Double Indemnity: The Complete Screenplay

Rating:
Summary: Wilders First Undoubted Masterpiece
Review: Double Indemnity is one of Billy Wilders best films. The screenplay is taut and extremely well written. You cannot miss this opportunity to read the master at the top of his game. Among the many highlights is the supermarket scene between the two conspirators. An absolute must read

Rating:
Summary: A toss-up for Raymond Chandler fans
Review: For those who already purchased the Library of America edition of "Raymond Chandler : Later Novels and Other Writings" (which contains the screenplay of "Double Indemnity"), here are two reasons why you should buy THIS edition of the "Double Indemnity" screenplay:

1. Unlike most other screenplays published in book form, this edition of "Double Indemnity" appears to be a facsimile of the original screenplay; It's not just a book, but a relic of classic film.

2. This edition also has the alternate/deleted "Gas Chamber" ending which the Library of America edition is lacking.

If it were not for the above two qualities, I would recommend any Chandler fan to purchase the Library of America edition of Chandler's work that contains the "Double Indemnity" screenplay instead of this one. Here's why:

In this edition, Chandler's name does NOT appear on the cover; only Bill Wilder is credited on the cover. However, Chandler's name DOES appear on the title page and first page of the screenplay (the Amazon scans of the book illustrate this curiosity). Why the exclusion of Chandler from the cover?!
Answer: This book was published while Billy Wilder was still alive and he was able to steal the limelight from Raymond Chandler one last time. Well done, Mr. Wilder.

As for the screenplay itself, I've read a lot of screenplays of movies that I have liked and "Double Indemnity" reads better than most. The voice-over dialogue for Neff (written by Chandler) is the best part of the screenplay and is worth having in print. Whether you're a fan of classic Film Noir or an aspiring screenwriter, this is a must-have for your bookshelf. As for Chandler fans, it's only a matter of which edition.

For more information on Raymond Chandler's involvement in "Double Indemnity", I recommend the book "Creatures of Darkness: Raymond Chandler, Detective Fiction, and Film Noir". After reading, you will see why I and other readers are so incensed by the exclusion of Chandler's credit from the cover.

Rating:
Summary: A brief tangential rant.
Review: Nearly everyone who is likely to view this page knows and loves the movie, and would most likely prefer watching it to reading it. This leaves devoted fans of Wilder and Chandler to consider it, as well as perhaps students of the form.

The screenplay itself is an unquestioned masterpiece, and has not even the movie's very very few faults (poor acting by secondary characters, etc.). So I will limit my comments to my assertion that this edition GREATLY underestimates the contributions of Chandler, going so far as to paint him as a pasty fussbudget ignorant of the craft of writing. Not true, bud, not by a long shot.

Wilder and Chandler got along like cats and dogs. That's no secret. Yet while Chandler had his faults, Wilder seemed to live to antagonize him, and quite uncharitably described him in some comments reprinted here. Saying how the married Chandler envied Wilder for "having all the pretty girls at Paramount" is one example of how cheap and childish the director's opinion of his co-writer was, as stated in this edition, quoting Wilder's bio. Either Wilder or Meyers had some crude bias against Chandler, if the introduction of this tome is to be believed at all. Because it's not even an accurate presentation of what Wilder really felt, as quoted in Chandler's own hit-and-miss bio written by Tom Hiney.

Anyway, much of the *structure* of the screenplay- the flashbacks, the additional scenes, the ebb and flow- is Wilder's tremendous savvy. But the things film historians seem to treasure above all else in this movie are the rapid-fire, crudely poetic, vernacular dialogue, as well as the feeling of cynical decay wrapped around the doomed couple's whole misbegotten endeavor like a shroud. And for those, I propose, Chandler must be given the majority of the credit. His novels are too sad and complex and perfect, providing ample evidence that he could not have been the doofus this book portrays.

There's my speech. Take it for what it's worth. The book is a good buy for serious students. But Chandler fans will be ticked off.