Okwhat in the HELL happened? Everything was soooooooooooooooooooooooooo confusing. Could anyone explain teh entire movie
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Black Dahlia
Zerose — 17 years ago(March 08, 2009 08:18 PM)
Okwhat in the HELL happened? Everything was soooooooooooooooooooooooooo confusing. Could anyone explain teh entire movie to me or show me a website that exlpains the movie's plot, please???
It IS a terrible film. This is from what I gathered:
There are two major plots: the Elizabeth Short case and the DeWitts case, both involved two investigators - Lee Blanchard (the Fire boxer) and Dwight 'Bucky' Bleichert (the Ice boxer). The beginning of the film - the riots and the boxing match - is just there to explain how they became partners and friends. It also supposed to explain why Bucky was willing to get in the ring with Lee; he did it for his senile father who needed 24-hour care. This however gained him a job promotion and some money, anyway.
LEE BLANCHARD
Lee became obsessed with the Short case because his own sister was murdered (there is an implication that his sister's murderer was never caught). He didn't want that to happen to Short, but he slowly had a breakdown when the truth about Short's life came out (stag films, casual prostitution, liar, etc.) because he thought she was "pure" like his late sister. If her lifestyle led her to her death, does this mean his sister could have had a secret lifestyle, too?
He was also obsessed with DeWitts because of his involvement with the bank robbery case and because of a chance that DeWitts could hurt Kay again. He killed Baxter Fitch (who introduced Kay to Blanchard, thus her information about the bank robbery in return for Blanchard's protection of her from DeWitts) to stop him associating Lee (and Kay) to the case. He also killed DeWitts for the same reason.
He was killed by Madeleine Linscott because he'd figured out the link between Elizabeth Short and the Linscott family. Instead of charging them, he blackmailed them for the money.
Morrie Friedman (Blanchard's informant and the owner of many LA clubs) chose to hide Blanchard's death because Blanchard's involvement and death could cause too many awkward questions by the media and public for the LA police and the crime underworld.
THE LINSCOTT FAMILY
Her father, Emmett Linscott, realised his 11-year-old daughter, Madeleine, was the real daughter of his long-time friend George "Georgie" Tilden because she looked just like Georgie. In other words, his wife Ramona had an affair with Georgie and gave birth to their love child, Madeleine.
As revenge, Emmett indirectly caused a car accident that destroyed Georgie's face (and the accident also possibly made him mentally handicapped) and thus making him no better than an errand man and gardener.
There was also an implication that Emmett also got greedy because Georgie was rising fast through their construction business (buying cheap building materials from Mack Sennett (real-life studio owner) and re-sells them to be used for the real estate), so Emmett stomped on him to gain a bigger role in their business. From then, there was a strong implication that he and Madeleine were having an incestuous affair.
Madeleine recruited various girls (through "sister" clubs and nightclubs) for her father's sideline business, making stag films in their abandoned construction lots. This is how she knew Elizabeth Short and her friends.
When Georgie became interested in Elizabeth Short, he and Ramona killed her. Ramona admitted in the end that she hated Madeleine for having Georgie's face because if it wasn't for that, Emmett would never discovered the truth and wouldn't have ruined Georgie's face (and mind). Elizabeth Short looked like Madeleine, hence their mulilation of Short's body and face. In other words, Ramona did things to Short she would have loved doing to her own daughter. (It's not clear whether she was aware that her daughter was in a sexual relationship with her husband Emmett, but I think she knew because of these comments she made about both Short and Madeleine's sexual lives.)
They apparently left the body near where Baxter Fitch was shot (by Lee). This location is the crux of two cases. When the investigation was made, Bucky was manipulated by Madeleine to keep him away from finding out the truth.
However, Lee Blanchard figured out the link and tried to blackmail Emmett, so Georgie and Madeleine killed him to protect themselves and Emmett. Ramona was seemingly devastated that Georgie died with Lee, which was probably why she fell apart in the end.
MY COMMENTS
That's the gist of it.
I'm sure I got some details wrong, but that's what I gathered to my best ability. I think the film would be good if the DeWitts case was left out. I think it was there to explain how much pressures Lee was under and to make Bucky see that Lee and Kay weren't as clean-cut or perfect as he thought.
I think his realisation began when Lee neglected the Nash case for the DeWitts case. He thought Lee was a "good crusader for justice", but when Nash was killed after killing a shop owner and the (possible rape) and killing of the shop keeper's little child, Bucky realised that Lee was driv -
heckbr2 — 17 years ago(March 23, 2009 10:19 PM)
Great Summary! However, I have to disagree with you and say that I enjoyed this film. I enjoy actually having to analyze and think about the plot of a movie every once in a while, instead of watching mindless action movies. Now, I haven't read the book that this film was based off of or researched the actual case, but as far as the movie goes, I thought the complex plot and character development made for a more realistic movie. This also leaves more for the viewer to interpret, which I think people should give a shot at. I think most people don't like this film because they don't understand it. All I have to say is watch the movie all the way through with an open mind and see what you get out of the film. My only complaint is that I'm sure they didn't use the "F" word that often back in the day as they did in the movie, but what do you knowit's Hollywood. I also think that the way the script was written, which people complain about not making sense, only adds to the feeling that the characters don't know what the hell is going on either (until the end). This brings the viewer into the action to try and figure out what is going on!
-
ashmorris22 — 16 years ago(April 11, 2009 10:57 PM)
Black Dahlia is a decent movie but I understand why the hell a lot of people confused. The writer of the book Jame Ellroy was upset with all of the editing of the movie. The true story of the murder isn't really identified but neither is it in the book. The relationship between Kay and Bucky way different in the book. Several other points are cleared in this movie but its good to see Josh Harnett in a different role. Overall it's about a six rated film.
-
DeuceWild_77 — 15 years ago(August 03, 2010 08:28 AM)
Best summary i've read about the movie, well done,mcvillain! I liked the movie, the problem is the screenplay, too much things happen at the same time, and plot twists to a mere 2 hours long movie, aah! and two other BIG problems was the cast of Hillary Swank and Fiona Shaw, Hillary was miscast, no way she had the looks (or even the acting skills) to perform a "Femme Fatale" and Shaw was embarassing, mediocre & over the top performance. Mia Kirschner gave the best performance in such a limited screentime, her screentest scenes haunted me for hours after i saw the movie.
-
SurlyRed — 15 years ago(August 11, 2010 04:47 AM)
nice one mac, that was very helpful. I've no idea how anyone could figure this all out without help, but I guess it needs another viewing or two.
reminds me a little of miller's crossing, very confusing at first, but after another watch it became clear, and it now ranks as one of my all time favourites. also mulholland drive, it takes nerve to create a movie very few will understand first time round. -
Zerose — 12 years ago(October 18, 2013 05:39 PM)
I know you made that response two years ago, but I finally watched Miller's Crossing (which has been on my To Watch list since I saw your recommendation). I enjoyed it a lot. I regret that I didn't watch it sooner. Anyway, thank you for recommending it.
-
bradjanet — 17 years ago(March 24, 2009 12:33 AM)
From the diector of "Sisters", "Blow-Out", "Dressed To Kill", "Carrie" and the silly but very amusing "Raising Cain", this film was the disappointment of the decade don't bother to try to work it outafter making the effort you'll still be left with one of De Palma's dreariest films.
But you ARE Blanche and I AM. -
ckahlenberg — 16 years ago(April 17, 2009 08:27 PM)
Thank you for starting this post. I feel I am a reasonable person when it comes to movies, but this plot line was just off the wall and into the trash can. I wrestled through the entire film and know less about it than when it started. Thank you all for being honest. I feel I have not gone senile just yet, but I am working on it!
-
BQQ — 16 years ago(November 13, 2009 05:10 PM)
As I was watching the film, I thought the second half was all in Bucky's mind, and I was expecting to see him wake up in a hospital. At least that would have made sense. Cliched, but detective losing his mind, could work. Cause otherwise, this was one of the most confusing, contrived, over-actingest pieces of cinema. De Palma has lost it.
-
redpower — 16 years ago(December 30, 2009 08:02 PM)
I think the problem with the film is nothing to do with the multiple plot lines. Its problem is we are given no clue throughout the film to suggest that the mum killed her.
Oh, and for those wondering if they would have used the word beep in this period I think the answer is a definite yes. -
arkham_asylum_london — 16 years ago(December 31, 2009 08:11 PM)
OK, just seen in the New Year (GMT) watching this and thought I'd log in here to get some answers.
Glad it wasn't just me then.
Think I'll watch LA Confidential again to remind myself I'm not thick
Oh and happy New Year everyone! -
super_frog16 — 16 years ago(January 04, 2010 06:03 PM)
I watched it with two friends and literally we all said 'what the hell' as soon as it finished. I have no clue what was going on and less of a clue about the point
I was confused from the word go, no idea why the girl was murdered and less of an idea about why that crazy old lady murdered her. She had no screen time at all and then at the end comes out, warbled something and then shot herself.
Yeah justthink this is the worst film iv ever seen.
'
The voice says i'm almost out of minutes
'
proud saltgunner! -
thatguy_78757 — 16 years ago(March 31, 2010 08:33 PM)
shmeevill
thank for pointing out what not many have the guts to say
I was baffled by this movie.
and it is NOT a case "Im too dumb to get, if I were as smart as you- Id get it"
it is confusingly told and that makes it bad cinema
beautiful LOOKING film, badly written
I looked at that synopsis someone posted here
it helped, but good art shouldnt need a synopsis, it should speak for itself
ps aside from a woman names elizabeth short being murdered- NONE of this even pretends to be historically accurate- does it? -
ThreeSadTigers — 12 years ago(November 08, 2013 08:48 AM)
- Can't understand Mrs. Linscott and Georgie's motive for killing Short. Were they just psycho? Why kill a young woman who looks like their own daughter?
Elizabeth Short is leaning on the Linscott family for money (effectively blackmailing them). Short wasn't a porn actress; she was brought into this world by her roommate, effectively as an outsider. As such, she's disgusted and degraded by her experiences in the film. She leans on the Linscott family to keep her quiet since making and distributing porn was illegal and would have tarnished the family's reputation if it got out, so Mr. Linscott arranges for her to go on a date with Georgie, as a favour, which she'll be well paid for.
It's never clear if Mr. Linscott intends for Short to be murdered by Georgie or if it was just an effort to scare her enough that she wouldn't be tempted to blackmail him again.
Georgie is obsessed with Short because she looks like Madeleine who in turn looks like a young version of her own mother, Ramona. His secret attraction to Madeleine is based on his past relationship with Ramona, his former lover. Because Ramona is still in-love with Georgie, she's enraged by his attraction to Short as surrogate for Madeleine, and since she can't exact revenge on her own daughter, takes it out on the 'disposable' Short.
When she disfigures Short, the implication is that she's disfiguring Madeleine (by-proxy) but it's also part of her (and Georgie's) obsession with death and the destruction of beautiful things. Georgie was left physically and psychologically disfigured in an accident arranged by Mr. Linscott (with the intention of murdering Georgie) and this seems to have also damaged Ramona, psychologically if not physically.
- Can't understand Mrs. Linscott and Georgie's motive for killing Short. Were they just psycho? Why kill a young woman who looks like their own daughter?
-
qfal — 14 years ago(August 23, 2011 09:05 PM)
Go to the following link to read a detailed synopsis of the BOOK. It is even more complicated than the movie, and has major differences, but will help you understand the movie.
http://www.wikisummaries.org/The_Black_Dahlia -
Doctor_Mabuse1 — 14 years ago(September 23, 2011 06:26 AM)
Understand this: Brian De Palma's 3-hour director's cut, highly praised by original novelist James Ellroy, was studio-slashed by an entire HOUR. The result was to render a complex story nearly incomprehensible.
Doctor Mabuse, Evil Genius, King of Crime