What did you think about the movie featuring Josh harnett, and Scarlett Johannson.. I am thinking of seeing the movie, i wanted your take on the film..so two thumbs up or down, and please explain why and please no spoilers as i havent seen the movie! thank you so much..ciao!
2006-10-25 08:32:52 · 8 answers · asked by alohaforever16 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
The Black Dahlia Murder
Discovered January 15, 1947
The murder of Elizabeth Short has intrigued, mystified, even disgusted the city of Los Angeles for more than half a centruy.
Elizabeth Short, a 22-year-old wannabe actress (spec), spent several years moving around, gaining odd jobs. Her passion for servicemen and aspiration to be famous made her a "different" woman of her time. She reportedly hooked up with a variety of men and women (one reported to having been Marilyn Monroe).
Her name evolved from her black hair and black attire. Some say she was named the Black Dahlia before her murder in January of 1947, others say the name was applied by journalists to sensationalize the crime.
The second link is a really good site for information on actual news footage. Be careful as the photos are very explicit, which is shocking if you consider the date of the crime. Nonetheless, I was definitely excited to see the movie after reading more about the actual information from news footage. However, my son went to see it and said it was very confusing and definitely not something that kept his interest. The more he talked about it, the more I realized, it was about the book written by James Elroy! The actual facts of Elizabeth Short's life is boring and mundane but would that make a movie? No - so enter fiction! Droll! I will wait for it to come out on video. :)
2006-10-25 09:09:40 · answer #1 · answered by terryoulboub 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The reason you got the downers is because of the fallacy in your lil' snipe there. You seem to still buy into the revisionist history BS that the civil war was about slavery. It had little to do with it. Lincoln didn't give a damn about the slaves, and was a racist bastard himself that wanted to repatriate them all back to Africa. The emancipation proclamation, contrary to popular belief, did NOT free all the slaves.. only the ones in the states & counties in rebellion. You got the thumbs down because of your ignorance about history & the truth, interjecting your own opinion in a matter that had nothing to do with the question,. Had the Confederacy won, slavery would have ended in short order regardless, due to changing attitudes and the advancement of technology. The British empire had outlawed it twenty years prior, it would have been unavoidable. Maybe if it had not been forced via the deaths of half a million Americans, and the trampling of the Constitution, we as a nation would have gotten over the transition sooner than we have... if we have. And you think there was no slavery in the North? Ok, that's so cute.. it may not have been institutionalized by law, and people may not have been deeded 'property', but trust me... the Irish, the Slavic, and the Chinese were very much slaves.... even well into the 20th century. Read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair sometime... you'll see a form of slavery that you never knew existed in this nation.. often more horrific than much of what the southern plantation slaves endured. A little knowledge is a very dangerous thing. Your snip about the south shows ignorance of a much bigger issue than you could ever imagine.
2016-05-22 13:25:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was alright by movie standards, but if you know the true story about the Dahlia and what actually happened to her, it will piss you off to no end. It twists the story and details around and paints her to be an idiot and a tramp. Not true in the least. The movie isn't exactly about her, it's about the dective's obsession with her.
As a movie it was decent. The historical aspects were terrible, I can't say that enough.
I don't recommend you see it. Wait til they start showing it on tv. It's really not worth it.
2006-10-25 08:37:47 · answer #3 · answered by Artemiseos 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Two thumbs down. Should have been very, very, very good. But, it wasn't. The overzealous director and editing department took it upon themselves (as they too often do) to butcher an amazing story and script. Shame on them.
2006-10-25 08:40:41 · answer #4 · answered by Big Dog03 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Two thumbs down....almost walked out of the movie...but paid $6....I do NOT recommend!
2006-10-25 08:35:53 · answer #5 · answered by margaret25ann 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have no intention of seeing the film. When the crime took place, I was a child living near LA, but was aware how terrible it was. Don't mean to spoil it for you, but I have no interest in seeing something that capitalizes on a woman's gruesome murder.
2006-10-25 08:37:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
One thumb up, and one thumb down.
2006-10-25 08:34:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Split vote. It dragged in spots.
2006-10-25 08:35:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋