The Woman in the Window (1944)

 Fritz Lang's "The Woman in the Window"

Fritz Lang's The Woman in the Window is a film noir that depicts a professor of psychology in the middle of a morality play. Whether his decisions are justified or moral reprehensible is entirely up to the viewer. 

The film stars Edward G. Robinson, a psychology professor, who meets a woman on the street and invites him to her place for drinks. While having drinks, a man (presumably her boyfriend) storms in and attacks the professor. The man almost kills him before the woman hands the professor a pair of scissors, killing the man. The woman says she only knows the man as a client and doesn't know his real name. The professor and the woman believe that if they call the police, there would be no way to justify the murder. So, they enact a plan to dispose of the body. Once they do, one of the professors friends, a district attorney has knowledge of the investigation and brings the professor along to investigate the crime. On top of all this, the man is discovered to be a very wealthy financer who had a bodyguard following him on that night. The bodyguard blackmails the professor and the woman, telling them that if they don't continue to pay him, he will call the police. The professor says the only way to secure their safety is if they kill the bodyguard. Their attempt fails, however, leading the professor to commit suicide. While dying, the professor wakes up to find that it was all a dream. 

The film asks questions about morality. In the opening scene, the professor is giving a lecture on the subject. He says that killing a man in self-defense is morally acceptable, while killing for one's own gain crosses a moral line. This notion becomes the foundation for which the themes of the film lie. When the professor kills the man in self-defense, we understand his actions and see them as morally acceptable. From there, things get worse and worse, which forces us to consider what exactly the moral line lies. Was it immoral for the professor to cover up his act? After all, it seems likely that he could be tried for murder, even if he did it out of self-defense. By the end, however, you're left to question if attempting to kill the bodyguard becomes morally corruptible. After all, the bodyguard is the one who is enacting blackmail, he's the real bad guy, right? You're just trying to evade prison for a crime you technically did to save your own life. Every action performed by the professor is to justify his own innocence. But how innocent is he? And where does your moral line lie?