MovieChat Forums > The Blue Dahlia (1946) Discussion > The funny thing about this movie

The funny thing about this movie

posted 16 years ago by trivial_matt
33 replies | jump to latest

Is that, although it was a big sucess, has a good rating and was Oscar nominated, Raymond Chandler himself hated it!

I have in my collection a comic book adaptation of Chandler's original script of The Blue Dahlia, and in this edition there's a preface that says that Raymond Chandler completely hated the movie after it was completed. He said that the worst thing in the movie was Veronica Lake, or, as he called her, Miss "Moronica" Lake.

I personally don't think this was one of Chandler's best works, but I didn't found it so bad, especeally Veronica, one of my farovite actress, but it only shows how angry Chandler was about Hollywood. Filippo Scózzari, the guy who drown the comic also hated it so much that in the epilogue he himself killed Chandler (you must see to believe!).

Anyway, who like (or hate) this movie, or any of Chandler's works, should look for this magazine, for it is really precious.

"Shouldn't you have paid your bills,
Monsieur Royale?"

"Of course, Monsieur Juju!"

[–] smulkin 16 years ago

I always sensed a lot of self loathing in Raymond Chandler, like he thought the genre work that made him famous was beneath his true talents.

Ironically, his strongest attempt at "serious literature," The Long Goodbye, is his dullest novel.

[–] ashogo 15 years ago

He definitely had some self-loathing, but I don't think he necessarily thought the pulp genre was beneath him. He dedicated an entire essay (the simple art of murder) to explaining the importance and power of the mystery genre, while also pointing out the problems he saw in them.

He in general hated any big corporate groups or people that tried to control or stop him from doing things his own way (kind of like Marlowe himself). Probably why he didn't get on well with anyone in Hollywood.

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

Can you say what specifically Chandler objected to about this movie in general and Veronica Lake in particular? I think both were very good, but I haven't read Chandler's novel.

[–] dshortt-1 15 years ago

Chandler may not have cared much for the way the movie turned out, but the script itself has a vintage Chandler voice, and it sounded pretty good to me!

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

I can't see what his objection to this script would be, but I'm far from a Chandler scholar. I know many writers are very touchy when someone adapts their novels to the big screen -- sometimes with good reason, sometimes not. Regardless, though Chander may have have major complaints with this film, he seems to be outnumbered. I think it's very well written, acted and directed, and most of the reviews I've read seem to agree.

[–] franzkabuki 15 years ago

Yeah I also think Chandler got it wrong here - it´s definitely not a bad film, even with this bastardised ending.

The thing with Chandler though appears to be that he could be a rather mean and rude fella when he was drunk (and he often was, of course) - I´ve also read about him giving Hitchcock some serious verbal abuse in public when they were working on Strangers On The Train, for no particular reason at all (except for him being wasted, that is).

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

Raymond Chandler was by most accounts a bitter, abusive man whose drinking and desperation are almost as legendary as his novels. That's not to say he wasn't a brilliant writer -- he most certainly was -- but if I were to spot him in a bar back in the day, I'd probably leave.

[–] franzkabuki 15 years ago

I don´t know if it´s supposed to be funny, but there have been serious speculations that Chandler was in fact a closeted homo and much of his depression and drinking issues may have had their roots there. Impossible to tell whether there´s any truth in that or not, of course.

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

I've heard that speculation. Of course, it was different era and he took a lot of secrets to the grave, so we'll never know.

[–] smulkin 15 years ago

One thing that needs to be clarified is that this movie is not based on one of his novels; he wrote it as a screenplay.

[–] franzkabuki 15 years ago

Why do you think it needs to be "clarified"? Nobody suggested otherwise as far as I recall.

Oh and by the way I think The Long Goodbye is his best, most complex novel. Weird that the only film made of it happens to be a thoroughly revisionist take by Altman (a very good movie though).

[–] smulkin 15 years ago

In some earlier messages, people were writing as if this were a novel. As for the Long Goodbye? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............

Marlowe doesn't DO anything in that book. He drinks, plays with the safe in his office, and waits for the case to unravel. I would much rather read the stories in Trouble is my Business, which are unapologetic genre/pulp fiction.

[–] franzkabuki 15 years ago

Well, to each his own. But he does get thrown to jail, kicks some ass and has his ass kicked - so all the usual components are there. And, in general, the cases had a tendency of turning up at his door anyway while he was doing... whatever he was doing. Of course there´s more leisurly pacing around going on than usual, but it´s best written imo and dramatically very strong. For me, probably High Window´s the weakest - and The Big Sleep kinda shows signs of being a debut at times. Some parts don´t gel so well.

[–] BlondeVixen 15 years ago

Raymond Chandler didn't like anything. He was an alcoholic grump, always crabbing.

[–] cujo3017-370-726670 9 years ago

I absolutely love the first half of The High Window because the writing was incredibly good, but it does kind of fizzle out at the end. The Long Goodbye was good but a major downer as the lead character is in a massive depressive funk. Lady in the Lake, The Bid Sleep, and Murder My Sweet were all very good. This movie, The Blue Dahlia doesn't seem very Chandlerish to me.

[–] cujo3017-370-726670 8 years ago

Omg, this is my feeling exactly. The writing in the first half was top notch but the second half was sub par and I'm still not sure how Mrs. Murdock was involved in the killings. The whole trip taking Merle home was weird and could have done without this part of the story. But I like to reread the story just for the first half. Mrs. Murdock was so vivid and so well drawn, as were some of the other characters (Morningstar, Greorge Anson Phillips) and the descritpion of Bunker Hill is sheer brilliance.

[–] bluenova19692002 12 years ago

Speculations are just that...Have you ever read about the various flings (with women) that he had? Or about how he pursued his future wife while she was still married to another fellow? Not the actions of a closeted homosexual.

[–] Signet 15 years ago

Another thing Chandler hated about this film was the fact that he was forced to change the ending. Originally, the movie was shot with one particular character being the killer but Chandler was forced to alter the script to make it another who was not so sympathetic. As a consequence, the movie comes across as a bewildering comedy of errors by the finale.

Also, I tend to agree with Chandler's assessment of Ms Lake's acting skills. She is a stunningly beautiful human being but her line readings make her seem addled.

[–] clore_2 15 years ago

Too many coincidences - and some just plain dumb situations.

Da Silva is running around with Ladd's wife. Of all the people to run into once he walks out on his wife, Ladd runs into Da Silva's wife Lake.

They split up, but just happen to be in the same spot later when Lake tells him that the cops are on his trail.

Ladd's a wanted guy and supposedly street smart, but he's dumb enough to get into a car with two strangers. Didn't his mother ever warn him about such things?

Lake just happens to pick at the flowers in front of Bendix the same way that Dowling did, and with the same monkey music going on in the background.

Tom Powers lets a murder suspect (Ladd) toss a gun to another suspect (Bendix) where we get some silly Buffalo Bill shooting stunt.

Nevertheless, there are some good lines. I love it when Powers tells Will Wright "Kinda hard on the Morrison dame too."

Or when the desk man at the hotel asks Ladd if he lives in San Francisco and he replies "Yeah, when I'm there."

Anyone notice that when the description of Ladd goes out on the air, they neglect to mention his height? They don't even say average height, they just ignore that qualification completely.

It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me

[–] m-j-mooney 15 years ago

"Anyone notice that when the description of Ladd goes out on the air, they neglect to mention his height? They don't even say average height, they just ignore that qualification completely".

That's because he murder suspect was "Johnny Morrison", not "Alan Ladd"!

Ladd was very self-conscious about being short, to the extent that he sometimes acted standing on boxes while his leading ladies stood in a trench! The character he played wasn't supposed to be a short guy, particularly.

[–] clore_2 15 years ago

Still, it's conspicuous by its absence. It's the norm for a suspect's height to be given in such a broadcast description. Somehow Paramount got the Army to release his induction papers reading that he was 5'9" and publicized that, so including it in the film would have helped preserve the fabrication.

It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Jason_Radley 13 years ago

Then there was the fender accident with the policeman turning up just when Johnny's in a tight spot in the hotel.

[–] stmarseille14-1 9 years ago

Al Pacino was short too and it didn't affect his movies.

[–] jcorzan 14 years ago

Chandler wasn't completely happy with the results, but it was typical of his own self criticism.

In a great book "Raymond Chandler Speaking", which is a compilation of letters written by him to various people, he goes into it in length with a letter to James Sandoe. It's primarily a criticism of film making at the time, as he put it, the camera's love affair with movement, and a bad director's habit of shooting and using too much film to make a point that can be made in one scene. He actually had nothing to say about Veronica Lake.

[–] Jason_Radley 13 years ago

Chandler was right; this film is ersatz noir.

[–] deforest-1 11 years ago

If you've ever read a biography of Raymond Chandler, he was a very strange man. A top oil executive still in the early years when he took up writing he married a woman 20 years his senior. While not condemnatory in itself, it gives a clue why he couldn't comprehend the attractions of youthful beauty and glamor -- and talent -- of Veronica Lake. He was also famous for not being able to follow his own screenplay for "The Big Sleep". And the stupidest thing about his screenplay was when Alan Ladd decides to dump Veronica in pursuit of the murderer of his wife, whom he despised.

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

I agree with people's criticisms of the happy coincidences that take place in the film;; and, as others may know, Buzz was supposed to be the killer but it was switched to Dad because it was deemed unpatriotic to make a serviceman an even unwitting murderer. Thus, the ending, and many parts of the movie, are entirely unrealistic and, because of that, comical. Regardless, I have trouble understanding what exactly Chandler was going for with his screenplay. I still like the movie.

[–] conductor71 9 years ago

"... as others may know, Buzz was supposed to be the killer but it was switched to Dad because it was deemed unpatriotic to make a serviceman an even unwitting murderer. Thus, the ending, and many parts of the movie, are entirely unrealistic and, because of that, comical." - thomas-begen-194-976045

I didn't know that Buzz was originally intended to be the killer but I could have guessed. I watched it last night for the first time and I agree with your comments about the ending, which really cheapened my overall impression of the movie. Buzz's 'confession' takes place in the office of Harwood (one of the other suspects) with Harwood's wife and another suspect, Dad, also present. Have they not heard of a police station as a more suitable place for carrying out these sorts of crime-solving activities? Then another major suspect (or at least he was before Buzz's confession), Morrison, walks in and quickly produces a gun and throws it to Buzz, who is then allowed to shoot it really accurately at a match, which apparently is meant to convince everyone that Buzz couldn't possibly have murdered a woman with a gun! Meanwhile, the police just stand there and watch this display of lethal firepower in a confined space conducted by murder suspects unfold right in front of them! The increasingly hammy and unconvincing over-acting of the actor who plays Buzz ("the monkey music!") becomes a major distraction the longer the film goes on- talk about signposting his mental instability and potential guilt for the audience. Then just as they are leaving the office, the police suddenly decide that Dad is the guilty party. Well mystery solved then!

Comments posted on another old IMDb thread ridicule the way that Alan Ladd and Veronica Lake first meet as being "implausible". However, compared to the other major plot faults, this wasn't really a big issue for me, especially as one quickly becomes too engrossed in their developing relationship to worry about how it all came about. After all, Lake is the pursuer of Ladd, not the other way around, and therefore I could accept that she might have spotted Ladd whilst out driving at night, been physically attracted to him and hence decided to pick him up. I don't quite understand the criticism of Lake's acting in this role. For me, she was one of the reasons that I didn't give up on this movie well before the end.

I would suggest that great movie stars don't necessarily need to be the most convincing actors in order to carry a film from start to finish, not that I'm saying that Lake was a great star, as I haven't seen enough of her work to judge. Example: was Marilyn Monroe amongst the most convincing actresses? Or did she have some other unique, indefinable qualities that allowed her to carry a film and for the audience to believe in her in spite of any perceived acting deficiencies? Maybe that mysterious attraction of the audience to Lake and Ladd is the only thing that keeps audiences watching this to the end, for it surely can't be down to the ridiculous screenplay or the unconvincing acting of the supporting cast.

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

The final sequence held in the office is entirely preposterous. I agree with most of your comments, except:

1. I think the actor that played Buzz was actually quite good

2. I found Lake's and Ladd's "coincidental" encounters a little too convenient, but like you say, not too troubling

3. Veronica Lake alone forces me to watch "The Blue Dahlia": I could stare at her for an eternity; however, I was disappointed she didn't wear the peekaboo for this film because she didn't want to encourage women working in factories during WWII to wear a hairstyle which would be an occupational hazard. As mentally afflicted as Lake was, she had the

4a. I take it a bit personally when people put down Marilyn. I believe she was a highly talented, though inwardly tormented actress with great potential who was stereotyped as the sex symbol, "bleach-blonde bimbo tart."

4b. I'm no expert on Marilyn's life or movie career, but she had a childhood that would make most other Americans' childhoods look like a fairy tale. "Don't Bother to Knock" is the best performance I've seen by her, though many have blasted the movie's lead actor and concept.

4c. I've heard of a few other films where she delivered wonderfully. Marilyn herself said, to paraphrase, "My best acting has been convincing men I'm in the throes of ecstasy." I think you get what I'm saying.

4d. Dovetailing of this: I think Elizabeth Taylor is more deserving of criticism than Marilyn. Taylor possessed the beauty of a goddess and she could act as a child or as an adult. However, most of her adult roles left me unimpressed. Because I haven't seen the great body of her work any more than I've glimpsed her fine body, I won't pass judgment on her. Those are my thoughts.

Yes, the main point of my reply is to defend Marilyn, which I'll do unto death.

[–] bcstoneb444 9 years ago

Actually I think TBD is a pretty good movie with Veronica quite effective, in a somnambulist sort of way. I tend to agree with one commentator who dexcribes it as ersatz noir. But the script isn’t really that bad, even with the lapses and coincidences (plotting wasn’t Chandler’s thing). But it’s not Double Indemnity. There he had the steadying influence of Billy Wilder to help see him through. Here he was on his own, and, it we’re to believe legend, wrote the script in five days through a perpetual alcoholic haze.