Cool News
Massawyrm Almost Completely Loves HOLLYWOODLAND!!
Hola all. Massawyrm here.
Man, oh man. I never would have thought it so – but here it is staring me in the face. I never would have thought this role was suited to Ben Affleck. I mean, where in his life could he have possibly drawn the experience, depth and pathos to play a mediocre actor, who’s downfall is that he is a product of his own success that ultimately has a love life that is far more interesting than his body of work? It’s just so clearly out of character for him. Come on, there’s no pithy, talented best friend. It’s nothing like him. Honest. He really dug deep on this one.
But the man certainly knows how to give his audience what they want. Here he takes a role in a film that involves him playing a character who in Act 1, Scene 1, has already had a bullet put through his head. Methinks Ben is catching on to just how much we like him. Seriously, if there’s an A-list Hollywood Star in desperate need of career resurrection right now, it’s Ben. With his last four theatrically released films being Surviving Christmas, Jersey Girl, Paycheck and Gigli, the guy needs a metric shit ton of cred to prove himself worthy of his success in the minds of many. Will playing a role so close to home pull that off?
Yes. Yes it will. Right from the get go, Affleck hands his haters a nice, hearty, steaming cup of STFU as he comes out swinging with what is easily the single greatest performance of his career. No. Stop laughing. I’m not kidding. He’s actually really, really good. The man becomes George Reeves – both in his off screen persona and as the 50’s era Superman. The cadence of his speech, the poses he strikes for the kids, the sharp humor mixed with a deep sadness – Affleck delivers a complex, layered performance the likes of which few are expecting and unlike anything he’s done before. Affleck acts in this as if his life depended on it, so much so that even his harshest critics are going to have to admit this is at the very least an above average performance.
I’ve gotta say, I almost, almost, almost absolutely love this film. I am so there teetering on the brink, ready to give myself over to it - but one thing keeps me from completely loving it. I’ll get to that later. Because god damnit if there isn’t plenty here to love. First and foremost the characters are amazing. Each and every one. This story refuses to let anyone be pure, pristine and blameless. Like the best of James Ellroy’s novels, everyone here, both hero and menace alike, are smatterings of gray areas. They’re all uniquely human, each character equal parts sleazy, underhanded, selfish, loathsome, fractured, and 100% understandable. No one is a cardboard cut out or a cliché. Even the worst of the worst in this movie possess deep motivations. It’s an actors wet dream and a pure treat for anyone who revels in drinking in character pieces.
And as impressive as Affleck is in this, he’s surrounded by a stellar cast who all turn in perfect, nuanced performances. Adrien Brody, the films actual lead, lives up to his hype once again, playing a flawed as hell headline hungry gumshoe only on the case to make a quick buck, and he does it with all the sordid gusto this film deserves. Bob Hoskins turns on the menace as the almost mob-boss-like studio head. And both Diane Lane and Robin Tunney each give masterful performances as the terribly flawed women in love with Reeves. No one holds back in this and there isn’t a main character in this film who isn’t performing at the very top of their game.
But unlike most character pieces, the film has a riveting storyline with a fantastic structure. Hollywoodland evolves with two different linear timelines, following both the last few years of George Reeve’s life and the investigation of his death by Adrien Brody. The mood is that of a hard-boiled, noir detective story, complete with all of the conventions you’d expect from that kind of tale. It’s a fascinating approach to a true life story that can only be compared to the work of the aforementioned James Ellroy.
The film builds perfectly, with each detail drawing you deeper and deeper into the mystery. As the various theories are laid out and presented, each version of the truth weaves the details of the crime together into coherent possibilities. This is a real life unsolved mystery, and the film knows it and never pretends otherwise. The writing is, at times, razor sharp, with lines that are sometimes funny as hell and other times amazingly revealing without much having to be said. The direction by first time feature helmer (but long time television director) Allen Coulter doesn’t hint at all of being either a first effort, nor that of a TV director. This is experienced pro level direction in look, tone and performance. An incredible first film, Coulter is clearly someone to watch.
All in all, I have to honestly say I loved every single minute of this movie. Every last one.
So what’s wrong? What’s keeping me from absolutely loving this film? The ending. But Massawyrm, you said you loved every minute of this movie. In fact, you said that, like, six sentences ago. Yup. Unfortunately, Hollywoodland ends. Abruptly. So fast you don’t even see it happening. It’s like a blowjob interrupted right at the end by a call from your mother. Right out of the blue, the film wraps up despite feeling like it’s about to go into the final reel. There’s no resolution, at least not the kind you’re expecting. I mean, technically there is, but it sure doesn’t feel like one. There’s no detectible climax whatsoever.
And I both get and respect why the decision to do this was made. Rather than falling into the usual trap of presenting its own theory about what happened, Hollywoodland wants you to figure it out for yourself. It wants to leave the final reel to you. Who did it? Was it really suicide? The movie sure shares a lot of blame, and while it doesn’t tell you for sure who pulled the trigger, it leaves you with a sense that there are actually many responsible, regardless of who actually finished the job.
And once the movie takes you as far as it is willing to go, it ends. And it’s one hell of a sucker punch to the gut. The screen goes black and your jaw drops. What? They didn’t just end it like that did they? In retrospect, I really respect what they’re doing here. But walking out of the theatre in that melancholic daze is never a fun experience. Especially when the movie really feels like a detective film. I mean, who ends a detective film without absolutely telling you who the killer is?
And that’s going to be the kiss of death for a lot of people. Movies live and die in their third act. And often they live or die in the last minute of the film. A great or terrible last minute can utterly validate or raze everything a filmmaker has spent two hours building. While the ending here is a bold choice and has the best of intentions - trying to send you out into the lobby discussing what really happened to George Reeves - a lot of people are going to be put off by the all too sudden fade to black.
Hollywoodland really asks a lot of the audience in its final moments, and if you’re the type of person who hates ambiguity, this is really going to get under your skin. Like I said, I’m almost completely in love with the film. But it’s one of those films that I’m going to have to revisit, prepared for the ending, and let wash over me again to ultimately decide for sure. Everything else in the movie is so damned good that I want to love it, and I know my disappointment stems from my expectations. Either way I have to say – the last moments disappointed me. At least upon my first viewing.
But one thing is absolutely clear. All of the buzz about this being the first Oscar Contender of the year is accurate. You’re gonna hear people bring this up over and over again for a few months until the season fully reveals itself. There’s plenty nomination potential here, and thus far this may be one of the finest made films released in 2006. This is the film that far and away puts Ben Affleck back on the map. Another film like this and his flagging career will be nothing but a memory.
Highly recommended for True Crime fans, anyone eager to see Ben Affleck prove himself, those who enjoy character pieces or those who love a great film and don’t mind an ambiguous, sudden ending. Not recommended for anyone who hates a lack of resolution – this is just gonna piss you right the hell off.
Until next time friends, smoke ‘em if ya got ‘em. I know I will.
Massawyrm
Got something for the Wyrm? Mail it here.
-
+ Expand All
-
I can't wait to see this in the theatre, just so I can hear the boos and hisses and shitty comments and complaints of all the audience members as we walk out. Yay. The average movie-goer does not want to be riddled with ambiguity. They want completeness, so they don't have to spend much time thinking about it after the fact. That takes imagination, and that might hurt. They won't care to discuss who killed George Reeves. 82% of the audience won't even know who the fuck George Reeves is. Too bad.
-
More than this film. I'm not a big
BA fan but I'll give it a look. -
Anyway, I thought this film was going to be dumb, but you and Harry like it, so maybe I was wrong.
-
With no resolution. It's really hard to end the film. I haven't seen "Hollywoodland" but after seeing how a film like "Hoffa" ends with giving it's own laughable theory, is it really that bad not giving us an ending.
I did think "Auto Focus" did a good job despite not knowing who did the crime. -
is no longer Box Office Poison?
-
ben affleck looks like ratatouille
-
I must agree with Massa on the whole ambiguity thing. I don't consider myself to be stupid but 99% of the time I like some resolution in my movies. Call me crazy but a begining, middle and end are usually what make up a good story. The only time I can handle some ambiguity is when the tale has already been told e.g. Resevoir Dogs. To not 'finish' the movie always smacks of laziness to me.
-
And I'm a huge Affleck fan. Does that make me gay? If so, I don't want to be straight. I'm so psyched that he's getting a chance to break out of his rut. I think the best thing about this movie is that it has generated two normal, honest reviews on this site. Who knew?
-
It was the perfect storm of mediocre films as both Smith and Affleck where just going through the motions. I was hard pressed to remember when either was good/entertaining. Smith did okay with Clerk II. I wouldn't mind Oscar winner, Ben Affleck actually reminding us of his talent.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azo8heDmNoQ
-
Possibly your funniest openingh paragraph ever. Nice review.
-
but I agree with the previous poster that people are going to walk out PISSED. I remember seeing the 6th Sense with my dad, we walked out of the theatre and his reaction was "that was crap until the last 10 min" when everything came togather and you reliezed that Bruce was a ghost. up to that point my dad was clueless, I had seen it and knew what was going on but wasn't going to tell him anything. Anyways, Massawyrm is right, without a conclusion people are going to be lost and confused and people are going to be pissed.
-
It just bears repeating. Hey Harry, got any gum, motherfucker?
-
I blame too many of those damned commercials. Anybody out there a George Pelecanos fan? I can't wait to see one of his books on the silver screen. I just read "Hell to Pay" in one marathon 6-hour sit down and it fucking ruled! It helps that his novels are set in the District of Columbia/VA/MD which is my current 'hood and I recognize most of the locations his characters haunt. Any fan of noir or just good old crime fiction could do a lot worse than to check out some of his books. The name again is GEORGE PELECANOS...he also write for HBO's "The Wire". Oh, and to Marty I say "Kundun....Loved It!!!"
-
it is, after all, one of Hollywood's great unsolved mysteries, right up there with Thomas Ince's murder on Hearst's private ship, the Black Dahlia's grizzly dismemberment, and the "did Monroe really commit suicide?" question. Being a 12 year old Superman addict at the time of Reeves' death I had a real problem facing the fact that he had killed himself. Then many years later while finishing up college I learned that facts of evidence had been covered up and that there were many doubts about the death. I wanted to believe that he hadn't taken his own life. When this motion picture came to my attention I hoped for some resolution. Had NEW evidence come to light that would settle the issue one way or another? I hoped that that was the case. However it is not. Annnnd the film was right to leave it as an enduring mystery instead of making up an ending. I was disappointed true, but presenting the known facts and letting us mull it over, talking about it is the totally right thing to do.
-
...that isn't written by Vern? I must be on IGN or something.
-
My ban on Affleck films was ruined by his cameo in Clerks 2. I might just sit this one out in protest. He's garbage.
-
You sure wouldn't know it from a season of Prison Break (or The Craft). I'll believe it when I see it. And as much as people make fun of Affleck, his 'debut' in Chasing Amy was a great role and I actually liked him as Matt Murdock (gasp!). So, best supporting actor nom for the Flak?
-
Would hate to have something different. We must satisfy the mainstream public.
-
...?
-
A resolution is allowed to be ambiguous, but please give the audience something! I hate when movies just end without resolution and then people praise it for not "spoon feeding" the audience. Fuck that, films are supposed to be stories and incoherent films are poorly told ones.
-
I just happen to believe that a good film is accessible on the surface as well as underneath. Films that require hours of disscetion after the fact are fine, but if all they are is a puzzle and there's no immediate enjoyment, it all reeks of pretention to me.
-
...as the two best currently-working actors that have made the worst Goddamn movie choices in the world. I have nothing but respect for 'Fleck, but I think even he would admit that he's made some poor career choices that have cost him dearly. I truly hope Hollywoodland brings him back to the spotlight. He's an underrated talent these days, and that's saying something, considering he's starred in some of the biggest-budgeted films of the last 10 years.
-
...Gus Van Sant's name immediately follows. A 20 minute tracking shot on a fucking window in "Last Days"? You owe me $5 for renting that piece of garbage, you no-talent dickhouse.
-
"All in all, I have to honestly say I loved every single minute of this movie. Every last one.
So what -
Man did that film drain me, and not in a good way. It took me over three days to watch that garbage, I could only sit thru 20-30 minute intervals in order to remain conscience. I wish I could get my money back on that one, and for the love of me I can't figure out how anyone could like that film (and I know at least one person who thought it was brilliant).
-
Plus, it was a great movie. Need more Phil Alden Robinson!!!
-
Brody's investigation isn't wrapped up with a finger pointed at the guilty party? Or do you mean that all story threads (external and internal conflicts) aren't tied up at the end and the audience is left hanging on all fronts?
If it's the former, I could deal with challenging story-telling. If it's the latter I think I'll pass on HOLLYWOODLAND; that would just smack of a carelessly put together narrative. -
I've never disliked a movie more, unless of course you count that little seen gem "Alone in the Dark".
-
Granted, it was from Cannes, but still!! People actually liked that film enough to GIVE IT AN AWARD. What the fuck is wrong with the world?
-
It was very voyueristic, and fascinating. I can see though how some would have found it incredibly boring. Maybe because I'm not American and having a verisumilitude look at High School in the suburbs of middle America which is so alien to be a factor in holding my attention. I hated the simplicity of the two killers being homosexual lovers though. That was too contrived and far fetched.
-
Am I the only one who liked DD? Come on. Somebody? I know you're out there.
-
No movie's resolution cuts off the audience's wondering about alternative endings and possible alternate solutions. I'm not accusing the makers of this movie of this since I haven't seen it, but so often that kind of ending is about pretentions to art when the moviemakers just aren't talented enough to come up with a compelling ending. It's a bit post-modern, these boomerang endings, and those who don't care for them just aren't sophisticated enough to handle them. It just strikes me as being a ripoff. Are there any great movies/books with unresolved endings? I'm sure there are, just can't think of any offhand. The whole "we don't want to judge" thing is kinda stale. I respect someone who can work in longstanding structures and make a satisfying, original work of art than someone who doesn't resolve the story he sets up and says "Make up your own mind" when coming up with a compelling resolution looks difficult. BTW, this doesn't look like a box office winner to me, and Affleck's career is balancing on the edge here. Can't say I'm sorry; his pal Damon had the same opportunity post-Oscar, and he made solid choices, and didn't just make any garbage with a big check attached.
-
Is it enough consolation to say that I found the visualization of the echo-radar sense to be interesting and well done? Because I'm afraid that's all I got for Daredevil.
-
At this stage, I'll take whatever I can get.
-
That movie was the bomb, yo. Seriously, if this movie matches the mood and overall greatness that LAC did, I will be there.
-
Maybe it is because I'm american, but either way... I was not only bored but put off by how unrealistic the entire thing was. I hated the reactions everyone had. I'm ok with using unknown actors, but it didn't even seem like Van Sant was TRYING to make these kids seem realistic. He could have gotten decent performances out of them, I'm sure, but instead it felt very much like a high school video project. I agree that it was a stupid thing to throw in, having the killers be gay, because it reeked of a cheap controversy, and you'd think Van Sant, who's gay himself, wouldn't push such a cliche like that.
-
Does anyone remember if that movie "Gosford Park" resolved who the murderer was. For some reason I have this idea that they left it also open to interpretation, but I haven't seen it in years.
-
And what about "Cache"? That film was praised in many circles but I couldn't stand how they ended it... Though that suicide scene was absolutely shocking.
-
I liked Daredevil, the Director's Cut was very good. Affleck's good too, not in the "Walken makes every shitty role from Envy to Country Bears great" way, but in the "Ben Kingsley's a good actor who sucks shit in everything he does these days" way. . . We also like Kevin Pollack.
-
not that this discussion has a single thing to do with Hollywoodland, but hey. The reason why I was so incredibly disturbed by Elephant was because it felt so documentary like. The verite made it powerful. To get 'performances' out of his actors would have cheapened the film and softened the blow. And I'm American. Just an American with some patience and ability to appreciate non-mainstream productions. And I also don't think the killers were gay. Just lonely and wanting an experience because they knew they were going to die.
-
He's not that bad, in fact he's quite good. I thought he gave a good performance in Sum of All Fears, too. He seems like a nice guy off screen too, so it's hard to hate a guy that much who's really nothing to deserve it. Now Nicolas Cage on the other hand, now there's a bastard I could see burned alive. Hate him. HATE HIM!!
-
Everything was just really weak in my opinion. I'm not asking for melodrama, but the dialogue was so wooden and so fake sounding that I couldn't buy it for a second.
-
Directors Cut was better. Affleck walked through it, but that's because the script wasn't have as engrossing as a sotry about Daredevil, Kingpin, Bullseye and Elektra should have been. Those characters have depth in the comics, and that movie felt very much like the readers digest version. Ferrell(sp?) was fucking perfect though. I always imagined Bullseye as Irish, even though it's always been written that he was probably American.
-
That is all.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 165 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 153 total posts 138 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 47 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 36 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 36 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 117 total posts 26 posts