Double Indemnity Movie Comparison

In 1943, James M. Cain wrote one of his most selling novella “Double Indemnity”. The following year, Billy Wilder, a movie director, with the help of Raymond Chandler, a screenwriter, took the book and adapted it to the big screen while keeping the original title. Eventually, the movie became very popular and nowadays, “Double Indemnity”, widely regarded as a classic, is often considered as a paradigmatic film noir since it has set the standard for films that followed in that genre. The movie adaptation is significantly more effective in creating the mood of suspense and making the overall story tenser through the changes made to the main characters, namely Walter Huff, Barton Keyes and Phyllis Nirdlinger.

To begin, the first obvious change

made to Walter Huff played by Fred MacMurray, is that he is called Walter Neff in the movie. Although it doesn’t contribute in building the mood, it is the first distinct element that readers observe when comparing the movie and the book. As a matter of fact, the movie keeps the confessional aspect of the narration in order to stay loyal to the book. Precisely, comparing the opening of the book and the movie, it displays two different moods. In fact, the book offers foreshadowing, which creates an atmosphere of suspense as Cain writes “That was how I came to this House of Death” (Cain 1). On the other hand, the film reveals that Walter is a murderer from the beginning, which contributes significantly to the atmosphere of the plot. Despite that perhaps, it seems to be a spoiler for the audience that have read the book, Wilder and Chandler actually make the audience wonder what happened to Neff. Acknowledging that the story is told in the perspective of Neff, it shows the evolution of the character as the movie goes forward. In addition, instead of allowing the plot to unfold more organically as in the book, Wilder and Chandler use an unconventional way to allow the plot and the atmosphere of the movie to develop efficiently. Moreover, as the movie alternates between the present and the flashbacks, back and forth, it adds greater tension to the movie, which makes the mood, even more, stressful. As a result, it keeps the audience on the edge of their seat all the way through the movie.
Comparing both stories, the film definitely made the plot, even more, interesting and added more tension to it by making Barton Keyes a bigger character.

As a matter of fact, Keyes elevated from a minor figure in the novel into a dominant player in the movie. In the novel, Huff says that Keyes is “the most tiresome man to do business with in the whole world” and that he “does nothing but sit with his collar open and sweat, and quarrel, and argue” (Cain 9). Moreover, the interactions between both characters happen mostly in a few scenes, for instance, the beginning, the middle and the end. In fact, Cain created Keyes as an obstacle for Huff, just to make the story not as smooth as Huff expected. Precisely, Keyes is a threat for the insurance sales representative, since the head of the Claim Department is good at seeking the truth of every fraud. Their relationship is portrayed as rivalry until the very end where Keyes says “I’m sorry. I’ve kind of liked you” and Huff responds, “I know. Same here” (Cain 104). Keyes in the novel plays a role that is not relevant enough to allow him to contribute to the mood. On the other hand, comparing the relationship between both characters from the novella with the film, it appears that in the movie, there are much more interactions. For instance, Billy Wilder added a significant gesture that is self-explanatory. That is, Neff lighting Keyes’ cigar. Concisely, this gesture builds a closer relationship between Neff and Keyes which later

becomes relevant to the mood. In fact, since they have a close relationship, when Keyes discovers that Neff did commit the fraud, it creates within the audience questions in regards to whether Keyes will expose him or not. Moreover, in the movie, Keyes is definitely the “Sherlock Holmes” of the story where he catches every evidence and can deduce almost every detail that occurred during the murder. By adding such powerful character, Wilder definitely made the overall plot tenser. Nevertheless, since Keyes is good at finding the “veritable” truth behind each story, the spectators feel stressed out just as if they were Neff.
On top of that, Phyllis of the film has contributed a lot more to the tension and the mood of the plot, in contrast to Phyllis from the novella.

Despite that Cain writes Phyllis in a way to build a mysterious and creepy mood around her, for instance when she tells Huff “Maybe I’m crazy. But there’s something in me that loves Death. I think of myself as Death, sometimes” (Cain 18), the overall tension of the plot was not much affected. As a matter of fact, Wilder removed some scenes and in exchange, created some of his own to the plot. There are two crucial element that contributed to tension and the mood of suspense. First, the criminal history of Phyllis that are present in the book were removed. The fact that these records were omitted makes Phyllis colder and a better femme fatale. For instance, the femme fatale character was portrayed so well by Barbara Stanwyck that Phyllis seemed to be an experienced criminal rather than a first-timer. Consequently, it adds creepiness to Phyllis and to the overall plot. Furthermore, Wilder added a scene where Keyes visits Neff unexpectedly while he is waiting for Phyllis. Tension was brought to the plot since the audience knows that Neff works with Phyllis while Keyes is not aware of it. Acknowledging that Keyes is determined to find who committed the crime, that scene must have made every spectator sit on the edge of their seat. On top of that, not only the omission and the addition of scenes about Phyllis contributed to making the

original plot tenser.
In conclusion, the film “Double Indemnity” by Billy Wilder demonstrates a better manipulation of the audience by subjecting them through stressful situations and suspenseful moments back and forth. Despite that James M. Cain’s original novella demonstrates a good understanding of crime fiction and femme fatale, Wilder’s version was better due to changes he made to the protagonists: Huff, Keyes, and Phyllis. All in all, the original novella denotes a different approach to the audience which makes Cain’s version less successful in exploring a suspenseful atmosphere.