In 1946, the former boxers Dwight "Bucky" Bleichert and Lee Blanchard are policemen in Los Angeles. Lee has a good relationship with his chief and uses a box fight between them to promote the department and get a raise to the police force. They succeed and are promoted to homicide detectives, working together. Bucky becomes a close friend of Lee and his girlfriend Kay Lake, forming a triangle of love. When the corpse of the aspirant actress 'Elizabeth Short (I)' is found mutilated, Lee becomes obsessed to solve the case called by the press Black Dahlia. Meanwhile, Bucky's investigation leads him to a Madeleine Linscott, the daughter of a powerful and wealthy constructor that resembles the Black Dahlia. In an environment of corruption and lies, Bucky discloses hidden truths.Written by
Claudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
In the diner scene the cash register shows a purchase of 4d which was the British symbol for pence, not something you're likely to see in LA. See more »
Ofcr. Dwight "Bucky" Bleichert:
Mr. Fire versus Mr. Ice. For everything people were making it out to be, you'd think it was our first fight. It wasn't. And it wouldn't be our last.
See more »
My wife and I went to see it yesterday with another couple. It's one of the worst movies I've seen in years (all 4 of us agreed). Two hours of torture. Hard to believe it came from Brian DePalma, or anyone else for that matter. "The Black Dahlia" manages to combine all of the right ingredients for a supreme stinker: 1. A confusing story line. It's supposed to be about a murdered women, the Black Dahlia, but there are so many confusing, unnecessary sub-plots going on, they forgot about the subject of the movie. 2. Bad writing. The dialogue was so bad it seemed like a parody of movies from the 1940's, with the corny dialogue, only exaggerated. It's as though Saturday Night Live wrote the script for a 10-minute skit, but stretched it into 2 hours. You can't believe how bad it is. 3. Wooden acting. I guess if you have a terrible script, even the best actors can't do much with it. Most of the actors try to copy the style of dialogue from the 1940s, which would be fine if we were in the 1940s, but this is 2006. There was one scene with a woman which was supposed to be serious, but it was so pathetically over-acted that people in the audience started laughing. Ouch! Save your money.
5 of 5 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this