The Black Dahlia (spoilers)

[Nina Myers]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 4:22pm

I saw the movie last night, and found it quite enjoyable, if not utterly confusing. Eckhart and Swank did a good job, but Hartnett and Johansson didn't really stand out.

Anyhoo, back to the "utterly confusing" part. I've looked everywhere for some sort of explanation, but I can't figure out why the woman (Ramona?) killed Betty. It had something to do with Betty reminding Ramona of someone who was disfigured by Ramona's husband, right? And was Madeline Ramona's daughter by Georgie? It all has to do with the movie that Eckhart, Johansson, and Hartnett saw, right? I'm so confused.

Can someone who's actually seen AND understood the movie give me some answers? They would be incredibly appreciated... I've been trying to figure it out for the past day.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 4:25pm

I was really looking forward to this movie, but after reading all of the reviews, I'm less excited.

I do have a friend that saw it at a screening, and she said it was very stylish and nice to look at...but not much else.

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 4:57pm

The fact that the reviews are so mixed makes me kind of eager to see it for myself.

[hannahshule]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 5:20pm

Wait, they actually pin the murder on somebody in the movie? I thought that this case was never solved?
((And I really don't have that great an interest in seeing it, so don't worry about spoiling it for me))

[broadway86]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 6:28pm

Saw the movie. Stylish and atmospheric, but doesn't have the weight necessary to make its desired impact. It's pure camp at points, and at other points, just plain bad.

I like Josh Hartnett, but he's not believable as either an en-boxer or a forceful detective. Johansson's sultriness only takes her so far. She's got nothing to do in this role. She actually disappears for long stretches of time. There were times when I actually forgot she was in the movie.

Swank is absolutley delicious, and fits right in with the period. Watch this, then watch her two Oscar-winning performances. It's not even the same actress. Eckhart was also good, but Mia Kirshner is very effective with a small part, and gives the movie whatever humanity it has. Fiona Shaw is... interesting. Not sure what else to say about her.

Overall, there really is no excuse to why this movie wasn't great. Look at the director, cast, crew, and writers. What went wrong. Updated On: 9/16/06 at 06:28 PM

[Plum]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 6:38pm

I was really looking forward to this movie, dubious casting and all, but the reviews have really dismayed me. I guess I shouldn't be shocked, though- who on earth had the idea that Josh Hartnett would make a good Ellroy protagonist?

I'll probably still end up watching it at some point, but I'm not hauling myself to a theater for it.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 7:13pm

I loved it; and thought Hartnett was excellent in his role. Johansson, far less so. It's so nice to see a film where you have to be paying attention!

[JLY's Jersey Gal]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 7:19pm

I saw previews for that film. I did not understand it on bit. But Hilary Swank was good.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 7:41pm

Ellroys books are very deep & sometimes confusing

I look forward to see it though

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 7:48pm

"I like Josh Hartnett, but he's not believable as either an en-boxer or a forceful detective."

Not that it negates your opinion at all, but James Ellroy seems to disagree.

[DAME]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 8:13pm

I thought the film sucked. Looked at my watch about 4 times. Josh H is a stiff actor. I am so happy I didn't pay for this one.

[Nina Myers]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 8:49pm

Can someone answer my above-posted questions? I'm terribly confused.

[broadway86]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 8:52pm

Not that it negates your opinion at all, but James Ellroy seems to disagree.

Did Ellroy say this before or after filming? I think he said it before. Either way, his performance wasn't convincing to me. I'm not alone on that, either.

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 8:53pm

Really, Dame? I can't ever remember being bored during a De Palma film. The visuals in his films are usually so entrancing. I have to see this film for myself soon.

Updated On: 9/16/06 at 08:53 PM

[broadway86]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 8:56pm

I can't ever remember being bored during a De Palma film.

Me neither. And The Black Dahlia, although I didn't care for it, was no exception.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 9:53pm

Funny. I read this "spoiler" thread because since the real case remains unsolved, I assumed that there would be no big spoiler here. Oh well...lol. I still want to see it.

[suddenlyseymour]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 10:07pm

I actually really liked this...maybe it's cuz I'm a Hilary Swank fan and I'm being biased haha anyway the only thing I didn't like was some of the film was pretty confusing and yeah the Fiona Shaw character was kinda bizarre. I loved Mia Kirshner as Beth Short. I thought she was perfect for the part and I loved how all of her scenes were done. I really want to see it again because of Swank.

*edit* I thought the ending sucked...the case was never solved and that's the way it should've been in the movie. Is that how the book ends?? Updated On: 9/16/06 at 10:07 PM

[luvliza89]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 10:35pm

I saw this today and really enjoyed it.

Some of the camera shots were gorgeous. A few times it looked like an actual old movie (the scene, and this gives nothing away, nearish the beginning when Johansson and Josh are outside her house there is a shot of Johansson that has a quality that looks like it could fit into any movie made in the 50s). That probably seems small/weird, but I absolutely loved it.

*Spoiler*





The ending I felt mixed about. And I'm talking about just the last couple of seconds. I understand why Josh was now seeing Elizabeth's dead body but it should have been shot differently or something. I was just like, um that's stupid. But I LOVED the last line by Scarlett. It seemed like a very Old Hollywood ending. Simple but effective.

[DAME]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 12:47am

BORING

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 12:48am

"Did Ellroy say this before or after filming? I think he said it before."

Well, I haven't heard him take it back. :-P

Seriously, though, I think he has praised Hartnett's performance in the film. I'm not sure where I read that, though.

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 1:29am

"BORING"

>But the formal complexity, the thematic complexity of your work… it’s all there! The critics that don’t get it are the ones that stay on the surface. They’re literalists, and they want everything to conform to everyday logic rather than the sort of dream logic you employ.

De Palma: There’s dream logic, and the other thing that amazes me is that they don’t look at what’s on the screen. That’s sort of being trained by television, where everybody talks everything out to them. I try to tell stories with pictures. I usually have quite elaborate designs, and I spend a lot of time picking these architectural places precisely because they will take root in your subconscious. But the critics sort of dismiss it as nice camera work. (Laughs)

>You’re a “cold technician”.

De Palma: Yes. Exactly right. “Manipulative, cold technician.” Well, hey! I’m sorry, but I don’t know too many people who are making those kinds of movies today. I go to a movie, and I sort of visually fall asleep. Nobody seems to think about the way things look, the locations that they pick, or telling stories with pictures. How about that?

>I remember Martin Scorsese talking about Eyes Wide Shut upon its release, and he was bemoaning the critical response. They’d forgotten that a shot has value.

De Palma: That’s right. Absolutely correct.

http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=interviews&id=7622

Updated On: 9/17/06 at 01:29 AM

[vbplayer]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 2:32am

Can't wait to see it. I like to form my own opinion. (spoiler) or not.

Reviews (of any kind) leave me cold. Not against the film, but against the reviewer. Who cares what "reviewers/critics" think.

[secondstar05]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 2:39am

"Anyhoo, back to the "utterly confusing" part. I've looked everywhere for some sort of explanation, but I can't figure out why the woman (Ramona?) killed Betty. It had something to do with Betty reminding Ramona of someone who was disfigured by Ramona's husband, right? And was Madeline Ramona's daughter by Georgie? It all has to do with the movie that Eckhart, Johansson, and Hartnett saw, right? I'm so confused."

I was pretty confused by this movie as well, but here is my attempt at answering your question(s):

I'm fairly certain that Ramona had an affair with Georgie (her husband's best friend), resulting in the birth of her daughter Madelene... this caused her husband to disfigure somehow Georgie out of jealousy. Meanwhile, Georgie became obsessed with Betty when he saw her on the set of the adult film she made. This caused Ramona, who I assume was in love with Georgie, to become jealous. She was pushed over the edge when her husband set Georgie up on a "date" with Betty, and when she found them together, she attacked Betty.

...That's what I got from it, but I could be totally wrong. Like I said, I was pretty confused too.

[vbplayer]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 2:46am

Anyhoo? What kind of word is "anyhoo"? FCS!

[DayDreamer]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 3:09am

I'll join the utterly confused camp on this one. And your explanation, vb, actually seems to clarify it a bit.

I was also confused by the beginning... Josh ("Ice") is getting ready for a fight, and he's fighting Leigh-or is it Lee- ("Fire"), or at least that's what I understood. He says how he had fought him before, and that's where the voice over begins. Yet, there's no resolution to the opening... we never go back to that moment. I also didn't quite get how they could just burn Leigh... and then he tells the other cop but no one winks that a cop was killed and burned.

I thought it was visually beautiful, but the performances were bleh, except for Hillary Swank. I confess I went to see this movie knowing NOTHING about it, so I stayed for the credits to see who the lady was... I couldn't believe it was her. Wow!