I enjoyed the screening of Wilder's Double Indemnity on Monday but I definitely got more out of it when I read the assigned essay by Gaylyn Studlar. There was a sentence on page 390 where it says "...the film is not just about adultery or murder, but is also about the struggle for Walter's soul... between Keyes and Phyllis... and how and why Pyllis won this struggle." I had never thought about the movie that way and when I thought about the premise with that mindset it struck me that Double Indemnity could be considered a subtly religious film. Consider Phyllis’ undeniably malicious personality, "rotten to the core", whilst Keyes is a man with "a heart as big as a house." Treating the two as complete opposites, one could interpret the authoritative Keyes as a metaphor for God, Phyllis as the seductive Lucifer, and Walter Neff as the epitome of the Imperfect Man. This comparison would explain Neff's feeling that his doom is inevitable even when evidence appears contrary, based on the assertion that God sees everything and knows what's going to happen (Keyes's infallible "little man"). The plot as a whole presents the idea of sin, which within religious context is either an act done out of self- servitude or in direct opposition to God. Neff betrays Keyes's trust and friendship for the sheer seductiveness of short-term exhilaration and then prolongs the dishonesty in self-preservation before finally confessing everything all at once. Such discussion over an interpretation like this could of course continue and be debated. In a case like this, the potential for discussion is a sign of artistic quality, and in that spirit I agree with Jason Joy's view that purposeful ambiguity can both avoid that which is not allowed and enhance that which is.