Let Him Go

Director: Thomas Bezucha
Starring: Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Lesley Manville, Will Brittain, Jeffrey Donovan, Kayli Carter, Booboo Stewart, Ryan Bruce, Adam Stafford, Bradley Stryker
Running Time: 114 min.
Rating: R

★★★ (out of ★★★★) 

In the Western thriller Let Him Go, Kevin Costner proves again just how invaluable a screen presence he can be in any type of role, but especially when handed a part like this, which is so firmly entrenched in his wheelhouse that it conjures thoughts of his best work from the '90's and beyond. While the ads and commercials previewed a mix between a feature length version of Yellowstone and a low-key actioner for older moviegoers (not that either would be the worst thing in the world), writer/director Thomas Bezucha goes a step further in delivering an adult drama that has a little extra, as the suspense  continues to build right up until its closing scenes.

With two great performances grounding this, it's definitely more of a slow burn, but an immensely satisfying one that pays off, finding Costner operating in the same  mileu that's served as a backdrop for some of his more memorable outings. Aside from the baseball diamond or golf course, there seems to be no on screen setting for which his skills are better suited than this, even if he isn't really the story's protagonist. With his character reluctantly dragged into a difficult, potentially lethal predicament by his determined wife, played by Diane Lane, you could argue she's the plot's true driving engine. It's a different dichotomy, as well as an opportunity to see the reunited Man of Steel co-stars carry a picture together as leads for the first time, benefitting from both their talents being utilized to maximum effect.

It's 1961 and retired Montana sheriff George Blackledge (Costner) and his wife Margaret (Lane) are living with their son James (Ryan Bruce) and wife Lorna (Kayli Carter), along with their newborn grandson, Jimmy. But when James dies suddenly in a horse accident and Lorna goes on to marry Donnie Weboy (Will Brittain) a few years later, Margaret's worst instincts about this new husband are confirmed when she spots him physically abusing Lorna and little Jimmy. Soon after, all three have suddenly disappeared from town, prompting Margaret to confide in George about what she saw before  both set out to find them. 

Unfortunately, the situation emerges as far more dangerous than expected, as Lorna and their grandson are essentially being held captive by Donnie's psychotic mother Blanche (Lesley Manville) and the Weboy clan, including a slimy and unpredictable Uncle Bill (Jeffrey Donovan), who leads them to the house, and potentially a trap. After a disastrous meeeting and new friendship starting to form with a mysterious Native American man named Peter (Booboo Stewart) George and Margaret now must determine how to rescue Lorna and Jimmy from this violently dysfunctional family, and live to tell about it. 

The relationship between George and Margaret is everything this story's foundation is built upon, with new dimensions to these two characters as spouses, ex-in-laws, and grandparents being revealed as the conflict escalates. As each carry their own set of responsibilities and problems, the first act is kind of a feeling out in terms of which lines they feel are permissable for to cross given that the widow of their deceased son is making awful choices for their grandson. Besides this being delicate moral territory, it's also complicated from a legal standpoint considering they'll never have the rights their ex-daughter-in -law does as the boy's mother. For this and other reasons he'll soon be talked out of, George is initially hesitant to get involved, at least until Margaret forces his hand by doing it herself. 

George and Margaret aren't exactly ever on the same page but Bezucha's script still depicts a couple unmistakenly supportive of each other, even when in massive disagreement. She never backs down or wavers in the slightest, barely flinching when confronting this monstrous family face-to-face. It's intriguing how she leads the charge while George, a lawman, takes the more passive approach, remaining superficially cool and collected. If we didn't know better, the assumption could be that he's apathetic, afraid or weary of the potential consequences should they get involved. But that's hardly it. 

Costner's so good at depicting a man who's simply checked out following his son's death and has already thrown in the towel, frequently referencing his age. George even looks sad and tired, as Margaret seethes at his opinion that they sit this out. As good as Costner is, Lane might have the tougher job, maintaining for Margaret the facade necessary to execute a plan to save the boy and his mom. You can sense her wanting to just jump out of her skin at the thought that this sadistic family has gotten anywhere near their grandson.

More than a couple of scenes between the Blackledges and Weboys are so tension-filled they're almost difficult to watch. After a methodical build to the initial dinner confrontation, everything goes completely sideways, as Lesley Manville's ferocious performance takes center stage and the grandparents realize they'll be in for a fight that's more than just a war of words. The tide turns in an  entirely new, violent direction, as we anxiously wait for when George will go into full Costner-mode, getting his John Wayne on and attempting to take on this family by himself. In a third act that's far from a disappointment, and complete with an outcome heavily in doubt, the question becomes whether he can. 

Mileage may vary in terms of sympathy for Lorna given her poor decisions, but there's really no measure for the atrocity of the the family holding her, determined to take posession of her son, regardless of the cost. And as it turns out, the Weboys may even have more protection to do it than originally feared despite George's law connections. Supplemented by an elgiac Michael Giacchino score and some great photography from Guy Godfree, Bezucha also has a good eye for action, as in one spectacular sequence where a character meets their demise so conclusively that it actually appears as if the gates of hell have physically opened to swallow them whole.      

Let Him Go is very much a throwback that recalls Costner's role in Clint Eastwood's criminally underappreciated A Perfect World from 1993. Despite him playing characters who straddle opposite sides of the law in each, there's a lot of that film in this, at least in terms of theme and atmosphere, with both centering around the protection of a child. Here, a story that starts traditionally enough pivots into something a bit more sinister, with Bezucha and his actors juggling a lot of balls in the air on its way to the finish. And it's the handling of that transition that puts this a cut above others in a genre that's slowly disappearing. If the quality of this project isn't a good enough case for its continuation, then maybe nothing is.

Man of Steel

Director: Zack Snyder
Starring: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Laurence Fishburne, Antje Traue, Ayelet Zurer, Christopher Meloni, Russell Crowe
Running Time: 143 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ (out of ★★★★)

Well, better late than never. The fact that I waited nearly a year before finally seeing Zack Snyder's Man of Steel should give you a pretty good idea how high on my priority list it was. Not because I dreaded it in the slightest or was at all protective of the character, which is easily the most challenging of all superheroes to adapt to the screen. But because I'm just so burnt out from superhero movies and franchises to the point that it's almost impossible to distinguish them from each other. You can blame Marvel for that.  So now it's good to know every day I avoided seeing this wasn't time spent in vain because in attempting to "reimagine" Superman and make him relevant to contemporary audiences, Snyder's stripped away the character's essence, succeeding only in making an overblown Marvel movie out of a DC property.

About 10 minutes into the film I completely checked out, realizing we've seen this all before when it was titled Thor, Captain America, Iron Man and The Avengers. But this is actually much worse than all those, and perhaps even worse (or at least barely even with) Bryan Singer's much-maligned Superman Returns, which made the supposedly crucial error of being too slavishly devoted to Richard Donner's original vision. Snyder is slavishly devoted to blowing things up, as his vision features some of the most mind-numbing, soul-crushing CGI I've ever seen in a film and a third act that literally had me tapping out and reaching for the Advil.

Remember when the teaser trailer came out and everyone actually compared it to The Tree of Life, thinking we'd be in for a deeper, more contemplative treatment? With few exceptions, this project is actually more of a disaster than it's been credited for, with the only hope being that this darker, more other worldly incarnation of the character is eventually seen for the embarassing misstep it is. But now that Snyder has temporarily been entrusted with Batman as well, that seems unlikely. If this Superman really is a reflection of our times, that's not a compliment.

This almost two and a half hour movie can essentially be broken down into four sections:

1. Thor Redux
2. "The Deadliest Catch"
3. "Field of Dreams"
4. Avengers Redux

Of these, the first section is by far the weakest and most pointless, not to mention the most troublesome aspect of the mythology to depict on screen. We spend nearly 30 minutes on the depleting Krypton learning how scientist Jor-El (Russell Crowe) and his wife Lara (Ayelet Zurer) come under attack from evil commander General Zod (Michael Shannon) and are forced to launch their newborn son Kal-El to Earth, his cells infused with the genetic code of the Kryptonian race. It's a sequence that could have easily been depicted in two minutes, but Snyder drags it out, calling attention to some spectacularly bad visual effects in the process. The opening resembles Thor's in terms of how much boring mythology is unloaded as a mere excuse to pummel our senses. That said, when Kal and the movie land on Earth, I really appreciated what it was trying to do and for a while it  actually looked like Snyder could pull this off.

Our first glimpses of an adult Superman (Henry Cavill) are interspersed with flashbacks to his childhood in Smallville, Kansas, where he's raised as Clark, the adopted son of Jonathan (Kevin Costner) and Martha (Diane Lane) Kent. These scenes of the young Clark being picked on at school and the advice he receives from his father about the importance of accepting, yet also concealing his identity, comprise the strongest moments in the film. By far. Why everything didn't just begin here is a mystery, but perhaps the filmmakers worried this ground was already covered in the Smallville TV series and fanboys would throw a hissy fit if the god awful Krypton scenes weren't included.

The idea of an adult Clark Kent as a bearded, brooding fisherman is a novel one that earns points for originality. Snyder is nothing if not a visualist and it clearly comes across in these scenes and especially the ones in Smallville, which are beautifully filmed. It's his commitment to actual storytelling that's a weak spot. Hans Zimmer's elegiac score is a plus, making it unlikely anyone will miss John Williams, whose incredible orchestrations just wouldn't fit here.  I refer to the Kansas section as "Field of Dreams" not out of sarcasm, but as a compliment to Costner, who delivers the film's finest performance with limited screen time. It's also perfect casting, not only playing up the actor's famously down home persona, but giving us a fresh but comfortable entry point into what could have been tired territory. Instead, watching this father trying to protect his unusually gifted son provides the only humanity in the story, as it all flies off the rails from there.

As Superman, Cavill is okay. With all the speculation about who would play the "Man of Steel," who would have thought that the choice ultimately wouldn't matter? Most of the time he takes a back seat to the distractingly bad effects and confusing set pieces. The British actor definitely offers a more brooding take on Clark Kent that won't soon be confused with anything done by Christopher Reeve or Brandon Routh. In fact, it's so far removed it won't be confused with anything related to Superman or Clark Kent at all, as even David Goyer's script goes out of its way to avoid mentioning him by name (see title). Some may appreciate these attempts to supposedly go "darker" or more "realistic" with the character but it's hard to even apply those adjectives when so many of the action sequences undermine it. But at least this is the best the costume they've had and if Cavill really was hired because he didn't look ridiculous in it, that's as good a reason as any to pick him for what's always been an impossibly thankless role.

The Lois Lane situation is bizarre in the sense that she's almost TOO involved, as if the filmmakers felt a need to justify the big name (and admittedly lazy) casting of Amy Adams by having the character wear as many hats in the story as possible. She's still the Daily Planet reporter. but there are almost as many points where you'd confuse her for a geologist, a military commander or maybe even a superhero herself in the last act. While Adams going out there and simply delivering lines still surpasses the miscast Kate Bosworth in Returns, it's worth noting that's all she does. Giving Lois a more prominent role and having her played by an older, more experienced actress than the male lead was an excellent idea on paper, but Adams seems completely bored with it, as if she can't get to the bank soon enough to cash her royalty check. And forget about any chemistry between the two. There's none.

Poor Russell Crowe is given what's easily the silliest expository dialogue of the entire cast as Jor-El. That he can deliver it with a straight face even long after his character's initial demise is more deserving of an honorary medal for screen survival than an acting award. He does great under terrible circumstances, working with material that's the polar opposite of Costner's. As Zod, Michael Shannon didn't need to be Terrence Stamp. He just needed to be Michael Shannon. But what's strange is how this movie doesn't even allow him to do that. Ironically, when playing a superhero villain, our creepiest, scariest actor is somehow not very creepy at all. Snyder just has him yell and and yell some more in a terrible CGI suit.

German actress Anteje Traue as his Krytonian sidekick Faora is a different story, as she basically steals every scene she's in, giving a seductively badass performance that recalls the best of Sarah Douglas as Ursa in Superman II. In his few scenes, I liked what Laurence Fishburne did with Daily Planet editor Perry White, but the part is so miniscule it barely warrants a mention. Metropolis itself is similarly shafted as a setting, functioning only as a CGI battleground for the tortuously long final act during which it's often difficult to make out what's happening. Those crying heresy at Superman (SPOILER AHEAD) killing Zod should probably consider the context in which it happened, not to mention the fact that this movie would still be continuing right now if he didn't. So for that, I'm eternally grateful.

Superman just isn't the type of superhero that lends itself to various interpretations or reimaginings. It can't be a campy 60's TV series or an 80's Gothic styled blockbuster or the first part of a dark, reality grounded Christopher Nolan trilogy. The character just doesn't have that flexibility, and despite the marketing trying to convince us we were getting the latter, they were really just trying to deliver a Marvel entry. Nolan may have a producing and story credit, but does anyone believes his involvement extended beyond giving a couple of notes and getting his name on the picture as a show of goodwill to him and a sign of reassurance to audiences? You can tell this was made by a committee looking to cash in on the Marvel craze, while poorly sprinkling traces of Nolan's tone to silence doubters.

That the writer is Batman trilogy scribe David Goyer is a surprise, but most of the problems lay in the execution more than the conception. It's obvious all the big creative decisions resulted from Warner Bros. guiding Snyder to create a DC "universe" or franchise for future tie-in installments. He did exactly as asked, with the irony being that Man of Steel ends at the exact point it really should have started, negating this film, yet putting them in a decent position for the follow-up. Unfortunately, all that was originally special about the Superman character was sacrificed in the process, resurrected in a way we never thought possible: As just another superhero.             
                 

Untraceable

Director: Gregory Hoblit
Starring: Diane Lane, Colin Hanks, Billy Burke, Joseph Cross, Mary Beth Hurt
Running Time: 101 min.
Rating: R

*1/2 (out of ****)

What a terrible film. I mean truly awful. Untraceable is the rare suspense/thriller that gets everything wrong. I should have seen it coming. The red flags were there. The big tip off should was seeing director Gregory Hoblit’s name on the credits. You may have heard of him, or if you’re lucky, you may not have. For years he’s been turning out forgettable, made for TV style thrillers hovering around C+ to B- level quality. His last effort was the hilariously over-the-top Fracture starring Anthony Hopkins and Ryan Gosling. Remember that one? Hopkins doesn’t. In a recent interview he couldn’t even remember the title of the film (and I can’t say I blame him).

Hoblit’s only lasting contribution to cinema was introducing the world to Edward Norton and directing him to an Oscar nomination for 1996’s legal thriller Primal Fear. Looking at the career trajectories of each since then, it’s become painfully obvious who the true architect behind that brilliant performance was. Whenever an actor signs up for a Hoblit picture it’s a foregone conclusion they’re just doing it for a paycheck…and there’s nothing wrong with that. Everyone has to pay the bills… even big movie stars. Even the ultra-talented Diane Lane. With Untraceable, Hoblit has finally made the movie I feared he would his entire career. Not one that toils in mediocrity like all his others, but something that is genuinely bad. I knew he had it in him. I’m just surprised it took this long. It’s The Condemned meets Saw, except it’ll be viewers who will feel as if they’ve been condemned sitting through a mess like this.


FBI agent Jennifer Marsh (Lane) and her partner Griffin Dowd (Colin Hanks) are members of Portland’s cybercrime unit where they investigate a website (appropriately titled “killwithme.com”) with a streaming video featuring the slow starvation of a small kitten. That’s strike one against the film already as few things bother me more than seeing the torture or implied torture of animals on screen (and this is coming from someone who’s never had a pet in his life). The scene isn’t really graphic but what it suggests is disturbing enough.. The webmaster then steps up his game a little and graduates to human subjects, torturing his victims in Saw-like contraptions with the time and speed of their death dependent on how many hits the site gets. And wouldn’t you know, the site is…UNTRACEABLE. This brings in local cop Eric Box (Billy Burke) whose character is even more boring then his name implies. He’s clearly being set up as a potential love interest for Jennifer but thankfully the film doesn’t fully go there. That’s a relief because Burke has as much presence as a dishrag. The corpses left in the perpetrator’s wake giving a more energetic performance than he does. It’s no surprise to anyone that at some point during the film things will start to “get personal” with Jennifer and the killer. It’s nearly a given that her family will be in danger and she’ll have to come to terms with her inner-demons, which include the recent tragic death of her husband. At least she isn’t a recovering alcoholic also.

Any thriller with a premise like this has pretty much surrendered itself to being of lackluster quality before the cameras even start to roll. But there were ways around it. The film could have gone one of two bad ways but unfortunately it went the wrong bad one. It could have been bad in a silly, entertaining way much like Fracture. I didn’t like that, but at least I was never bored and was thoroughly entertained by its awfulness. It knew how to have fun and the actors helped. Here, Hoblit isn’t given as goofy or endearing a script, which ends up being the film’s major undoing. It’s actually being presented as some kind of social commentary. On what? The evilness of the internet or that people like to watch each other get tortured and killed. That’s really deep.

I consider myself a fairly pessimistic person and have never seen a glass that I didn’t think looked half-empty, but even I have a tough time believing if the public found out that their participation caused people’s deaths they’d flood the site with hits. And assuming, out of curiosity, the site did see an increase in traffic (which it likely would) I seriously doubt it would occur to the point where victims would be killed in seconds as the hits just keep on coming. It was only done so Hoblit could film huge, dramatic death scenes. And of course we have to have the incompetent F.B.I. head honcho cluelessly hold a huge media press conference talking about the site so the deaths can speed up. The movie ends up promoting exactly what it’s trying to condemn with its depraved world view. You could actually envision teenagers leaving the film wanting to set up a website like this. That’s how out of their way the screenwriters and Hoblit go in trying to make it look cool.

Making matters worse is nearly every line of dialogue and development in the story you can see coming from miles away. A film like this really needs to be twist-laden to capture the viewer’s interest. Instead, most of the first half of the picture consists of characters typing away at their computers. There isn’t a single surprise to be found and they even give away the killer’s identity early for no apparent reason. It definitely isn’t to explain his motivations because that doesn’t come until way later. They could have actually had fun with the killer’s identity and had us suspecting it could be someone close to the protagonist. Instead, he’s a nameless faceless nobody and we get a somewhat predictable explanation for his motivations at the end. Even last year’s Lindsay Lohan debacle I Know Who Killed Me had enough sense to realize that keeping the murderer’s identity a secret can lead to an entertaining reveal. As for the killer himself, the less said the better. Tobin Bell’s job is safe.

The movie’s one saving grace is Diane Lane. That I’m still giving the film this low a rating despite her effort should give you an idea how bad it actually is. A widely known but little talked about prejudice in Hollywood is that male actors are encouraged take on action roles well into their 50’s and 60’s (i.e. Willis, Stallone and Ford) but the second an actress hits 40 they’re kicked to the curb and forced to play mothers in Disney films. There are very, very few exceptions to this. Lane is one of them. That she’s cast in an action heroine role is cause for celebration because she really deserves it and is believable in the part. Just as believable, if not more so, than any actress half her age.

Unfortunately, where as directors of male action leads go out of their way to protect their star and make them look youthful and energetic, Hoblit attempts to make Lane look old and haggard. He lights her unflatteringly and most of the picture she looks like she hasn’t slept for 5 years. And the funny thing is… he doesn’t really succeed. She still looks pretty good! But don’t think for a second any studio would allow a director to even attempt to pull that on Stallone or Willis. And why do I have the feeling that when this film tanked at the box office all the talk in conference calls the next day was how it’s Lane’s fault and further proof that women (especially over the age of 35) can’t carry suspense thrillers. Jodie Foster had to hear it last year. It’s not as if they need to be given decent material or anything.

I couldn’t help but wonder what Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson were thinking as they viewed this film, co-starring their son Colin, in a darkened theater on premiere night. They couldn’t have liked it. Especially Tom. It probably hit him right then and there why he’s never starred in a Gregory Hoblit film. But they can take solace in the fact that young Hanks does give a lively performance and escapes what could have been a career killer with his acting dignity in tact. He tries but the script doesn’t give him anything to work with outside of the geeky partner role, which he plays as well as possible. Would it have killed the film to tease some sexual tension between him and Lane’s character? I found it hard to believe any straight man working with that woman wouldn’t feel something. I can’t say adding a creepy obsession on his part is great screenwriting but it’s better than anything this movie offered up and would have at least at made the time go faster. You know a movie’s bad when I’m stealing elements from last year’s awful Halle Berry thriller Perfect Stranger… to make it BETTER.

The term “torture porn” gets liberally thrown around a lot by the media these days at films that rarely deserve it. This does. In fact, the entire plot literally revolves around the topic. Say what you want about the Hostels and Saws of the world but they don’t have the ugly view of human nature found here. Even the worst installments of the Saw series (I’m looking at you number 4) contain plot complexities and ideas well out of this film’s reach. Hostel Part 2 tackled a similar violence as entertainment topic with far more intelligence.

A neat twist at the end of this film would have been for the site hits to just stop as the American public realizes they want no part of this. Or better yet, the hits speed up at alarming rates not because viewers want to see the captors die, but because they don’t want a hand in prolonging their suffering and encouraging this psycho. But that makes too much sense. If the filmmakers had done that then maybe Untraceable wouldn’t have been nearly unwatchable

Hollywoodland

Director: Allen Coulter
Starring: Adrien Brody, Diane Lane, Ben Affleck, Bob Hoskins, Lois Smith, Robin Tunney
Running Time: 126 min.
Rating: R

*** (out of ****)

Sometimes a subject is so interesting it can carry an entire film, even if said film doesn't necessarily live up to expectations. George Reeves, star of the 1950's television series, The Adventures of Superman, is such a subject. You get the impression a dozen diferent kind of movies could have been made about him, but what we get here is a murder mystery whodunnit without a resolution. Of course, it can't have a resolution since they never really found out whether Reeves shot himself or was murdered.

Hollywoodland makes a good case for the latter and hopefully puts to bed once and for all that stupid urban legend that Reeves jumped out of his window thinking he could fly like Superman. Ultimately though, his death was ruled a suicide and the case was closed. This material screams for a biopic not a murder mystery, but I'm recommending it anyway and that's in no small part due to the performance of Ben Affleck, who delivers some of the most nuanced work of his career as Reeves. It's easy to argue he was robbed of a best supporting actor Oscar nomination.

When actor George Reeves (Affleck) is found dead from a bullet wound to the head in his Hollywood Hills home, the Los Angeles police department rule it a suicide and close the case. However, his mother (Lois Smith) knows something's very wrong and hires private detective Louis Simo (Oscar winner Adrien Brody) to investigate the mysterious circumstances sorrounding his death and delve into his sordid personal life, which included an affair with Toni Mannix (Oscar nominee Diane Lane)) wife of famed MGM studio boss Eddie Mannix (Bob Hoskins). Through flashbacks we see how that relationship began and eventually crumbled, leaving Toni angry and bitter. What's interesting about his affair with Toni is that her husband knows everything, but has absolutely no problem with it unless he hurts her. Eventually he does. Toni is older and that age difference ultimately causes the relationship's undoing as Reeves begins to tire of her matronly demeanor and crave someone younger and more exciting.

Enter aspiring New York actress Leonore Lemmon (Robin Tunney) who eventually becomes his fiancee and second potential suspect in his death. When Reeves abandons Toni an infuriated Eddie Mannix, who's a big name with big connections, is the third suspect in what could potentially be a homocide. As Louis edges closer to the truth he uncovers more about Reeves, and himself, than he ever thought possible, personally affecting him on levels he didn't expect. The movie tries to relate those personal struggles with his separated wife and son to Reeves' problems, but it comes off forced, not quite connecting like it should. As a murder mystery the film doesn't quite hit the mark either because we can't have any kind of closure on Reeves' death since no one ever found out what happened. Instead the movie is held together by the examination of him as a person and how his own celebrity caused him to self destruct. All of this is brilliantly brought to life by Affleck's surprisingly complex performance.

Reeves is depicted as a really good guy who's only wish was to be taken seriously as an actor. Unfortunately his big break came as Superman, which made him a laughing stock to his peers and prevented him from being hired for anything else, causing his personal and professional life to unravel. There's a wonderful scene in the film at the premiere of From Here To Eternity when Reeves shows up onscreen in a small role opposite Burt Lancaster. The entire theater bursts in laughter and erupts with Superman cat calls. Humiliated, all Reeves can do is cower in his seat. Affleck plays the entire scene just right. He doesn't say anything, but we can tell from the look on his face that Reeves' entire world just came crashing down and he's forever burdened by the role that made him a star.

What's interesting is that when we see scenes of the filming of the show and Affleck in the costume, we can see the humiliation on his face and also understand why he'd be ridiculed. Let's face it: The Superman character is kind of a joke since it's always been exploited by Hollywood just to make a quick buck no matter how talented (Christopher Reeve) or untalented (Brandon Routh) the actor playing him was. It's virtually impossible for any actor to ever be taken seriously again after playing the part. However, as much as this burned Reeves up inside, he took his responsibility as a role model to children seriously. In the movie's best scene, he has to talk down a small boy with a loaded gun pointed right at him. How he does this without hinting in any way to him that he really isn't Superman is amazing. Had the film explored these themes further instead of emulating an E! True Hollywood Story, the film would have been unforgettable.

After years of starring in junk (and just now recently admitting to it), Affleck finally finds in George Reeves the role that brings out his strengths as an actor. There's no doubt he saw similarities between himself and Reeves as both men desperately wanted to overcome their image to be taken seriously as an actor, battling both personal demons and having tabloid romances. But for the first time in years he looks relaxed in a role that he completely owns, which should hopefully lead him to make more interesting choices moving forward.

While the film doesn't completely succeed drawing parallels between the life of Reeves and the man investigating his death, Brody's performance as the embattled Louis isn't to blame. He does good work here, as toward the end it becomes clear he's ironically the only person who actually cares for Reeves as a person, not as a celebrity. Brody will never look like your typical leading man, but every time out he gives it everything he has and often gives great performances in films unworthy of it. Lane, Hopkins and Tunney all give solid supporting turns.

This is the directorial debut of Allen Coulter, who's best known for his work on televison's The Sopranos and Sex and the City and he does an admirable job capturing the look and feel of 1950's Hollywood in all it's glamour. Hollywoodland is a good movie that could have been great if it spent more time examining George Reeves the man rather than trying to pointlessly unravel the mysterious circumstances surrounding his death.