Double indemnity

In Double indemnity, Phyllis isn’t happy because of the way Mr. Dietrichson is treating her. Phyllis feels like a prisoner, locked in, trapped, and unloved. Ultimately her hatred for Mr. Dietrichson, and her desire for freedom and power, are what lead her to kill him. Neff, on the other hand, seems pretty happy. He has a job that he likes to do and that pays him well. However, based on Neff’s shameless and bold moves toward Phyllis, it seems he lusts after women.

Analyzing both characters, it seems that Phyllis values freedom and power while Neff just wishes to be desired and wanted by women. In this way, Phyllis is a much more complex character, while Neff is a simple character with a simple desire. The fact that Neff ultimately decides to agree to kill Dietrichson for Phyllis, and also because he thinks he can get away with it, shows how far his willing to go to satisfy his own selfish desire.

It is interesting, however, that at first Neff refuses to have any part in Phyllis’s devious plan, but later rethinks the whole situation and ultimately decides to go through with it. It is this scene that shows a stark difference between Neff and Phyllis. Neff still has a conscience, and wrestles with it throughout the movie. He feels the weight of it. Phyllis, on the other hand, doesn’t once feel remorse for the evil deeds she’s done and manipulates rather easily. It seem as if Phyllis is accustom to acting evil, and has formed the habit of doing so. Neff is lustful but he hasn’t undermined his conscience as much as Phyllis has.

Later on, while Neff is confessing how he killed Mr. Dietrichson, he recalls how he “couldn’t hear” his “own footsteps” and how he “had the walk of a dead man.” This marks the death of his conscience and his mortal soul. It is at this point that Neff truly becomes evil and a murderer, like Phyllis.

Phyllis later reveals that she indeed just used Neff for the money and that she was also manipulating Zaccatti, making him think that Lola was with another man so he could go into one of his “jealous rages” and kill Lola. Taking into account that Lola had earlier confessed her belief that Phyllis had killed Lola’s mother, this gives us a clear picture of who Phyllis is. She is manipulative, evil, and selfish.

However, in one of the final scenes between Neff and Phillys, it seems that there is still some good in Phyllis. She decides not to kill Neff, stating that she was unaware that she was in fact in love with him until she was unable to fire a second shot. Phyllis’s heart of stone finally has melted a little and has allowed love to pierce her heart. Neff, however, is indifferent to her, having seen her manipulative motives, and kills her because he no longer sees any good in her. He is filled with hatred and only sees Phyllis as an evil being, with no soul, that would be better off dead.

Taking the movie as a whole, it doesn’t seem that this is what a nihilistic world looks like since the exact same situation could have happened in a world where God actually exists. The movie starts with Neff’s confession, and it ends with his ultimate demise. It may seem that Neff was fated to commit this crime, but the reality is that throughout the movie Neff had many opportunities to not kill Mr. Dietrichson. Neff could have chosen to not listen to Phyllis’s and chosen not to be lured by Phyllis’s beauty. Neff knew what he was doing was wrong but decided to do it anyways. He had choice.

Word Count:625

Published by gonzalezk2451

Hi, a little about me. I'm currently a student at Sac City College and American River College. This is my third year attending a community college and I'm currently majoring in Biopsychology with the hope of transferring to UC Santa Barbara in the Fall. I took an interest in this class because it combined both my interest in philosophy and my love for movies. How did my interest for philosophy come about you may ask? Well, I was born in a very religious Catholic household and I have very vivid memories of going to church often to pray with my family. My faith stuck with me up to my days in high school where I joined a Christian club and I met a Pastor from a different Christian denomination. He had different beliefs than I did, concerning Christianity, which led me to dive deeper into the Catholic faith and learn more about it. Scrolling through YouTube, trying to find answers to questions that I had about my own faith, I stumbled upon the YouTube channel of a Father named Robert Barron. He would comment on popular movies in the culture, from a Christian perspective, and he would also talk about the intellectual and philosophical tradition of the Catholic Church. He loved to talk about philosophers such as Aristotle, St. Augustine, and, mainly, St. Thomas Aquinas and also critique many philosophers such as Nietzsche, Kant, Sartre and other philosophers. His YouTube videos introduced me to the philosophy world and sparked an interest in me for the subject that has stayed with me to this day. Some other things about me, I was a Cross Country runner and Track and Field athlete during high school and also during my first two years at American Rive College. I like learning about my faith and I also love hearing podcasts. Some current hobbies of mine are reading and flipping stuff on Ebay.

3 thoughts on “Double indemnity

  1. I agree that both Walter and Phyllis have a conscience in the situations you mentioned. Maybe I just want to see a little redemption in them.

    Like

Leave a reply to vickiprimrose Cancel reply

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started