Angel of Death: A Film Analysis of Phyllis’s Death in Double Indemnity by Jonah

Jonah Jerabek
Professor Sinowitz
Noir Films and Fiction
10/6/17
Angel of Death: A Film Analysis of Phyllis’s Death in Double Indemnity
            “You can do better than that, can’t you baby?”. Walter Neff slowly approaches Phyllis Dietrichson, daring her to pull the trigger on him just once more. Blood seeps into Neff’s jacket but despite his sparking nerve endings, his demeanor refuses to be bothered. His dark form glides across the living room towards Phyllis’s frozen physique. She stays stiff as he plucks the gun from her calm hand. Without a card left to play, Phyllis sobs her love for Neff. “Sorry, baby, I’m not buying”, Neff deflects her pleas. “I’m not asking you to buy, just hold me close”; Phyllis buries her face into Neff’s unforgiving shoulder. Swiftly and without remorse, Neff stares into Phyllis’s eyes and sends a piece of lead into her torso. He proceeds to drag her limp body onto a nearby couch. Standing up professionally, he gives her one last glance before grabbing his fedora and walking purposefully towards the door.
            This filming of this scene is particularly important for Double Indemnity because it represents not only the power struggle taking place between Neff and Phyllis, but also a stark contrast to Neff’s character earlier in the film. Since their introduction, Phyllis had been playing Neff. She heartlessly manipulated him into taking the life of her innocent, if cross husband and then, with a calculated bullet, attempted to take Neff’s too. Altogether, this is the climax of the film. Planning Mr. Dietrichson’s murder, orchestrating it to perfection, being softly driven insane by the Barton Keyes’s unstoppable search, every action, reaction, and interaction that made up this film all led to this lone moment.
The curtain is drawn and the scene begins.
            As Neff wanders towards Phyllis, the audience is treated to an over-the-shoulder shot of Phyllis beyond Neff’s dark silhouette. The back of Neff’s head and shoulders are seen through remarkably low-key lighting as his upper body casually sways towards his attacker. He’s lit so darkly that he’s hardly distinguishable from a shadow. Like the angel of death descending upon a firstborn son, Neff appears to have no emotions, nor fears, nor even thoughts. He’s just an instrument, compelled and shielded by a single purpose. In that moment, he is invincible.
            Meanwhile, Phyllis is shown in high-key lighting; she is revealed by the light and completely exposed. Phyllis is powerless for the first time in the film. This signifies a huge shift as Phyllis has so consistently held power over Neff through his love for her. But when she pushed him too far, Neff suddenly felt nothing for her and all the power darted back in his direction.  
            A close shot shows Phyllis and Neff’s intimate exchange as she professes her love and Neff appears not to feel a thing. The close shot is particularly important for this scene because it evokes a huge level of intimacy. The audience, besides a slight outline of Neff’s shoulder and left hemisphere, has an image very similar to what Neff would receive. Her damp eyes plead for Neff’s forgiveness. They plead for your forgiveness. This close shot is painfully vital because this particular moment either marks Phyllis’s first moment of true vulnerability or her greatest acting yet. Whichever, it may be, it certainly deserves the blatant attention that a close shot gives. As she buries her head into Neff’s shoulder, her faces dips into the darkness, the power he holds so devoutly. The close shot continues until he pulls the trigger and her body drops into his arms.
            As she falls, the shot switches to a medium shot. We watch him softly slump her body onto the couch, and stand up. For the first time, our eyes are drawn to the chairs, a vase, a large obscure painting, and a plethora of other accessories. Suddenly, Neff and Phyllis don’t hold command of the focus as they had. Before he’d pulled the trigger, they were the sole focus on the screen. Now, the scene is far more ordinary than we’d expected. This instantaneous switch from emotional begging and a heartless execution to an average living room provides a harsh clarity.
            Personally, this was the most powerful transition in a very powerful scene. The fact that the ordinary chairs, lamps, and pillows hadn’t changed in the slightest is harshly shocking. A man was so driven by uncontrollable hatred that he committed the ultimate action of revenge. Meanwhile, some intolerable pillow is audacious enough to hold up the exact same space as it had before this life changing event. It doesn’t shrink away in fear nor fade away out of respect. It just is. This cruel transition screams louder than the screeching bullet leaving Phyllis’s pistol. Neff grabs his fedora and strides off in this uncomfortably casual setting. He returns to the darkness as he exits the front door, leaving a room exactly the same as the first time he had entered it.

            This scene was a filming masterpiece. It perfectly summed up Neff and Phyllis’s power struggle, Phyllis’s emotional or feinted vulnerability, and Neff’s perspective after he took Phyllis off the earth. This was all accomplished using nothing more than a couple shot transitions, lighting changes, and shifts in focus.  That is astounding.

Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 8, 2017 at 9:56 AM

    Your idea about Neff being obscured by the shadows so much that he blends in with them and that when Phyllis leans on him she disappears is very interesting. I had noticed the shadows in the scene, but I never thought about it so in depth and creatively as you did. There were a lot of obvious things to point out about the scene to show that Neff had power over Phyllis, such as how his scenes were longer than hers, which shows superiority, but the way you chose to describe the scene related very well to the overall theme of the essay and made the essay flow well.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousOctober 9, 2017 at 11:48 AM

    I enjoyed the way you set the scene for this paper, so good job. I felt that in writing my paper I struggled with describing all that was necessary for the scene, but you do a good job with description here. Maybe one thing to consider is including stills for the specific moments you're talking about from the movie just to give the audience some more context. I was also a fan of the way you described Neff's approach to Phyllis after she's shot him as not having emotions or fears, which is true, since Neff is incredibly composed during this scene. I would maybe cut back on some of the stronger statements you use such as "he is invincible" because I think you drive this point home with your evidence and stating it may not be necessary.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Watchmen as a Neo-Noir

Shannon Swingley Noir, Film and Novel Professor Sinowitz December 15, 2017. 1300 The Watchmen as a Neo-Noir Watchmen is a superhero film adapted by Zack Snyder based on the DC comics written in the 1980’s. The Watchmen, made up of the Comedian, Ozymandius, Dr. Manhattan, Nite Owl II, Rorschach, and Silk Spectre II, are a band of masked hero’s modeled after the minutemen of their parent’s generation. All of the minutemen are lost to time except for the Comedian, and the Watchmen are left to look after the wellbeing of the world, despite their success in helping the west win the Vietnam war and keep Nixon in the Whitehouse, the multiterm president outlaws masked heroes, disbanding the team. The Comedian and Dr. Manhattan are coerced to work with the government. The doctor keeping an eye on nuclear dangers in the world, and despite his efforts soviet posturing for nuclear attack during the cold war is coming to a head. Ozymandius, now Adrian Veidt capitalizes on his identity as
Read more

Noir? I barely know her! Why Neo-Noir is a Genre in its Own Way

Mallory Pendergast Noir Film & Novel Professor Sinowitz 15 December 2017 Noir? I barely know her! Why Neo-Noir is a Genre in its Own Way Throughout the semester we have read and watched many noir novels and films, but at some point, there was a shift in the elements constituting noir, to what some refer to as neo-noir. This shift occurred around the 1960s, ending with Orsen Wells’ film  Touch of Evil . After watching this film and then watching  Chinatown , which is roughly the transition from classic noir to new-noir in our class, I definitely noticed the elements of classic noir shifting to a more modern style, and it was not just because the films were beginning to be produced in color. Some of the elements that have been transformed in neo-noir are violence, femme fatales, the chronological order and complexity of plots, false accusations, unreliability of narrators, sexuality, and the personal codes of protagonists (“The Elements of Neo-Noir,” 2014). The escalation
Read more

Noir and the Necessity of an Unhappy Ending

Shannon Swingley Noir, Film, and Novel Professor Sinowitz November 17, 2017 Noir and the Necessity of an Unhappy Ending         Curled up in my college dorm cliché of a beanbag chair, I was able to take a more attentive approach to The Postman Always Rings Twice than some of the other films and novels from this seminar because I began reading early for once. The end of the novel was growing more and more uncomfortable in the context of noir than any of the other stories had managed. This wildly dysfunctional thrill seeking couple, who were at each other’s throats for a lack of excitement were going to meet their happily ever after despite venomous arguments, an unplanned pregnancy, and an un-convicted murder hanging over their heads. Our class has foundationally defined noir for its sense of impending doom, so reading the hardboiled character in a baptismal moment where, “all the devilment, and meanness, and shiftlessness, and no-account stuff in [Frank’s] life had been pr
Read more