Fine, I think this is massively overrated. It doesn’t entirely work as pulp, nor as art. It’s too well written and the performances are too good to simply neglect it as a formulaic noir thriller. On the other hand, this feels visually too pastiche, it’s a director doing an impression of Roman Polanski, except it’s not as precise. Some directorial choices in particular feel over the top given how serious the movie is (e.g. the music choice during the fight at the police station; RusselI Crowe seemingly having superhuman strength in some scenes; a cop character threatening someone by hanging the person out of a window), but I would say that most of it is competently done. Still, I find it weird that its lack of ingenuity didn’t get panned at the time, because it came out in an era where you had the Coen brothers (Fargo, Blood Simple, Miller’s Crossing) and David Fincher (Se7en) doing much more inventive stuff in this genre, making L.A. Confidential seem regressive by comparison. Meanwhile, I also wouldn’t say that the storytelling is its main strength. It’s a perfectly fine crime mystery with some nice twists, but the three main characters are way too one-dimensional, and what is ends up saying about its themes (justice, redemption) is pretty thin and general. It’s also not the kind of film where you’re going to remember individual bits or scenes, this is focussed on the bigger picture, and that picture is nothing special. It’s essentially a b-movie that’s elevated by the talent that’s involved in front of and behind the camera, but that doesn’t stop it from being average.
5.5/10
Review by Alexander von LimbergBlockedParent2023-02-11T19:15:11Z— updated 2023-02-12T21:03:04Z
So that's a film noir. Kind of. Technically it isn't but it feels like a film noir. Everything is solid: cinematography, actors, atmosphere and character building. 1950's California is also a great location. I really like the 50s design, men in suits, and an intimate look at the Californian dream (if there's such term). Manufactured by Hollywood. And shattered.
Only issue I have: I have seen this before. Bits and pieces of it can be found in almost all Hollywood thrillers or movies about cops and the mob. It's still suspenseful how exactly the story will go down but it ain't unique enough to be more than a 7/10. If that movie were made in 1960 we would maybe have an 8/10 but I can't see that this was still an influential movie in 1997. Even the style, let's call it "modern noir" for the lack of a better term (there's probably a name for this genre), as much as I like it, is not very different from 1974 Chinatown an there's plenty real film noir classics that tell better stories. I mean, I get it. Back in 1997 people still went to the movies and the audience hadn't seen a film-noir-like movie for ages. To end this dry spell, they released LA confidential. It was a calculated move. There was no need to be extra innovative and reinvent the genre.
Best piece of 50s tech: a backyard incinerator (only mentioned - unfortunately not shown). What is that? Is that like a little waste combustion plant just for one block?
PS: when I saw Audrey in Roman Holiday in that one scene, I instantly knew that LA confidential never will be a classic movie. It lacks the magic.