Hollywoodland

[mysterygal]

....but I was braced for because of what I read here.

Which made me wish I did some reading up on the movie on here before going out and seeing it!:eusa_doh: oh well, I had a great time with you guys
Pros: I loved the clothes, especially the women along with make-up, I really think they did a great job there. I'm not a huge fan of Ben Affleck, but I have to admit that I was very impressed by his role.
Cons: excessive swearing always grates my nerves and along with some crude scenes I felt like I needed to shower afterwards.
I really felt this could have been great if they were to leave out some scenes and leave out some , or a lot of the language in this movie, it was just very unnecessary. Especially Mannix's wife, the words coming out of her mouth were foul and I would not expect that coming from somebody who back then, would have been a very distinguished lady. This is not a movie I would buy or watch again. Once again I feel Hollywood has ruined another would-be great story line.

 

[MK]

Cons: excessive swearing always grates my nerves and along with some crude scenes I felt like I needed to shower afterwards.
I really felt this could have been great if they were to leave out some scenes and leave out some , or a lot of the language in this movie, it was just very unnecessary. Especially Mannix's wife, the words coming out of her mouth were foul and I would not expect that coming from somebody who back then, would have been a very distinguished lady. This is not a movie I would buy or watch again. Once again I feel Hollywood has ruined another would-be great story line.

Agreed. The language was over the top and wasn't needed.

Then again....people who sleep with other people's spouses don't have much class anyway.

 

[jamespowers]

Agreed. The language was over the top and wasn't needed.

Then again....people who sllep with other people's spouses don't have much class anyway.

:eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Some of the language was shocking, intentionally so. The theater I was in let out a collective gasp.

 

[mysterygal]

Then again....people who sleep with other people's spouses don't have much class anyway.

lol got me there. No, she didn't have any class. In fact, just about everyone in that film was very dysfunctional.
I do see this as something Ben Affleck will notice as being a role that he needs to watch out for since he did quite well. Maybe the problem with his other films was that it was just the wrong kind of character [huh]

 

[SGB]

Superman suit

Interesting tidbit:
http://www.profilesinhistory.com/images/GinessBook2k_lg.jpg

SGB

 

[Veronica Parra]

Looks like kids' pajamas.

 

[SGB]

Looks like kids' pajamas.

Awfully expensive pajamas.....

 

[Rundquist]

I saw the movie last night and I enjoyed it. I’m glad that it didn’t come to any heavy handed conclusions about the cause of Reeves death. Unfortunately I think that the film is doomed to do lousy at the box office. The pacing of the movie is probably too slow for today’s audience. As mentioned above, the film also calls on the audience to draw their own conclusions and today’s audience likes to be spoon fed everything. I would probably not see the movie again, but as far as I’m concerned the movie did it’s job. It at least entertained me once. Most movies today don’t even do that. On a side note, I did see the trailers for Black Dahlia and Flyboys. Black Dahlia looks like it could be good. Flyboys looks like a complete piece of garbage. However, I will probably see it just because I’m an Aviation fan. Cheers

 

[MrBern]

Especially Mannix's wife, the words coming out of her mouth were foul and I would not expect that coming from somebody who back then, would have been a very distinguished lady.

I think that was the point. She wasnt a distinguished lady. She was a showgirl mistress who landed a mogul, then kicked to the side. She was notorious & brazen enough to seek out her own conquests.
So a potty mouth is not unexpected in her depiction. I thought Diane Lane made the character quite sympathetic.

I was surprised to see Reeve's fiancee was so crass. I could see him falling for a spunky gal, but not someone so base. Maybe it was her youth & his midlife crisis....

 

[LizzieMaine]

Just back from seeing this (I skulked to an early show at the Evil Multiplex, hoping not to be recognized patronizing such a place), and I guess I have mixed feelings.

For one thing, I think the picture was at least forty minutes too long, and it could've been tightened up a lot thru some judicious script editing. The subplot about Adrien Brody's domestic woes just kind of laid there, I thought, and didn't really add a whole lot to the development of the character -- he was a schlub before he got involved in the Reeves case, and I got the feeling he was going to still be a schlub, albeit in a nicer suit, after the fadeout.

Affleck was the real surprise for me. He's always been pleasant to look at, but I think he must've been investing in acting lessons lately, because he had more depth in the role of Reeves than anything else I've ever seen him do. He also had the look and manner absolutely nailed -- there were points where I was trying to remember what the real Reeves looked like, but the only face I could see was Affleck's. Excellent job -- maybe even Oscar- worthy. Lane and Hoskins were also very well cast.

I was also very pleased with the overall look of the film -- clothes and settings were just right, and there was just enough seediness around the edges to make it look like a slice of real life and not a museum tableau.

It's not any kind of a feel-good film, and you might want to take a long bath after watching it. But I think it was well worth the $6.

 

[Feraud]

It's not any kind of a feel-good film, and you might want to take a long bath after watching it. But I think it was well worth the $6.

I agree it is not a feel good movie but a bath is not really necessary is it? There are worse films out there.

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

I agree, I was pretty shocked by some of the things coming out of the ladies mouths. Would a lady during that era really speak that way? I think so, it just wasn't talked about. I think these "ladies" were real characters, and the actress did a good job of portraying the taudry woman that they probably were. I mean, Toni had an affair with a much younger man, and brought him along to dinner with her husband and his mistress. So, I guess a few dirty words wouldn't have been out of the ordinary. But, what do I know about being a lady like that

 

[mysterygal]

I think that was the point. She wasnt a distinguished lady. She was a showgirl mistress who landed a mogul, then kicked to the side. She was notorious & brazen enough to seek out her own conquests.
So a potty mouth is not unexpected in her depiction. I thought Diane Lane made the character quite sympathetic.

I was surprised to see Reeve's fiancee was so crass. I could see him falling for a spunky gal, but not someone so base. Maybe it was her youth & his midlife crisis....

Well that makes more sense, her being a showgirl, or ex showgirl, would of gave me a clue to where she came from at least. I came into the movie having no idea the background on any of these people. And I agree with the fiancee, didn't seem somebody that he would of fallen for.

 

[Shimmy Sally]

Thanks for the reviews of Hollywoodland. I've been debating if it would be worth a trip to the theater. My last two ventures were Dead Man’s Chest and 3-D Superman at IMAX. I should have known both would be disappointing over-use of special effects. Oh well, the guys were easy on the eyes.
As to the plot of Hollywoodland ... at least there is one! Yes, there have been delusional trashy showgirls (who imagine themselves to be elegant) and immoral cheating spouses throughout history. Do I want to see another movie about messed-up celebrities?
If the sets and costuming are well done, I may pay-per-view next month with the volume down.

 

[matei]

I saw a preview for this film and actually thought that aul Ben looked pretty good... ahem, in a manly way.

It was the scene where some kids saw him smoking. The suit looked neat, I dug the thin belt.

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I like Ben Affleck as an actor. He was good in the Silent Bob films...

 

[airfrogusmc]

Just back from seeing this (I skulked to an early show at the Evil Multiplex, hoping not to be recognized patronizing such a place), and I guess I have mixed feelings.

For one thing, I think the picture was at least forty minutes too long, and it could've been tightened up a lot thru some judicious script editing. The subplot about Adrien Brody's domestic woes just kind of laid there, I thought, and didn't really add a whole lot to the development of the character -- he was a schlub before he got involved in the Reeves case, and I got the feeling he was going to still be a schlub, albeit in a nicer suit, after the fadeout.

Affleck was the real surprise for me. He's always been pleasant to look at, but I think he must've been investing in acting lessons lately, because he had more depth in the role of Reeves than anything else I've ever seen him do. He also had the look and manner absolutely nailed -- there were points where I was trying to remember what the real Reeves looked like, but the only face I could see was Affleck's. Excellent job -- maybe even Oscar- worthy. Lane and Hoskins were also very well cast.

I was also very pleased with the overall look of the film -- clothes and settings were just right, and there was just enough seediness around the edges to make it look like a slice of real life and not a museum tableau.

It's not any kind of a feel-good film, and you might want to take a long bath after watching it. But I think it was well worth the $6.

Just saw the film tonight and I do agree that it should have been edited a bit. Its OK. Great nah but worth seeing. The look of the film was great. Loved the 50s cars.

 

[carebear]

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I like Ben Affleck as an actor. He was good in the Silent Bob films...

Like most people, he's at his best when he isn't trying to "act".

 

[Doh!]

Well, I finally saw it tonight and thought it was WONDERFUL! Whenever they showed Affleck in The Suit, I found myself grinning ear to ear, just like the kids onscreen when they saw Superman make his live appearance. There was talk before that DC Comics wouldn't allow them to use the "S" logo (note that it's missing in the trailer); I couldn't imagine how they could've shot around the Superman costume.

I found Affleck a little stiff as Reeves; I think he should've dropped the impression and just used his own voice. Brody was terrific, though -- as was Lane and pretty much the entire cast. I agree that it could've been about 10 or so minutes shorter (ironically, I found the ending aprupt) but thought the pacing was quite good.

Here's a weird thing: until I got to the theater, I wasn't aware that it was an R rated film. As an adult, I was hardly "shocked" by anything onscreen (I've seen much worse) and wonder if the material was treated more seriously by having it an R. The story didn't necessarily require an R had they trimmed the language, but it didn't bother me that it went in that direction. Perhaps they were trying too hard to be L.A. Confidential.

Anyway, I really liked it but probably won't buy it on DVD. However, I'd see it again someday...

 

[katiemakeup]

I enjoyed it enough... although I could have done with a little less of Adrian Brody's character and more on George Reeve's life and his problems. I thought Ben Affleck was very good. I was confused at the part where the little kid aimed the gun at Superman... was this a flashback/dream?