We might say that from the perspective of 1944 Phyllis makes a bad woman because she refuses to be relegated to a woman’s world (i.e., the kitchen and the grocery story). She’s tired of everyone putting things on the top shelf where she can’t get them. Notice we never see her in her kitchen where her maid works—only in Walter’s, which isn’t a real kitchen at all but a kitchenette on one side of his cramped apartment (that Phyllis apparently would prefer—“sounds wonderful,” she says of his corner drugstore breakfast). She also isn’t much on the usual goal of a women in film of being a mother and having a family, even though she already has a ready-made one that she’s managed to “promote” herself to over the first Mrs. Dietrichson. Notice she was a working woman before, as a nurse, another “woman’s job,” which Phyllis likely noted wasn’t going to get her anywhere. Phyllis saw where she was “supposed” to be (i.e. in a home, as a mother) and figured out a way to get there. Significantly, once she is there, she discovers it’s not what she really wants either, so she keeps “climbing” to get to that “top shelf,” where the men are.
However, things go awry, of course, in part, because he discovers Phyllis has plans of her own—(always the problem for Phyllis, who’s never been officially allowed plans of her own, especially if they don’t involve being a mother and a wife). The return grocery store trip is telling. In that scene, it’s Walter who realizes things (i.e., Phyllis) have slipped out of his control, and now he’s on that ride Keyes told him about—“straight down the line.” The panicked look on his face at the end of the scene says it all: he’s cooked.
Consequently, he has to come up with a new plan, one that Phyllis can’t be a part of. Interestingly, in their final meeting, a reprise of their first clandestine meeting in her husband’s house (which they reminisce about), Phyllis does betray her womanliness after all, unable to protect herself—from her feminine softness finally for her lover, who, as it happens, has other plans. Walter betrays no such feminine softness, and gives it to her at close range--after she admits her deceit and declares her love. Oddly, though, Walter does show himself a better “parent” than Phyllis (since he theoretically fills her father’s vacated place), protecting Lola from her evil stepmother and providing her a chance at happiness in the end by giving Sachetti a nickel to repair the damage Phyllis lies have done.
In the last scene with Phyllis and Walter, I don't think she is showing her womanliness, I think she is continueing to be the conniving woman she has been throughout. She begins the scene by herself, setting the stage to perhaps claim an intruder that she shoots. But when she doesn't kill him, she has to switch tactics to again try and seduce him; get him on her side once again. But Walter isn't falling for it this time...or does he shoot her in "self-defense" so he can't fall under her spell once again.
ReplyDeleteDianne--That is such a great interpretation. I think it is important to really analyise all of the movements of the characters in the scene to predict their true intentions. This scene was so good because it leaves the viewers contemplating the woman's intentions for a long time after the film is over. I like how we don't really get a definate answer, but our able to create one in our minds ourselves.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the movie I kept thinking of finger prints being on various items for the police to find in order to determine who was involved with the crime at hand. Soon realizing that this was the era before forensics and finger prints, I had to sit still and see how the mystery would play out during that day and age. What a house wife she was, and a little sneaky having a single gentleman over to the house when the maid was gone, and no one else at home, let alone to make the business decisions. I did hold my breath when the car did not want to start after the body had been dumped. What a fun movie and a plot that probably has set the stage for so many movies sense. House wife she was to play, but I never had a glimpse of anything she did by way of a “homemaker”. There was a scene that she mentioned knitting and her husband was not even good with holding the yarn. She obviously was not happy in the role females were to play as a house wife for the time period in society. She needed attention.
ReplyDeleteI also wondered about fingerprints, but then the film really grabbed my full attention and I forgot all about them.
DeleteAlong with the house wife comments you made, I found it funny that she changed the appointment to the next day, even though her husband wasn't able to make it. Phyllis did tell Walter that her husband would renew the policies with him, but don't you think she could have said that over the phone? She had obviously been thinking about the life insurance policy for a while, but had to find not only the right salesman, but also the right time to run it by him and see what he thought, or find out how suspicious he would become. The maids day off would be the perfect time to discuss delicate matters such as those.
The knitting reference is amusing, and does seem more an invention than reality (though it is appealing to connect her with the knitting Fates and their various threads). Tellingly, Walter asks, "is that what you married him for?" (apparently questioning her portrait of connubial bliss--or at least Phyllis' interest in something so domestic) and then jokingly inserts himself into her family knitting circle. Walter, like the audience, very likely don't see Phyllis as the knitting type.
ReplyDeleteAs to forensics--fingerprints had actually been around for a few decades in criminal investigation by 1944, even though they're not mentioned in the film. The first use of fingerprints in a criminal prosecution occurred in 1902 in NYC. Even in 1883 Mark Twain had been fascinated with the possibility of such usage of prints and invented a crime solution involving fingerprints in Life on the Mississippi. A decade later he focused another courtroom drama, Puddenhead Wilson, on fingerprint identification.
Diane - I like your interpretation of the ending. Phyllis uses her tears and vulnerability to continue manipulating Walter even after she shoots him! She uses a similar approach earlier in the film when she mentions that her husband hits her. This use of vulnerability as the bait used to entrap her prey reminded me of the fairy child in Keats' La Belle Dame sans Merci (http://www.bartleby.com/126/55.html). The macho, knight-in-shining-armor syndrome kicks in when the femme fatale shows her innocent facade. As an audience, we don't feel too badly for the victim since his motives for helping her were less than pure. It's clear that Walter has a sexual attraction to Phyllis, and the cash she would inherit from the "accident" doesn't look too bad either.
ReplyDeleteDoes the femme fatale usually use her vulnerability in addition to her femininity to lure in her victims, or is that observation limited to these two examples?
I really enjoyed the analogy of Phyllis reaching for the top shelf. In the film, Double Indemnity, the audience witnesses the grocery store scene where a woman wanting baby food is reaching to wards the unreachable top shelf. The woman could reach towards, but never obtain items on the top shelf. The shopper was compelled to enlist a male to aid in her pursuit of reaching the top. Without Walter’s assistance, the woman was certain to fail until she could find another male to come to her aid. The same was true for Phyllis, she could not adequately (not get caught) carry out the murder of her husband from inception through fruition without Walter’s masculine characteristics, i.e. his mind (the way a male thinks versus a female), physical prowess, and knowledge of insurance claims (a masculine profession). In effect, Phyllis was striving for a position of the top shelf and fell short because she could not shed herself of her feminine qualities whether she wanted to or not. This was evident in the last scene, as mentioned by Dianne and Casey, where Phyllis uses feminine characteristics of tears, vulnerability, and a declaration of love in order to continue her manipulation of the bleeding Walter.
ReplyDeleteNice literary connection! Le Belle Dame, an early femme fatale, fits perfectly.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting how Walter would deal with the manipulation of Phyllis. As much as I wanted to figure out what would happen next, Wilder chose endings that I didn't see coming. I found that I was sitting on the edge of my seat to try to figure out what the next move might be. I find it interesting also that love for another can make you do some pretty crazy things, in the movies and in life.
ReplyDeleteQuestion for Double Indemnity:
ReplyDeleteFrom all that we can see of Phyllis, it looks as though she has always been able to keep her hands clean, for example, while caring for Mrs. Dietrichson (the first wife) Phyllis leaves the window open, therefore Mrs. Dietrichson dies of a cold. Also, in the car, Mr. Dietrichson is killed by Walter. Do you think Phyllis has always intended to keep her hands clean or do you think that's just how things ended up playing out? If it came down to it, do you think she'd be able to kill somebody herself? She wasn't able to kill Walter at the end, but she blames that on falling in love with him.