Abstract
Double Indemnity is widely regarded as a classic example of film noir by film critics and fans of the genre alike. In terms of genre Double Indemnity clearly belongs to the film noir category although it is due to the lighting and style that many believe, film noir should be classed as a style of film making as opposed to a genre. They would suggest that this therefore belongs in the genre of ‘crime drama' but thanks to the fact that film noir has created its own conventions that separate it from crime drama, I believe it should be classed as an independent genre. Some would argue the films should be grouped according to a director or auteur who will put his own unique codes and conventions into the film so that it is identifiable and immediately associated with him/her. In Double Indemnity we aren't given any clear indication that it is a Billy Wilder film. He himself is often not classified as an auteur director despite his success in directing. The auteur theory states the films should reflect the director's personal vision whereas it is sometimes easier to sway towards genre as one can simply adhere to a set of pre-constructed values.
The genre debate gives us three ideas: setting, mood and format with which we can place a film within a genre. For instance if the setting is that of a battlefield, we can usually assume it is a war film. This theory is often very easy to apply to older films but as time wore on the boundaries between genres wore thin. Now there are hybrid genres. For instance it is possible to have a romantic war film (two genres that are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum) e.g. A Very Long Engagement (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, Warner Brothers, France, 2005). However as Double Indemnity was made during the classic Hollywood era it is possible to see that it adheres to many of the conventions associated with film noir. For instance the heavy use of lighting (including Venetian blinds), the morally ambiguous protagonist, the femme fatale etc.
