Blue Velvet”. Tiptoeing through a fog of red light, into the mysterious… psychedelic… disturbing world of David Lynch. Do not walk, but run.

David Lynch is notably known for his cult classic television show, Twin Peaks, which only lasted two seasons (but is returning soon at high demand). He directed many neo-noir films such as Mulholland Drive and Blue Velvet. He tends to use violence in his work, but transforms it into an esoteric, or surreal visual.

In Blue Velvet, a young man Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) comes home after his father becomes ill. He finds a detached ear in a field and he decides to work with the town detective's daughter Sandy Williams (Laura Dern) to figure out what happened. The ear guides Beaumont on an investigation, which leads him to a sensual, mysterious nightclub singer (Isabella Rossellini) and a group of psychotic men who have taken her child. Beaumont tries his very best to solve the mystery and help the woman, but is also caught in her situation. It is difficult for him to part ways, when he is deeply attracted to her.

In the film, it opens up with the title sequence, against a blue velvet background and haunting, spine-tingling instrumental music. It cuts to the soothing song “Blue Velvet”, which is the film’s theme song. The viewer sees red roses, a man smiling and waving on an electrical plant truck, accompanied by his dog. It later transitions to yellow tulips, children crossing the street heading to school, and then a house with a man watering his lawn. The music continues as the scene cuts back and forth between a woman inside the house watching a mystery film and the man watering his lawn, who suddenly has a stroke. A dog and a baby approach the man as he lays on the ground, struggling for help. Then the music becomes creepy and eerie as a close up of the grass follows a pile of bugs.

Cut to the end of the film, where a similar sequence happens. In this case, Jeffrey, Sandy and her mother are in the Williams’ kitchen looking at a bird sitting on the windowsill with a bug in its beak. Sandy asks, “It’s a strange world, isn’t it?” with no one answering her. The beginning sequence of the film is repeated, however it is shown in reverse order: yellow tulips, man with dog on passing truck, red roses… and finally a little boy running towards Dorothy, who is reunited with her son. The look on her face indicates that she is finally at ease and happy to be with her son, but there is also a sad look to it. The film closes with the last line from “Blue Velvet”, echoing “And I can still see Blue Velvet through my tears”. Which could mean that although Dorothy is safe and with her son, she still has the painful memories of the events that occurred.

I believe the film opened like it did to show in almost a sarcastic way how at peace and cheerful the town looked, but little do the residents know that there are ominous events happening. Not everyone is happy, or every situation is good, and the beginning shows this. The ending is just a repeat in reverse form but altered because it actually is a happy ending, though it raises eyebrows in which, “Is everything really okay? Is David Lynch just messing with us again? Will Jeffrey find another ear?” these are questions that some might ask, but they are unnecessary because at the end, it closed without having any loose ends.

'Blade Runner' Review

In the dystopian science fiction film noir Blade Runner directed by Ridley Scott, based on the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick, tells about human-made robots called “replicants” that look visibly identical to humans and are used by the Tyrell Corporation for hard labor. The replicants rebelling on Earth are searched for and “retired” (killed) by police operatives called “Blade Runners”. In the film, the replicants were genetically made to be emotionless androids that hold no empathy for others, but they appear to be compassionate, whereas humans in contrast appear rude and lack humanity. Thus, asking the question, “What does it mean to be human?”
In order to identify replicants from humans, they are given a test called "Voight-Kampff". Their empathy toward things is tested through their response to certain questions. Tyrell’s assistant, Rachael is an experimental replicant, but she believes she is human. Rachael’s mind is full of memories from her past. However, when Blade Runner, Deckard, tells her bluntly that her memories were inserted into her brain from a real human; she shows true emotion by crying. Though, she is forced to go through a more advanced version of the "Voight-Kampff" to check if she’s a replicant for sure. Rachael is depicted as a femme fatale replicant. She saves Deckard from being killed, but her relationship with him is depicted as dominated by Deckard.

The leader and most dangerous of the group of rebelling replicants was presented as Roy, who appeared to hold human, yet animalistic characteristics. When Roy manipulates genetic designer, J.F. Sebastian to get to his “creator” Tyrell to try to convince him to expand his 4-year lifespan, and is rejected, he kisses then kills his creator. While doing so, he seems to express regret when he kills Tyrell.
The epic battle towards the end of the film between Roy and Deckard exposed Roy’s animalistic side when he searches for a beaten Deckard and howls at the ceiling. When Deckard is falling off a building and is near death, a dying Roy saves him in time and tells him about all the things he has done and all the things he has seen and utters his last words: “All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain. Time… to die”. Roy releases a dove, which could be represented as his soul or in Biblical images such as Noah’s Flood. Roy’s behavior towards the end of his life showed how compassionate and humanistic a very powerful replicant can be. As for the humans shown in the film, they were characterized as cold people. As Zhora, a rebel replicant, was being “retired”, the human population was oblivious of the event. They held their power over their creations by forcing them into being “mega-manufacturers”.
Blade Runner creates the idea that replicants are harsh, unsympathetic androids when in reality, they are compassionate with each other and show concern. Humans are revealed to be cold and lack humanity, while replicants’ humanity was shown many times, when a replicant would save a human’s life. The question “What does it mean to be human?” is not quite answered when the film adds that Deckard might be in fact, a replicant. Although, a replicant’s past and memories are inserted into their minds and come from a human’s; it is still possible for a human and replicant to have the same memories. But the question remains uncertain… until the sequel is released in October of 2017.

'Taxi Driver' Review

“You’re only… as healthy… as you… feel.”

This is what Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) says to himself as he poorly handles being ignored and despised by Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), with whom his date with did not go as well as he thought it would. Though, this to me, is when Travis’ mental state decreases.

In the 1976 film Taxi Driver, directed by Martin Scorsese, it highlights loneliness and alienation, which happens to be the theme for this year’s Film Society. A young, war veteran, Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro), takes up the job as a taxi driver and travels around New York picking up and dropping off different types of people. As Travis does his job, he becomes attracted to a woman, Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), who works as a volunteer for Senator Charles Palantine (Leonard Harris), who is running for President. After a date went wrong with Betsy, Travis finds himself involved with an underage prostitute, Iris (Jodie Foster), who Travis believes he can rescue her from her pimps. Although Travis starts as a taxi driver in the beginning of the film and survives death and endures obstacles along the way; at the end, he is still a taxi driver, but not the same person he was before.

Within the course of a few months, Travis changes drastically and it started after his terrible date with Betsy. He becomes fixated on getting stronger and getting muscles. He buys guns and spends time on gearing himself up for his end-goal, which remains unclear to me still. The film offers many elements to consider paying more attention to and draw out conclusions about. Though the question of whether Taxi Driver is a film noir or not, is a popular question. This question can be answered when looking at the character types and dissecting specific qualities the film may have that would be considered as film noir aspects.

Martin Scorsese is a name in the film industry that many people know. It is not only his directing that made Taxi Driver an iconic film, but I believe the score really stands out. Bernard Herrmann, who composed the music for the film also did the score for other film noirs, such as Citizen Kane and Psycho. The score consisted of mainly instruments, like the trumpet, saxophone, and drums. When Travis would see Betsy or experience a calm, content moment with someone, the music would be intimate and smooth like jazz. However, the instruments would play intensely when a person or situation appeared bad or suspicious came across Travis. The score helped move the film along and progress, as it was easy-going and not too distracting.

To avoid spoiling too much of the film to those who have not seen it yet, I would encourage those to skip over this paragraph and read the next. In the last leg of Taxi Driver, Travis goes on a mission which, as the audience might assume is to assassinate Senator Charles Palantine, goes wrong. When Travis’ initial plan does not go as planned, he rushes over to the apartment where Iris lives and does her work. At Iris’ apartment is where the bloodbath occurs. As Travis is killing pimps left and right, there is no sound except for Iris’ money collector yelling out “I’ll kill you” repeatedly and the splashing noise that comes from the bodies after the bullet goes through them. This long sequence features Travis attempting to kill or have himself killed twice, which made me think was this shoot-out planned or random? The scene that follows the bloody massacre, is of newspaper clippings of Travis recovering from a coma and being considered a hero for saving Iris’ life. This scene is almost oneiric, as it does not feel real. This ending felt unrealistic because throughout the film, Travis was mentally unstable. From the bad date he had with Betsy, the people he drove around, working out excessively, buying weapons, taking pills… all to the point of him killing men. People tend to always remember the quote "You talkin to me?" but what they don't pay much attention to is the line that follows, which is "Cuz, I'm the only one here." This adds to Travis' unhealthy mental state because not only is he alone in his room, but he is talking to himself in the mirror. He knows no one can hear him, yet he is talking as if someone else is in the room with him. When he is with other people, he is not really there, or at least not mentally. The only time when he is comfortable speaking aloud to others or speaking at all is through his journal, because it is for him only.

In all, it comes down to Travis being alienated in a world that he feels is unclean and filled with people who are scum. He wants to take out the garbage and start anew, but this is difficult for him when everyone around him is corrupted with something awful. He also wants to help others. He is socially awkward or not socially aware of what is acceptable and what is not. He believed the pornographic movie he brought Betsy to was a great idea, though it was not. When he killed the men that were with Iris, at the end, he was considered a hero for saving her. However this is unsure because there was a moment when Iris looked content with her pimp, Sport (Harvey Keitel) as they danced together. It is as if Travis were the dead flowers in his apartment: quickly dying because they weren't given proper attention or care.

'Double Indemnity' Review

I wrote six pages of notes for this review, so this post will most definitely be more than 300 words.

Please bear with me, Toth.

When searching for film noirs, Double Indemnity will most likely be at the top of the list. In this 1944 classic, Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray), works for an insurance company and gets tangled in an arrangement with Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck). Mrs. Dietrichson plans to kill her husband, Mr. Dietrichson (Tom Powers) and live off the money from the illegal accidental death claim (which is also referred to as "double indemnity"). Although Neff and Mrs. Dietrichson are romantically involved, their relationship begins and ends deadly with their plan for murder. When the film comes close to its end, the couple's perfect plan is revealed to have errors and the truth is unveiled by close sources to the murderous couple.

While the film was a great start for the course and there were many things that could be said about it, there are a few things in particular that I wanted to point out. In less than the first 10 minutes of Double Indemnity, Neff reveals himself as the mastermind of Mr. Dietrichson’s “accidental” death and explains his reasoning for his actions. He tells the entire story to his colleague and confidant, Barton Keyes (Edward G. Robinson), with the use of flashbacks and voice-over. This is an important aspect in the film, because it made me wonder, what was the director and screenwriter, Billy Wilder’s point of having Neff reveal everything to the audience and Keyes, in the beginning instead of having to find out at the end of the film? I came to the conclusion that it allows the audience and Keyes (in this case he is somewhat like the audience: confused and shocked) to sympathize with Neff’s characterization. Neff is, in the beginning of the film, in a state of weakness, with his injury and desperation. He without hesitation, goes straight to his office to leave a message to Keyes, telling him the truth, after he commits his last act, something that adds to the trouble that he is already in.

Double Indemnity also contains one motif that only stood out to me until the very end of the film. Neff and Keyes have the type of friendship that is filled with admiration, brotherly love, and humor; humor being the main aspect. Whenever Keyes took out a cigarette to smoke, he would never have a match to light it. Therefore, Neff would always be right next to him, ready to light his cigarette with one of his own matches. I believe Neff even made a remarked that Keyes should carry his own matches, but Keyes claimed he didn't have to, because he had Neff do it for him. I found this interaction between the two to be completely genuine and calming because it was the one thing that kept their minds off of reality, the major situation that they were dealing with on separate occasions. In the very last scene, Neff is at his most weakest point and the only person there for him is Keyes. When Neff, who is lying on the floor in light clothing, about to take what could possibly be his last cigarette; Keyes walks over to him, wearing a dark suit appearing like death. However, this time the roles are reversed and Keyes is the one to light Neff’s cigarette.

The cigarette and match motif came to light in the very end to me, mostly because I realized that in this moment, Keyes was finally the “tall man” and Neff was “small”. Keyes tend to be the man to be unsure and distracted throughout the film and “so close” to solving a situation, whilst Neff would be very precise and know “move-by-move” with everything until everything goes wrong at the end. The motif highlights that Neff and Keyes switch roles and that one is leaning on the other for guidance, something that Neff never needed before.

Great quotes that stood out in Double Indemnity:

"Wolf on a phony claim."

"...You said it was a suicide. Check. You said it was murder... Check."

"They keep the liquor cabinet locked" "It's okay, I keep my own key."

"She's a tramp from a long line of tramps."

"How could I have known that all along, murder smelt like honeysuckle?"

 

 

 

 

Hello... it's me again.

Hello... it's me again.

I apologize to those of you, who have been loyal readers of my blog since 2014, when I decided to first create it. Even though writing, especially about films of all sorts, is my favorite thing to do, I slowly lost interest in my blog. I began to question myself and my writing, which is something I rarely do. Therefore, I stopped updating my blog with the idea that "people don't actually read anymore". HOWEVER, luckily for you readers and for me, in some magical sort of way, I am basically being "forced" to write one blog post every week, until the middle of December for my Film Noir class. What's amazing about this class is that I already have the list of films that I have to write reviews about. I have seen maybe 4 or 5 of the movies on the list, but many of them I have not, but I am super excited to watch them with brand new eyes. What I find ironic, is that in my last blog post from 2014, I mentioned that I love black and white films and guess what... the first film I had to watch for my Film Noir class is from the 1940s and is in black and white. Awesome.

Not only will I be posting more to my blog, I have this newfound bravery that I most definitely did not have two years ago. I still believe that many people do not read as much as they should be in this era, so I will be creating a YouTube channel soon. My channel will give me more time and flexibility to express myself without having to spellcheck. I am really excited to share my thoughts with everyone, so keep a look out!

Keep reading,

Marisa