Latest
Why Rotten Tomatoes Sucks: The Score Does Not Mean What You ThinkWhy Amazon KDP Sucks: They Terminated My Account OvernightIngramSpark: How I Publish Now and WhyWhy Fiverr Sucks for Ghostwriting: The Buyer’s SideWhy eBay Sucks Now: A Seller’s Numbers and a Buyer’s WarningThe Ghost Story TraditionThe Gothic TraditionThe Christmas Ghost Story TraditionBooks to Give a WriterResurrection as a Narrative StructureThe Beach Read ArgumentWhy It’s a Wonderful Life Failed on ReleaseWhat to Read in SpringWhat to Read in SummerWhat to Read in OctoberHow Warner Bros. Dismantled a $17 Billion Cartoon EmpireThe Imaginary Scarcity TrapThe Graph That Goes Vertical Is Usually Somebody Else’sSubstack Is Not Collapsing. The Promise Was.The Disasters That Happen to Ordinary PeopleToba: The Winter That Almost Ended UsJay Stifflemire: Nothing Ever Gets Written DownGeorgie-Ann Getton: I Forgot I Had Free WillAI Detection Cannot Be Evidence, and Publishing Is Using It That WayAI Consciousness Left Philosophy and Entered the LaboratoryThe Office Block Where the Bedrooms AreBlack Tuesday: The Web Ring War Nobody Outside It NoticedThe Web Got Fenced: What AI Search Costs Small SitesWhat the AI Visibility Industry Sells, and What the Evidence SaysBlack Tuesday: The Original ring-master.net Page, 2000Behind the Book: Peacekeeper, The Dissolution WarsBehind the Book: Publish Your BookBehind the Book: Real World SurvivalBehind the Book: ReincarnationBehind the Book: Sell Your BooksBehind the Book: Selling on eBayBehind the Book: Show Don’t TellBehind the Book: Street-Smart Management WisdomBehind the Book: Stuck in the MiddleBehind the Book: The ADHD MarketerBehind the Book: Suddenly UnemployedBehind the Book: The Blonde With a Violin TattooBehind the Book: The Blog-to-Book BlueprintBehind the Book: The Day Your Website DiedBehind the Book: The Death of ThinkingBehind the Book: The Emasculation of AmericaBehind the Book: The Ethical WorkplaceBehind the Book: The Ghostwriting AdvantageBehind the Book: The Gig EconomyBehind the Book: The Villainization of America

Crime Films Part 2 – The Near Perfect

Part 2 – The Near Perfect

Series Navigation

Part 1: The Masterpieces |
Part 2: The Near Perfect |
Part 3: The Excellent |
Part 4: The Very Good |
Part 5: The Solid Craft |
Part 6: The Watchable |
Part 7: The Failures

The heist films in this tier all do the same thing: they show the plan, then show it failing for a reason the plan could not have anticipated. Rififi runs half an hour in silence, The Killing scrambles its chronology, and Le Trou films the concrete-breaking at close to real duration.

The other group is procedural refusal. Zodiac never solves it, Memories of Murder never solves it, and Mindhunter opens with a hostage negotiation conducted correctly in which the man dies anyway.

Every rating is the one carried by the review it links to. Ties are broken by year, and this is the second of seven parts.

Every film in this tier withholds something and makes the withholding the engine. Work the mechanics in the Mystery Writer’s Handbook.

↑ All Entries

1. Fargo (1996) [full review]

► Read the full review of Fargo (1996)

1996
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.1/10

"Marge is the most decent person in the film and also the most competent, which the genre almost never allows at the same time."

The Coens open with a title card claiming the film is a true story and it is not. They did it so the audience would accept a series of events that read as too stupid to invent, and the gag works because the film treats every stupid decision with total seriousness. Nobody in Fargo is being written down to.

Jerry Lundegaard is the engine and William H. Macy plays him as a man drowning in a problem he created and cannot describe out loud. The car lot scene with the TruCoat, the phone calls to GMAC, the scraping of the windshield in the parking lot: Jerry is always doing a small task badly while an enormous one collapses behind him.

Marge arrives thirty-three minutes in, unusually late for a protagonist, and the film gives her a pregnancy, a husband who paints ducks and a decent breakfast before it gives her a case. McDormand plays competence as politeness. She is the smartest person in every room and never once says so.

The wood chipper is what everyone remembers and the scene before it is the better one. Marge drives Grimsrud in the back of her cruiser and talks to him about the money and the day, and the speech is not a lecture. It is a person genuinely unable to understand, and the film ends on her admitting it.

For WritersThe Coens hold Marge back for a third of the running time and spend that time establishing exactly how bad things have become. She arrives into a situation the audience understands completely and she does not, so every scene of her investigating carries dramatic irony the film never has to point at. When you delay a protagonist’s entrance, pay for the delay by giving the reader information the protagonist lacks. Write the first act from the side of the people who caused the problem, then bring in the person who has to solve it. The reader is ahead. Competence becomes suspenseful instead of reassuring.

↑ All Entries

2. Last Man Standing (1996) [full review]

► Read the full review of Last Man Standing (1996)

1996
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 6.4/10

"Walter Hill licensed the Yojimbo structure properly. Leone had not, for A Fistful of Dollars."

Walter Hill remade Yojimbo as a Prohibition western and shot it in a Texas ghost town with almost no color in the frame. Bruce Willis plays John Smith with none of his usual warmth, narrating in a flat register that never asks the audience to like him. He is in it for money and the film is honest about that for the full length.

The structure is the same one Kurosawa took from Dashiell Hammett and it still works. One man, two gangs, information sold in both directions until the town destroys itself. Hill’s addition is scale: the shootouts are enormous, slow and loud, and bodies fly backward off the impact in a way that reads as cartoonish and was deliberate.

Christopher Walken’s Hickey is the reason to watch it. He arrives late, says very little, and carries a Thompson gun with the calm of somebody who has already decided how the evening ends. The film’s best sequence is Hickey walking a corridor while Smith counts rounds in a room he cannot leave.

For WritersHill keeps the Yojimbo skeleton intact and changes only the surface: desert instead of village, Prohibition instead of Tokugawa, automatic weapons instead of swords. The plot beats land in the same order and the film never pretends otherwise. When you borrow a structure that works, borrow the whole thing and spend your invention on texture. Writers who take half a structure and improvise the rest usually break the part that was carrying the weight. Identify the load-bearing sequence in your source, keep it exactly, and make everything around it yours. Hill kept the three-way betrayal structure and rebuilt everything around it.

↑ All Entries

3. L.A. Confidential (1997) [full review]

► Read the full review of L.A. Confidential (1997)

1997
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.2/10

"Ellroy’s novel runs four intersecting plots across years, and Hanson and Helgeland cut three of them to keep the three cops."

Curtis Hanson compressed an Ellroy novel that runs eight hundred pages into a two-hour film by cutting subplots and keeping the three cops. Bud White is muscle with a private code about men who hit women. Ed Exley is ambition wearing glasses. Jack Vincennes sells cases to a tabloid and is the only one who knows exactly what he is.

The film’s argument is that Los Angeles in 1953 ran on an agreed fiction and that everyone profited from maintaining it. Sid Hudgens sells the fiction, Dudley Smith enforces it, Pierce Patchett manufactures women to fit it. The Nite Owl massacre is a crime and also a story somebody needed told a particular way.

Vincennes gets the best death in nineties crime cinema. He works out the answer, walks into Dudley’s house to confirm it, and Dudley shoots him mid-sentence without raising his voice. Kevin Spacey plays the last two seconds as a man realizing he has been stupid instead of as a man dying.

Rollo Tomasi is the film’s cleanest piece of construction. It is Exley’s invention, a name he made up for the man who killed his father and got away, and he tells it once in an interrogation. Vincennes carries it to Dudley as a dying word and Dudley repeats it back to Exley without understanding what he has just confessed.

Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce were both unknown in America and Hanson fought the studio to cast them, on the argument that the audience needed to not know which one would survive. It is the single most important decision in the production and it is invisible on screen. That is what a good casting decision looks like.

For WritersExley invents Rollo Tomasi as a rhetorical device in one scene, and the film converts it into the mechanism that identifies the villain ninety minutes later. Nothing about the first use announces it as a plant. It reads as character, not as setup, because it tells the audience something true about Exley the first time it is said. When you plant a payoff, make the plant do independent work. A detail that exists only to be used later announces itself, and readers who feel a gun on the mantel start watching the mantel, a habit plot devices that work and plot devices that wreck a story covers in detail. Give the object a job in the scene where it first appears and the second job will land as discovery.

↑ All Entries

4. Infernal Affairs (2002) [full review]

► Read the full review of Infernal Affairs (2002)

2002
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.0/10

"It runs a hundred minutes against The Departed’s hundred and fifty-one, and the compression is the whole advantage."

Two men, planted in each other’s organizations as young recruits, spend ten years becoming the thing they were sent to impersonate. Andrew Lau and Alan Mak open on the recruitment and then jump the decade, so the audience meets both men already exhausted by a cover they can no longer separate from a life.

The Morse code sequence on the rooftop is the tightest suspense writing in Hong Kong crime cinema. Yan taps a message with a finger against a railing while Ming listens through a wire from a car below, and both men know the other is there. The scene runs on two people trying not to be identified by a rhythm.

Tony Leung plays Yan as somebody whose only proof of his real identity is a file in a dead man’s computer. Andy Lau plays Ming as somebody who has decided he would prefer the fake one. That asymmetry is the whole film. One man wants his name back and the other wants his erased.

The elevator ending is why the film outlasted its remake. Scorsese’s version resolves the moral question with a bullet. This one leaves Ming alive, promoted, saluting at a funeral for a man he killed, and unable to prove to anyone that he was ever anything else. That is the worse outcome and the film knows it.

For WritersLau and Mak give both undercover men the same problem in opposite directions and then never let either resolve it cleanly. The structure is symmetrical and the sympathy is not, because one man is trying to recover a self and the other is trying to destroy the record of one. When you build a mirrored pair, make the mirror imperfect on purpose. Identical arcs produce a diagram. That is the same failure behind characters who all sound alike. Give each half the same external situation and a different internal want, and the comparison generates argument instead of symmetry. Then refuse to punish them equally. The audience should be unable to decide which man they want to survive.

↑ All Entries

5. Memories of Murder (2003) [full review]

► Read the full review of Memories of Murder (2003)

2003
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.1/10

"A rural police force with no forensic capability investigates crimes that required one, and loses."

Bong Joon-ho made a serial killer film in which the police never catch anybody, based on a real Korean case that went unsolved for seventeen years after the film came out. The investigation is incompetent, the interrogations are violent, and the countryside is beautiful in a way that keeps refusing to match the subject.

Detective Park believes he can identify a murderer by looking at a face and the film spends two hours proving otherwise. Song Kang-ho plays him as neither stupid nor corrupt, exactly, but as a man operating inside a system that has never required him to be right. The torture is procedure. Nobody in the station thinks it is unusual.

The tonal control is the achievement. A drop kick in an interrogation room is funny, then a body is found in a drainage ditch and the same officers are standing in the rain, and Bong never signals which register a scene will be in. The audience is left off balance for the entire film, closer to the experience of the case than any procedural rhythm.

The last shot is the whole thing. Park, years later, out of the police and in business, stops at the same culvert, looks into it, and then looks directly into the camera. A child has just told him another man looked into that culvert recently and had an ordinary face. Bong is looking at the audience for the killer.

For WritersBong refuses to resolve the case and the film is stronger for it, because the failure is the subject. The detectives are not defeated by a genius. They are defeated by rain washing a footprint away, by a lab in another country, by a station that never taught them how to preserve a scene. When you write an unsolved crime, make the failure specific and procedural. A killer who outsmarts the police flatters both sides. Scene of the Crime is the reference for getting the procedure right. A police force that loses evidence to a tractor tire indicts a whole system, and the reader carries that out of the book.

Infernal Affairs, Zodiac and True Detective all run on who knows what and when. Take the machinery apart in the Point-Of-View Handbook.

↑ All Entries

6. Zodiac (2007) [full review]

► Read the full review of Zodiac (2007)

2007
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.7/10

"Fincher shot some scenes across seventy or more takes and built the film almost entirely from the documented record."

Fincher shot the film like a research project and the obsession is the point. Graysmith is a cartoonist, not an investigator, and the film follows him for twenty-two years as the case destroys his marriage and his career and gives him nothing back except a conviction he cannot prove.

The film is scrupulous about what is known. Where the evidence is thin it says so. The handwriting analysis, the fingerprint that does not match, the jurisdictional mess across four counties: Fincher includes all of it, including the parts that make his own candidate look less likely.

The basement scene near the end has no violence in it at all and is the most frightening sequence Fincher has ever shot. A man offers to show Graysmith some posters, the stairs creak overhead, and the film simply lets the audience calculate how badly this could go. Nothing happens. That is why it works.

For WritersFincher builds the terror in the basement out of nothing but a floorboard and a closed door, and then declines to pay it off. No attack, no chase, no confrontation. The scene is frightening because the audience has been supplied with enough information to run the worst case themselves. When you write dread, stop supplying events and start supplying conditions. Establish that the character is alone. Establish that nobody knows where they are. Establish that leaving would take an awkward minute. Then hold the scene longer than is comfortable. Readers frighten themselves more efficiently than any author can. Sensory detail is how you hand them the materials.

↑ All Entries

7. In Bruges (2008) [full review]

► Read the full review of In Bruges (2008)

2008
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.9/10

"Two hitmen wait in a Belgian town after a job has gone badly wrong, and the waiting is the film."

Martin McDonagh sends two hitmen to a medieval Belgian town to wait for a phone call and spends the first act letting them be bored. Ken wants to see the buildings. Ray wants to die. The comedy is genuine and the film never uses it to soften what Ray did in the church. It is stated flatly and left on the table.

Brendan Gleeson plays Ken as a man with a moral position he has had for years and never had to test. When Harry orders him to kill Ray, Ken makes a decision in about four seconds and then spends the rest of the film paying for it. The tower sequence is the cleanest piece of self-sacrifice in the genre.

Ralph Fiennes turns Harry into a man ruled by a code so rigid it is almost a joke, and then the film takes the code entirely seriously in the last two minutes. Harry does what he said he would do. The film gives him no escape and asks for none.

McDonagh writes dialogue the way he writes for the stage. The arguments run long and the characters keep circling back to points they have already lost. The restaurant scene with the Canadians, the alcove scene with the tourist, the fight about Bruges itself: all of it is character work disguised as digression.

For WritersMcDonagh makes the audience like Ray for forty minutes before he tells them what Ray actually did, and then refuses to walk it back. No context is offered that would reduce it. The film lets the affection and the fact coexist and hands the reader the problem. When you write a character who has done something unforgivable, resist supplying the extenuating circumstance. Establish the affection first, state the act plainly, then leave both standing. A reader holding two incompatible responses at once is a reader who is actually engaged. Writing deaths that matter works the same ground. McDonagh never lets the audience off, and the film is better for the refusal.

↑ All Entries

8. The Dark Knight (2008) [full review]

► Read the full review of The Dark Knight (2008)

2008
RLR: 10 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 9.0/10

"The Joker has no origin, no name and no stated want. That removes every lever the genre normally supplies."

Nolan built a crime film and put a cape in it. The bank heist that opens the picture is structured like Heat: professionals, a plan, and a member of the crew who has been instructed to reduce the split. The Joker is not introduced as a supervillain. He is introduced as a man who has out-thought his own robbery team.

Heath Ledger’s performance works because the film gives him no origin. He offers three different accounts of the scars and the film refuses to arbitrate. A villain with a backstory can be understood and therefore contained. This one is presented as a fact of the city that cannot be reasoned about, only responded to.

The ferry sequence is the thesis stated out loud, the film’s main weakness and also its clearest scene. Two boats, two detonators, a deadline. Nolan sets up a prisoner’s dilemma and then has characters explain what a prisoner’s dilemma is, and the explanation is unnecessary because the staging already did the work.

Dent is the actual protagonist and most of the audience does not notice. His arc carries the argument about whether institutions can be fixed from inside, his fall is what the Joker was building toward the entire film, and Batman’s decision in the final five minutes exists only to protect the story about him.

The IMAX photography matters more than it sounds like it should. Nolan shot six sequences on 70mm and the scale difference is visible in the frame, so the city physically opens up at the moments the film wants weight. The Hong Kong extraction and the truck flip both read as real events in real space because they mostly were.

For WritersNolan withholds the Joker’s origin and gives him three contradictory versions instead, so the audience stops trying to explain him and starts watching what he does. A motive is a handle, and villain motivations fall apart the moment a reader can grip one. Take the handle away and the character becomes weather. When you write a villain you want the reader to fear instead of understand, give them a consistent method and an inconsistent history. The method makes them legible enough to follow. The missing history stops the reader from filing them away as solved. A backstory does exactly that. Method without history is the most efficient version of a threat you can write.

↑ All Entries

9. Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995) [full review]

► Read the full review of Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995)

1995
RLR: 9.5 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.6/10

"The puzzles make an entire city work as a location, running McClane and Zeus across Manhattan on somebody else’s schedule."

John McTiernan brought McClane back to a city instead of a building and the change is the whole film. The first movie was about geography under a character’s feet. This one is about a man being run around Manhattan on a clock by somebody who is deliberately wasting his time.

Samuel L. Jackson’s Zeus is written as somebody who does not want to be there and says so constantly, and the film never converts him into a sidekick who learns to love the cop. The argument in the car about race is not resolved. They finish the day still annoyed with each other. The genre rarely manages that.

Simon Gruber’s riddles are a misdirection at the scale of the plot, not just the scene. Every puzzle exists to keep the entire NYPD focused on schools and subway stations while a truck convoy empties the Federal Reserve. The film tells the audience this halfway through and the reveal still lands because the misdirection was working on them too.

For WritersThe riddles operate on the police and on the audience at the same time, and the reveal works because the reader was genuinely occupied by the wrong problem. Misdirection fails when it is only aimed at characters. Readers watch characters get fooled and feel clever. When you plant a diversion, make the reader do the work the diversion demands. Give them a puzzle they want to solve, let them solve it, and make the solution irrelevant. Time spent thinking is what makes the redirect cost something. Gruber wastes the department’s afternoon and the audience’s attention in the same move, and both discover it at once.

Rico wants rank, Cody wants his mother, Dixon wants to outrun his father. Build wants that specific in the Deep Character Handbook.

↑ All Entries

10. Mindhunter – “Episode 1” (S1E1, 2017) [full review]

► Read the full review of Mindhunter – “Episode 1” (S1E1, 2017)

0
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.6/10

"Fincher shoots the interviews as static two-shots of people talking in bad rooms, and it is the most frightening hour on television."

Fincher opens the series with a hostage negotiation that fails, and Holden Ford watches a man kill himself while he is still talking. The rest of the hour is Ford deciding that the Bureau’s vocabulary for why people do this is inadequate. That is the whole premise, stated as a professional problem instead of an interest.

The look is deliberately unglamorous. Fluorescent classrooms, motel carpets, a beige FBI basement with a boiler in it. Fincher shoots conversation with locked-off cameras and long takes, and the restraint makes the eventual interview material land as content instead of as style. The most violent thing in the hour happens in the first four minutes and is never shown again.

Jonathan Groff plays Ford as somebody too pleased with his own curiosity, and the series is clear from the first episode that this is a flaw. The road school sequences show him failing to read a room full of police officers who have actually seen bodies, and the failure is played straight.

The premise is that language is the tool. Sequence killer, not crazy. The episode is about a man arguing for better terminology in a building where terminology is policy, and it makes that argument dramatic by attaching it to a career he is risking to make it.

For WritersFincher opens on a failure and never lets Ford recover the initiative inside the hour. The pilot has no win in it. What it has instead is a question the character cannot put down. That question is what the audience carries to episode two. When you write a first chapter, consider giving your protagonist a loss and an obsession instead of a victory and a goal. A goal can be achieved and closed. An obsession renews itself every time new information arrives, and a reader will follow a person who cannot stop further than they will follow a person who is winning.

↑ All Entries

11. True Detective – “The Long Bright Dark” (S1E1, 2014) [full review]

► Read the full review of True Detective – “The Long Bright Dark” (S1E1, 2014)

0
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.8/10

"Cary Fukunaga directed all eight episodes, unusual for American television and visible in every frame of the Louisiana exteriors."

Cary Fukunaga shot the entire first season himself and the continuity shows in the opening hour. Louisiana in 1995 is photographed as industrial landscape: refineries, canefields, a flooded church. The crime scene under the tree is staged as ritual and the episode refuses to explain any element of it.

The dual timeline is the structural engine. Two detectives are interviewed separately in 2012 about a case from 1995, and both of them are lying to the camera about something. The audience watches the 1995 footage and then hears the 2012 account of the same day, and the gap between them is the episode’s actual suspense.

McConaughey’s Cohle talks and Harrelson’s Hart does not want to hear it. The car conversations are the show’s signature and they work because Hart is a reasonable man being lectured, so the audience shares his irritation while also finding Cohle more interesting. Pizzolatto keeps both responses live.

For WritersPizzolatto puts both detectives in front of an interview camera in 2012 and lets the audience watch 1995 directly, so every lie is visible the moment it is told. The unreliability is not a late reveal. It is the form of the show, running from minute one. When you use dual timelines, let the later one be testimony about the earlier one and then show the earlier one straight. The reader becomes the only party with complete information, and every discrepancy they catch is a discovery they made instead of a twist you delivered. Testimony against footage is the cheapest unreliability you can build.

↑ All Entries

12. Little Caesar (1931) [full review]

► Read the full review of Little Caesar (1931)

1931
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.2/10

"Edward G. Robinson was thirty-seven and this made him a star, and the closing line is among the most quoted in American film."

Mervyn LeRoy made the first great American gangster picture and Edward G. Robinson built the template every performance since has worked from. Rico is small, vain, humorless and entirely without appetite for anything except standing higher than the man above him. He does not want money. He wants the position.

The film is seventy-nine minutes long and almost nothing in it is wasted. Rico arrives in the city, joins a crew, kills upward, hosts a banquet in his own honor, and loses everything inside a year. W. R. Burnett’s novel supplied the arithmetic and LeRoy filmed it without decoration.

Joe Massara is the film’s other half and modern audiences find him harder to place. He wants to dance professionally and Rico cannot process that as a real desire. The jealousy in those scenes is written as loyalty and plays as something else, and the 1931 code had no language for it.

Mother of mercy, is this the end of Rico. The last line is delivered from a gutter behind a billboard advertising Joe’s dance act, and the composition is the entire moral of the picture in one frame. LeRoy had the sense to hold it and cut.

For WritersBurnett gives Rico an appetite that is not for money, sex or safety. That single choice is why the character outlived his imitators. He wants rank. Every decision he makes is legible once you know that, including the ones that destroy him. When you write ambition, name the specific thing your character is hungry for and make it narrower than the reader expects. Generic greed produces generic behavior. A man who wants to be called boss will do things a man who wants to be rich never would. Writing Heroes and Villains works this ground., and the difference gives you your plot.

↑ All Entries

13. The Killers (1946) [full review]

► Read the full review of The Killers (1946)

1946
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.7/10

"Hemingway’s story ends exactly where the film’s first act does, with a man told he is about to die who declines to move."

Siodmak opens with the Hemingway story filmed almost word for word: two men enter a diner, wait for the Swede, and the Swede lies on a bed in the dark and refuses to run. Hemingway stops there. The film spends the next ninety minutes explaining the twelve minutes it just showed.

The structure is eleven flashbacks delivered by an insurance investigator working backward through a life. Riordan is a bland man doing paperwork and the film uses him correctly, as a frame that never competes with the material inside it. Every witness has a reason to shade the account.

Burt Lancaster was twenty-nine and had never made a film. Siodmak shoots him mostly in reaction, and the Swede’s defining quality is passivity: he is out-thought by Kitty in every scene they share and knows it while it is happening. Ava Gardner plays her without a single moment of visible calculation.

For WritersSiodmak takes a story that ends with a man waiting to be killed and builds the film backward from it, so the opening scene becomes the question instead of the answer. Hemingway wrote the mystery. The film supplies the solution and keeps the original intact inside it. When you adapt or expand a short piece, look for what it withheld and build there. The best expansions do not continue the source. They excavate the part the source declined to explain, and the original scene survives untouched as the spine of the new work. Hemingway’s twelve minutes are still there, untouched, at the front of the film.

↑ All Entries

14. White Heat (1949) [full review]

► Read the full review of White Heat (1949)

1949
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.1/10

"Cody learns of his mother’s death in a prison mess hall and has to be carried out by six men, shot in a single take."

Raoul Walsh brought Cagney back to the genre after a decade away and gave him a character with migraines, a mother fixation and no impulse control whatsoever. Cody Jarrett is not a businessman like Rico or Tony Camonte. He is a symptom, and the film treats the criminal organization around him as a hospital ward.

Ma Jarrett runs the gang and Cody sits in her lap during a headache in the middle of a hideout full of armed men. Margaret Wycherly plays her without any softness at all. She is the strategist, she is the one who says top of the world first, and the operation collapses within days of her death.

The prison mess hall scene is the best thing Cagney ever did on film. He hears about Ma down the table, keeps eating, and then comes apart in stages across sixty seconds until it takes six men to carry him out. Walsh shot it in one take with extras who had not been told what was coming.

Made it, Ma, top of the world. Cody on a gas tank, shooting into it, going up with it. Walsh ends on a line Cody has been saying since reel one and converts it into something the audience has been waiting the whole film to hear in the wrong key.

For WritersWalsh plants top of the world as an ordinary line between mother and son in the first act and brings it back as the last thing Cody says while standing on an exploding gas tank. The words never change. The situation changes underneath them. When you write a repeated line, resist the urge to vary it for effect. Put it in a domestic scene where it means nothing, use it once more in the middle where it costs a little, and then place it at the moment of maximum pressure unaltered. The reader supplies the escalation you did not write. Subtext in fiction is built out of exactly this.

Rififi gives thirty-two silent minutes to one job and Le Trou gives even more. Learn when to slow down in the Pacing Handbook.

↑ All Entries

15. Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950) [full review]

► Read the full review of Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950)

1950
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.6/10

"Preminger reunited the Laura cast and made the harder film, in which the detective is the killer and conceals it."

Otto Preminger reunited the Laura cast for a film about a detective who kills a suspect with a punch and spends the rest of the picture concealing it. Dana Andrews plays Mark Dixon as a man whose violence is a family inheritance he is trying to outrun by being harder on criminals than anybody else in the department.

The concealment plot is the engine and it is unusually well built. Dixon moves the body, plants a suspicion, and then watches an innocent man get charged with the killing he committed. Every step he takes to protect himself tightens the case against somebody else, and he keeps taking them.

Preminger shoots the city as a set of rooms with too many exits and Joseph LaShelle lights it flat and hard. The film has no glamour in it anywhere, including in Gene Tierney’s part, and the choice reads as a deliberate correction to Laura six years earlier.

For WritersPreminger builds the entire second act out of a protagonist making self-protective decisions that each damage an innocent party further. There is no villain driving it. The pressure comes from Dixon’s own choices compounding, and the audience watches him choose every time. When you want escalating guilt, remove the antagonist from the mechanism. Let the protagonist take one defensible step, then a second that is only defensible because of the first. Guilt the reader watched a character earn is heavier than guilt an author assigned. Dixon is never once forced. Every step is available to him and he takes it anyway.

↑ All Entries

16. The Asphalt Jungle (1950) [full review]

► Read the full review of The Asphalt Jungle (1950)

1950
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.8/10

"Huston built the heist template here: assemble the crew, establish each specialism, execute the job, watch the people fail."

John Huston made the heist film a genre with this one. Plan, crew, execution, unraveling. Every caper picture since has used the four-part structure and most of them have used Huston’s specific insight: the job goes well and the people go wrong afterward.

Doc Riedenschneider is the planner and the film gives him a weakness that is not greed. He is caught because he stops to watch a teenage girl dance to a jukebox and loses four minutes he could not afford. Huston makes the flaw specific, small and humiliating. That is far worse than making it dramatic.

Dix Handley wants to buy back a horse farm in Kentucky and the film takes the ambition seriously instead of treating it as irony. Sterling Hayden plays him with no self-pity. The last scene, with Dix collapsed in a field while horses walk around him, is the only moment of grace Huston allows anybody.

Emmerich is the respectable man and the film is precise about what respectability costs. He is broke, he intends to double-cross the crew from the beginning, and his suicide is staged as paperwork. Huston puts the real corruption in an office, not in the crew.

For WritersHuston gives the master planner a flaw that is embarrassing instead of tragic. Doc is not undone by hubris or a rival. He stops to watch a girl dance and loses four minutes. The smallness of it is what makes the ending land. When you bring a competent character down, scale the cause below the stakes. A great scheme defeated by a great opponent is a contest. A great scheme defeated by a human lapse is a judgment, and the reader will remember which one you chose. Huston picked four minutes and a jukebox, and the whole film turns on it.

↑ All Entries

17. Rififi (1955) [full review]

► Read the full review of Rififi (1955)

1955
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.1/10

"The blacklist made Jules Dassin unemployable in Hollywood and he left for France with nothing and made this."

Jules Dassin was blacklisted out of Hollywood, took a French job he did not want, and made the best heist film ever shot. The centerpiece is thirty-two minutes with no dialogue, no score and almost no sound except tools, and audiences in 1955 sat through it in complete silence.

The silence is functional and not decorative. The crew is working directly above an occupied apartment and any noise ends the job, so the film’s formal constraint is the characters’ operational constraint. Dassin makes the audience participate in the problem by giving them nothing to listen to except the risk.

The umbrella and the fire extinguisher foam are real techniques and Dassin was asked by police in several countries to cut the sequence. He had done the research, filmed it accurately, and the accuracy is why the scene generates tension: every tool does something the audience can verify.

The second half is the genre’s standard collapse and Dassin gives it a specific shape. The crew is not betrayed by a member. They are undone by a mistress, a nightclub rival and a child, and Tony drives home dying with the money in the back seat while the camera watches Paris go past the window.

For WritersDassin removes sound for half an hour because the characters cannot make any, so the formal choice and the dramatic situation are the same constraint. The audience is not admiring a technique. They are inside the problem. When you impose a constraint on your prose, tie it to something the characters are experiencing. A chapter written without dialogue because the characters are hiding earns its silence. A chapter written without dialogue because the author wanted to try it reads as an exercise, and readers can tell the difference immediately. Constraint that serves the story disappears. Constraint that serves the writer announces itself.

↑ All Entries

18. The Killing (1956) [full review]

► Read the full review of The Killing (1956)

1956
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.9/10

"Kubrick was twenty-eight and ran the whole racetrack robbery out of order with a newsreel narrator reading times like a stopwatch."

Kubrick was twenty-seven and shot a racetrack robbery out of chronological order with an omniscient narrator reading times like a stopwatch. The structure was borrowed from Lionel White’s novel and Kubrick pushed it further, doubling back over the same afternoon from five vantage points. No other American film of the decade was structured this aggressively, and the studio wanted it recut.

Sterling Hayden’s Johnny Clay assembles specialists who do not know each other. That is the correct professional decision and also the reason it fails. The weak point is not a criminal. It is George Peatty’s marriage, and Elisha Cook Jr. plays a man so desperate to impress his wife that he tells her everything.

Marie Windsor’s Sherry is the best femme fatale of the decade because the film lets her be bad at it. Her plan is greedy, rushed and poorly executed, and it destroys everything anyway. Competent villains are easier to write. This one wins by accident. The plan survives the racetrack and dies in a living room in Queens over a suitcase.

For WritersKubrick fractures the timeline and hands the audience a narrator with a stopwatch, so the reader always knows the hour even when they do not know the outcome. The disorientation is in sequence, never in orientation. When you scramble chronology, anchor every section hard. Give the reader a time, a place and a named viewpoint in the first line of each jump. Readers will follow almost any structure if they are never confused about where they are standing, a point plot, pacing and story structure makes at length, and they will abandon a simple one if they are. Kubrick’s narrator is doing orientation work instead of atmosphere. That is the job.

The Killing and The Asphalt Jungle wrote the heist structure everything since has copied. Study it in the Plot Handbook.

↑ All Entries

19. Breathless (1960) [full review]

► Read the full review of Breathless (1960)

1960
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 7.7/10

"Godard was told to cut twenty minutes and removed them from inside the scenes instead of between them."

Godard shot it in four weeks with a camera in a wheelchair, no permits and no finished script, and then cut it apart in the edit because the first assembly ran long. The jump cuts were a repair that became the most influential formal decision in post-war cinema.

Michel is a thief who has seen too many Bogart films and is performing a version of himself for an audience that does not exist. Belmondo plays the performance instead of the man, running a thumb across his lip in front of a cinema poster, and the film never lets him have a sincere moment he is not also watching himself have.

Patricia is the one with the real decision and Jean Seberg plays her opaque. She sells papers, half-considers a life with him, and then turns him in and tells him she did it, on the reasoning that if she betrays him she will know she is not in love. The logic is monstrous and the film treats it as ordinary.

For WritersGodard’s jump cuts began as a way to shorten a long film and ended as a statement, and the lesson is in the order those happened. The technique solved a practical problem first. When you find yourself reaching for an unusual structure, check whether it is fixing something. A device adopted to cut twenty minutes of dead air will read as purposeful because it is. A device adopted because it seemed interesting has to carry its own justification, and readers rarely grant it. Godard found the technique by cutting, not by planning, and the film carries that history in it.

↑ All Entries

20. Le Trou (1960) [full review]

► Read the full review of Le Trou (1960)

1960
RLR: 9 / 10
⭐ IMDB: 8.5/10

"Becker films the concrete-breaking at close to real duration, including one stretch that runs several minutes on a single tool."

Jacques Becker cast a man who had actually participated in the escape, put him in the film as himself, and then shot the digging in real time. The concrete floor sequence runs several minutes with one tool and no cutaways, and the audience feels the duration because Becker refuses to compress it.

The film is about trust between five men who have no reason to extend it. Gaspard arrives into an existing cell and the others have to decide within an hour whether to tell him. Every subsequent scene is the group re-evaluating that decision while continuing to dig.

Becker died shortly after finishing it and the film was his last. There is no score, no romance, no flashback and almost no backstory. The men are defined entirely by how they work and what they are willing to risk for each other. Becker had been a director for twenty-five years and stripped everything decorative out of his last one.

The betrayal at the end is filmed without any accusation. One man is taken out, comes back, and the final shot is a cell door and a single word from the man he sold. Becker gives it no music and no reaction shot, and it is more devastating than any confrontation would have been.

For WritersBecker shoots the digging at something close to real duration and never cuts away to relieve the audience. The tedium is the tension, because the reader understands exactly how long the men have and how slowly the floor is giving. When you want a reader to feel a cost, stop summarizing the work. Write one instance of the labor in full, at length, with the physical detail intact. After that you can summarize the rest and the reader will supply the weight, because you taught them what an hour of it actually involves. Becker spends the time up front and buys shorthand for everything after it.

Honorable Mentions: Crime Films Without a Review Here Yet

No review on the site so far for any of these. Each one earns a place in the conversation and each is on the list to be written.

The Long Good Friday (1980)

⭐ 7.6/10

Bob Hoskins spends the film hunting whoever is attacking his operation and never once considers that he might be too small to matter. The last two minutes are a single close-up that outperforms most third acts, and the answer turns out to be politics instead of crime.

Thief (1981)

⭐ 7.4/10

Michael Mann’s first feature and the template for everything after it. James Caan plays a safecracker who describes his entire life plan off a magazine collage, and the film is about what happens when a man with a plan takes on an investor. The diner scene predates Heat by fourteen years.

The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973)

⭐ 7.3/10

Peter Yates and George V. Higgins produced the most convincing criminal dialogue ever filmed, almost all of it men in cars complaining about money. Mitchum plays a low-level gunrunner with no illusions left, and nobody in it is a professional in the Heat sense.

Le Cercle Rouge (1970)

⭐ 8.0/10

Melville runs a twenty-five minute heist in near silence and spends the rest of the film on fatalism. Every character is condemned in the opening narration, and Melville shoots Paris in a blue-gray that makes the city look like a waiting room.

Serpico (1973)

⭐ 7.7/10

Lumet builds an entire film out of a man refusing money. Pacino plays Serpico as somebody whose integrity functions as a personality disorder inside the department he chose, and the film is honest about the cost. He ends the picture correct, alone and shot in the face.

The French Connection (1971)

⭐ 7.7/10

Friedkin shot New York like a documentary crew working without permits and let Popeye Doyle be genuinely unpleasant. The chase under the elevated tracks is still the benchmark because the camera stays in the car. The film ends on a missed shot and a title card.

City of God (2002)

⭐ 8.6/10

Meirelles covers twenty years of a Rio favela through a kid with a camera and lets the structure fragment on purpose. The cycle is the argument. Every dead gangster is replaced by a younger one who was watching, and the film refuses the audience an exit.

Gomorrah (2008)

⭐ 7.0/10

Garrone strips every romantic convention out of the mob film and shoots five unconnected stories in Naples with mostly non-professional actors. Nobody is glamorous, nobody wins, and the economics are the subject. The waste disposal thread is the most damning material in it.

Uncut Gems (2019)

⭐ 7.4/10

The Safdies build ninety minutes of overlapping dialogue and escalating debt around a man who cannot stop taking one more position. Sandler plays Howard Ratner with no self-awareness and no brakes, and the film denies the audience relief until the ending takes everything.

Cop Land (1997)

⭐ 6.9/10

Stallone put on forty pounds and played a deaf small-town sheriff surrounded by NYPD officers who treat him as furniture. The film is a western in New Jersey and the final sequence, shot from inside his damaged hearing, is the best thing in his filmography.

State of Grace (1990)

⭐ 7.0/10

Phil Joanou’s Hell’s Kitchen film was buried by Goodfellas arriving the same autumn. Gary Oldman plays the most frightening version of an uncontrolled crew member anybody has committed to film, and the closing shootout runs against a St. Patrick’s Day parade.

Blue Ruin (2013)

⭐ 7.1/10

Jeremy Saulnier made a revenge film about a man who is bad at revenge. Dwight is frightened, untrained and physically weak, and every act of violence in the picture is clumsy and takes too long. The genre has almost never been this honest about what it involves.

Dishonorable Mentions: Crime Films That Failed

Also unreviewed here, and included because failure teaches faster. Each of these had the budget, the cast and the material.

Live by Night (2016)

⭐ 6.4/10

Affleck adapts another Dennis Lehane novel and loses the thread completely. The film covers a decade of Prohibition in Tampa with no scene long enough to build anything, and the protagonist has no discernible want. Production design attached to nothing.

The Counselor (2013)

⭐ 5.3/10

Cormac McCarthy wrote the screenplay directly and nobody edited him. Brilliant actors deliver philosophical monologues at each other while a drug plot happens offscreen. The bolito scene works. Almost nothing around it does.

The Devil’s Own (1997)

⭐ 5.9/10

Alan Pakula directing Harrison Ford and Brad Pitt through an IRA gunrunning plot that Ford publicly said had no finished script when shooting began. The two leads are acting in different films and the ending was rewritten repeatedly during production.

Bad Boys II (2003)

⭐ 6.6/10

Two and a half hours of escalation with no structure underneath it. Bay destroys a Miami neighborhood, a morgue and most of a Cuban compound, and none of it accumulates. The chase down the hillside shanty town is the clearest example of spectacle detached from consequence in the decade.

The Big Bounce (2004)

⭐ 4.8/10

An Elmore Leonard adaptation that removed the plot. The cast is deep and relaxed to the point of inertia, the con is never explained, and the film ends as though somebody lost a reel. Leonard is the hardest writer in the genre to adapt and this demonstrates why.

Vigilante Diaries (2016)

⭐ 3.7/10

A crime thriller assembled from footage of people standing in front of cars. The plot is unfollowable, the action is shot too close to read, and the film keeps introducing characters past the ninety minute mark. Included as a floor marker.

↑ Back to Navigation

What Do You Think?

Twenty films is a small number for a tier this deep, and the ordering here is a rewatch rating and not a critical consensus. Putting Die Hard with a Vengeance beside Rififi will annoy people. Tell me which film you would move and what you would drop to make room.

Continue the Series

Part 1: The Masterpieces |
Part 2: The Near Perfect |
Part 3: The Excellent |
Part 4: The Very Good |
Part 5: The Solid Craft |
Part 6: The Watchable |
Part 7: The Failures

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best crime film of the 1950s?
Rififi (1955) for the heist and Le Trou (1960) at the edge of the decade for the prison break. In American crime, The Asphalt Jungle (1950) invented the structure every caper film since has used.
Is Fargo based on a true story?
No. The Coen brothers put a title card claiming it was a true story on the front of the film and later admitted they invented the whole thing. They did it so audiences would accept events that read as too stupid to have been written.
What is the Rififi heist scene?
A thirty-two minute sequence with no dialogue, no music and almost no sound except tools, in which four men break into a jewelry store from the apartment above. Police in several countries asked Jules Dassin to cut it because the technique worked.
Is The Departed a remake of Infernal Affairs?
Yes. Scorsese’s 2006 film is an official remake of the 2002 Hong Kong original. The original is tighter at ninety-seven minutes, and its ending leaves the surviving mole alive and promoted. That is bleaker than the American version.
Why does Zodiac not solve the case?
Because the real case was unsolved when Fincher made the film and remains so. The film is about Robert Graysmith’s obsession and what it cost him instead of about catching anybody, and it is scrupulous about the evidence.
What makes L.A. Confidential work as an adaptation?
Curtis Hanson cut most of James Ellroy’s eight-hundred-page novel and kept three cops. Ellroy has said publicly that he approves. The Rollo Tomasi device is the film’s own invention and it carries the identification of the villain.
Is White Heat the best Cagney performance?
The prison mess hall scene is. Cody hears his mother is dead, keeps eating, then comes apart across sixty seconds until six men carry him out. Raoul Walsh shot it in one take with extras who had not been told what was coming.
Is Memories of Murder based on a true story?
Yes. Bong Joon-ho drew on the Hwaseong serial murders, ten killings in Gyeonggi Province between 1986 and 1991 that went unsolved when the film was made in 2003. Lee Choon-jae confessed in 2019 after DNA evidence identified him while he was already serving a life sentence.

🏷︎ Film List

0 comments

No comments yet. Yours can be the first.

Was this useful?

Leave a comment