Rebel in the Rye

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.

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.

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.

Greetings again from the darkness. "Holden Caulfield is dead." So states Jerry's letter to his mentor. You likely know Jerry better as J.D. Salinger, and he wrote that while hospitalized with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome after WWII. Of course, we know this proclamation is premature, as Holden Caulfield is the main character from Mr. Salinger's famous (and only) novel, "The Catcher in the Rye" … a high school literature staple for decades.

Imagine your dream is to become a great writer, but your own father continually reminds you that "meat and cheese distribution has been good for this family." Your restlessness often works against you, and though you are hesitant to admit it, a mentor for writing and life direction is desperately needed if you are to avoid the family business. Enter Columbia professor Whit Burnett (Kevin Spacey).

This is Danny Strong's first feature film as a director, though you would surely recognize his face from his frequent acting appearances – often as a weasly character. He is also the creator of TV's "Empire" and wrote the screenplays for THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY (Parts I and II) and LEE DANIELS' THE BUTLER. Strong does an admirable job in showing the commitment required to hone one's writing skills and proving "the difference in wanting to be a writer and actually being one."

Jerome David Salinger is played well by Nicholas Hoult. His scenes with Spacey's professor are the film's best, and Hoult also shoulders the responsibility of Salinger's writing frustrations, personal life challenges, military service, and finally, his decision to become the most famous and long-lasting recluse (by comparison, Howard Hughes was an amateur).

We learn that Burnett was instrumental in getting Salinger's first short story published, which finally gave Jerry the answer needed for a writer's most dreaded question, "Have you been published?" Quite a bit of time is devoted to his odd romantic relationship with Oona O'Neill (Eugene's daughter and the future, long-time wife to Charlie Chaplin). Zoey Deutch (daughter of Lea Thompson) plays Oona as an enigmatic lover attracted to Salinger's genius, but incapable of being patient for his career that might happen (and might not). She opts for the sure bet.

Salinger's military service included Utah Beach on D-Day, and nearly as remarkably, his toting the tattered manuscript 'Catcher' pages throughout his tour. He returned home in 1946, and in 1951 "The Catcher in the Rye" was published. It's been referred to as the Great American novel and a rite of passage, while also being banned and derided for its whiny Holden.

Director Strong emphasizes Salinger's turn to Zen Buddhism and his sessions with Swami Nikhilanda, as well as his evolving distrust of stalking fans and two-faced media. Support work is provided by Sarah Paulson as Salinger's salty agent, Lucy Boynton as his wife, Victor Garber as his father, and Hope Davis as his supportive mother. Just as in real life, we get nothing of Salinger's later years of solitude and isolation in New Hampshire, where he died at age 91.

The book has sold more than 65 million copies, and continues to sell well today. In a shift from the recent documentary SALINGER by Shane Salerno, and the book "J.D. Salinger: A Life Raised High" by Kenneth Slawenski, this dramatization doesn't dig too deep, but it does allow a new generation to personify the legend. Perhaps it even paints a picture of a better/nicer man than what his real life actions showed. Regardless, the older Salinger certainly seemed to embrace the cause of "write and get nothing in return".

I'm not a Salinger fan by any means, so if I loved this movie it must have something going for it. Danny Strong is one of the best writers in Hollywood, and he creates a fast-moving and compulsively watchable story about a young man burning with ambition. Only young J. D. Salinger's ambition is not for wealth and fame. He wants to write a great book, and he wants to do it his way.

Nothing is more boring than watching writers write in a movie. But Danny Strong manages to make it exciting because we actually see Salinger learning from his mistakes and even more tellingly, learning to accept criticism from his mentor, his agent, and his publisher. By the time he's come back from the war, badly shell-shocked, and has to literally learn how to write all over again, you're completely in his corner. And the movie feels more like ROCKY than SYLVIA.

So why didn't I give this movie ten stars? Well, for one thing, too many of the party scenes looked like advertisements for alcohol and tobacco products. Late in the film, Salinger finds a guru who tells him to give up all "distractions," but it's telling that they never discuss cigarettes and alcohol as problems in their own right. Because of course nobody ever heard of a great writer succumbing to alcoholism.

The other problem is the supporting cast. They're not bad, they're sensational. Kevin Spacey plays the Columbia writing professor like he's lovable old Mr. Chips. But it's a palpable schoolboy fantasy. I went to Columbia, and let me tell you, most English professors were closer to the Drill Instructor in Kubrick's FULL METAL JACKET. No matter what kind of work you turned in, they always made you feel like Private Pyle. Nobody was looking to uncover any geniuses when I was there, and nobody ever did!

Then there's Sarah Paulson as Dorothy, the world's most sultry and stunning literary agent. She's got the goods, all right. And she plays every scene like she's Lauren Bacall putting the moves on Bogart in TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT. The problem is, young J. D. Salinger is not Bogart. He's closer to Wilmer in THE MALTESE FALCON. So when Dorothy caresses him with casual endearments like "my darling," and "my love," you feel like it's either crude manipulation or writer Danny Strong giving in to his own teenage fantasies. It would have been nice to see Dorothy buttering up other writers, or maybe just making with the golf sticks, like the agent in SUNSET BOULEVARD.

So overall, a fun movie with a lot of excitement, but not really as hard hitting as it pretends to be. Holden saw phonies everywhere, but this movie pretends they don't exist. It's really pretty goddamn shallow, if you want to know the truth.