Hollywoodland (2006) User Reviews

An ambitious actor in '50s Hollywood and his untimely death

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 16 March 2007]

"Hollywoodland" has probably brought George Reeves more fame and celebrity than even he ever dreamed of - imagine being the subject of a feature film when you were most famous for being the TV Superman. Had he lived into his seventies, he might have been around for the renaissance of the old shows and stars due to the nostalgia of the maturing baby boomers. But he'd probably rather have it this way.

Reeves started out in small roles such as one of the Tarlton twins in "Gone with the Wind," and before going into the service himself, nabbed some good parts while the big stars were fighting the war. Like many young actors back then, after the war, his career had lost momentum. He ultimately landed the role of Superman and during that time appeared in "From Here to Eternity." The film shows people recognizing him as Superman during the Hollywood premiere of "From Here to Eternity," and as a result of the audience laughter, his role was severely cut. However, many people state that Reeves' role in the final product was no smaller than it was originally.

Unfortunately, in the '50s, once you were associated with a television role, it was a death knell. When Jack Larson (Jimmy Olson in Superman) went into an audition after the series, the director said to the others in the room: "Please don't embarrass this man. He knows I can't cast him," or words to that effect. The actors today are more fortunate as the business has changed. It would be a steep upward climb if Reeves was to shake that Superman image. At the time of his death, he was forming his own production company and planned to go to New York. He also wanted to direct.

"Hollywoodland" stars Ben Affleck, Diane Lane, Adrien Brody, Robin Tunney, Bob Hoskins and Lois Smith. It's the story of slimy detective Louis Simo (Brody) - a man who sells info to Confidential magazine and takes low-rent clients - and his investigation of George Reeves' death, considered a suicide. During a small gathering in his home, Reeves went upstairs to his bedroom and allegedly shot himself. But many people believe he was murdered. Simo plays out different scenarios in his head with different suspects as he searches for evidence and motives. There were several people in Reeves' life who had motives: Reeves' long-time girlfriend Toni Mannix, wife of studio exec Eddie Mannix, a man with an unsavory past known by MGM as "The Fixer"; Mannix himself, who was suspected of being involved in the death of Jean Harlow's husband Paul Bern and later on of faking a car accident in which Toni was killed; and Leonore Lemmon, George's young girlfriend toward the end of his life, who expected to marry George. In the midst of his investigation, Simo has problems with a seedy client as well as difficulties relating with his young son.

This is a beautifully produced film with some marvelous performances, particularly from Diane Lane, Bob Hoskins, and Ben Affleck. Affleck's resemblance to Reeves in some scenes is scary - particularly as Clark Kent! Affleck even had Reeves' vocal rhythm. An excellent performance, and hopefully one that will lead to some better films and roles for him. As Toni, Lane is superb - sexy, tough, and completely possessive of George; Bob Hoskins is great as the bombastic, thug-like Eddie Mannix. Robin Tunney makes a gorgeous Leonore, a cheap low-life. Adrien Brody's Louis Simo is probably more cerebral than most detectives of this type, but he's still good. The problem is not so much in his performance as it is that his storyline is intrusive.

The scenes filming "The Adventures of Superman" are fantastic, and I for one wanted to see more. "Hollywoodland" captures the reality of making a television show back then and evokes the atmosphere of Hollywood in the '50s beautifully. However, it moved slowly, and there was too much of Brody's problems and too little of George's relationships. While it was an interesting film and very worthwhile, it just didn't hang together as one would have hoped.

Reeves' friend, Jack Larson (portrayed in the film by Joseph Adam), who was an adviser on the film, read several versions of the script, and met with the actors. His biggest concern was that the film not put Toni Mannix, with whom he was very close, in a bad light. Larson was very, very impressed by Ben Affleck's intelligence and personality and thought all of the acting was top-notch. One thing he was sure of - Reeves never had any intention of marrying Leonore Lemmon. "George lived big," Larson said, "but it was Toni's money." He adds, "No one wants to listen to me...He committed suicide."

Good style but slow pace

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 9 October 2014]

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.

Affleck Shines But the Movie Fails to Entertain

[JoshuaMHetu · 6/10 · 14 August 2019]

First things first, Ben Affleck is not only amazing as George Reeves but he's by far the best part of "Hollywoodland." Oozing a dark charisma as the doomed TV actor, Affleck creates a surprisingly compelling character. He even makes a convincing Superman, ironic given his casting as Batman in the DCEU.

But despite Affleck's stand-out performance the overall film is dragged down by otherwise shallow characters and a weak, unengaging story. The film tells the tale of a private detective (Adrien Brody) as he investigates the mysterious death of "Superman" star George Reeves. The film starts out strong with a promising premise, and by far the most interesting element of the plot involves the flashbacks to Reeves' rise as a TV star and his ultimate death by gunshot. But the majority of the plot, which focuses not on Reeves but on Brody's private detective, is too slow and lacks dramatic tension. Many if not most scenes involve overly long, bland conversations that don't do enough to further the plot. Reeves aside, the main characters are largely undeveloped and not interesting.

"Hollywoodland" could've been great had the producers decided to do one of two things: A) Cut out the investigation storyline set in the present day and focus the movie almost entirely on Reeves, or B) Make the movie a thriller like "Rashomon" or "JFK" that told alternative versions of Reeves' life and death from different points of view. But as is, in spite of Affleck's performance and a handful of good scenes "Hollywoodland" just doesn't work. 6/10.

Shot

[tedg · 1 October 2006]

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.

So Mixed On This One

[he88 · 7/10 · 4 February 2021]

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.

Good but just misses the mark

[Robert_duder · 7/10 · 13 September 2006]

HollywoodLand is likely to be a contender for Oscars this coming season. I think that it won't take home any nominations for best picture but quite possibly directing, supporting actor and maybe even supporting actress. The film is well performed, the cast is quite good but they really have to give it their all given that the script is something sub par compared to what it could have been. The potential for this film is endless and it really could have been something but somehow it just misses greatness. They have a terrific mystery and a biography to go on and they do cover both with significant detail and yet the film seems to drag a little bit and just when you think they are offering their take on the death of Reeves they take you in another direction. Certainly this does give the viewer the opportunity to come to their own conclusions but in some ways it also leaves you feeling cheated and confused by the whole thing.

Adrien Brody is really the leading man playing Private Detective Louis Simo. I think that Brody's character is reflective of George Reeves in many areas, trouble with two different women, self obsessed with success, a hero to youngsters (Reeves had millions of children while Simo had his son that looked to him.) They both had struggling careers and both of them sat on the job of a lifetime when it came to Reeves and Superman and Simo and Reeves' death. Brody could act his way into any role and this is no exception. He is terrific, and watchable as Simo, if not sometimes feeling a little underhanded and sleazy but you feel sorry for the guy. Still he's a strong character but I wanted more from him especially in the end. Diane Lane is absolutely stupendous as the wife of an MGM studio head, Toni Mannix. Mannix enters into a long term affair with George Reeves which is basically the most serious relationship Reeves ever had and yet it never furthered his career in any way. It also opens the door to many conspiracy theories about his murder. Lane shows a lot of emotion and does such a terrific job that she is perhaps more deserving than anyone of an Oscar nod this season. And of course the much talked about Ben Affleck plays the irrepressible George Reeves. Now I've only ever seen Reeves in the Superman TV Serials but when I heard Affleck was playing him...I scoffed...I didn't think he could pull it off and I've never been a huge Affleck fan although he has had some decent roles. I was completely wrong. He absolutely embodies the character and brings Reeves to light in a very personal and important way to the story. He brilliantly gives this part his all and as many reviewers has pointed out his own career reflects Reeves in many factors. This could be a turning point for his career or simply a highlight but either way he single handedly makes this film worthwhile. Bravo!! One of my favorite actors Bob Hoskins plays MGM head Eddie Mannix and he could have done so much with this role but sadly he gets very little screen time. Hoskins can command attention but he really isn't given a great part.

Veteran TV director Allen Coulter must be given credit for accurately capturing and immersing us all into the 1950's and giving the film noir feel to the film. He also must be given great credit for the stylish way the time line is handled. With the exception of one or two subtitled dates on the bottom of the screen, everything else simply flips back and forth between Reeves' career and after his death and you never once feel confused by it. He so delicately sets up the characters and distinguishes them so clearly in the two different time periods that notification of time change is not necessary. All this makes for a very strong film but somehow it's just missing something. The film does drag a little long and I don't think enough scenes feature Reeves and his personal life although I realize the film is about his death. Some of the characters are not in depth enough like Hoskins and even Brody's character to some extent. Too much time is spent on establishing clues that aren't vital to the story. And more closure on Brody's character would have been nice. He has realized something about his son and his life by looking at Reeves', a man who seemed to have it all but yet no conclusion comes from it. The film is definitely worth seeing and I'm sure you'll hear about it for awhile and I think some Academy coverage would not be out of the question but it does fall short from greatness. 7/10

Compelling neo-noir film

[Floated2 · 7/10 · 11 December 2020]

Interesting developments and drama unfolding. In one of Ben Affleck's better performances his storyline is more compelling and rewarded watching than the lead of Adrien Brody's. The non-linear storytelling was slightly confusing at first but seeing the entire film being pieced together in the end was very good. It seemed to be left off as an open interpretation which seemed to work.

Somebody beat up the private eye already, so we can see the Reeves mystery

[MartianOctocretr5 · 6/10 · 17 September 2006]

You would wonder why a movie looking at the 1959 suicide (or possible murder) of a moderately well known actor would take over two hours running time to tell the story. It's because the movie is really two stories run side by side. There are flashback sequences of George Reeves (Ben Affleck) in the last few years of his life, inter cut with scenes of a private eye trying to uncover facts about the actor's death.

The story line about the sleazy detective (Adrien Brody) with some hot shot self important attitude adds nothing, and just bogs down the pacing of the film. In truth, he's nothing but a two-bit nobody that sticks big wads of gum in his ugly mouth, and tries to accuse and exploit everybody in sight, even the mother of George Reeves, who hired him in the first place. As if that isn't enough, you're subjected to the long-since overused cliché of a divorced dad's problems with his ex and son. Nobody cares. I kept hoping somebody would beat the daylights out of this idiot, and reduce his ego a few hundred notches. These scenes rarely address or reveal anything about the mystery. Apparently, this whole scenario illustrates a parallel between this character and Reeves himself, but so what?

On the other hand, the Reeves biography is well executed. The latter-day version of film noor is utilized: deep brownish/orange hues employed to indicate period and mood, rather than the original black-and-white technique. It works, although the retro classic B&W would probably have been better for a murder mystery like this. Affleck rises from the ashes of Gigli and Pearl Harbor (and other duds) to give a great performance. Any fan of the original Superman TV series would immediately see he did his homework in researching Reeves. Subtleties such as the sly grin, and the speed of his speech matched the real Reeves well. When he had the Clark Kent glasses on, especially, the effect was almost eerie. Diane Lane is spectacular with her aging starlet style character. Other actors in the cast shine, as well.

Superior acting, an intriguing famous mystery, retro film noor styling, these were great and should have been enough. The excess baggage detective scenes detract from the movie, but it's still good enough to watch. It might be better to wait for the DVD release--you could fast forward though all the superfluous scenes.

Moody Hollywoodland Reveals Seamy Side of the Permissive Film Colony

[lavatch · 9/10 · 8 September 2006]

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.

A Journey Into Dark Territory

[seymourblack-1 · 7/10 · 30 September 2013]

The mysterious circumstances surrounding the death of the actor who was known to millions of TV viewers for his starring role in "Adventures Of Superman" (1952-1958) gave rise to widespread speculation about whether his death was a case of suicide or murder. "Hollywoodland" tells the semi-fictitious story of an investigation into the case by a private detective who, just like television's Superman, finds that his ambitions lead him into dark territory.

Louis Simo (Adrien Brody) is the private investigator whose personal life is in turmoil and whose professional activities don't earn him enough to pay the bills. He becomes aware of the death of George Reeves (Ben Affleck) when he discovers how upset his son is about what happened to his TV hero and later becomes more intrigued when he learns, from a detective that he used to work with, that there are certain facts about the case that the authorities want to keep under wraps.

Simo sees an opportunity to win some valuable publicity and soon gets himself hired by Reeves' mother Helen Bessolo (Lois Smith) who doesn't believe for a minute that her son would've committed suicide. Simo's investigation reveals a number of unexplained pieces of evidence and it isn't too long before a few different theories emerge about how Reeves actually died.

Reeves was an actor whose career had started with a small part in "Gone With The Wind" but subsequently failed to develop in the way he'd hoped it would. He'd become involved with an older woman called Toni Mannix (Diane Lane) who bought him a house, a car and good clothes but ominously turned out to be the wife of MGM studio executive Eddie Mannix (Bob Hoskins). Reeves' initial anxiety about this was relieved however, when he learnt that Eddie and Toni had an open relationship and Eddie also had a Japanese mistress.

The opportunity to play Superman was a turning point for Reeves because it made him famous and provided him with a modest income. Unfortunately though, he didn't find the role satisfying and had aspirations to play more demanding parts which could earn him recognition as a serious actor. Very few roles of the type he wanted came along and when they did, audience reaction was negative because being so well known as Superman meant that no-one could take him seriously in any other role. Reeves became bitter, dumped Toni and later became involved with a young starlet called Leonore Lemmon (Robin Tunney) who was present at his Hollywood home on the night of his death.

"Hollywoodland" is a movie in which the Los Angeles of the 1950s is beautifully and convincingly recreated and its story about the unexplained inconsistencies surrounding the death of George Reeves is genuinely intriguing.

Ben Affleck is marvellous as he brings to life the charm and sadness of his character and subtly shows how humiliated he felt at certain points in his career and Diane Lane is terrific as the wealthy but vulnerable Toni who was left devastated and angry when her affair with Reeves ended. Bob Hoskins and Adrien Brody both make a strong impression but overall the quality of the acting in this film really is exceptionally good.

One half of a good film - Keep Reeves, chuck Brody

[shoolaroon · 5/10 · 7 September 2006]

The following may contain spoilers.

This is actually two movies in one (or two unhappily wedded plot lines in one) - the George Reeves portion, reviewing the last few years of his life, prior to Superman and up to his death, is simply excellent. Ben Affleck does a phenomenal job in portraying Reeves. He creates a thoroughly likable, funny, rather intelligent bloke who, while he doesn't take himself or life too seriously, would like to make something of himself in his profession. His story of a bittersweet success that traps him, is very compelling. Diane Lane is also excellent as his somewhat desperate and sometimes calculating, married mistress. All the people in the Reeves part of the movie are excellent, and the film looks really good.

Now for the bad news. Adrien Brody, alas, is not remotely convincing as a detective in any time, place, era, or circumstance. The only point in the movie where I felt he was not out of place is when he gets beaten by thugs. Brody, unfortunately for him, looks like a natural victim. I like to say he has a face like a question mark. He can play a scholar, a musician, a poet, a writer, a scientist - but NOT a man of action (King Kong was also dreadful), or a detective. He's simply not believable in this type of role. No reflection on his acting ability - to some extent you have to LOOK the part. Try putting Orlando Bloom into one of Russell Crowe's roles, and vice versa. Doesn't work.

The whole Brody/Simo part of the movie is trite and hackneyed. We don't need to know about his domestic situation and I for one, don't give a damn, Scarlett. The whole separated/divorced father trying to connect with his alienated son and being thwarted by his bitchy wife is just so old and formulaic and unnecessary, especially when placed against the freshness and vitality of the Reeves plot. No, we don't learn anything more than we need to know about this character through his pathetic domestic situation and I don't care what kind of lessons he supposedly learns at the end. It's like Movie Psychobabble Script for Dummies 101. I'd love to get my hands on this film and just gut the whole Adrien Brody story line and fill out the Reeves story line.

Alas, Hollywood will never stop reaching for sentimentality and manipulating us. Just tell the story - that's enough.

Excellent drama, compelling, and about as truthful as drama can be.

[JimB-4 · 9/10 · 9 August 2006]

As someone who has spent a number of years preparing the definitive biography of actor George Reeves, I approached this film with great trepidation. I had previously turned down several offers for the film rights to my own book because I felt it unlikely that those projects would result in a film truthful to the essence of the man I had come to know so well. All I can say is that the makers of "Hollywoodland" came as close as is humanly possible in the real world of movie-making to achieving exactly what I would have hoped for -- an examination of George Reeves's life and death that is true to the times he lived in, true to the kind of man I found him to be, and as true as possible to the most likely scenarios that have been projected to explain his death. While this is not a biography nor a documentary, and while adhering to each and every fact of Reeves's life would have resulted in a film exactly as long as his life, the artists here have done a powerful and affecting job of telling Reeves's story, and have framed it in a fictional setting that illuminates rather than obscures the truth.

In any event, in any life, there is what happened and then there is the truth, and the two may not always equally serve our understanding of the event or life in question. It is true that "Hollywoodland" takes occasional liberties with specific facts, in no less way than Shakespeare took liberties with the real life facts of Hamlet or Julius Caesar. But as Alfred Hitchcock said, drama is life with the dull bits left out. What matters is not whether a costume is the right shade of blue or whether there's really a gas station at the intersection of Sunset and Benedict Canyon. What matters is whether the essence of a true story has been faithfully told. And "Hollywoodland" does a superb job of portraying that essence, who George Reeves was, what his world was like, and what impact he had on those who knew him and those who only knew of him. Allen Coulter, the director, has done a splendid job capturing the era and has paid enormous attention both to period detail and to the details of the lives of the real-life characters. Only Reeves's fans (and not even many of them) will notice the pinkie ring on Ben Affleck's finger or the widow's peak in his hairline or the exotic Alvis auto he owns, yet these are all completely authentic to the actual Reeves. More importantly, Coulter has done an exemplary job of making Reeves into a human being, one whose dreams we ache for almost as much as he does in the story.

Adrien Brody, as the fictional detective whose story provides the audience a window into Reeves's life, is solid and manages to bring a little charisma to the comparative low-life he plays. Diane Lane is superb as Reeves's lover, the sexually hungry but aging Toni Mannix. And Ben Affleck does certainly his best dramatic work ever as George Reeves. In makeup, and with his own matching cleft chin, Affleck sometimes looks astonishing like the real Reeves. But more importantly, he captures the haunted quality of the actor on a treadmill to oblivion, as well as the immense charm for which the real Reeves is widely remembered in Hollywood. Although the script does not give any of the actors the kind of deeply meaty scenes that win Oscars, some of the hardest work to do is for an actor to excel in scenes that don't require fireworks. Affleck in particular does so in this film, and I think it does him credit. He is reported to have researched the role intensely, and it shows. The performances of Larry Cedar, Bob Hoskins, and Lois Smith also stand out especially distinctively.

The cinematography is stunning, with the frequent flashbacks clearly distinguishable from the "present day" scenes without the distinction being glaring or even obvious. And the musical score is elegant and very evocative of the time.

It is perhaps inevitable that die-hard Superman fans, for whom George Reeves is not so much a human being as he is a sort of superhero himself, will find things to carp and cavil about in this film. As a researcher with over thirty years of in-depth study of Reeves's life, I can split hairs over details pretty easily myself. And I suspect, too, that some of the complaints will be about the depiction of things that are actually true, but which don't show Reeves in a worshipful light. All I can say is that I have spent my adult life studying, admiring, and trying to understand the man whose story this film tells, and I think George Reeves would be touched and proud of the care these filmmakers have taken. I highly recommend "Hollywoodland."

Deeply flawed, but packs a hell of a performance from Affleck

[DonFishies · 6/10 · 8 September 2006]

As if it was almost specifically planned out, we now have Hollywoodland, another Superman related film, only a few months after Superman Returns. And fortunately enough, that is where the comparisons end (unlike the upcoming Infamous and last year's coincidentally familiar Capote). While being heavily flawed, Hollywoodland succeeds in more than a few respects, and is rightfully worth a watch at some point.

The film book ends with the death of George Reeves (Ben Affleck), the actor who portrayed Superman in the 1950s television show. His death was ruled a suicide, but the film stands tall as a question to this. Told in parallel story format, the film follows both fictional private detective Louis Simo (Adrien Brody) as he tries to uncover more of the "hidden" pieces of Reeves' death, and Reeves himself as he rises from actor for hire to a superstar thanks to the wife (Diane Lane) of a studio head (Bob Hoskins).

The death of Reeves (and the subsequent "Superman Curse") has built up quite the controversy and publicity over the years, so it should be no surprise that someone finally took the liberty to make a film about it. But what screenwriter Paul Bernbaum has done here is unsuccessfully blend fiction with fact. While all of the sequences involving Reeves actually happened, everything with Simo did not. This has been done fairly well in the past, but here it just is a mixed bag. While the film throws multiple theories and multiple facts at you through Simo and the colourful cast of characters he meets, there is just a foreboding sense that something just feels off. You just know you are not getting an accurate picture of what was going on, and thus, the film just does not work on the level that it should. It also stretches the length of the film way past where it should have ended.

The scenes involving Reeves rise and eventual downfall however, are quite spectacular. While you just cannot feel for anything happening on the fictional end of the story, you actually really get a deep sense of what was going on with Reeves. It is absolutely fascinating to watch the events unfold, and these are literally the best scenes in the film. Unfortunately however, they come short and sweet between the scenes involving SImo, and thus end abruptly. Some scenes even involve some pretty fairly important plot points, and if they are not addressed during the scenes with Simo, they just are never gone back to again. It just seems like they had a basic outline and frame for the film, and they did not want to go anywhere outside of it.

The sets and look of the film are feel invested within the 1940s and 1950s, and make the film look authentic. Cars, buildings and costumes all look plucked right out from that time period, and all are well converted to look good enough in a film made in 2006. The cinematography portraying an earlier age of Hollywood is superb in its execution, and helps allow the film to feel even more authentic. The Superman suits all look especially great, as does the aged looking footage involving Affleck playing Reeves in From Here to Eternity and The Adventures of Superman.

Brody has seen much better days than he does here. His character goes through more than a few changes during the film, and he just cannot show the same range that he did when he won Best Actor for The Pianist only four years ago. His expression and demeanour basically stay the same throughout the movie, and because of how sloppy the scenes involving Simo are, his performance really takes a beating. The movie falters totally while in his care, and if there was no real sequences involving Reeves, the film would just not work at all. Thankfully, that is not the case. The supporting cast are fairly solid in their almost minuscule roles, but sadly, Lane and Hoskins feel totally underused. While Lane does an adequate job as always in her limited screen time, Hoskins practically breathes excellence with what he does. In a few instances, he looks, sounds and feels downright evil. I would have enjoyed a lot more of him had there been more for him to do.

But easily the best thing about the entire film is Affleck as George Reeves. We will never see Affleck dawn the cape of the Man of Steel, but we get a great look at what he would look like if he ever had the chance and then some. He is electrifying in the role, and allows his character to grow and evolve properly throughout the entire film (unlike Brody). He may not be on the screen the whole time, but he makes the fascinating Reeves story even greater with his performance. This is definitely the one acting spot that critics have been waiting for from Affleck for years. His delivery of the dialogue is pitch perfect, and when the film gets particularly emotional, he only gets better.

He is the Man of Steel, and more importantly, he is George Reeves.

And I am unsure if this is with all prints of the film, but the one I saw had the boom mike blatantly visible for a good chunk of the film. It was jarringly distracting too.

As an all-around film, Hollywoodland is not all that great (and I really wish that they fought harder for the much better title Truth, Justice and the American Way). The key fictional story is totally off, and the fascinating true story of Reeves just does not feel like it is anywhere near as important as the fictional one. It does feel authentic however, and we will probably never see a better performance out of Affleck. So at least it has that to say for itself.

6.5/10.

Good actors let down by poor execution

[Chris_Docker · 5/10 · 24 November 2006]

1959. Los Angeles. Someone's just blown their brains out with a Luger. Or have they? Shady detective gets onto it. The guy was Superman. Or rather, he was George Reeves, who played Superman. Played here by Ben Affleck. Movie studios are at a crossroads in history.

First up, Ben Affleck is good. For someone who maybe wants to get out of comedy (as Reeves wanted to get out of playing the TV Superman), this is a shot for him to be taken seriously. He's surrounded by first rate performances from the likes of Diane Lane, superb as the older-woman seductress. Bob Hoskins, as the studio boss, has a gravitas and conviction that frees him from the more flippant or lowlife characters he has played. Then there's Adrien Brody as a sleazy detective turned honest guy. It's difficult to see how this picture could go wrong. But it does.

With beautiful 50s sets it took me a long time to decide why they somehow failed to convince. There is none of the mysteriousness of L.A. Confidential or the similarly themed Black Dahlia. Hollywoodland has neither a classic noir nor a detective genre feel. The camera-work and editing has a modern, snappy feel to it that is out of synch with the subject matter. It's not clear who is at the centre of the story - are we to focus on Brody or get seriously into the Reeves character? The film interleaves Reeves' life with the detective's investigation and, although there is a common thread between the two men, it is not strong enough to make up for a lack of dramatic tension. Then there's the title: it suggests something far too grand for a microcosm about one actor. Although there are a few broadsides against a corrupt Hollywood system, they lack subtlety and are themes that have been covered more fully many times over.

Diane Lane is mesmerising, first as a gorgeous vamp and then as the frustrated older woman. The recreation of scenes from the first (very low budget) Superman shoots are fascinating and if there had been more of them it might have been a way to flesh out Reeves' character. There is too much emphasis on who is sleeping with who they shouldn't. If the resolution was going to be based on this fine, but it seems the wrong formula for this film. With the exception of Lane, what character development there is comes too late and with insufficient force to justify two hours of meandering.

Hollywoodland wants to take on some big ideas, but brilliant acting is let down by weak direction and execution. At the end of two hours, we are still left asking what was the point. It made me want to put my iPod on and just listen to a fifties crooner such as Julie London - and pretend I was watching something constructed by someone who knew what they were doing.

Truth, Justice and the Hollywood Way

[gortx · 12 September 2006]

I guess I would count as a 2nd Generation ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN fan. I wasn't born when the series aired, but I was one of those kids who nonetheless grew up watching it faithfully in reruns on local Boston TV. And, I still find the opening theme and credit sequence to be amongst the best the industry has put out. Of course, there were always those "older kids" who had to go and try to spoil things by repeating the urban legend that George Reeves had killed himself trying to fly and falling out a window. But, I still remained a big fan. The 1978 version re-invigorated that spirit (I don't find many, if any, who have the same awe for SUPERMAN RETURNS. People like it, they don't seem to LOVE it).

Despite the wretched title, I looked forward to HOLLYWOODLAND. It is certainly curious that they used a fictionalized private eye to tell the tale of George Reeves. It takes a while to realize that the focus is more on Adrien Brody's PI, Simo, than on Reeves. Indeed, Affleck is 3rd billed behind Brody and Diane Lane. Brody is fine, but you keep wanting the film to get back to Reeves - who cares if a PI is having marital problems when TV's Man of Steel is dead (and SOMEONE'S responsible!)?

The acting is terrific, especially Diane Lane -- who also gets points for doing the very un-Hollywoodland thing of letting her true age show (compare to Sharon Stone's reptilian post-surgery look). Brody is fine and Affleck is getting the reviews of his career, even if, in the end, it's more a supporting role. The much praised look of the film is well detailed for a mid-budget item (especially for those who don't actually live in L.A. who won't mind the mostly Canadian locations - autumn foliage in L.A.?!).

In the end, the "mystery" is never solved. In addition, with such a split in the focus of the film between the PI and Reeves, you never get inside of the characters enough to draw your own conclusions. The ending drags on a good 15 minutes too long, and it's disappointing that it focuses on the PI and not on Reeves. A curious choice indeed. Entertaining, but not all too engrossing.

It's good, but far from great

[zetes · 7/10 · 11 September 2006]

Adrien Brody plays a detective investigating, and becoming obsessed with the death of George Reeves, most famous for playing Superman on television (played by Ben Affleck). The story of George Reeves is a compelling and sad one, and that's where the film is best. Reeves (in flashbacks) is having an affair with a studio boss's wife (played by Diane Lane; her husband is played by Bob Hoskins). He becomes a kept man, and his career is going nowhere. The detective part of the movie is much less successful, mainly because it all feels like a been-here-done-that. Brody is fine; he's kind of channeling Peter Falk from Columbo. The character's drama is pretty much all cliché. He's divorced and is having relationship problems with his son, and has to deal with his ex's new meathead boyfriend. For some not very believable reason he becomes so entangled in the case that he refuses payment when his client turns tail and runs. He's working on another, less interesting case that he's not doing very well on because he's so worked up about the Reeves case (seriously, this subplot should have been excised). He even gets beat up by some heavies. I just never really cared. I wanted to get back to the Reeves story. Affleck gives the best performance of his life (which isn't saying much, honestly). Lane is also very good. There are also several very good supporting performances, from Robin Tunney (playing Reeves's fiancée), Jeffrey DeMunn (playing Reeves' agent) and others. I liked the movie, but it is somewhat uneven.

Could've been so much better

[kmase · 7/10 · 14 September 2006]

When I first began hearing about this movie, the premise, as I understood it, was that George Reeves'apparent suicide was in fact a murder, heading into the movie with that in mind, I was a little surprised, although not terribly disappointed to find that this movie is less about a murder mystery and more about man trying to find his path to stardom. What makes this movie ultimately so frustrating is that it wastes time and energy trying to give you a parallel storyline with Adrien Brody, as the self-important amoral private eye, who is trying to fix his life, this was an unnecessary and at times tedious plot line and as good as Brody is the better storyline and performance belong to Affleck. With some better editing and a more focused view of what this story should be this would have been an outstanding movie. Ultimately it seems that rather than take a chance on the performances generating buzz, the producers decided to sell a mystery that never fully materialized, as opposed to a layered and interesting character piece about a man not many people knew about.

Great cast, including a potential Oscar winning performance from Ben Affleck, shine in a story thats only half worth telling

[dbborroughs · 6/10 · 8 October 2006]

Okay the answer to the Ben Affleck question is yes, he's on the fast track to another Oscar. Simply put he is that good, so good that this may end up his signature role which may forever be associated. As for the rest of the movie, yea well thats another story.

This is the story of George Reeves. Beginning just after his "suicide" the movie follows private detective Adrian Brody, hired by Reeves mother, as he tries to uncover whether Reeves suicide was that or murder, a possibility owing to many unanswered questions and odd loose ends. At the same time we travel back in time to when Reeves career is stalled and he become involved with the wife of studio honcho, a move he thought would set him on the road to easy street but actually hobbled his career further.

This is an odd film, and to be honest I'm going to have to sit and watch it again. Its not that the film is bad, its not really, its just that it seems like they've grafted an okay noir thriller on to a great Hollywood portrait and its a bumpy mix. The Brody stuff is just okay. Its your typical story of a desperate for money detective getting in way over his head until the case takes over his life and leaves him wondering which way is up. The best stuff, the stuff that you'll remember and that should have been the entire movie, is the Reeves stuff. Affleck has the role of life time playing a man who's role of a lifetime destroyed him. Its a wonderful, yet heartbreaking story. I wanted to spend more time with him and less with the seedy Brody. I understand that the film makers had things they wanted to use Brody to get across, however its just not interesting enough to make you care.

This is a movie you'll probably want to see on DVD or cable instead of shelling out 10 bucks in the theater, its not bad, but its only really half interesting.

HOLLYWOODLAND (Allen Coulter, 2006) ***

[Bunuel1976 · 7/10 · 27 April 2007]

I rented this after I recently acquired the 1st Season of the ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN TV series on DVD-R - which starred George Reeves, the subject of this film. It's one of several recent biopics or thrillers to have a film-making background - AUTO FOCUS (2002; I took the opportunity to rent this one as well because of it), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE (2005), even THE BLACK DAHLIA (2006).

In itself, engrossing and entertaining and admirably displaying little undue pandering to modern tastes - as can be witnessed by the name-dropping of the likes of Ralph Meeker and Johnny Stompanato which, most probably, mean nothing to today's moviegoers. Still, the title is perhaps unsuited: Reeves was a TV star but only a bit-part actor in films, and his is certainly not the first name one would think of to sum up the old Hollywood! Incidentally, the film supplies three possible avenues with respect to how events might have transpired on the fateful night of his death, but then leaves the audience to draw its own conclusions.

Unfortunately, the main plot - the investigation into the actor's mysterious "suicide" in 1959 - is too often interrupted by Adrien Brody's personal domestic problems; it's possible that this element was intended to play as a parallel storyline, but it mostly proves a distraction. That said, Brody is excellent - and equally good are Ben Affleck (as Reeves, though I didn't think it was necessary to digitally paste his facial features over those of the late actor during the snippets shown from the "Superman" series and FROM HERE TO ETERNITY [1953]!), Bob Hoskins (as real-life MGM executive E.J. Mannix and producer of two Tod Browning horror classics, MARK OF THE VAMPIRE [1935] and THE DEVIL-DOLL [1936]!) and Diane Lane (as Mannix's wife and Reeves' middle-aged promoter/lover).

Marvelous neo-noir thriller

[mgconlan-1 · 9/10 · 23 August 2006]

"Hollywoodland" intercuts a biopic of the last eight years in the life of actor George Reeves (Ben Affleck) with an investigation by scummy private eye Louis Simo (Adrien Brody) into the circumstances of Reeves' death. (He allegedly shot himself in his upstairs bedroom while his friends were having a party downstairs.) Though a bit draggy in spots and afflicted with the overall brown look all too common in films set in the recent past, "Hollywoodland" not only flawlessly evokes the 1950's visually but tells a compelling neo-noir tale about ambition, greed, sex and the lure of stardom. It's a film for those who liked "Chinatown" and "L.A. Confidential" but I thought it was better than either of those because it wasn't quite as relentlessly cynical and despairing. Bob Hoskins is superb as MGM second-in-command Eddie Mannix (explaining how he fits into this tale is impossible without involving a spoiler), Adrien Brody proves that there IS life for him after "The Pianist," and Ben Affleck - well, nobody had to direct him in how to play a star on the skids these days!

The mysterious death of 50's icon George Reeves

[Wuchakk · 7/10 · 26 November 2021]

In the early morning hours of June 16, 1959, George Reeves (Ben Affleck), star of the Adventures of Superman that ran from 1952-1958, is found dead in his Westside Los Angeles bedroom from a gunshot wound to the head. While the official cause of death is listed as suicide, his mother hires a private detective (Adrien Brody) to investigate the possibility of murder. Although it is argued that Reeves had reasons to kill himself due to depression over being typecast and aging issues, several individuals had motive and opportunity to kill him, including ex-girlfriend Toni Mannix (Diane Lane) and her powerful husband, the manager of MGM (Bob Hoskins), as well as Reeves' fiancé (Robin Tunney). The biggest mystery is why the other three individuals in the house at the time of Reeves' death waited 45 minutes to notify police.

"Hollywoodland" (2006) is a crime drama in the neo-noir vein and also a tragic biopic similar to "Auto Focus" (2002), "Mommie Dearest" (1981) and "Changeling" (2008). The only fictional character is Brody's private eye, but he was based on real-life detective Milo Speriglio.

The movie effectively details the three different death scenarios with the hint that one is the most likely. But, really, it begins as a mystery and ends as one, which I think is fitting since no one actually knows what happened at this point. In any case, this is a worthy tribute to Reeves and his life in Hollywood during the 50s. After watching, research the case for yourself.

Also notable on the female front are Caroline Dhavernas as the detective's girlfriend and Molly Parker as his ex.

The film runs 2 hours, 6 minutes and was shot in Los Angeles and the greater Toronto area.

GRADE: B.

I'm sorry... what was your point again?

[onepotato2 · 2/10 · 12 March 2007]

Meandering, plodding speculation on whether 50's TV actor George Reeve killed himself or was murdered. I really can't imagine that if your script fails to supply Reeve with sufficient desperation that you would retreat after a few murder scenarios to suicide (!) as the culprit.

Everyone's working at the height of their ability, but there are some movies that don't benefit from well-developed acting skills. Adrien Brody is especially adrift here trying to work up an Oscar-worthy moment with a script that offers nothing to anyone involved. He looks like he's in a Gap ad.

The writer must have noticed that ambiguity is an intriguing quality in art. Everything artistic is not ambiguous. Everything dull is not art.

A powerful and moving film with a great performance by Diane Lane

[McCormack7 · 10/10 · 20 August 2006]

I wasn't sure what to expect going into this film. I had seen the great trailer several times and thankfully the film more than lives up to the quality of the trailers. The film is an exploration of fame and what that might cost. It is also the story of three people... Louis Simo (Adrien Brody), Toni Mannix (Diane Lane), and George Reeves (Ben Affleck). When Reeves body is found, Simo looks into the apparent suicide and starts to uncover very disturbing things including the torrid affair Reeves was having with Toni Mannix (Diane Lane).

The film is superbly acted. Everyone here is at the top of their game. Affleck and Brody have never been better, and Bob Hoskins is very intimidating as Ed Mannix (Diane Lane's husband). But it is Diane Lane who gives the standout performance here as a woman who starts off as a confident seducer and ends as a volatile and distraught shell. It is an amazing performance that is both sexy and heart-wrenching. Affleck is also touching and sympathetic as Reeves.

The cinematography is amazing and the story is intelligently written and told. It manages to be both fascinating, interesting and entertaining. The films 126 minutes fly by and the film is very engrossing. Top that with some great performances including an Oscar worthy turn by Diane Lane, and you have one of the best films of 2006 so far. 10/10.

'Nobody ever asks to be happy later.'

[gradyharp · 6/10 · 7 February 2007]

HOLLYWOODLAND is a very long (two hours plus) film noir that is actually a film khaki: the droning muted brown to ochre tones of the film itself match the story well - and that is not necessarily a compliment. The 'unresolved' death of B-grade actor George Reeves who was disconsolate at having his crowning achievement be the Superman role (my, how times have changed!) is the subject of this story as written by Paul Bernbaum (best known for his ongoing 'Halloweentown' series) and directed by Allen Coulter whose credentials as a TV director are impressive. With a cast of top-notch actors this should have been a surefire hit, but somehow being unable to care about any of the characters in the film makes it leaden.

Though the film takes place in 1959 (the death by suicide vs possible homicide) the action spreads into the early 50s as Reeves (Ben Affleck) stumbles up the rickety Hollywood ladder of minor roles, alcohol and carousing until he meets aging Toni Mannix (Diane Lane) whose marriage of convenience to super producer Eddie Mannix (Bob Hoskins) leads to his attaining the role of Superman and the accompanying position of being Toni's lover. The story weaves rather aimlessly through Reeves' checkered life with paramour Leonore Lemmon (Robin Tunney) and influences from well-meaning supporters. But while we watch this rather tepid Hollywood wannabe climb we are escorted by the investigation of his death by one Louis Simo (Adrien Brody) who has been hired by Reeves' mother Helen Bessolo (the always fine Lois Smith) to prove that her 'brilliant actor' son was murdered.

The suicide death of Reeves is an open and shut case with the LAPD until Simo tinkers with the evidence, all the while ignoring his rather smarmy career as a private investigation, a distraction which leads to its own dire consequences. Simo also encounters problems with his ex-wife Laurie (Molly Parker) and his young son disillusioned that Superman would kill himself. The facts of Reeves' life parallel with the facts of Simo's life and the manner in which Coulter works with this data places past with present, Reeves with Simo in tightly connected frames so that we never know whose is coming into the next dark space: it becomes a bit tedious and confusing, but in the end it is all bleak and disjointed.

The actors try hard to salvage this film and there are some good performances here. But for this viewer it is just a long khaki song that never reaches the chorus. Grady Harp

Noir misses the mark

[bob_gilmore1 · 4/10 · 13 September 2006]

Let it be known that my rather stingy rating for this film does not stem from any dislike of film noir or neo-noir. But this weak entry in the genre underscores the point that "Chinatown" has a lot to answer for. For every on the spot classic like "LA Confidential" there are a number of turkeys like this that try to match it for quality and interest.

There is no doubt that they have the look right. They have the costumes right and the cars right and the background music right. What the film lacks in any sort of momentum and any sort of sympathy for the characters or what happens to them. In short, after a promising first twenty minutes we are left to wallow in a stagnant uninteresting tale that begs the question of why such a footnote in history deserved such a grand treatment.

The problem might rest with the casting Adrian Brody. He seems to young to play a convincing private eye. The scene where he has been beaten (allusions to Marlowe's "black hole opening up, and he dove right in")and lies wounded talking to his operative on the floor is downright embarrassing. Many will claim that it is his discovering (Like Jules Amthor's view of Marlowe "You are a dirty little man in a dirty little business")that he is really worthless and vile is the point. We should look on in awe that he recognizes this view of himself as some big development. It is not. It is certainly not worth nearly two hours of your time, despite the lush trappings.