But "Hollywoodland" is not a cautionary tale, and it certainly isn’t inspirational. At times, it’s a conspiracy film, but even in this, it ultimately robs viewers of any speculative theories about Reeves’ death. We’re left with a sad portrait of personal and professional failure.
The acting, with one crucial exception, is outstanding. The cast full of Oscar nominees includes Brody, who inhabits his role as private investigator, and Lane, who is by turns sexy, vulnerable, scorned and submissive. But Affleck’s performance as Reeves anchors the film, and it’s not the slam-dunk needed to make viewers forget a string of performances that squandered any good will the actor earned with his strong performance in 2002’s "Changing Lanes." This is Affleck’s movie, and it proves to be too much for him to carry. He has baggage of his own to overcome – remember the slings and arrows that greeted the instantly infamous flop, "Gigli"? – but Affleck’s career has been charmed in a way that Reeves’ never was. Indeed, Affleck’s ability to land plum roles is more mysterious than anything in "Hollywoodland."
So, why was this movie made? It turns out that the lives of the rich and famous several decades ago were – just as they are today – filled with moral compromise, and that once you get past the glamorous surface of Hollywood, there’s an ugly underside. If that surprises you, then "Hollywoodland" may be just the ticket. For everyone else, there’s little to take away from this film. Like so much that has emerged from Tinseltown over the years, it’s largely distasteful and quickly forgettable.
AUDIENCE: Adults only.
CAUTIONS: