Rebel in the Rye

After role by role, performance by performance, he demonstrate his lovely artistic force in the skin of J. D. Salinger. Not only a great performance but, in same measure, the right story. Simple, dramatic, convincing. Inspired portrait of a great writer and the art of Nicholas Hoult to propose the precise nuances of his character. A film about deep loneliness. And about the basic choice defining it.

The glamored-up remix of the life of J.D. Salinger, famously reclusive American author who gave the world „Catcher in the Rye" and, er, other writings. Salinger is played by Nicholas Hoult, one of my favorite young-ish actors who can't quite reach stardom. He's a fine actor, and has lots of screen charm but hasn't found his real breakthrough yet. At least in my opinion. Usually he's used as window dressing in trivial roles, even in serious movies. If you haven't seen Hoult's star making turn in BBC's „Skins" first season – this was ten years ago, mind you –, you probably won't even recognize or care about him. But yes, he's appeared in a string of blockbusters too, such as the three last „X-Men" (as Hank / Beast) and „Jack the Giant Slayer", or „Mad Max: Fury Road". He is often heavily disguised tho. You may also remember him from „About a Boy" (2002) but back then he was only just a boy. „Rebel's" main strength is not its historical accuracy, nor well- balanced story about the great man's life, nor going deep as its hero aspired to, but a fact that the writer-director Danny Strong bets on one strength and goes happily all in on it. The strength is this being a true actors' movie, and they truly deliver. The performances are wonderful and everything else is there to support them. I would argue they have reached drama series quality storytelling, only in shorter form, in 106 minutes. Hoult appears appropriately soulful but mentally fragile, and Kevin Spacey as the only other major character (his mentor / friend) is just as solid as you'd expect from screen veteran of his standing. Every scene Spacey's in is like a masterclass of great movie acting. If this was a project of much higher calibre – instead of premiering in Sundance this January and then disappearing quickly – we would talk about serious Oscar chances. You know how deliciously the man can be. Critics are true that the movie is ultimately pretty shallow and petty, just what Salinger himself would have tried to avoid, but it's pretty and well-acted, and makes some points about being creative and/or famous that every modern person would still benefit from considering. Such as doing something doesn't mean you're all that creative or deserve much praise. Or: true creativity emerges after working through your fears and vanity. Or also: being famous is not for everybody. In 2010's, there's been a new trend to create fictional movies about real people and/or situations. Most are mainstream (i.e, shallow), as is „Rebel in the Rye", but this doesn't reduce its power to entertain in a cheesy way. The result is likable indeed. Writing is a lonely job and "Rebel" has the power to remind us the glamorous side of it too, if only for a second.

I haven't read "Catcher in the rye" and I'm grateful for this. I'm not saying this because it is a bad book but because it would create unrealistic expectations for this movie. Fortunately, I simply enjoyed the movie for what it was - a biopic. I've found it inspiring and even charming to some degree. It also persuaded me to buy the eBook (Catcher in the rye) which I'll start reading soon.

If you are quite educated about Salinger, chances are that you're going to be disappointed because what's on the screen can never be as good as what's in your mind. Even if this is a movie about the author and not the book, chances are that you see Salinger in your own unique way. This is true about all authors.

If you are not, then you can enjoy the movie. You can relax and not compare every single detail with actual facts. After I've saw the movie, I've discovered that there are many differences compared to actual recorded history and if I knew these things beforehand, I would have been frustrated. I didn't and I've enjoyed two hours of a good movie. The end.

This is an interesting and involving biopic of the reclusive author of Catcher in the Rye. I found it attractively filmed and giving enough insight into his life, WW2 experiences, struggles with getting published, creative process and personal life. It's a nice change from those overly angst filled salacious biopics that focus too much on the unsavory aspects of a creative genius.

Nicholas Hoult is watchable and does a reasonably good job in the role. He may not have been the first person one would think of since he is an English actor and quite different looking from the real person. Would have thought they would have chosen an actor with Jewish heritage.

The supporting cast all perform well. Sarah Paulson is good as a literary agent. Kevin Spacey in one of his last roles before the scandal brought his career to a halt plays his writing teacher who helped him in the beginning. Hope every movie that is affected by scandal of one of the actors isn't shelved or not released. Too many other people's efforts would be wasted.

Do you remember reading the Novel "The Catcher in the Rye" by J D Salinger in High School days ?? Sure enough I dug out a Paperback copy from my little library today after seeing this Movie. A very well put together production called "Rebel in the Rye" that gives you a behind the scenes look at Mr Salinger's Life. I enjoyed the Film enough to re read the Book and my guess is that is what the Director was hoping people would do ?. The Hollywood Bells and Whistles Fancy Costumes and Music from the 30's and 40's are what you see and hear along with nice looking cast and Great As Usual Kevin Spacey who portrays Whit Burnett Salinger's mentor.