Zeroville

In principle there could be a great movie here. In practice, like others have said, the idea seems to have been to pack multiple movies into one, and that rarely works.

Let's move past the banal question of whether it was "faithful to the book" and consider it on its own merits. There's the kernel of a great idea here, a film that luxuriates in movie trivia and in explaining technical details, while constantly having fun with the idea of ignoring the movie filming timeline of our reality (cf the catchphrase "f$%# continuity", writ large).

The problem is that Franco makes three rookie mistakes.

• he doesn't stick to *that* movie; instead he insists on throwing in other stories, most jarringly the Soledad love story. Look, we get it, Megan Fox is pretty. But that doesn't mean she has to be used (and used up) in the most boring way possible. Compare with the much more interesting use of Dottie, not as love interest but as teacher/explainer of Editing.

• movies (and books) about obsession, about "here's how much I love something and why" can be done well. But again, you have to avoid the rookie mistake: the book has to be about obsession *generically*, not about your particular obsession. Once you list details, every person on earth (and that's most of them) who doesn't agree with your exact ranking of first through tenth greatest whatever's loses interest.

That's why Juliet, Naked is so much better a movie than High Fidelity (oh shut up, you know it's true!) because they both deal with obsession, but one doesn't make the mistake of going into specifics.

• third rookie mistake: "explaining" via mental illness, dreams, and visions, the crutches of the lazy and incompetent screenwriter.

You don't need to explain in a movie! The audience will happily accept magic realism -- the Simpsons have been doing it for 30+ years. Purple Rose of Cairo? True Lies? Neither of them felt a need to justify their magic realism as the product of dreams or mental illness.

Or, of course, Inglorious Basterds and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Again, just tell the story, don't "explain" why it doesn't match consensus reality!

Franco keeps trying with this stuff (compare _The Disaster Artist_) and I appreciate his trying. I just hope he learns from each misfire and next time executes in a more focussed fashion.

There are not enough well-done obsessive movies -- most of them are pathetic shambles, either cautionary tales about "here's how you will suffer", or watered down by including uninteresting stereotypical side plots -- and I think Franco has it in him to do the job right, once he has the courage to do it his way, not the Hollywood way.

The score on here is very unfair. This is a literary story told competently and at times with some great ideas. Loved the meta editing on editing, the fake Lucas and Spielberg meets Coppola scene, love all the nods to film in both style and reference. Maybe the idiots who say this makes no sense need to watch Lost Highway and Suspiria (the original) at least before criticizing this film. I liked it a whole lot more than The Irishman, if that's any help. Megan Fox really needs more work like this. She's pretty great in this.

It's 1969. Cinephile Ike Jerome (James Franco) arrives in L.A. He has a tattoo of Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor on the back of his shaved head. A Place in the Sun is his favorite movie. He befriends a film editor and becomes one himself. He falls for film star Soledad (Megan Fox) and starts working on her movie. Self-important producer Rondell (Will Ferrell) is a bully.

Before using a single frame of film, James Franco needs to figure out what kind of movie he's making. This starts with Franco playing a serial killer. Ferrell seems intent on making a comedy. Megan Fox is doing a tragedy. Everybody is doing something a little different. It's messy and disjointed. It has a surreal feel but in an amateur way. Filmmaker Franco leaves a lot to be desired. Eventually, he arrives in a place where he's trying to be an arthouse surreal director. It may be pretentious but at least, it's something concrete. Franco should keep trying but he's nowhere near good enough to make something like this work.

Appreciate james francos adaptation. If you're into films and enjoyed the book this is decent. Not great but the book is a trip so this was bound to be weird. Some funny moments.

Im so surprised at the IMDb rating. And it actually....can give u hope. I liked all the actors and went into the movie not know anything about it. It was interesting I stayed with it. Then...it became more interesting. Then towards the end I was enthralled and even got chills one moment when I realized that there was whole other level achieved and done so sneaky that it makes u almost want to rewatch it again. But the psych level achieved was just enough to make this movie one to remember and even rewatch. Maybe not right away. But it's worth a rewatch for sure. Great movie.