Hollywoodland

Just when I had given up on ever seeing a "Hollywood Star Filled" film along comes a masterful film about the not so famous star of the 1950's television phenomenon, "Superman". I saw the film this evening and Mr. Brody, the director, writer and Ms. Lane were all in attendance but that did not seem to matter much. The film is a real work of artistry. I cannot tell you what a delight is is to go see a film that I have heard nothing about and then sit in the theater totally and thoroughly engaged in a serious film that manages to convince the audience that the art of film making is alive and well. If I had known that Ben Affleck was in the film I would have passed. Its a good thing I did not. He and Diane Lane re-introduce the idea of stardom to film making. They were fantastic. The script was fantastic, the period accuracy enthralling and the long forgotten story riveting. Hollywoodland should prove to be the next "Capote". Congratulations! A 21st Century Noir treat.

It's 1959 and George Reeves (Ben Affleck) best known as TV Superman is found shot dead in a house full of people. The police rules it a suicide. Questionable private investigator Louis Simo (Adrien Brody) is hired by Helen Bessolo to investigate the death of her son Reeves. As he digs into the case, the show flashes back to Reeves' time in Hollywood starting as a nobody trying to get his foot in the door. He has an affair with Toni Mannix (Diane Lane) who he doesn't know at first that she is actually the wife of a MGM studio head Eddie Mannix (Bob Hoskins).

The movie is a little slow and a little long relishing in the noirish hard-boiled style. Allen Coulter is a TV director and that may be why the movie moves more slowly. It doesn't quite have the urgency. Adrien Brody's slow brooding mannerisms only accentuate the pacing. I like the era and the style. I could do with a quicker pace. Ben Affleck fits this character better than his other nice guy roles. He's a little dark and a little complicated. It signals a change in Affleck's career path for the better. The style is there but the pacing is lacking.

I'm a boomer so I was pretty young when the actor who played Superman died. Like the kid in the movie I too was disappointed tha Superman could be killed. I don't think I went half nut job like the kid did, but I was angry. After all I really believed wearing the obit and you'd have all his powers.

On one hand this is filled with really great acting. So well crafted that it was a joy to watch. N the other hand it was frustrating by the end. I fear if I say more I'd spoil the show. It's a real roller coaster of a show.

I was ten years old when I learned the shocking news of the death of George Reeves, the television actor whom I idolized as Superman. I appreciated how "Hollywoodland" made this moment impressionable on the youngster Evan "Scout" Simo, the son of the investigator Louis Simo pursuing leads in the Reeves case. For both me and little Scout, the death of Reeves was an early realization that appearances are not always the same as reality in the world of illusion and Hollywood celebrity.

Under the skillful direction of Allen Coulter, "Hollywoodland" captures that moment in film history when the studio system was in decline and about to give way to a new and more independent period of film-making. Perhaps from his previous credits in directing episodes for HBO's "Six Feet Under" series, Coulter was able to draw upon great location environments for a quintessential sense of Los Angeles. Much credit should go as well to designer Julie Weiss for her colorful costumes (especially men's short-sleeved shirts) that evoked the era of the 1950s in L.A.

The performances were uniformly outstanding. Ben Affleck brings out both the charm and the raw vulnerability of George Reeves, an actor of limited ability, struggling and eventually succumbing to the pressures of fame. Affleck was the spitting image of Reeves, especially in the Clark Kent-style, black-framed "owl" glasses. But the real strength of his performance was in his sensitivity as his character made choices that took him into deeper and deeper emotional waters, culminating in tragedy. In the film's parallel story, Adrien Body was a standout as Louis Simo, the private eye seeking his own fame in trying to uncover the mysterious circumstances and motivation of Reeves' tragic death. The luminous Diane Lane was superb in the role of Toni Mannix, the wife of a powerful studio boss and the lover of Reeves. I found Lane's performance in "Hollywoodland" even better than her Academy-award nominated role in "Unfaithful."

The film conveyed a moody atmosphere that begs comparison with "Chinatown," another film that recreates the essence of old Los Angeles. While not as brilliant stylistically as Roman Polanski's masterpiece, "Hollywoodland" nonetheless was a compelling and indeed riveting drama. Although the mystery of the tragic death of George Reeves was not resolved in this film, it nonetheless provided depth and complexity to the characters, as well as a lurid illustration of the pressures and the accompanying risks involved in struggling to succeed in the film industry.

Its not impossible to be a clever writer of films today. But it is hard if you want to play with the noir genre. I've seen two recently that know what they are doing: "Brick" and "Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang." The notion of noir is so well developed now, it is hard to play with. There's a parallel in Jazz, I think, the other uniquely American invention in popular art. It seems innovation has stopped in Jazz — some say it is impossible — and matters of style now rule, together with degrees of deviation from the form.

This tries something different and fails tremendously. I would appreciate it if what they attempted were bold and engaging. But it isn't and the most I can say is that it is an uninteresting failure.

What's attempted here is a sort of layered noir. In genuine noir, you have two worlds, the world of the hapless folk we see and the world of fate that jerks them around. The viewers are assumed into that second world.

In this project, the two worlds are both put on screen. One world is the world of chumps, occupied by Reeve, and our mannered noir detective. He's strictly noir, with the required boozing, womanizing, injury-attracting, money chasing qualities.

The other world is the world of movies, their producers and watchers together. Its a vast conspiracy, protected by the police (and all of the government, presumably).

This isn't the same as Billy Wilder's "Sunset Blvd" which puts the world of movies in that first world, subject to the same capricious twists as the aging actress and her new monkey-boy.

No, this is different, but it isn't well worked out. Halfway through we realize that we should have "gotten it" by now, or at least been given a thread to follow to later loose. Instead, there isn't anything developed. Yes, we see a man get sad. Yes, we see a mystery, played Rashomon-like with multiple truths. Yess we see loyalties formed and broken, and a bunch of other narrative fragments thrown in.

But we get nothing we can follow. There are four or five ways to give us an unfollowable narrative that we can follow. Not here. This movie committed suicide before it came to us.

The only nice things I can say are that Diane Lane does her character well, but then she really does worry about looking pretty in Hollywoodland. And there is a nice visual touch in the Sacred Heart cards, that in real life were placed by Ms Mannix after the death.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.