Universal Pictures | Release Date: September 15, 2006
2.7
USER SCORE
Generally unfavorable reviews based on 188 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
31
Mixed:
29
Negative:
128
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
0
EllieJ.Sep 17, 2006
A terrible film. The dialogues were convoluted and hard to understand. The characters weren't well established and the story just isn't believable. "The Black Dahlia" was a waste time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
MichaelL.Sep 18, 2006
Pure, unadulterated crap. Too many disperate elements, too much extraneous material that has nothing to do with the matters at hand. A lush, overproduced excuse for DePalma to indulge in his usual bra and panties peep-show antics. Can this Pure, unadulterated crap. Too many disperate elements, too much extraneous material that has nothing to do with the matters at hand. A lush, overproduced excuse for DePalma to indulge in his usual bra and panties peep-show antics. Can this man make a film without black lace and garters? The Black Dahlia case is interesting enough without the clap-trap fictionalization added in this confused, muddled mess. And that ending! WHAT? Props to Fiona Shaw for the only watchable scene in the film. Johansen and Hartnett are good enough, and Swank is...well...swanky. You want to see a clever, campy, muder and mayhem film set in old Hollywood? Rent 1971s "What's The Matter With Helen?" That wacky tale, at least, makes sense. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
MarkJ.Jan 2, 2007
The Black Dahlia is frought by weakly written characters, who seem to switch roles throughout the film almost as often as the seemingly confused plot. The film switches from comic book cinematography to thriller to comedy within the space of The Black Dahlia is frought by weakly written characters, who seem to switch roles throughout the film almost as often as the seemingly confused plot. The film switches from comic book cinematography to thriller to comedy within the space of an hour all attempting to justify the limited array of characters who occupy each space. By the end I just didn't care, its pointless, its boring, its a really disappointing film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MovieManNov 10, 2006
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It looks like a 10 year old put it together, hoping to get it shown on his local cable access channel. To call it bad is an injustice to the word - it would have to improve ten-fold in order This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It looks like a 10 year old put it together, hoping to get it shown on his local cable access channel. To call it bad is an injustice to the word - it would have to improve ten-fold in order to qualify for a bad rating. The story in nonexistent, the acting is bad and the production values are terrible. Your time would be better spent re-arranging the wires behind your television. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
ShootsyOct 21, 2006
...all of a sudden "Mission to Mars" becomes a masterpiece!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
RobertxxxxOct 9, 2006
The Big Sleep meets Chinatown meets Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
TheHansonBrothersSep 15, 2006
Unbelievably awful, what in the world happened here. Can't believe this score is above 20.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
SSshanksSep 15, 2006
Ugh. A bunch of disjointed scenes that never really add up to anything. Nice looking though.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
IanB.Sep 15, 2006
Exceptional set design and lighting are lost in a generic film noir whose almost incidental ties to the Elizabeth Short story serve mainly as props for scenes of sex and violence. The writing reeks ('nuff said). Mia Kirshner and Exceptional set design and lighting are lost in a generic film noir whose almost incidental ties to the Elizabeth Short story serve mainly as props for scenes of sex and violence. The writing reeks ('nuff said). Mia Kirshner and Scarlett Johansson glimmer in their roles, Josh Hartnett, well, tries his cardboard best, but Hilary Swank, John Kavanagh and Fiona Shaw vie for the real acting raspberries as a (way) dysfunctional family with the worst accents since Inspector Clouseau. If you really like boxing or feel deep in your heart that Elizabeth Short deserved every blow and cut she got, you may like this film, but if you prefer real film noir, see 'Hollywoodland'. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
FrankP.Sep 16, 2006
Bad. Good for some campy laughs but the direction is a mess. Like high school acting class. And the story is incoherent. The actors try their best but it's clear DePalma was asleep at the wheel.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
DaveK.Sep 16, 2006
STATS ON MOVIE: # of people in the theatre on opening day - 45 # of people who left within 45 minutes - 11 # of people snoring next to me - 2 # of people who boo'd it when the credits came - 15 This was an awful movie, each scene is STATS ON MOVIE: # of people in the theatre on opening day - 45 # of people who left within 45 minutes - 11 # of people snoring next to me - 2 # of people who boo'd it when the credits came - 15 This was an awful movie, each scene is just disjointed and connects with the movie in no way at all. Casted horribly too, Hillary swanks character was pointless, Eckhart was pitiful, and so was Hartnett. Do not waste your weekend time! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RalphieBoySep 16, 2006
Let me sum it up for you...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
PaulJ.Sep 17, 2006
Not horrible, but not great (or even good). Low point: Lack of Plot and completely fictitious solving of the crime. High point: cinematography.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
GabeW.Sep 17, 2006
A sadly confused noir that needs to provide a scorecard so that a viewer can attempt to figure it out. Aside from a few memorable scenes the film is boring which is extremely sad since de Palma has been often a truly innovative and exciting A sadly confused noir that needs to provide a scorecard so that a viewer can attempt to figure it out. Aside from a few memorable scenes the film is boring which is extremely sad since de Palma has been often a truly innovative and exciting Diorector. But this one is as stiff as the corpse itself. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
PatK.Sep 18, 2006
Started out thinking this movie was taking me some place....but somewhere in the middle, I realized I was totally wrong. Horrible, corny, ending.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
GrahamS.Sep 24, 2006
I wanted to like this film, I enjoy Noir, I like many of the actors...but this is by far the worst film I have seen this year...or maybe any year. The only real crime of interest is this overlong -convoluted mess is how to waste this much I wanted to like this film, I enjoy Noir, I like many of the actors...but this is by far the worst film I have seen this year...or maybe any year. The only real crime of interest is this overlong -convoluted mess is how to waste this much talent. I think DePalma has made equally bad and derivative films before. The likely comparisons are sure to be Chinatown, and LA Confidential. Robert Townes' script Polanski, and Nicholson are largely untouchable in my eyes. Curtis Hanson's LA confidential - was spellbinding- this film is something entirely different. When you see an old photo faded with years, most people look for something of interest. With no real connection to the scandal and a difficult script this is the equivalent of a dull photo of 40's wallpaper. How bad must a film be when the highlights are the barn door and the kitchen table- Avoid this mess!!! I am trying to think what I have seen that is worse- A least SHOWGIRLS was so bad it was laughable, DePalma has taken us to new depths. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
BobbieSep 26, 2006
Possibly the worst adaption of a book ever. They took a great book and turned it into trash. Avoid.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
GuySJan 4, 2007
I can't think of a movie that bored me more than this. Although I haven't yet read the book by the occasionally excellent James Ellroy -- and after seeing this bowl of tripe, it's doubtful I will -- I expected that the movie I can't think of a movie that bored me more than this. Although I haven't yet read the book by the occasionally excellent James Ellroy -- and after seeing this bowl of tripe, it's doubtful I will -- I expected that the movie would at least hit some of the author's signature noir notes. This was a caricature of the genre, with cardboard characters and an unfocused, meandering script. If the flick bears even a slight resemblance to the book, Ellroy should give back his advance. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
VS.D.Feb 11, 2007
So awful I couldn't even make it thru it. I'm a fan of the book and when I heard David Fincher was directing, I was delighted. Then I heard he dropped out and De Palma was taking over. Then I wept. De Palma is such a dreadful So awful I couldn't even make it thru it. I'm a fan of the book and when I heard David Fincher was directing, I was delighted. Then I heard he dropped out and De Palma was taking over. Then I wept. De Palma is such a dreadful director--no subtlety, no understanding of telling the story with the cut, no understanding of plot and story. I couldn't think of a worse director for this material (though Joel Schumacher would be a close second). Dreadful, dreadful stuff. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
ElliotP.Feb 4, 2007
When you get the feeling 1/2 way through this movie that cleaning your bathroom would be more fun than this film - trust your instinct. I wish I had.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JamesA.Jul 5, 2007
This movie would be worse than our Home Video. Dont waste time!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
GerrickCOct 25, 2006
Didn't I hear someone say that this movie is from the director of Scarface? That's BS and anyone who sees this movie will know it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ElisaP.Oct 4, 2006
[***SPOILERS***] I was relieved to find out that I wasn't and imbecile when my question â?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JenniferH.Oct 8, 2006
Overwrought, overworked, plain stupid dialogue, flat main character (young Tommy Lee Jones look alike, but little depth of intelligence here to add any interest), ridiculously convoluted story line predictable psycho-sexual elements. The Overwrought, overworked, plain stupid dialogue, flat main character (young Tommy Lee Jones look alike, but little depth of intelligence here to add any interest), ridiculously convoluted story line predictable psycho-sexual elements. The writing is SO bad that you end up wanting to laugh where it seems the makers expect you to be horrified and engaged. Best actor in the film without reservation, Mia Kirshner, who effectively plays the troubled sad subject of the murder story Ms. Betty Short. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
NicoleB.Sep 16, 2006
The title of this movie is deceiving at most. I am still perplexed how the "story" of this movie and Elizabeth Short actually do fit together. The writing was below average and the ending really left me feeling stupid, mostly because I sat The title of this movie is deceiving at most. I am still perplexed how the "story" of this movie and Elizabeth Short actually do fit together. The writing was below average and the ending really left me feeling stupid, mostly because I sat through this for 2 hours. This movie does not offer a real insight into the Elizabeth Short story and to tell the truth sheds a very poor light of her character, I can understand why her family was upset about this book and movie. In short, don't waste your money if you have interest in the actual case, see if you like a predictable story that is disjointed with twists and turns that will make you think does this studio actually think I am this stupid. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
TerryG.Sep 16, 2006
If you're interested in the Black Dahlia murder case I suggest you wait until another movie does it justice because this one is not about Elizabeth Short, it's not about why she was murdered and it offers a ridiculous fantasy as to If you're interested in the Black Dahlia murder case I suggest you wait until another movie does it justice because this one is not about Elizabeth Short, it's not about why she was murdered and it offers a ridiculous fantasy as to the identity of the killer(s). Not only that but the acting is amateurish and unconvincing, the soundtrack is annoying and out of place, the direction is muddled and confusing, the dialogue is just plain silly and unmemorable, the sense of place - LA in the forties - is no where to be found and facts regarding the murder case are incorrect. I have no idea what this movie is about other than a few sexual fantasies of Brian de Palma and James Ellroy. Every aspect of this film is glaringly bad. Hopefully, someone else will tackle this subject with an eye toward authenticity, good characters and, if it isn't too much to ask, a good story. In the meantime, read the facts about the Black Dahlia murder and then use your imagination to make your own movie. But imagine it in Los Angeles, not Bugaria where this movie was filmed. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RackT.Sep 17, 2006
[***SPOILERS***] 0/5 stars. Yup. ZERO. if a movie is bad, then fine, but this movie was a complete fraud. I was so pissed after seeing this movie. It is not worth a rental. It is not worth an HBO viewing. I want to start a petition to force[***SPOILERS***] 0/5 stars. Yup. ZERO. if a movie is bad, then fine, but this movie was a complete fraud. I was so pissed after seeing this movie. It is not worth a rental. It is not worth an HBO viewing. I want to start a petition to force them to give everyone back their money. It is like false advertising. I wanted to walk out 45 mintues but didn't. She wouldn't walk out because it was almost over. I wish I would have gone outside and down manual labor for 2 hours. I have never seen so many people walk out of a movie before. I would guess 14 at least. Ok. This movie is supposed to be based on a true event that is the murder of Elizabeth Short. But guess what. This movie wasn't even about that! Yup. You heard me right. I felt like I was in the wrong movie for th efirst 35 minutes. It took 35 minutes for the movie to even acknowledge the name of that chick and anotehr 10 mintues for the murder to occur. So what was the movie about? Well, it was about the story of 2 fictional cops and their relationship!!! Yup. You heard me right. The only thing close to protraying the actual events of what we know happened that night was the following: 1) Elizabeth Short was murdered 2) Her body was cut in half 3) her face sliced from ear to ear. That was it. That was the entire non-fiction part of the movie. The rest of the movie was a Hollywood make believe story. You never saw Elizabeth Short. You never learned what happened on the night of the murder. All the movie showed was her just showing up dead in a field. No background. No history. No nothing. The entire plot of the movie was about these 2 damn cops. After that at the end they pieced together a make believe outcome to Short's death and it ended. Listen. I watched a 60 minute piece on The Black Dahlia on A&E and I know more of what about actually happened then what the director/writer/producer (whoever) even tried to explain. It would have been one thing if things in this movie were just far fetched, but they are impossible and couldn't be further from what is know about the event. Acccording to all websites and the A&E special the murderer was most likely a doctor or someone in the medical field. In the movie, it was nowhere even close to that (I want to give it away but won't). Seeing this movie was like going to a movie thinking it is about football only to be watching a tap dance tournament. I was so fucking pissed off. I want my money and my time back. 0/5 stars. ZERO. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JoshB.Sep 17, 2006
Completely uninspired butchering (heh) of a pretty great book. Captured none of the spirit, none of the noir of ellroy's novel. Watching Johannson/Hartnet on screen together looked like a biopic about the would-be romance of Keanu Completely uninspired butchering (heh) of a pretty great book. Captured none of the spirit, none of the noir of ellroy's novel. Watching Johannson/Hartnet on screen together looked like a biopic about the would-be romance of Keanu Reeves's Grandfather and a bag of sand. Awful. A complete waste of time and money, for everyone involved. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ShellyM.Sep 18, 2006
I know this was supposed to be set in a sort of "old Hollywood", but it came across as sort of cheesey. I found my self laughing (along with the rest of the people in the theatre) at scenes that were not supposed to be funny...
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ClintM.Sep 18, 2006
I really felt let down completely by this one. and it's not b/c it makes you think and asks you to weave the story together ... it's that the threads it tried to weave were woven on totally different blankets!!!! the I really felt let down completely by this one. and it's not b/c it makes you think and asks you to weave the story together ... it's that the threads it tried to weave were woven on totally different blankets!!!! the writers/editors/director ... whoever ... couldn't put a compelling, logical, intriguing, twisty story together! instead of the movie unfolding its mysteries ... they fall apart, completely. and Josh Hartnett officially joins Paul Walker as one of the worst actors out right now. sorry. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful