It could be much better.

Boring, slow lack of storytelling. How a movie should not be.

Not bad but not great. The cast was great josh hartnett Aaron eckhart scarlett Johansson Mike starr rose mcgowan and Hilary swank. The acting was great but i felt like Josh and Aaron did not have a whole lot of screen time together. The beginning of the movie was very slow paced didn't even get to the murder mystery story until 30 minutes in the movie. And also the ending was slow paced aswell and they show you who is the killers and the murder was unsolved. So it felt like they were making fun of the murder. So decent movie 7.2 out of 10 but wished it was better.

Hard to watch a meandering movie looking for a plot. Reminded of many similar but far superior movies while watching. Depalma has never impressed. Only it gets worse over the years

Lukewarm, mess of storytelling, boring and lacking in engaging material. i doggedly persisted til the end, but shouldnt have bothered.

An enjoyable neo noir film that has a lovely cast and has enough plot twists that keeps you engaged throughout its run time.

The cinematography is undeniably beautiful, but there are about three different incoherent movies stuffed into this mess.

Never even finished the movie. The worst story telling I've ever experienced. Can I have the hour and a half of my life back?

For a crime movie based on a true story, I expected more, as at times the film drags on which makes it boring to watch. However, as it concludes, the plot begins to make sense as it feels all over the place throughout it. Overall, a fine film that borrows ideas from sin city and crime thrillers but is executed poorly.

I will never forget watching this in the theatre and halfway through asking my friend if they had any idea what was going on and they said "no". We stayed hoping it would eventually make sense. When the credits started to roll the guy behind me said "what the f*** was that?" Needless to say he read my mind. To this day I still tell people this is the worst movie I have ever sat all the way through.

Very stylish and rich in atmosphere but this is one of De Palma's lesser entries. Only a few of the performers seem reigned in and the third act becomes too convoluted and runs almost completely out of steam.

Enjoyed the plot, the era, and the suspense!

Trama fitta, in continuo mutamento e molto complessa anche per un genere in cui è diventato quasi essenziale alzare sempre l'asticella della suspense. Le atmosfere e i colori riportano facilmente indietro a quell'epoca; anche alcuni primi piani agli attori con pose esasperate sono totalmente in linea con quanto cercato. Alcuni personaggi minori molto bizzarri e stilizzati erano onestamente evitabili e in alcuni passaggi sarebbe stato utile allo spettatore avere qualche spiegazione in più per stare al passo con la trama.

Living in LA I recall reading all the buzz about this movie when it came out in 2006 and made a mental note to check it out. Fast forward 15 years and I found the DVD in the LA Public Library (yeah!) and decided to check it out (literally and figuratively -- get it? Public Library and check out??) I can't add much more than what everyone has posted.. the professional critics were spot on as were the rest of us. Here is what I learned: 1) Los Angeles had some pretty darned FAB-U-LOUS lesbian bars back then!! I mean!! Big fleshy dance numbers in one place and totally fabulous bar with lesbians looking fantastic. Gone are the days, eh? 2) Seems to rain a lot in LA back then. I mean A LOT! Almost all night scenes show freshly wet streets and such. Nice for the "noir" look, for sure, but it never rained that much in LA as depicted in this flick. Not in the late 1940s and especially not now! 3) It's really really hard to provide period-set cover shots in LA so De Palma's story boarding and locations are a text book case on how to try to achieve this : - complex long shots with specific and changing fields of focus, following the actors and action - extremely well framed and very tightly shot 4) Construct all the large period piece sets in Bulgaria where labor is SUPER CHEAP and fly the actors in for filming.

This film was quite good except for too many sub-plots and characters.

I have not read Ellroy's book, but I am rather knowledgable about this case, having read seven books on it, none of which seem to me good and some of which are downright irresponsible. After fifteen minutes, it became plain that the movie was using the case as a backdrop for a noir story of romance and police procedure and would not attempt to deal with the particulars of the death of Elizabeth Short. That's both good and bad. It frees the story from coming up with a plausible explanation of this probably unsolvable crime and means that the movie can stand on its own as a story. Here, I have reservations. The plot is not set forth with sufficient clarity, and some of the assumptions as to how people would act are ludicrous. Many characters are heightened, thin, unbelievable caricatures, although the hero, Bucky Bleichert, remains this side of plausibility. The melodramatic conclusion is so huddled that the last fifteen minutes disappoint rather than stun, as I believe they are intended to do. There is no evidence that Elizabeth Short took part in most of the activities the film suggests that she did, but that can be chalked up to artistic license. The period atmosphere is effective for a while, although Kay Lake's kitchen has appliances that were not around in 1947. Something supposed to be a Ming vase didn't look like one to me. Also there were no ball point pens in America until the early 1950's. However, people did smoke all the time, and the typewriters could have looked like that. The most interesting theme—not fully or sufficiently developed—is that in Hollywood making movies and living are intertwined or identified. I suppose it could be argued that that underscores the artificiality of the denouement, but if we are supposed to believe and even be moved by the plight of these tortured characters, they have to possess credible human reactions and emotions, not be pieces in a tangle of heartless manipulation explained like a set of mechanical operations.

It is well mad and well acted but it seems too obsessed with noir to work properly.

Shoots for noir, comes up gris. Simply doesn't make the grade and comes very close to becoming a satire or send-up of the whole noir genre. If you want that period for noir, watch L.A. Confidential. Far, far better. I know Scarlett Johannsen is sooo much better an actor that I have to assume the buck stops with Di Palma, the director. Josh Hartnett comes off ok (just ok, I guess) but the voice over, again trying to be noir, is stilted and stagey. Hard to even know where Aaron Eckhart comes from in all of this; you don't know until the last 2 or 3 minutes. It's like an NBA game, as they say; don't bother with the first 46 minutes of regulation play; just watch the last 2 minutes. No, seriously: watch L.A. Confidential instead.

Everyone who loves 40's crime movies I recommend this!

despite the poor ratings, this was an interesting movie with a great cast, as there were several other stories around the main story-line of the death of Betty Short