Both set in the 50s Los Angeles. Both have great casts, great plot.
-
mgtbltp — 11 years ago(September 03, 2014 05:05 AM)
Just Sid Huggens & Dudley Smith sport the fedoras in LAC.
If you watch Crime Wave watch it with the commentary from Eddie Muller & James Ellroy.
I'll quote the author James Ellroy on his commentary on the DVD for Crime Wave "Sterling Hayden That is my Bud White. That is my Bud White! (expletive) Russell Crowe in 'L A Confidential.' I mean he was okay, but he's a shrimpy little (expletive) Bud White as Bud Whites go. Sterling Hayden is the real deal. Look at this! He's not even acting. Look at that hat!" lol 'nuff said. -
Captain_Augustus_McCrae — 14 years ago(June 05, 2011 06:07 PM)
LA Confidential takes it by a nose. I really liked both films, and Jennifer C. is
unbelievably hot in Mulholland Falls (far more so than Kim Basinger in LA Confidential, IMHO), but LA Confidential is the better film by a bit. I'm in the middle of a "Noir" bender right now, and I can't get enough of this type of film.
"It ain't dying I'm talking about, it's living!!!"
Augustus McCrae -
degree7 — 14 years ago(August 24, 2011 11:42 PM)
I think Mulholland Falls is a far more authentic and realistic drama of the period, rather than the over-praised LA Confidential.
It has better acting as well.
I said I never had much use for one.never said I didn't know how to use it. -
BB-15 — 13 years ago(May 05, 2012 10:48 PM)
"Both have great casts"
I thought so.- For me I liked Mulholland Falls better. I enjoy old fashioned crime mysteries. I don't mind that they take their time and that they don't become action movies. The focus in this kind of film is the mystery about the crime and having the detective figure it out.
- I remember that the critics loved Kim Bassinger in L.A. Confidential but I didn't think she gave an Oscar caliber performance.
- L.A. Confidential also has a big shoot out scene at the end. This is popular for lots of the audience who enjoy action. For me that action movie style scene got in the way of the story.
- But Mulholland Falls was not as popular with L.A. Confidential. Imo MF not only didn't have as much action but MF also shows some parts of the US military in a negative way. I think some of the audience did not appreciate that. I was OK with the military backstory of MF because I knew it was based on real events involving atomic bomb testing.
BB
it's just in my opinion - imo -
-
franzkabuki — 13 years ago(May 14, 2012 02:02 AM)
Falls isnt bad necessarily, but L.A.Confidential is indeed superior in pretty much every department one can think of. The story of MF doesnt ultimately add up to much and the little eccentrities it insists on employing from time to time - like all that Palminteris psychiatrist stuff and bizarre behaviour exhibited by some characters - is just silly and distracting. Its also ridiculous how a 50-year old Nick Nolte is made into an action hero seemingly capable of beating up an entire army single handedly. But, yeah, its at least pretty look at and reasonably engaging most of the time. Worthy of something like a 6,5/10 rating.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan -
crooked_spoons — 13 years ago(September 24, 2012 05:47 AM)
L.A. Confidential. And I never even really liked L.A. Confidential.
Simply put, LAC has charisma and relies more on the actors than set design and costumes. It has a story that's gritty in a way that goes beyond a nostalgia piece or cheesy vanity project. It feels like an original film made for adults, whereas Mulholland Falls comes off as remake of some long forgotten film noir rewritten with some nudity to make it palatable for modern audiences.
I don't know, something about Mulholland Falls feels empty. Shallow where, with so much talent on the screen, there should have been depth. The whole way through it felt like each scene began just after the director finished reminding the actors they were playing a movie set in the 50s and instructing them to 'make it feel classic-y'. Something about MF feels seems disingenuous, almost as if Dragnet had tits and swear words and nothing more.
Now frankly I never thought LAC was the masterpiece many said it was but in a side by side comparison with this, it's a modern classic.
Everybody needs love. Have you held your hostage today?
-
first-things-first — 12 years ago(September 14, 2013 11:14 AM)
I pick LA Confidential. That movie showed humanity at it's worst. How the good we're manipulated for the greater good - to eliminate organized crime and how the bad has many faces. That power without a conscious is dangerous. In Mulholland Falls there was redemption and debts paid by the protagonists and antagonists. In LA Confidential it was business as usual, with different players.
she loved poetry and romance, but she hit the glass ceiling at birth -
Noirdame79 — 12 years ago(February 16, 2014 02:48 PM)
I agree with those who say
L.A. Confidential
is the superior film. It certainly held my interest more than
Mulholland Falls
.
L.A. Confidential
is a winning example of neo-noir done right, almost to perfection. The performances, direction, script, music, cinematography and recreation of the period (costumes, sets, locations, etc) is to die for, pardon the expression. And the plot was intriguing.
Mulholland Falls
isn't a bad movie. I think it had tremendous potential. Unfortunately, a few things didn't work for me. The military stuff, the poor use of Jennifer Connelly (I'm a straight female, but I'm not blind to her appeal and what it would have added to the film if she had appeared in more than just flashbacks) and miscasting in some roles. It could have been a much better movie.
Chinatown, L.A. Confidential, Hollywoodland
and
Changeling
get my votes for best neo-noir (although
Changelin
g is set in the late 1920s to the early 1930s). -
DracTarashV — 11 years ago(December 14, 2014 01:28 AM)
L.A. Confidential is probably the greater film (better script, direction, character development), but I personally prefer Mulholland Falls. To me, MF is a slightly more captivating film with better visuals, drama, and more intense fight scenes. Plus, the cast is just marvelous: Nolte, Palminteri, and the ravishing J Connelly give terrific performances that are just as good as, if not better than, the ones in LAC. But above all, the 1950s in MF actually looked authentic compared to LAC; a modern car driving by in the latter wouldn't have looked so out of place (I do like the look and style of the film nonetheless).
Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!