[deleted]
It's a good movie. Fast-paced and interesting. Richard Gere and Alfred Molina both gave excellent performances.
shareIt was great. Gere and Molina were incredible, not to mention the supporting cast.
shareFast paced? I found it one hour too long... Catch me if you can is fast-paced, this one is not. IMHO.
shareDefinitely worth seeing.
http://shareddarkness.com/2007/04/06/hoax.aspx
Just a lot of fun, and Gere's best performance in years.
Take elements of Speilberg's Catch Me If You Can, mix it up with a bit of Scorcese's The Aviator, and fit all into your typical movie-biography framework and you've got Lasse Hallström's latest The Hoax. Now this is a good movie! Finally, I can say this without questioning or wondering if I'm lying to myself. While by no means an utter breakthrough, or a completely original idea for that matter, the film pulls off its initial purpose tremendously well. Hallström fills his film with clear parallels to our world while making them vague enough that the story holds up on its own two feet.
Putting it frankly Clifford Irving, portrayed by Gere in his best ever performance, is our current president who through clever lies and charisma has gained power and money. Irving is irrationably power hungry and will do anything to keep his con afloat. The only problem is that his power is gained through and by using others, an empty form of power that can only be sustained by more and more lies and quickly fizzles away as suddenly as it was bestowed. Hallström and writer William Wheeler have constructed and extremely clever and well-paced script filled with great twists and turns as well as a great amount of scathing social commentary disguised a bit amidst engaging drama not unlike last years Inside Man.
And yet, a carefully crafted script and thought provoking social commentary aren't all you need for a great film. You also need great performances, which this film has; Gere is a bit better than adequate as Irving (the partions when he very nearly goes mad are near brilliance) while Alfred Molina is charming as his bubbling sidekick. But you also need two things The Hoax does not achieve: great cinematography, a certain sixth sense for imaginative and effective camera work, as well as an original plot set up. Instead we are given more of the same: typical "safe" and merely sufficient cinematography and your average movie-biography plot right down to the rediculously overused flash forward opening sequence which we eventually run into later on in the film.
So, while not wholly original, The Hoax is a really good film. One worth watching if not for its fascinating true story then for its thought provoking, almost caustic message.
Oddly enough for such a biting critique of our times, The Hoax ends on a rather positive note. The Stones say it best in their song which closes the film, "You can't always get what you want . . . but if you try some times you just might find you get what you need."
-Open the pod bay doors Hal!
-This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
Yes, it is worth seeing. The trailers for this movie are deceptive...they make it appear more lighthearted than it actually is. I also think it ran a bit too long and yet the ending felt rushed.
Overall I found it interesting and amusing in places. Richard Gere's performance was dazzling. Alfred Molina was the perfect #2 man. The scenes at McGraw-Hill were great too.
I would definitely recommend the movie, but be prepared for a darker piece than that portrayed in commercials.
P.S. As for the dissatisfaction by the subject of the piece, I couldn't care less that the real Clifford Irving thinks the movie takes liberties with the truth about his life. He certainly is in no position to complain about honesty and authenticity. Ironic, isn't it?
I'm 1/2 way through the "Catch Me if You Can" movie.
I'm very intrigued by this story, so hopefully I will luck out and see it when an opportunity arises.
One question: If Clifford Irving is dissatisfied with the final product, then what gives?
[deleted]
Irving lobbied to have his name removed as a technical advisor on the film.
http://shareddarkness.com/2007/04/06/hoax.aspx
Based on what I've heard (and there was a piece in the LA TIMES about this yesterday), he called the movie "a hoax about a hoax," but wasn't knocking its quality, per se. Just the portrayal of him, in that several character liberties were taken (e.g., he's portrayed as a bit of a desperate, down-on-his-luck writer at the time he concocts this scheme, when he says in reality he had a four-book deal). No biggie, probably the sort of reaction anyone would have about a movie that recounts a very controversial and embarassing time in their life.
In my opinion it's definitely worthwhile.
My only objection was the Alfred Molina character, who struck me as unbelievable at times.
But the film was a pleasant surprise - well written with a topnotch cast, that really didn't drag until very late in the film.
Sure wish I could see this movie, no where around where I live is showing the movie. Not last week or this week. And there are over 150 movie theatres I have checked. I've even checked some farther away from where I live, and it isn't playing. Darn!
shareIt should be out in your area on Friday, 4/13. Right now it's in limited release. I saw it recently and it was great!
shareIrving is not portrayed as some sort of "hero" taking down Nixon - which is probably what he wanted. It is there in the film as only one motivation. It paints him more as a talented writer who fell in love with lying so much that he couldn't tell truth from reality - which is a good discription of Irving. And it totally is upfront that the main motivation was to get an assload of money.
So, the film understands him maybe better than he understands himself.
And, COME ON, Irving is complaining about somebody misrepresenting HIS life! That is just way too funny.
Old Cliff had a four book deal, it's true. But no ideas for a new book without which he would not get paid. For the flip side of the story, feel free to read "Hughes: The Private Diaries, Letters and Memos"--my book, on which "The Aviator" was based.
sharehttp://shareddarkness.com/2007/04/06/hoax.aspx
Should definitely be going wide this weekend. It's a lot of fun.
Just saw it, it was really right up there with all the films I've seen in theaters so far this year (Grindhouse included) The movie felt right on par with such "in the spotlight" films as Network, A Dog Day Afternoon, and Forest Gump. It does take a slightly darker turn, midway through the movie but is saved in the grace of the overall tone of the movie, begining and end. The only thing that really strays this film from being solid are a few extraneous scenes dotted about here and there, but thankfully enough they are realized and played with in a sort of flash back technique used later in the film.
Being friendly to most ages it stands as a quarky and ultimately feel good time to spend in the movies, although nothing spectacular or important enough that is necessary to see on the big screen.
7/10
http://shareddarkness.com/2007/04/06/hoax.aspx
Yeah, I think it's Gere's best work in quite some time. He seems unchained, less burdened, free from all the weight of real-life advocacy and seriousness that sometimes seeps into some of his roles.
I enjoyed the movie.
I have digested the purported inaccuracies in the movie, and enjoyed and appreciated the film in spite of them.
I just don't see the comparisons to Catch Me If You Can. While I might have enjoyed Catch (honestly, it left my frontal lobe fairly quickly), I found The Hoax as a much more intelligent film. Catch is anchored in the standard chase scene fare that tends to be boring because it is so rampant in films over the past 30 years.
The Hoax is much more aligned with films like "All the Presidents Men" or "Zodiac". It's not a chase film in any respect. And while I think the film pales in comparison to the two films I have mentioned, this is still where it's intentions lie.
Also, the Howard Hughes aspect of the film adds to the aura.
Where The Aviator attempts to explain Hughes, The Hoax, as well as Melvin and Howard, serve to feed the mystery. It is fascinating, in the same way that the Roswell incident is fascinating. Except with Hughes, we know he existed. We just don't know the details behind his peculiar behavior in hist last 20 years or so.
I'd easily recommend the Hoax. I'd recommend Melvin and Howard more. But I'd suggest both of these films over Catch Me if You Can or The Aviator.
Wow, I can't believe all the people saying this movie was good. Personally, I thought it was one of the worst 10 movies I've ever seen in my life. It was boring and Gere just really doesn't pull it off in this movie. The one point of credit I will give is to Alfred Molina who was quite comical.
Other than that, I wish I could have gotten my money back....would have been better to just throw it out the window than spend it on seeing this movie!!! I would not recommend it.
Really? I can understand maybe being underwhelmed by it.
But, if this is one of the worst 10 movies that you've ever seen in your life, you haven't seen very many movies. I mean, it's not even the worst movie out right now. The number one movie in America is Disturbia, which, I thought was worst than this. I mean, a teenage Rear Window ... please. How boring and predictable.
I don't quite see how this film was bad, but as for not liking it, to each his own.
share[deleted]
[deleted]