We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.
The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ...
Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.
Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.
Author: Manohla Dargis
LA Confidential was the film that should have failed. For a start, it’s based on one of James Ellroy’s signature Gordian knots of sleaze, death and violence in post-war Hollywood. Reducing several hundreds of pages of that to a screenplay while keeping intact the suffocating intensity was no mean feat, and Manohla Dargis’ entry into the BFI Modern Classics series does an excellent job of explaining how it was done.
Dargis’ main point is that director Curtis Hanson succeeded in turning LA Confidential into an Oscar-nominee by not trying to directly translate Ellroy’s book into moving pictures. She meticulously sets out the differences in plot, dialogue, characterisation and cast of players between book and film and discusses how these changes turn the book and the film into distinct entities. (For example, in the novel the role of Inez Soto is far more prominent.)
In Dargis’ view, and you can’t help but agree with her, Hanson’s version of LA Confidential is more like an homage to the book. This approach allowed him to create a story that was uniquely his own and played to the strengths of his chosen medium – the film relies heavily on facial expression, action and framing devices to drive the plot and characterisations in ways that the book obviously can’t.
LA Confidential emerged almost a full decade before Brian de Palma’s ill-fated attempt to bring Ellroy’s The Black Dahlia to the screen – it’s a shame this little book wasn’t available to him to explain to him how that Hanson kid made it look so damn easy.
Clare Moody