ABSTRACT
In addition to those directly involved in the prosecution, interpretation and enforcement of laws there is one group of individuals who have emerged, both in film and literature, with a distinctive role in relation to justice.1 These filmic portrayals are imbued with a special perspective in that the private eye seems to offer an alternative to the official version of justice. Private eyes in fiction conjure up a world where men (sic)2 live by their own private code of justice while they ply their trade on the borders of the law. The reason why the moral dilemma has emerged has been the nature of the work of the private investigator (PI). Rather than solving mysteries in the public interest, as occurred in the sleuth and police detective model, the PI works as the janissary of the powerful. This has featured consistently throughout the PI film, producing a conflict in relation to the path of justice and the interests of the rich client. This has been the bedrock of conflict in the PI film, from The Big Sleep (1946, 1978) through Harper (1966) to 8MM (1999). The stereotype of the cynical, world weary private eye with his own standards of ethics standing apart from the sordid fray of daily life may, however, be misleading. How the PI is presented to the world has altered, and the frequency of their appearance has varied. Our examination of the range of private eye cinema suggests that the Chandleresque perspective on justice and legality within private eye films over the years has not, in fact, been entirely consistent. We suggest it is intimately tied up with the nature and type of films about law, which co-exist with PI cinema.
