Disastro a Hollywood

Ben (Robert De Niro) is a Hollywood producer struggling to stay on top. His film Fiercely has a horrendous test screening with an ending of the villains shooting the dog in the head. Director Jeremy Brunell (Michael Wincott) insists on keeping it but studio exec Lou Tarnow (Catherine Keener) forces him to cut it or she pulls it from Cannes. Ben's latest movie is threatened with a shutdown unless he can get Bruce Willis to shave his beard. He has two ex-wives. He's jealous of the recent ex-wife Kelly (Robin Wright) who may have a new lover. Zoe (Kristen Stewart) is the daughter from his first marriage.

Robert De Niro is being too serious. There are times when the story has good satire. It either doesn't take it far enough or De Niro gives it too much gravitas. It becomes a series of tired ugly unfunny situations. This is probably funnier on the page than on the screen.

I can applaud the effort here, it really wants to say something, I'm just not certain that the director had the balls or the producer the guts to give it both barrels! Which I suppose is ironic given the subject matter! (Though I don't think intentional) Robert De Nero plays an ailing producer on the decline in the business, he has two ex wives and stress from egotistical stars and their demands, whether it be high maintenance directors or attention seeking actors.

The core of the problem I have with the film is that the main character is completely unsympathetic.

You'll hate him, he's shallow, selfish, egotistical and devoid of any passion. Whilst this may be the point of the character, and I think it is, it doesn't make for a good film! I went away from the film thinking that they were trying to tell me that Hollywood is full of artists, but that the system breaks them down into nothing more that monkeys who turn out dross films that appeal to the mass market because focus groups tell them too.

Well if the artists are going to produce films like this then maybe there should be some editorial control, away from the hands of the artists because this missed, in my opinion, on just about every level.

The film that this will be compared to most is The Player by Robert Altman, a much better film and I highly recommend, the main difference between these two films however is in The Player everyone is in on the joke, Altman never speaks down to the audience and has fun with the story.

Tim Robbins (in The Player) is just as much of a shallow and hollow character and you'll dislike him as much as De Nero in this but because you are included in the joke, because you can see how distanced from reality he has become, by being a part of the Hollywood system, you can feel sorry for him.

Sadly for De Nero in this I couldn't.

I can't recommend this title to anyone but the dedicated film fan who will see a lot of the in jokes about Hollywood, everyone else should give it a miss.

I just got back from an AFI screening of Barry Levinson's satirical comedy, "What Just Happened?", an inside look into the movie business and big studio politics. Robert De Niro was in attendance along with director Barry Levinson and screenwriter Art Linson. Although I tried to get a photo of De Niro, sadly, I was never close enough to get a good shot.

Based on producer Art Linson's book, "What Just Happened? Bitter Hollywood Tales from the Front Line", the film version tells the story of a successful Hollywood producer, Ben, played by Robert Deniro, as he juggles his personal and professional crises. This film has an impressive cast including Robin Wright Penn as Ben's second wife, Kelly; John Turturro as Dick, the stereotypical shifty agent; Stanley Tucci as Scott, the blocked screenplay writer; Michael Wincott as Jeremy, the temperamental director; Catherine Keener, as Lou, the hardcore studio exec; Bruce Willis as the demanding movie star; and Sean Penn as himself.

This mildly funny expose of modern-day Hollywood, was entertaining, but a little disappointing. The message is supposed to shock and outrage the viewer about how the film industry ruins art by turning it into pure commerce. But there have been plenty of Hollywood satires like "The Player" that have done this genre better. Although the source of the material is authentic and despite an outstanding cast (who all give great performances), "What Just Happened?" ultimately has nothing new to say besides the fact that Hollywood is a devious place to work. As a gimmicky farce, it works, but as a satire it was a limp and familiar insider's movie that lacked sharp irony, humor and novel characters.

This film won't appeal to everyone, but it does have some good one liners and funny moments. However, the combination of these actors working together in a comedy may be worth the cost of admission alone.

This film was really poor. I went with two friends and they both really hated the film. People started walking out of the cinema halfway through. Essentially the film is so condescending and self indulgent. I have no doubt that the movie luvvies who are parodied in the film love it. However for the general public it is a real bore. The over loud gun reports. Bruce Willis wants to keep his beard, big deal.Robert De Niro is late for meetings, that's drama.The moments in the film that appear that are meant to be subtle are laided on with a trowel. Big cast real letdown. Still I am sure everyone involved was well paid. And movie critics will over praise the film to feel like they are part of this oh so wacky world.

What Just Happened (2008)

** (out of 4)

Disappointing adaptation of Art Linson's book about a major Hollywood producer (Robert DeNiro) who finds his world both personally and professionally falling apart in the matter of one week. His latest finished film has the director butting heads with the studio over the ending and his upcoming picture is on the rocks because its star Bruce Willis wants to have a beard. The producer then finds out that his ex-wife (Robin Wright Penn) might be having an affair with his screenwriter (Stanley Tucci). You know, if you're going to make a satire about Hollywood then it might be a good idea to put in some humor. If you're going to make a hard edged film about Hollywood then it might be a good idea to put in some edge. This film comes off as a major disappointment considering the source material, the director and the all-star cast they lined up to do the film. Not only do we get DeNiro turning in a very good performance but we get a fun cameo by Sean Penn as well as nice supporting work by Tucci, Penn and John Turturro. The main reason for folks to see this picture would be for the performance by DeNiro who after years of so-so work actually manages to pull off a pretty good comeback. It's just a shame to see it wasted in such a bland movie. I think every bit of the blame has to be thrown at Levinson and the screenplay. It's clear the director and writer had something to say about Hollywood but they rarely ever say anything. I was really shocked at how few laughs the movie had and it wasn't because they went for them and missed but instead they simply didn't go for them. We really don't get any major incites into Hollywood that we haven't seen before and the movie never really takes any punches either. There's the whole subplot about a director having his vision taken away by the studio yet the movie isn't critical of the studio. This movie really isn't critical about anything so in the end you have to wonder what the whole point was to begin with.