Talk:L.A. Confidential (film)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the L.A. Confidential (film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Organized crime Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Organized crime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Library of Congress Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

California: Los Angeles Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

References to use

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

Palmer, William J. (2009). "The Decade of Spin". The Films of the Nineties: The Decade of Spin. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 56–64. ISBN 0230613446.

Film vs. Book

Having read the book several times and seen the film many times, I added a section talkin about some of the differences. I hope others will expand on these and refine my bullets. I always like sections of movie listings comparing them to the original books - it's always interesting to see how they differ and how they are the same. (JHickey). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.139.45 (talk) 02:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

There has been a merge tag on Rollo Tomasi for a long time - could anyone who knows the subject comment on, or even better make, the merge? Kcordina 12:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the lack of comments, I'm going to remove the merge tags as I don't think they should be merged. Kcordina ^Talk 08:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TandM Studio

citation source: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119488/trivia (fifth point)

"references to real life"

This section seems to be nothing but speculation, and it composes more than half the entire article. I incline to deleting the entire section. Thoughts? Uucp 15:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and am going to steal your thunder by taking the initiative.Gnrlotto 05:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many of those references are pretty well-known. Most of them even seem to be directly from the DVD commentary and extras. Ellroy is well known for having used large slices of real history and snuck it into his work. Perhaps someone could go through and check them? Spider1 22:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article split from novel

The article associated with this talk page is now exclusively about the film version of L.A. Confidential. Please note that the plot summary is based on, and repeatedly refers to, the novel. I have left it in place so that it can be reworked to adhere more closely to the film. --ShelfSkewed Talk 06:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name?

What's with "L. A. Confidential"? The book cover and film title clearly list the name "L.A." without a space, as is the proper way of representing the city nickname. --Chancemichaels 20:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels[reply]

Agreed. The title is what the title is, and that trumps the naming conventions. I've moved both book and film articles back.--ShelfSkewed Talk 20:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:La confidential.jpg

Image:La confidential.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:La confidential.jpg

Image:La confidential.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TV pilot

I'm just curious, but since the TV pilot based on the film flopped, could this article be placed in the [[Category:Failed pilots]] category? - Cubs Fan (talk) 04:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning changes to critical reception

Does anyone mind if I move more detailed mention in the intro (RT Tomatometer, Metascore) of the critical reception to the "Reception", and instead have "Critically acclaimed, it was nominated for nine Academy Awards and won two, Basinger for Best Actress in a Supporting Role and Hanson and Helgeland for Best Screenplay - Adapted." 1337wesm (talk) 03:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

- to use in the article.--J.D. (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Book vs. movie

I removed the following as original research and bring it here for discussion. As I say, this is entirely OR, and thus improper for an encyclopedia article. Now, if a notable source discussed these differences, and that source was used, that would be a different matter. But, this is just someone's independent analysis. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The L.A. Confidential movie shares a general plotline and characters with the book it is based on, but is greatly condensed. Several characters' roles are changed or exchanged with other characters, and a great deal of the complex story surrounding the Nite Owl killings in the book is deleted or only referenced in passing. Many of the book's memorable lines are used in the movie, though many are attributed to different characters or in different situations than original. And while there are dozens of major plot and character differences between the book and the movie, the screenplay nonetheless manages to exact the same overall style of the book while at the same time eliminating a number of slurs and colloqialisms used in the book which are not generally considered acceptable in mainstream cinema. Of note, almost all of the movie characters used greatly resemble their descriptions in the book, aside from Sid Hudgens, who in the book is described as a tall, wiry man, while in the movie he is portrayed by Danny DeVito.
Although the differences are too many to list entirely, they include:

The movie takes place over a matter of a few weeks or months, while the book takes place over almost a decade period.

While the movie ends with a shootout at the Victory Motel among Dudley Smith, Bruening, Bud White, Ed Exley, and others, the book begins with a shootout in a different motel between Buzz Meeks and Dudley Smith's men.

Leland "Buzz" Meeks is killed at the beginning of the book in said shootout, but in the movie he is killed later and placed under the Lefferts' house. In the book, the body under Lefferts' house is that of Duke Cathcart. Also, in the book (and in Ellroy's Black Dahlia and The Big Nowhere) Meeks is named Turner "Buzz" Meeks.

In the movie, Duke Cathcart is killed at the Nite Owl. In the book, Duke Cathcart is killed by an impersonator named Dean van Gelder who is trying to take over his hooker and pornography business. van Gelder is killed at the Nite Owl.

In the movie, D.A. Ellis Lowe is set up for blackmail with Matt Reynolds in a gay tryst, with Reynolds killed subsequently. In the book, it is Lowe's opponent in the D.A. election who is set up with a juvenile prostitute to ruin his chances of election. However, the book does mention Pierce Patchett having homosexual blackmail photos of D.A. Lowe, though only in passing.

The notable movie scene where Bud White hangs Lowe from the window of his office does not take place in the book.

In the Christmas party dance scene in the movie, Jack Vincennes is dancing with "Karen" and nothing further is seen of her. In the book, Karen eventually marries Jack.

In the movie, Deuce Perkins is cast as a Mickey Cohen drug lieutenant and killed almost immediately. In the book, Perkins is an opium-smoking musician who kills juvenile prostitutes in a brutal fashion and is heavily involved in the entire story.

In the movie, the lead suspect in the Nite Owl killing is "Sugar" Ray Collins. In the book his name is "Sugar" Ray Coates.

Inez Soto plays a bit part in the movie, while she plays a major role in the book. The romantic relationship between Ed and Inez is also absent, along with her personal relationship with Bud White.

The movie eliminates almost the entire storyline involving Ed Exley's father Preston and his (faulty) solving of the murder of "Wee Willie Wennerholm" by Loren Atherton - which is then linked to several gruesome killings in the book that are all related to "Fleur-de-lis", Pierce Patchett, and Dudley Smith.

In the movie, the two-man shooter teams killing Cohen's lieutenants are Dudley Smith's men Bruening and Carlisle. In the book, it is a three-man shooter team consisting of Lee Vachss, Abe Teitelbaum, and Johnny Stompanato acting on behalf of Dudley Smith, with Deuce Perkins as their driver.

In the movie, Jack Vincennes is killed by Dudley Smith. In the book, Vincennes is killed by an escaping convict during an assault upon the "Q" Train transferring inmates. This scene, deleted from the movie, is also where Bud White is badly injured toward the end of the story (in the movie, it is in a shootout at the Victory Motel).

While the high-class pornographic magazines are one of the central plots of the book that tie almost all of the characters and sub-plots together, they are only a minor sub-plot in the movie.

Exley's story about "Rollo Tomasi" killing his father in the movie is not present in the book. Preston Exley, his father, is a significant character in the book and eventually dies via suicide.

Dudley Smith is killed by Exley at the end of the movie. In the book, he is the only "bad guy" left standing at the end and continues as an LAPD Captain - although Exley promises to Bud White that he will kill him at some future time. Both Exley and Smith reappear in Ellroy's White Jazz. Smith debuts in Ellroy's The Big Nowhere.

The well-known scene where Exley calls Lana Turner a "two-bit hooker" in the movie, shown often in advertisements at the time of release, is not present in the book. In the book, Lana Turner is talked about in far more graphic terms, especially by Mickey Cohen.

Plot Summary

That's a huge plot summary -- someone should rewrite it a bit to hit the high notes and not explain every scene and event. --75.73.22.234 (talk) 02:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thank you for pointing this out. Apparently the plot was massively and inappropriately expanded back in January. I've restored it to its state prior to that expansion. Doniago (talk) 13:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was expanded again here. Maybe parts of it are useful, but its current state is not acceptable per MOS:FILM. I'm reverting. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 22:05, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A heads-up that we have an editor currently expanding the plot by hundreds of words. I've messaged them about WP:FILMPLOT considerations and won't identify them here unless they wish to discuss the matter further, but if anyone feels their edits are appropriate despite the guideline, please do say something. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 03:28, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Basinger's age and casting

Iistal (talk · contribs) has repeatedly added a statement that the casting of Basinger was unconventional becasue she was in her mid-40s, 11 and 14 years older than on-screen love interests Crowe and Pearce, respectively. There is no source for "unconventional" even though I have twice asked for a source. Sundayclose (talk) 01:52, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it were sourced, it's judgmental and ageist. --Drmargi (talk) 03:07, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]