I saw it a few years ago and remember being impressed with it on a number of levels -- acting, cinematography, and innovation.
My favorite scene is when the camera slowly raises up to where the main character is on a residential street, and pans over to a block or two away where Elizabeth Smart's body was just being found.
Why does it only have a rating of 5.6?
Yes I don't get it either. I think it's a solid 7.5 or so.
share[deleted]
Speaking for myself, I knew going into it this movie was based on James Ellwood's novel (i.e., a fictional account). I'd never read it because I was more interested in the non-fiction books about the Black Dahlia, and knew Ellwood had departed too much from what's known about her and her (truly horrific) murder to peak my interest.
Had I not known this, and thought this was closely based on what we know about Elizabeth Short and her murder, with a decent theory about who killed her, I'd have been sorely disappointed too.
As some kind of theory and presentation of what is known to have happened, this (and I assume Ellroy's novel) was terrible.
As a story, with the Black Dahlia as central to it, I thought it was excellent, although the "solution" was too whacky for me. Up until that, I thought it told an interesting tale of the (real) rampant corruption and graft in the LAPD of the time, which probably did figure into the real Black Dahlia case one way or another. I thought it did a great job of recreating Los Angeles and its atmosphere of seediness in those parts of town.
[deleted]
Agreed, the sets, costuming, and props were great. Plus the camera work and acting. It held me longer than it did you, but then I did go into it knowing it was based on a novel and not on the actual case. It only lost me at the "reveal" in the last 5-10 minutes.
shareNo, it's tedious and uninteresting, a failure of a film based on an iffy book that was still better than the film.
shareDid you read the book? I agree, based only on what I know about it, it was iffy as any kind of theory or retelling of the actual Black Dahlia.
Overall, I loved it. You didn't like the recreated atmosphere of LA at the time? I loved that it opened with the Zoot Suit Riots, and segued neatly into seeing the corruption of the LAPD.
I read the book, it was okay as a suspense novel, but not as history.
As for the movie, maybe the setting was good, but the leads were so lifeless that I couldn't give a rat's ass about their problems. I don't know if the failure was on the part of the writers or a bunch of very untalented actors (I've bashed them all elsewhere), but it was probably both.
Ellroy isn't my kind of author, so I wasn't interested. Just curious if you'd read it, and if so, what you thought.
I didn't have any problem with the leads, or any of the cast. In fact I liked them. Loved the sets, props, and camera work.
My only problem was with the writing, as I said above, in that the "reveal" at the end left me flat.
Underated movie indeed
shareI appreciate the movie now more than when I first saw it, but it would have been better if it hadn't been so heavily edited (at the studio's insistence).
From what I've read about Brian DePalma's original cut (which James Ellroy loved), more time was devoted to Bucky's obsession with Elizabeth Short and his emotional breakdown over the case. I also discovered that at least one actor's role was completely removed from the theatrical version. Joey Slotnick played Robert "Red" Manley, who was one of the actual suspects in Elizabeth Short's murder. There are a couple of publicity stills from his scenes in the original, nearly three-hour version of the film that was screened at The Venice Film Festival prior to it being trimmed to two hours for theatrical release.
Do you know if there's a director's cut? I would be intrigued to see it.
shareIt has never been released, sadly. I would like to see it, especially since Ellroy liked it and considered it the most faithful adaptation of his work. There is an online petition to release it. This may be a long shot considering how many bad reviews that the film has received, but it got a blu-ray release, so you never know. There are more favorable reviews for it in recent times, even though some reviewers admit that there are problems with the movie in terms of the plot being hard to follow.
https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/the-black-dahlia-directors-cut
I have noticed that some people have ridiculous reasons for hating on this movie. Some complained that the characters smoked too much (it's set in the 1940s, and it is noir), someone complained about "animal cruelty" in a three-second sequence where one character shoots at pigeons, and of course, there are those who don't understand the concept of historical fiction. That's partly the studio's fault because they did market it as being a true story, but that was not what DePalma or Ellroy intended for the story to be. You would think that the opening credits stating that it was based on a novel and the disclaimer before the closing credits would be a hint, though.
I think David Fincher's intention was to adapt Ellroy's novel into a television miniseries, and I certainly wouldn't mind if someone does that in the future. But I would still love to see the original cut. There is a lot to appreciate about this movie, but it could have been better.
No doubt that it could have been cleaned up in some areas, especially what seems like the double-ending and reveal of the motive. A cleaner third act would have gone a long ways, as I was scrambling within the last 15 minutes or so to try to catch up and piece it all together.
But this is such a beautifully shot film, and I definitely agree with OP that the one float-over shot from the street behind the building the two main characters were staking out down to the street where it followed the characters who would be the catalyst for the shootout was such a brilliant sequence.
Hopefully the petition reaps some benefits and they do eventually release a director's cut. With some proper editing and pacing of the third act, this film could be elevated to the status that's befitting its production design.
Yeah this is a baffling mystery to me why the score is so low.
Finally got around to watching this amazing film, and even though it has the typical camp of a De Palma film, it's BEAUTIFULLY shot... just... wow. It looks like it actually takes place back in the 1940s, very similar to how Mulholland Falls was shot, but I think The Black Dahlia edges it out, even if ever so slightly. If I did have a gripe with the set pieces it was that ALL the cars were too clean in every shot; normal people don't keep their cars all so clean (as evident with actual footage of city streets from back in the 1940s).
In any case, I loved that this was a hard-boiled detective, noir-thriller. We literally do not get films like this at all these days.
I remember hearing and reading all kinds of heavy criticisms of the film when it first hit theaters back in the day, but I always thought that this film was a late 1990s affair? I'm kind of shocked that it was actually a 2006 outing. But that makes it even better because in many ways Palma's filming techniques make it look timeless, as if it could have fit in any era; only the age of the actors' would give away which era it truthfully belongs to.
But man, what a great film... it did slow down a bit after the halfway point, but it had plenty of twists and turns to maintain intrigue, a solid 7 out of 10.
Fincher's Zodiac creams this film in every single aspect.
shareI was thinking about Zodiac while watching this film, and came away vastly more satisfied with this film than Zodiac. I'm sure some people enjoyed Zodiac wasting nearly three hours on a story that ended on an unresolved cliffhanger, but it felt like I was robbed of my time for what was essentially an exercise in nihilistic storytelling.
Don't get me wrong, Fincher did a great job directing it, but I got nothing out of it.
That's why it's s good film it's a cold case. Rather than Hollywood it up he decided to be as true to the story as possible. It is an exercise in nihilistic storytelling. How else would you tell that story?
shareWith characters that offer resolution in their own lives/sub-plots that at least makes audiences feel like it wasn't a waste of time?
A good example of this is Joy Ride, where you never find out who the trucker is and he never gets caught. It still feels like a movie that has resolution for the characters at least.
Another one is Jade, which despite it's messiness, still had a bit more of an open ending as you found out why the murder took place but still never really got the particulars. But it still felt like a story that at least had a beginning and an end for the characters.
There are several more in that vein that I can't think of right now, but Zodiac was essentially an open-ended movie for most of all its characters and its main plot that was sort of like: Look at how everyone wasted their lives on nothing. The end.
That is a personal preference. I personally do not need that type of resolution in order to feel I have watched a fulfilling film.
See you are doing the classic critiquing which I do not vibe with. You are critiquing a film and faulting it for not being how you would have made it. This is not like ordering from a food menu. You judge the film for what it is not what you want it to be. Joy Ride ends up being a b movie. Zodiac is first class they are not even in the same breath.
You have your preference in how you want stuff done but in the end that is not something to fault a film for.
It wasn't her anyway
share