The Black Dahlia (Brian De Palma, 2006)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Lino
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:18 am
Location: Sitting End
Contact:

#1 Post by Lino » Thu Oct 13, 2005 7:23 am

Official french poster is up:

Image

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#2 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:09 am

Here's a really good De Palma site that has frequent updates on the movie:

Here's a recently posted stills from the movie:

Image

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#3 Post by Polybius » Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:26 pm

Mark Wahlberg was going to do the Eckhart role first. Too bad they also couldn't replace Hartnett. (Anyone who's read the novel will be amused by Hartnet playing the narrator, who talks a lot about how ugly he is.)

I'm a confirmed DePalma skeptic, and I really regret that Fincher didn't do this, but this is such a great story that I'm interested to see what becomes of it.

Plus any movie set in the late 40's with Scarlett Johansson, Mia Kirshner, Hilary Swank and Rose McGowan automatically has my full attention.

User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

#4 Post by justeleblanc » Thu Oct 13, 2005 7:33 pm

There was a story about the making of this film that I can't seem to find anymore. There's a scene in the film where a 13-year-old girl was to appear naked in a lesbian sex scene. When they put out a casting call, they regretted to include that the actress had to be over 18, and I think that was a little problematic. If anyone knows where I can find this article that would be great.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#5 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:54 am

Here it is, from De Palma a la Mod:
CONTROVERSY AS FOX COLUMNIST RED FLAGS DAHLIA CASTING

SPOILER ALERT:

The following article may contain minor spoilers, as it discusses casting descriptions for The Black Dahlia
Fox News columnist Roger Friedman yesterday wrote about a casting listing that went out this week which inadvertently, he stated, "could have gotten famed director Brian De Palma in a lot of trouble." Friedman said that "eyebrows were raised" Tuesday "when DePalma and [Art] Linson sent out a casting call for a girl who looks 13 to play nude lesbian scenes in the movie." Friedman mentioned that De Palma and Linson are "the men who gave us "The Untouchables" a decade ago" (although it was almost two decades ago), and cheekily headlined yesterday's item with the following: "Brian De Palma Casts for 'Untouchables'". The column refers to a casting notice that went out last Friday from the Johanna Ray casting agency, which has been working with De Palma and Linson on the film since January 2004. The listing is for the part of Linda Martin, a character from James Ellroy's novel. Friedman wrote, "The actress who lands the role of Linda Martin, her parents should know, will have two scenes. One of them will show Linda 'naked in a lesbian porno film.'"

I have obtained a copy of the original casting notice, and it seems the Fox columnist either misread the item, or felt like being an alarmist. At the top of the listing, it clearly states in bold, "MUST LOOK 13 YEARS OLD!!!" Near the end of the listing, it clearly states, in bold, "MUST BE 18 YEARS OLD." After that, it states, "DO NOT RESUBMIT- your previous submissions obviously weren't young enough!" Here is what the notice states in between. The blank areas contain possible minor spoilers-- click your mouse over the blank areas to read those parts.

[LINDA MARTIN] NUDITY REQUIRED. Looking for a Caucasian girl to play 13 years old. Must have street quality and a unique looking beauty. There are two scenes, one of which shows her naked in a lesbian porno film that the police find (same scene as ELIZABETH SHORT). It is filmed in Black and White and nothing is required for her to do that will give the movie more than an R rating, but the actress must be completely comfortable with NUDITY. The second scene is a 4 page interrogation scene. Works approximately three days in Bulgaria. Please submit young, unique and experienced girls and DO NOT SUBMIT WITHOUT REVIEWING NUDITY SCENE THAT IS POSTED WITH THE SIDES!!!! MUST BE 18 YEARS OLD.

After Friedman questioned the listing to the agency, they put out a second notice that stressed at the top, "PLEASE NOTE ACTRESS MUST BE AT LEAST 18 YEARS OLD." Everything else about the notice was exactly the same. Friedman wrote in his column:

When I called to ask if the production company was serious, a worried casting associate told me: "We're not hiring anyone underage. But agents and managers were sending us girls in their 20s who looked too old. We want an 18- or 19-year-old who can play 13 or 14, not an actual 13-year-old." She added that earlier casting notices for the film stressed that distinction and sent them along for verification. Later, I got another call from the production company reminding me that they were certainly not looking for an underage girl or one who looks 13, just "innocent, like she hasn't been around the block yet." The nudity, lesbian and porno part remains in effect.

Toward the end of the item, Friedman discussed De Palma's history of controversial sex in his films, citing his last movie, Femme Fatale, which, according to Friedman, "featured Rebecca Romijn as a lesbian cat burglar whose private tastes left little to the imagination." Friedman brings up the De Palma-Hitchcock comparison, saying, "But even Alfred Hitchcock might blanch at the idea of using a 13-year-old girl, even a fake one, in the suggested situation." The columnist then goes on to mention Brooke Shields and Jodie Foster performing sexy roles when they were just young girls, overlooking the fact that the notice clearly states that the actress who plays Linda Martin must be 18 years old.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#6 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:14 pm

Some new pics are up, from a French mag:

Image

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#7 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Tue Jan 17, 2006 1:38 pm

This sounds promising:

[quote]At a Court TV dinner, Ellroy said he'd seen three hours of unedited footage from “Dahlia,â€

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#8 Post by Polybius » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:54 pm

Again, I suggest anyone interested in the period, the style of story or just to have an idea before the film comes out, pick up a copy of the novel. It's fabulous.

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#9 Post by Polybius » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:55 pm

I'm gonna go get the papers, get the papers...

User avatar
foofighters7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 11:27 pm
Location: Local

#10 Post by foofighters7 » Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:59 am

Horrid, Josh Hartnett? I mean, I dont completly dislike the guy. I just REALLLLLY dont want to see him in this role, in this movie. Take away him and DePalma, and you got something there.

Depalma is a hack. He always has been. Hes one of those directors who have had very few original ideas in his life, and feels he must make films that have a very specific feel or very close story, to other films. I dont know why he does this, perhaps he doesnt have faith in original storys. Or he doesnt have much faith in himself for making something where he would have to provide most of the ideas and style, and story.

I mean, seriously, look at his work. His damn space movie Mission To mars , hmm seems a lil like 2001. His damn Sisters, hmm seems like hes stealing SOMETHING from Hitchcock. The thing is, some of his films, wether they stole something from someone else or not, are good. I dont think any of them are great. I use the word Steal loosely. I cant say wether or not he has aknowleged the odd similarities to other films at times.
I think he has some kind of list, and simply marks off the film storys as he makes them. For instance, I think now he can mark off the 'based on true story Noir film'.

I dont know, maybe im just to hard on him. I dont think I am, Snake Eyes??? Need I say more?

But having said that. I LOVE the story and history of this event, SO I do hope he has done a good job. I can deal with him I think, but this Hartnett fellow, Im not sure I can get past him.
sorry for typos, its late, im not checking. hehe

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#11 Post by rs98762001 » Wed Jan 18, 2006 3:29 am

I dont know, maybe im just to hard on him. I dont think I am
Yup, you are.

Carlito's Way
Dressed to Kill
Casualties of War
Scarface
Blow Out
Carrie
etc...

De Palma isn't consistent, but he has made some fantastic movies.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#12 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:15 am

Polybius wrote:Again, I suggest anyone interested in the period, the style of story or just to have an idea before the film comes out, pick up a copy of the novel. It's fabulous.
Definitely. I just started re-reading it to refresh my memory for when the film comes out and am struck again by the visceral nature of Ellroy's prose. Knowing De Palma's love of graphic violence it should be interesting to see how faithful he is, in that respect, to Ellroy's book. I sense an unrated version popping up on DVD in the future...

che-etienne
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:18 pm

#13 Post by che-etienne » Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:31 am

That's true. Ellroy really has that ability to put the reader in the thick of the situation as it were, right next to his characters. Though I have not read "Black Dahlia", I remember that feeling in "L.A. Confidential". His prose takes on the quality of what I can best describe as a camera that tightly holds on its subject even in the most tense of circumstances. Speaking of which, though Hanson's adaptation of "L.A. Confidential" was decent, having since read the novel I feel it was quite tepid... let's hope De Palma doesn't water this one down as Hanson did.

User avatar
foofighters7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 11:27 pm
Location: Local

#14 Post by foofighters7 » Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:36 pm

De Palma isn't consistent, but he has made some fantastic movies.
I think you made a mistake and accidently used the word 'fantastic'.
I agree Carlitos Way is quite good, I think its his best.
As for Dressed To Kill, its a FAIR film, I dont see how anyone could say its fantastic. Casualties of War, well he was able to mark off his war film here, and I love a few performances, but then again, I really only liked SEVERAL of his films, not for HIS work, but for the actors used in the films work. Casualties to me just becomes a bad timing film. Its not bad, i think its prob his 2nd or 3rd best film,but again I see nothing to make it a high point of the genre.
Scarface, a good movie, with good acting once again, but I think possibly one of the most over-hyped movie of all time. If your a Rapper I guess you would say its the best movie of all time.
Blow Out, and Carrie, well I dont like either of these movies, and I cant find to much to say about them. Sure Blow Out has its fans, but when you think great movies, do you think of Blow Out? When I think of Good movies I dont think of Blow Out either. Carrie, ugh, well he was at least able to mark off his horror film from his list.

Now to be fair, I havent seen Blow Out in awhile, Carrie I just seen again though, and the others I havent seen in awhile either. Ive seen Scarface many times, (I do love Pacino's performance), and its worth watching, if for nothing else, his amazing performance.

Well, Im HOPING this film ,at least, falls somewhere near the top of his list of films.

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#15 Post by rs98762001 » Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:34 pm

I love those films of De Palma's that I listed. I also forgot PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE, which is really quite bizarre and amazing.

All of DePalma's "fantastic" movies indeed have their own flaws, but they also all share something interesting and subversive. Too much so for his career to just be outright dismissed. I agree with you though that he's frequently disappoints and confounds (I can't believe I paid money to see SNAKE EYES, despite the wonderful first shot) which is the great frustration of his inconsistent career. So the less expectations we have for BLACK DAHLIA, the better.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#16 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:45 pm

che-etienne wrote:That's true. Ellroy really has that ability to put the reader in the thick of the situation as it were, right next to his characters. Though I have not read "Black Dahlia", I remember that feeling in "L.A. Confidential". His prose takes on the quality of what I can best describe as a camera that tightly holds on its subject even in the most tense of circumstances. Speaking of which, though Hanson's adaptation of "L.A. Confidential" was decent, having since read the novel I feel it was quite tepid... let's hope De Palma doesn't water this one down as Hanson did.
I think Hanson did a great job all things considered. I mean, having to condense that many pages into a workable 2 hr. movie? Check out Manohla Dargis' BFI book on the movie. She makes a very convincing argument for its worth. Hanson did the best he could by maintaining the spirit of the novel, trimming some of the narrative fat and maintaining a tight focus on the central storyline that ran through the novel. Obviously, there are things I would change or put back in that were in the novel but, let's face it, to do the book proper justice, you'd have to break it down into a mini-series for HBO or something like that.

User avatar
pzman84
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:05 pm

#17 Post by pzman84 » Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:22 pm

Is it just me or would you have liked to see this movie in Black and White so it looked like a movie from from the 1940s?

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#18 Post by Polybius » Thu Jan 19, 2006 1:02 am

Actually, no. That was cool when Marty did it for Raging Bull and it worked for Good Night and Good Luck, but that's a bit of an overused tool at this juncture. Considering the previous major Ellroy adaptation of a period novel was in color and still took us deeply into the milieu, I'm okay with using color. Besides...you can't see Mia's eyes in B&W and that would be criminal.

I don't know that I would call DePalma a hack, but my opinion of him isn't all that high, as a scroll back will illustrate. I think he put a permanent scar on his reputation with the series of slavish Hitchcock apings. Those are all stylish and sort of interesting, but ultimately rather empty, especially considering he did a whole series of them. Taking a spin in another guy's style as a tribute (like Todd did to Sirk in Far From Heaven) is one thing, but parking there and doing it repeatedly is quite another.

Still, I hope this will pan out.

Some stills for those interested...

Image
Image

User avatar
pzman84
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:05 pm

#19 Post by pzman84 » Thu Jan 19, 2006 1:42 am

Polybius wrote:but that's a bit of an overused tool at this juncture.
Yeah, with all of those artsy-fartsy Black and White films that pack theaters every year. Damn the studios, for making tons of these films!

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#20 Post by Polybius » Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:27 am

You ask for an opinion, I give you a respectful one and you use me as a urinal cake. Really nice.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#21 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:57 am

Polybius wrote:I don't know that I would call DePalma a hack, but my opinion of him isn't all that high, as a scroll back will illustrate. I think he put a permanent scar on his reputation with the series of slavish Hitchcock apings. Those are all stylish and sort of interesting, but ultimately rather empty, especially considering he did a whole series of them. Taking a spin in another guy's style as a tribute (like Todd did to Sirk in Far From Heaven) is one thing, but parking there and doing it repeatedly is quite another.
Good point. De Palma was kinda the Tarantino of his day. It's as if he samples other filmmaker's work in his own, however, I think that in De Palma's best movies (Scarface, Carlito's Way, The Untouchables, etc.) he still has enough of his own preoccupations to make them uniquely his own. Let's face it, everyone is influenced by other films/filmmakers and has ripped something off from somewhere, De Palma is just more blatant about it. The guys has made a few great films so that I don't think he can be totally discarded as a hack, just very inconsistent.

User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

#22 Post by justeleblanc » Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:12 pm

Polybius wrote:Besides...you can't see Mia's eyes in B&W and that would be criminal.
Such a true statement!

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#23 Post by Polybius » Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:41 pm

Fletch F. Fletch wrote: I think that in De Palma's best movies (Scarface, Carlito's Way, The Untouchables, etc.) he still has enough of his own preoccupations to make them uniquely his own.
Agreed. He bought himself a lot of room from me with The Untouchables.
Let's face it, everyone is influenced by other films/filmmakers and has ripped something off from somewhere, De Palma is just more blatant about it.
True, but in his case, he sort of fixated on one director and made half-as-well-done films in his style. It would be the same if Woody had done 3-4 consecutive films in the Bergmanian vein of Interiors.

The point you make is well taken and is essentially the same one that we've all discussed before in relation to P.T. Anderson. There is a line somewhere that distinguishes homage from ripoff, and it's only really located in the aesthetic sense of each moviegoer. Thus, for me, Anderson's on the good side with Boogie Nights, but over the line (with his own unpalatable nonsense thrown in for good measure), in Magnolia.

Bottom line on Brian: inconsistent but sporadically brilliant.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#24 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:04 am

Polybius wrote:Agreed. He bought himself a lot of room from me with The Untouchables.
Definitely. That movie has so much going for it. Top notch cinematography and production values, Mamet's hard boiled script and inspired performances by Sean Connery and De Niro...
True, but in his case, he sort of fixated on one director and made half-as-well-done films in his style. It would be the same if Woody had done 3-4 consecutive films in the Bergmanian vein of Interiors.
Agreed. De Palma really needs to get off the Hitchcock kick.
The point you make is well taken and is essentially the same one that we've all discussed before in relation to P.T. Anderson. There is a line somewhere that distinguishes homage from ripoff, and it's only really located in the aesthetic sense of each moviegoer. Thus, for me, Anderson's on the good side with Boogie Nights, but over the line (with his own unpalatable nonsense thrown in for good measure), in Magnolia.

Bottom line on Brian: inconsistent but sporadically brilliant.
Exactly. Although, I will have to disagree with you on Magnolia. :wink: But your point is well taken.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#25 Post by tavernier » Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:29 pm

From the New York Times:

A Dark Moment in the Harsh Hollywood Sun

By PAT H. BROESKE

DURING her brief lifetime, Elizabeth Short never starred in a single movie. There is no record of her having played so much as a bit part. Yet within popular culture, Short — who frequently told friends she wanted to break into show business — has emerged as something of an honorary leading lady whose shadowy life and violent death follow the contours of a classic film noir script.

She certainly had the looks. Along with a hubba-hubba figure, she possessed a great smile, alabaster skin and dark, curly hair. And she died right: young, mysteriously and gruesomely. Screaming headlines reporting her murder in 1947 warned of a "werewolf maniac," as this city's five newspapers sought to outscoop one another. Photos of her corpse — torso cut in two, face slashed into a hideous mock of a grin — were suppressed.

But the nickname cinched it. It was derived from a popular movie of the day called "The Blue Dahlia," starring Veronica Lake and Alan Ladd. Short, who at the age of 22 stood out with her black clothing and her dark, sometimes flower-adorned hair, was known to friends as the Black Dahlia.

Obsession has surrounded Short's murder from the beginning, as a roll call of confessors — there were dozens — stepped forward, claiming they had done the Dahlia in. But to this day the case has not been solved, further adding to the lore. Now, nearly six decades after her death, Universal Pictures is preparing to release "The Black Dahlia," based on James Ellroy's 1987 novel of the same title, giving Short her first big-screen close-up. Directed by Brian De Palma and budgeted at about $45 million, the film will reach theaters in the fall, with a cast that includes Josh Hartnett, Aaron Eckhart, Scarlett Johansson, Hilary Swank and, as the mysterious title lady, Mia Kirshner.

"There aren't many cases with the mythic quality of the Dahlia," Mr. De Palma said in a recent interview. "London has Jack the Ripper. America has the Black Dahlia."

An avid reader of detective fiction and true crime, Mr. De Palma was nonetheless surprised by the public fascination with the Black Dahlia. "There are all these books," he said. "It just goes on and on. People getting new information, having recovered memories, finding old files and new theories."

Talking about the lure of Mr. Ellroy's novel, a dark mystery involving a love triangle and corruption, Mr. De Palma added: "I love all that 40's stuff, all that noir stuff shot in L.A. — and I haven't shot too many pictures in L.A. I love to get the characters in the suits and the hats, and I love that great kind of noir cynicism that pervades the Ellroy novels."

In "The Black Dahlia," Mr. Ellroy fictionalized Short in much the same way he transformed real-life characters in his book turned film "L.A. Confidential," using her murder to propel the novel's many twists and turns. "I was interested in art and theme," Mr. Ellroy said, rather than in solving the actual case.

Mr. Ellroy, who was drawn to the Dahlia case as a child through the Jack Webb book "The Badge," also became fixated, in large part, because his own mother was murdered when he was 10. "Elizabeth Short and my mother kind of merged," he said.

"I used to ride my bike" to the Dahlia crime scene, Mr. Ellroy continued. "I started having these horrible nightmares about Elizabeth Short." (He later examined his mother's murder in his 1996 memoir, "My Dark Places.")

Mr. De Palma's film is a tangled tale of friendship, love and sexual desire among several Los Angeles detectives and the trio of mysterious women in their lives, and it is just as labyrinthine as Mr. Ellroy's book. "It is not the story of Elizabeth Short," Mr. De Palma said, explaining that the Dahlia is shown in flashback. "The movie is complicated. It's about characters who are impacted and obsessed with what happened to her."

For the many people who have followed the Dahlia case over the years, Short has been the ultimate mystery woman, representing everything from broken dreams to misogynistic savagery to the lure of unsolved crime.

This much appears to be settled: Elizabeth Short grew up in Medford, Mass., as a free-spirited girl who enjoyed being noticed — and being different.

She was 18 when she moved to the Bay Area to be with her father, who had deserted the family. A month later, she struck out on her own, making her way toward Santa Barbara. For the next few years, she moved between Southern California and Miami, Chicago and Boston. "She always had her suitcase in her hand," said John Gilmore, whose 1994 book "Severed: The True Story of the Black Dahlia Murder" was followed by a wave of books from other armchair detectives. "She was on the move. Not to something, but from something."

According to reports filed by investigators, Short spent the last five months of her life moving from place to place — at least 11 different residences. One report said "the victim knew at least 50 men at the time of her death." Frequently spotted on Hollywood Boulevard, and in the company of servicemen, she was not a prostitute. But she was adept at charming men into picking up her tabs. It was a married salesman who dropped her off at the Biltmore Hotel in downtown Los Angeles, at approximately 10 p.m. on Jan. 9, 1947.

A week later, on Jan. 15, a passer-by spotted what she thought was a mannequin lying in a vacant, weed-covered lot on Norton Avenue, between 39th Street and Coliseum Drive. After moving in for a closer look, the terrified woman called the police.

Officers arrived and found a naked body that had been expertly bisected and drained of blood. The two halves appeared to have been carefully posed, and the victim's face had been slashed so that the mouth was extended into an eerie smile. There were rope marks on her wrists and ankles, indicating she had been restrained, and other signs of torture.

The photos of Short's mutilated body and face were considered so shocking that newspapers had to "reconstruct" them, removing signs of violence. It was not until 1984 that several of the unretouched photos appeared in print in Kenneth Anger's compendium of Hollywood scandals, "Hollywood Babylon II." (Nothing shocks anymore: the original photos can now be seen on Web sites, and on coffee mugs and curiosities like a Dahlia snow globe.)

Many theories have emerged about Short's killing. Were Bugsy Siegel and the mob involved? A drifter named Jack Anderson Wilson? In one book, a former police detective named Steve Hodel posits that his own father, Dr. George Hodel, was the murderer.

Meanwhile, Larry Harnisch, a Los Angeles Times copy editor, has been digging through files, speaking with members of the press-shy Short family and working toward his own hypothesis (and planned book): that the killer was a surgeon named Walter Bayley. It was Mr. Harnisch who cataloged the case files that the Los Angeles County district attorney's office only recently made available to researchers.

"People love to go through the stuff, but I don't know if anyone will solve the case," said Sandi Gibbons, a public information officer for the district attorney's office. Besides, she said, "There would be nobody around to prosecute, because they'd be dead."

The files at the Los Angeles Police Department remain off limits even today. "The case is still open," said Brian Carr, a robbery-homicide detective who calls himself "the keeper of the Dahlia files."

"I read the letters that come in," Mr. Carr said. "There's one guy who uses numerology and triangulation."

Many would-be detectives inquire about DNA evidence, he added, but "there isn't any." The reason: "The body was cleansed."

As for all the theories, "We aren't taking any official stance," he said.

Given its horrific nature and mysterious circumstances, the Dahlia case continues to resonate culturally. Imagery of the case derived from Mr. Ellroy's writings inspired the jazz composer and saxophonist Bob Belden to write the 12-part musical suite "Black Dahlia." (Heavy metal has offered up its own homage: a group called the Black Dahlia Murder.) And last year, a Bay Area artist, Hailey Ashcraft, was curator of multimedia exhibition that explored the mystique surrounding Elizabeth Short. Among the pieces was a photograph of a vacant lot with two abandoned couches.

Mr. De Palma, who is known for exploring dark themes in films like "Scarface," "Body Double" and "Dressed to Kill," said he believed that the Dahlia's mystique was derived from the actual crime-scene photos and those taken by the coroner. "Once you have looked at the real pictures, you never forget the Black Dahlia," he said. A number of those images appear in the film when one of the characters (played by Mr. Eckhart) plasters them on his wall. "You see them in the background," Mr. De Palma said. "We don't move in that close. But what we do see is disturbing."

For Josh Friedman, the screenwriter, who had the formidable challenge of adapting the 300-plus-page Ellroy novel, his most memorable encounter with Elizabeth Short and her sad story took place a year ago, on the anniversary of her death. Mr. Ellroy, who had come to town to see some friends, invited Mr. Friedman to join them for dinner. "Afterward, we went down to 39th and Norton," he said. "And James took us to the exact spot where her body was found."

Asked to recall that night, Mr. Ellroy said: "It was cold. We didn't get too misty. But I like to check in on her every once in a while."

Memorials of one kind or another will continue for Short. It couldn't be any other way. After all, said Mr. Ellroy: "The Dahlia is arguably America's most celebrated unsolved murder. And a story like no other."

Post Reply