critical noir

I read a couple diffrent reviews, but the one a liked the best was by Roger Ebert. Ebert's review was insightful, and interesting. Ebert's summery of the film was great, detailed and to the point. In the review Ebert whent above and beyond telling his readers details about the film that they would not know by just watching the film or reading the novel. Such as Wilder the director hired Chandler to write the screen play.  When Chandler showed up the first day he was wasted on booze, and smoked a smelly pipe, I wonder what was in that pipe. Chandler knew nothing about putting together a screen play, But he sure could put a nasty spin on the dialouge.  That is one of the reasons why the film was one of the greatest examples of film noir in the last century.  Another fact that Ebert points out to his readers that is very insightful and just darn right intresting is Double Indemnity origanl final scene was Walter was sitting in a gas chamber in a prison somewhere in California, about to be uthanized. But in the theatrical version the gas chamber scene was cut.  Which I think Wilder should of left in the film. 

This article gave me a better insight into the whole film noir era, and what elements tuley makes a great noir film.