Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Double Indemnity
This film contains heavy voice over narration. Do you think this is a useful device in the film? What is the effect of the narration? How would the film be different if there was no voice over narration? Or, if the narration was provided by someone other than Walter? Blog entry is due Thursday, Feb 9th.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I thought that Walter's narration of the story was a useful device for the film. It makes it clear that the story was told from Walter's perspective. If the story was told from the perspective of Phyllis it would have been a much different movie.
ReplyDeleteWalter's narration of his own story is a typical element seen in Film Noir. The voice over shows from the first scene his transformation from a lonely insurance salesman to an investigator/detective of his own story. The narration takes most of the attention away from the plot and turns it instead onto the transformation of Walter's character and how he succumbs to Phillis' femme fatale ways. If Walter wasn't narrating his own story, he probably wouldn't have been seen clearly as the main protagonist.
ReplyDeleteThe narration acts as a good framing device that sets the tone for the rest of the film. It serves to engage the audience by forcing them to jump around in the chronology of the story. Towards the end, specifically after Walter is shot, the audience is clued in as to when the narration takes place and it serves to reward them for being able to follow along. I also think that if the story weren't told by Walter, instead maybe Keyes for example, then the story wouldn't have the same amount of detail and personal involvement as it does.
ReplyDeleteI think the voice over did a great job in this film. By using the voice over, we can access into the story much more easier, and have more depression and darkness from the movie. If the narration was provided by someone other than Walter， then this film will lose lots of tensions.
ReplyDeleteI thought the use of voiceover narration in Double Indemnity was excessive. It worked well as a framing device at the beginning and end of the film, but was overused throughout, especially during scenes where Walter's actions and the dialogue clearly demonstrated his motivations. Voiceover narration is an important element of film noir, so it forms an essential part of Double Indemnity. However, I think the film could have benefitted from less voiceover narration through the middle portion.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI think the using of voiceover is helpful in this movie. We can follow the story by watching the screen and listening to the voice at the same time. It helps storyteller to explain what's going on. And i think, in some degree, voiceover does positive effection on the combination between seeing and hearing. it also helps director to creat many montage effects.
ReplyDeleteIn narrative movie, if you chose to tell a story step by step, voiceover may seems ridiculous. However, if you tell a story in a reverse order, an appropriate use of voiceover may drives the movie to success. And i think Walter is the best man to be the stoyteller not only because this thing happened on him, but also he is the key person of the whole story. He knows everything. If let other people tell the story during the movie, i may ask why this guy knows everything.
But i think there is too much voiceover in this movie. If Walter could say a little bit less and give us some mystery, people would willing to dig the secret out.
I would argue that for most movies, voiceover is an easy way out, to properly convey the entire plot. However, with this film, i think the voiceover helped a lot. After all, this is a film noir, we are being told the story through the protagonist, and that's demonstrated when he speaks in the voice recorder. This tale is through mystery, the telling of a story, and i think voiceover gives the film that mystery style. Like many of you have said in this post, the story is told in reverse order, so i think it makes it 100 percent appropriate to use voiceover.
ReplyDeleteWith that said, i think the movie needs to be taken for what it is, a great introduction the world of film noir. I dont think that this film has mastered all the techniques, however, it layered the foundations for future film noir movies.
The fact that I thought the main character was a bit overplayed and fake made the narration a bit of a drag. However, I feel without the narration we would not have been able to follow the events of the film. Through the narration we are able to hear the main character think through certain events and make sense of them in relation to the plot. It allows us to make connections which will allow us to make sense of the scene we are presented with in the beginning of the film.
ReplyDeleteThe entertaining element of this particular narration is that even the narrator, whom usually has better judgement and is more aware, fails to present a reliable unbiased source of information. The narrator is painting confessing his action but is also portraying himself as the victim of a woman's wishes.
I feel as though the narration in the movie truly served its purpose well. We get an idea from the very beginning what has happened, what the situation for the character at that point in time is. We get somewhat of a sense of urgency, but of relief at the same time. Urgency in the sense that the character is doing this before he goes away somewhere. A confessional before he has to live if you would. And progressively it helps move the story along because we get to hear what the character is thinking, feeling and we can see what he is seeing. The poor acting aside, the narration truly does serve it's purpose in terms of character development and story plot.
ReplyDeleteThe narration added to the movie. Since the movie is about Neff's experience , having his character narrate , made the events more believable. The narration wasn't awkward, it fit right in to the film. Neff is able to give an accurate description of how his character changed over time and what consequences that had. It makes it easy for the audience to understand the plot because the narrator unfolds it well and adds his on comments and feelings about it. The narration adds to Neff's character sketch and also reveals character traits of Lola, Phillis, Keyes and Nino. Having another character narrate , would not be as effective , simply because the story essentially is about Neff. Also the poor acting by Fred Macmurray can be ignored at times because the narration makes his actions more convincing.
ReplyDeleteAs this film involves the protagonist taking the audience back in time, I found that the heavy voice over narration was effective. Without any narration, the audience would not have been able to understand what was going through Walter's mind as he made certain choices, and what he has learnt from his actions. Only Phylis or Keyes could have been able to provide any form of narration instead of Walter. However, had either one of these two been used, the audience would not get the full story and less of the focus would be on the protagonist, Walter.
ReplyDeleteI think that the use of voice over narration in the movie was really the only way to tell the story and keep the same meaning. Because the whole film was to be viewed as a story being told through Walter's eyes, having the heavy voice over which vocalized Walter's internal thoughts and beliefs was necessary and effective. Were the voice over to come from a character like Phyllis, the entire film would have been shifted to make us sympathetic to her. And the voice over was used to represent Walter's confession to Keyes, so I think it would have been impossible to receive a voice over narration from Phyllis because she would never confess to her crimes.
ReplyDeleteThe voice over in Double Indemnity serves the purpose of revealing to the reader events of a murder we later watch happen. It’s a useful device in terms of making the movie less about plot and what happens and more on how it happens and why. If it weren’t for the voice over, there would be less of the expected “doom” that there usually is in the film noire genre. Also, Fred MacMurray lacks that mysterious, bitter personality you would expect in a character that plays Walter Neff, making the voice over narration even more necessary to the story. He kills the women he loved and shows no remorse through the narration.
ReplyDeleteIf the narration were provided by someone other than Walter then the story would obviously be completely different. We view the story from Walter’s point of view, we figure out, and unmask characters together with Walter. If, for example, Phyllis were to narrate the story, there would probably be much less mystery and unraveling to do near the end.
MacMurray's narration in the film played an important role in revealing the psychology behind his character, Walter. Walter's narration not only provides critical insight into the motivations and reservations of his actions, but it also adds to the mysterious and ominous tone of the film. Although Double Indemnity does not represent a complete mastery of film noir techniques, it still falls into the genre because of the focus on the psychology of Walter. The narration wouldn't be as effective if it came from Phyllis because she is a much more emotionally unstable and fragile so her narration wouldn't be a reliable source of information.
ReplyDeleteNarration is an element in Film Noir. As the narration is by Walter it portrays him as a protagonist. Otherwise if it were by Phyllis, the story would have taken a different turn or by any third character like Keyes it would not convey the love and the passion that Walter had for Phyllis. The narration in the beginning of the movie is a good way of building the background ant setting up the mood but it shouldn’t have built the whole story as the story and the actions were strong enough. Overuse of the narration did not give the audience a scope to come up wit their own observations.
ReplyDeleteI think voiceover narration is very nessary and effective in Double Indemnity. The voiceover gives us a distinct and direct way to understand the movie and the story plot. In another hand, the voiceover make the story told in reverse order, it's very interesting to the audience. I think narration really works in film noir.
ReplyDeleteIf the narration was provided by someone other than Walter I will confuse the story and events, because he is the key line of the whole story.
I Thought that Walter's narration was an incredibly important tool used as it showed the audience that we were watching the story from Walter's perspective. Since the story is being told from Walter's perspective the audience has to understand that there are stark differences between what we are seeing and what actually happened as Walter's emotions may have distorted events. Walter is the only one who can tell the story as he is the only one who saw all the important events and the femme fatal is a sociopath with no perspective.
ReplyDeletePeter Markoski
I think the use of voice over was an effective tool in Double Indemnity. By having Walter narrate the film, we are not only told what he did, but why he did certain things. The voice over really helped us get into his mind and understand his point of view on things. Having someone else narrate wouldn't have been as effective.
ReplyDeleteAlthough cliché and overused in some parts of the film, narration was a beneficial and necessary aspect of “Double Indemnity.” Without getting to look into Walter’s brain, and getting to see his thoughts and motivations, the audience never sympathizes for him. Neff is supposed to be the tragic hero of this story. The only problem is, he doesn’t do many heroic things. In fact, we see him do some pretty terrible things: he seduces a married woman and then conspires with her to kill her husband. Without growing to like Neff even a little, the audience would miss much of the meaning in the film. For example, the end scene, and the theme of friendship between Neff and Keyes would be extremely diminished if the audience only liked Keyes. We would fail to understand how Keyes could forgive/sympathize with a heartless, evil man. If the narration were absent, the audience would be brought through the story with an evil character with no redeemable qualities, making it much bleaker, shallow, and more depressing.
ReplyDeleteThe only other way this film could work would be if either Keyes or Lola served as the narrator/ main protagonist. They are the only other characters with positive qualities. If it were narrated by either of them, however, it would be a much different film with much different themes and messages. If the film centered on Keyes, it would be a story of a good man who fights for justice, until he discovers the truth and has to decide whether to turn his best friend in. If Lola were the protagonist, it would be about a girl surrounded by tragedy, and the film would have to delve much deeper into Lola’s character than the original did to create a lasting impact.
I definitely think the narration affects the film as a whole. It made me want to sympathize with Neff since the very beginning; to feel his pain and understand that he never particularly intended to become a/the villain. Without it, the film would just be another story of a male character falling into the hands of a femme fatale and paying the price on his own – no emotional involvement or perspectives to consider. If someone other than Walter had provided the voice over, I don’t think I would have cared to pay such close attention to the details of the film.
ReplyDeleteThe narration helps the film to move smoothly along with what’s happening on screen. It also gives sympathy towards the main character Walter. Narration gives the film its structure, laying out the story. The voice of Walter, in the background of a scene, gives the audience this examination deep into the mind of Walter. Perhaps if the film were to be revealed in another perspective, the audience would not relate to Walter. The story wouldn’t appeal to the audience if Phyllis were the narrator, because she is seen as this devious character. Walter’s innocence and “true love” instincts are what leaves the audience wanting him to succeed. With Walter’s control and ability to see every action fall into place, similar to a detective, gives him every reason to be the core voice behind the storyline.
ReplyDeleteThe use of voice over narration in Double Indemnity is extremely well done and adds a lot to the film. The narration allows the viewer to get inside Walter Neff’s head and helps clarify both his actions and mindset throughout the film. If there were no narration, a number of events would lose all of their significance and meaning. For instance when Neff first meets Phyllis Dietrichson, without narration the viewer would never know the extent of Neff’s infatuation with her. If another character provided the voice over it could allow for another interesting point of view, Keys for example, but that would completely change the tone of the film.
ReplyDeleteThe narration of Walter Neff throughout the film is a classic characteristic of Film Noir. Not only does it allow us to get inside Walter's head, it allows us to become a part of the detective aspect of the film. By using the narration, the audience is actively involved in figuring out what happens to Walter. If the film did not have a voice over narration, we would still get the gist of what happened with Walter and Phillis, but Walter's character would lack depth, and the film would lack closure. If the story was told by someone else then the movie would be completely different. The fact that the narration comes from Walter provides insight into his consciousness and ultimately lets the audience get well acquainted with their main character.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest thing the narration serves is tying the beginning of the story to the end (or more correctly the end of the story, to the beginning of the story, to the end of the story, or something...). Regardless, it's an easy and effective way to address how the story is supposed to go without using subjective camerawork. I feel like this film would seem less "ill-fated" if it didn't have a narration. The narration makes it seem like the story has already happened and already has a doomed ending, rather than having the audience feel like they are witnessing the story unfold. If the story was narrated by anybody other than Walter, then the audience simply wouldn't look at the story from his perspective. If the narration was by Phillis, the audience may choose to side with her more because they feel more personally connected to her.
ReplyDeleteI think Wilder could have done the film without a narration and still said everything that he wanted to say. He was a pretty brilliant director so it's not like he was using it as a crutch. Wilder even said in an interview with Cameron Crowe "In writing voiceovers, be careful not to describe what the audience already sees. Add to what they’re seeing." That's not to say that I think it was a bad stylistic decision for Double Indemnity (or for Sunset Blvd.) but it was a choice, not lazy writing. I think Wilder added a layer of complexity to the characters that would have been otherwise unattainable. I think, while not strictly necessary, the narration adds to the telling and aesthetics of the story in the same way that a film score does or a long take does. None of these are, strictly speaking, essential to telling the story but in te correct context I think they add to the movie in pretty significant ways. The narration establishes the movie's tone, it creates a sense of dual chronology and of something close to omnipotency (Neff, having already experienced everything that has happened, often foreshadows the way that the story will go--treating his eventual fall from grace like a foregone conclusion) mixed with subjectivity (Neff's characterization of everyone around him, of course, biases us as viewers). Without Neff's narration, Double Indemnity would be a very different movie--not necessarily better or worse--just different.
ReplyDeleteThomas Perry
ReplyDeleteThe narration in double Indemnity is an effective tool that guides us through Walter's story and Walter's perspective. The emotional effect wouldn't of been the same had another character provided the narration. I almost felt like the narration was breaking the fourth wall and directly addressing the audience, but was reminded several times that Walter was actually telling his story to Keys. Nevertheless, the narration served its purpose and effectively and explicitly explained the story, motives, plot, etc. Had narration been absent, aspects of the film may have appeared disoriented. Overall, I enjoyed the narration very much.
Most film noirs contain heavy voice overs, it is almost an element of it. It is a useful device in this film, since Walter is telling the story, the visuals are almost like pictures in a book illustrating the story. Without it I don't think the whole dual time theme would have worked. Also if someone else told the story then it would be a much different one, since we each see our experiences differently.
ReplyDeleteMiguel A. Tamayo
I believe that the voice over narration is essential to the storytelling method of this film and other noirs because it really accentuates the grittiness of these stories. Since the events happened to Walter first person, he is put in the best place to make Phyllis out to be the biggest monster ever, which is what the director was going for. The narration of Walter gives us his side of the story and how he views it. If it was from Phyllis' side the whole story would have been completely different and much more skewed than Walters. It also allows Walter to repent for his sins in a way that wouldn't have been aptly shown with a third person narration.
ReplyDeleteSpencer Cohen
Double Indemnity's voice over narration, a stylistic choice shared by many noir films, is instrumental in drawing the audience into the depths of the human psychological condition, a major component of the film noir movement. Utilizing a number of cinematic devices to do so, lighting, sound composition, set design ect, none may be as effective as the spoken word of the narrator, most often the film's central protagonist, in this case Walter, as it serves to most explicitly convey the thoughts and feelings (ie human psychological condition) to the audience. Subsequently, without the use of voice over narration, the film would ultimately be rendered less powerful and the synergy between all the other various cinematic devices that serve to articulate
ReplyDeletethe motifs of the film noir movement, would be broken, as it is the musings of the narrator that serve to link the ambience exuded through those other devices, together.
Nicholas Kolasinski
Through watching these older films I am starting to realize that voice over narration is probably the most common form of storytelling. I feel as if in this situation it works because of the story being told from the future. Film Noir has a basis in humanity and the dark side of the human, and through one's account of this event you can understand how it is effecting them, and what drove Walter to committing a murder. The structure of the film does feel very dated, and not extremely creative, but the voice over narration in this situation serves it's purpose.
ReplyDelete-Daniel Carter