In general, the cinema is historic for portraying women in a negative manner. Whether it be women as the weaker sex, women as helpless and unfit for the real world, women as nothing but a sexual toy. Whatever it may be, women are usually negatively portrayed in films. In the film Double Indemnity, I have trouble deciding how the film is portraying the character of Phyllis Dietrichson.
Phyllis is originally seen as a typical housewife, when Neff comes into the house. When she begins asking Neff how she could get money from her husband's life insurance, we realize she is contemplating murder, thus the title. ("Double Indemnity" is a clause in most life insurance policies that doubles the payout, should the death be caused by certain accidental means.) Plotting murder certainly isn't the historic portrayal of a female character. She definitely isn't helpless. She does have an alluring personality. So that isn't a negative portrayal of women. But she is a murderer.
My big question that I have for this film is how they are trying to portray women. They're obviously not going for the "women are helpless" angle. Phyllis seems completely capable of plotting and carrying her plot out. If anything she seems very destructive, even increasingly destructive as the film progresses. So has Double Indemnity portrayed women negatively in a new way? That they are destructive, meddling creatures? Or is this a way of telling the viewer that women aren't helpless and very capable of doing the same things men can? Cause Neff doesn't want anything to do with it, making Phyllis the stronger sex, physically but maybe not morally. Is there a battle of the sexes in this film?
What are your thoughts? Negative portrayal, positive portrayal or, if possible, both?
No comments:
Post a Comment