Ryan Murphy's HOLLYWOOD on Netflix- Page 5

[joevitus]

Posted: 5/5/20 at 8:46pm

Can't stand Murphy's work, but this "don't involve real stars in it!!" angst misses the whole point. If it were just a fantasy, it would be empty. That it crosses over from a fairly realistic depiction of Hollywood at the time--including real people of the era--and through the "magic of Hollywood moviemaking" change of a true Hollywood story sets in motion a magical transformation of first Hollywood and then the country--that's the whole point. The concept could only work, to whatever extent it can, if it starts with real people and real situations then morphs into fantasyland.

[Plannietink08]

Posted: 5/5/20 at 9:00pm

As much I liked it I do agree with the criticism of Parson’s character. The man was a rapist. Dangling his boyfriend’s early death in front of us so we’d feel something for him only to then force Rock into yet another sexual assault was tacky. Fast forward to the last episode where he apologises to Rock and suddenly we’re supposed to feel sorry for him again?
No. That character deserved to be locked in prison or run out of town for his actions throughout the series. He didn’t deserve a happy ending, he didn’t deserve a new career and he didn’t deserve a new partner. Ryan Murphy putting that in and trying to make us sympathise with a Harvey Weinstein-esque character doesn’t sit right with me.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 5/5/20 at 9:35pm

[Sho-Tunes-R-Us]

Posted: 5/6/20 at 3:39am

SmoothLover said: "I did not see Boys In The Band with Parsons on Broadway but the thought crossed my mind that he might have given the same performance. AS I recallhis a Broadway reviews were not very good. I feel like I waswatching an interpretation of Harold from BITB when I watched Parsonsin Hollywood. I think there was a directorial choice in Hollywood that did not help matters and that was to ask the actors to interpret their performances as if they were in an old a Hollywood movie which resulted in 1 dimensional performances. And of course as we have said repeatedly the script was not fully realized.



Not certain if you saw my post about eight posts above yours, but you will be able to compare/contrast Parson's HOLLYWOOD  and Boys In The Band performances/characters soon.



"

 

[binau]

Posted: 5/6/20 at 3:45am

Plannietink08 said: "As much I liked it I do agree with the criticism of Parson’s character. The man was a rapist. Dangling his boyfriend’s early death in front of us so we’d feel something for him only to then force Rock into yet another sexual assault was tacky. Fast forward to the last episode where he apologises to Rock and suddenly we’re supposed to feel sorry for him again?
No. That character deserved to be locked in prison or run out of town for his actions throughout the series. He didn’t deserve a happy ending, he didn’t deserve a new career and he didn’t deserve a new partner. Ryan Murphy putting that in and trying to make us sympathise with a Harvey Weinstein-esque character doesn’t sit right with me. "

Importantly rock didn’t forgive him if I recall so I don’t think we need to either. I think it is meant to show that people can change, which is a positive message - even if he should be in jail. 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 5/6/20 at 3:47pm

This may go down as one of my favorite guilty pleasures ever.  My definition of guilty pleasure: something I know was not good, but I thoroughly enjoyed anyway.  In movies, my all-time guilty pleasure is probably the Melanie Griffith movie, Shining Through.

I mention that because I think period pieces make for the best guilty pleasures.  They provide the opportunity to wallow in great production values, incredible sets and costumes in virtually every shot.  Even the gas station set was perfect.

I thoroughly enjoyed the storyline, even though I knew it was cheesy.  Some of the reviews I read said that it should have played it straight and shown the horror of trying to do what they did, but ending it in disaster, because that was the time.  Some said the preachiness at the end was focused on emphasizing that things have gotten better, but are nowhere near where they need to be, that it was a plea to push for more inclusiveness, more minorities in leading roles, more acceptance of gays as leading men and women in big-budget movies, etc.  I agree with the serious version proposed, but it would have been a different movie entirely.  Maybe, Murphy should next tell the story of trying to film Meg as it would have happened in the late 40s??  Re the second comments, they certainly make sense to me.

I loved the performances across the board, but would single out three as standouts: Joe Mantello, Patti Lupone, and Dylan McDermott.  I have seen Mantello act in only three shows, and I thought he should have won the Tony for The Normal Heart.  His performance in this show blew me away; it was just so lived in and honest.  It made me want him to spend much more time taking classic character actor roles in movies and TV  and theatre, even if the price is directing less. Patti Lupone was also just perfect, and I had the same reaction as with Mantello...why doesn't she act more in film and movies; she is made for great character roles.  I have always considered McDermott handsome, but wooden.  Still handsome for his age, he was anything but wooden...what a hoot.  They should all be serious contenders for Emmy nominations.  I enjoyed most of the younger actors' performances, although I felt that the actor who played Rock Hudson was wooden playing a person, let alone a wooden actor.  Re the younger cast, I would single out the male lead; the woman who played Lupone's daughter;andJeremy Pope, who has as much charisma film as he does in the flesh.

I expect be watching this a second time within weeks.

Updated On: 5/6/20 at 03:47 PM

[Skip23]

Posted: 5/6/20 at 4:14pm

I loved the performances across the board, but would single out three as standouts: Joe Mantello, Patti Lupone, and Dylan McDermott. I have seen Mantello act in only threeshows, and I thought he should have won the Tony for The Normal Heart. Hisperformance in this show blew me away; it was just so lived in and honest. It made me want him to spend much more time taking classic character actor roles in movies and TV and theatre, even if the price is directing less.Patti Lupone was also just perfect, and I had the same reaction as with Mantello...why doesn't she act more in film and movies; she is made for great character roles. I have always considered McDermott handsome, but wooden. Still handsome for his age, he was anything but wooden...what a hoot. They should all be serious contenders forEmmy nominations. I enjoyed most of the younger actors'performances, although I felt that the actor who played Rock Hudson was wooden playing a person, let alone a wooden actor. Re the younger cast, I would single out the male lead;the woman who played Lupone's daughter;andJeremy Pope, who has as much charisma film as he does in the flesh.

I expect be watching this a second time within weeks."

Loved that Murphy and Co gave these actors a chance to shine. Agree about LuPone (such a star!), Mantello (flawless in an interestingly written role) and McDermott (yes - a hoot and sexy as hell). Also about Picking (just SOOO wrong) and Pope (wow). 

 

And also the shining Sorvino (sobbed at her scene in the cafeteria), Taylor (her seduction scene with Mantello was a master class - and so touching), and the magnetic Samara Weaving who spun gold from a role which could have been forgotten (BTW - she SHOULD have won the Meg role!). 

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 5/6/20 at 4:16pm

I'm itching to watch it all the way through again too.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 10:34am

I certainly had no trouble watching this entire series in two days.  It was a beautifully produced, pleasant fantasia - though I have to confess, while it was nice seeing a show where essentially every character's dreams come true,  the piece really lacks tension and true conflict and I found myself wishing that Murphy had instead tackled some of the real scandals of Hollywood history (the Fatty Arbuckle trial, the William Desmond Taylor murder, etc.) that have never been given major dramatization and are true stories of moral debate that deserve to be told.

The best part of HOLLYWOOD (aside from the costumes) were the performances - namely from the members of the cast over fifty.  The sole cast member I thought was a little weak was Laura Harrier - she sort of lacked the kind of fire and intrigue I wish that character had. Samara Weaving's 'screentest' for Meg was better - even with her throwing it at the end!

It will be interesting to see if Ryan Murphy continues the series. I can't imagine, if he does, it will continue with this plotline. It seems pretty resolved

 

 

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 11:26am

It will be interesting to see if Ryan Murphy continues the series. I can't imagine, if he does, it will continue with this plotline. It seems pretty resolved.  

Many speculate that if Netflix gives HOLLYWOOD another season, Ryan Murphy will continue his anthology trend of not following the previous season and keeping each new season its own story.  Keeping with his repertory of actors from the series (same cast playing new roles).  He can tackles Hollywood of the silent era, the 1920s, the 60's, the 70s, etc.  

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 1:29pm

That's what I suspect too, Brody, but I think Murphy should be warry about doing a series based around revisionist 'alternate' universe history of Hollywood. As others have pointed out, others, like Quentin Tarantino have done a better job applying that concept to other periods in Hollywood history.

Truly, I wish he'd just give us history.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 7:15pm

Andrea Peyser reviewed it in today's NY Post and literally gutted it from stem to stern. No one escaped her venom. Its bleeding remains were left there for all to see .

Yikes

[Jarethan]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 8:25pm

Skip23 said: "I loved the performances across the board, but would single out three as standouts: Joe Mantello, Patti Lupone, and Dylan McDermott. I have seen Mantello act in only threeshows, and I thought he should have won the Tony for The Normal Heart. Hisperformance in this show blew me away; it was just so lived in and honest. It made me want him to spend much more time taking classic character actor roles in movies and TV and theatre, even if the price is directing less.Patti Lupone was also just perfect, and I had the same reaction as with Mantello...why doesn't she act more in film and movies; she is made for great character roles. I have always considered McDermott handsome, but wooden. Still handsome for his age, he was anything but wooden...what a hoot. They should all be serious contenders forEmmy nominations. I enjoyed most of the younger actors'performances, although I felt that the actor who played Rock Hudson was wooden playing a person, let alone a wooden actor. Re the younger cast, I would single out the male lead;the woman who played Lupone's daughter;andJeremy Pope, who has as much charisma film as he does in the flesh.

I expect be watching this a second time within weeks."

Loved that Murphy and Co gave these actors a chance to shine. Agree about LuPone (such a star!), Mantello (flawless in an interestingly written role) and McDermott (yes - a hoot and sexy as hell).Also about Picking (just SOOO wrong) and Pope (wow).



And also the shining Sorvino (sobbed at her scene in the cafeteria), Taylor (her seduction scene with Mantello was a master class - and so touching), and the magnetic Samara Weaving who spun gold from a role which could have been forgotten (BTW -she SHOULD have won the Meg role!)."

Funny that you mention Samara Weaving.   I am watching her test thinking, 'boy, she is great'...and then we hear that she wasn't very good.  I think that was either a director faux pas or a writing one.  Either way, I thought she should have gotten the role.  Maybe, it was a subtle reference to the quieter, more naturalistic acting that the Holland Taylor character mentioned at one point.  Either way, she was better.

Updated On: 5/7/20 at 08:25 PM

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 9:34pm

Weaving’s audition was for PEG. When they changed the character’s race and renamed it MEG, her audition was null hence why she was given the friend role.

[CT2NYC]

Posted: 5/7/20 at 9:51pm

BrodyFosse123 said: "Weaving’s audition was for PEG. When they changed the character’s race and renamed it MEG, her audition was null hence why she was given the friend role."

That's not quite accurate. Claire botched the end of her audition purposely, so that Camille would overshadow her, which helped it get changed to MEG.

Updated On: 5/7/20 at 09:51 PM

[goodlead]

Posted: 5/8/20 at 2:05pm

I think a big problem with this series is that the script for "Peg" (or "Meg" is a cliche-ridden bunch of hooey.  If it were a good script, it would ennoble the characters who are trying to get it made.  But as it isn't, it diminishes them and makes it hard to take them seriously.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 5/9/20 at 8:11pm

The Hollywood Reporter asked Ryan Murphy if he would do another season of ''Hollywood,'' and he replied: ''It was created to be a limited series. It was created to be one season; that’s what it was done for. ... I could see at the end of this creating the idea of, "Well, what would the world look like?" I would never follow the characters again. But, 20 years from there? I don’t know. It’s not something I’m thinking about; Netflix and I have not even discussed it and nor would we unless it had some huge success. I’ve done these anthology shows like American Horror Story and American Crime Story, and this was not designed like that. This was designed to be 7 episodes. That’s kind of what it is.''

Updated On: 5/9/20 at 08:11 PM

[phantom39]

Posted: 5/10/20 at 6:38pm

Well, couldn't really get past the second episode. Patti is the only thing that saves this

[WestEndGal]

Posted: 5/11/20 at 10:30pm

I have such mixed feelings about this! On a purely superficial level I enjoyed the show, and binged it in a few days. The production levels are great and it is a gorgeous show to look at, and on the whole the performances are top notch.

But the whole premise of the show I just didn’t really get, and it didn’t work for me. Rewriting Hollywood history to make it seem like all it would have taken to erase centuries of bigotry and racism was a few brave industry folk standing up for what’s right was to me so self indulgent that it was laughable. I kept shouting “oh come on” at the tv screen in frustration, lol! And for all that we’re meant to come away and think that the talent got what it deserved purely for their talents, it felt odd then that the main protagonist, Jack Castillo, really only became the star he was because he was a good looking white boy who casting couched his way to the top!

I will say I liked Patti Lupone in this, which surprised me a little as I’m not usually her biggest fan. Jeremy Pope, Joe Mantello and Samara Weaving were also standouts for me, and I wish we’d gotten more of Kate McGuinness as Vivien Leigh because she was great and a real scene stealer! Also, please no one come for me, but I thought Darren Criss was woefully miscast. It didn’t help that he was saddled with a pretty uninteresting character who didn’t have an awful lot to do.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 5/12/20 at 12:26am

If Darren Criss didn't have one of the flashier parts to play, I'd cite the screenplay, not his role. That said, Criss has happily promoted ''Hollywood'' and, as a biracial actor, says he's proud of what his character and the series stands for, especially since he's one of the show's producers. It's also possible that Criss wanted to play a more low-key role this time around. In his last Ryan Murphy mini-series, ''The Assassination of Gianni Versace,'' he was front and center as Andrew Cunanan, and gave an acclaimed tour de force that earned him an Emmy, a Golden Globe and a SAG Award.

Meantime, here's Criss hosting an Instagram chat with his ''Hollywood'' co-stars, including Patti LuPone, Jeremy Pope, David Corenswet, Holland Taylor, Jake Picking, Dylan McDermott ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcSczeJoGFY

Updated On: 5/12/20 at 12:26 AM

[MCW1227]

Posted: 5/12/20 at 5:53pm

As someone who is older than the average poster, I think knowing a little more of the history of this era made it a bit more difficult to watch at times.  I stopped at the awards episode but will continue to watch.  The mixture of reality and fiction made this harder for me to buy into .  I would have liked reality or fiction instead. And what was up with Rock Hudson’s teeth? I have seen many of Rocks movies and his teeth were not like that.  
 

the performances are great, especially Dylan and a Rob Reiner.  Patti is Patti so no surprise there!  

[silent]

Posted: 5/12/20 at 10:13pm

Laura Harrier was the weakest link. A young Regina Hall (heck, current Regina Hall) would’ve been better as Camille. Harrier just acted with her red lipstick.

Weaving’s role should’ve gone to Elizabeth Gillies or Emma Roberts.

Was it intentional for Jack not to service men? I think the actor was one of the producers too.

They definitely should’ve had a disclaimer for the series. Most of today’s audience believes everything.

And Jim Parsons seemed like he was in an episode of In Living Color rather than a Netflix show. They should’ve just cast Jim Carrey.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/13/20 at 1:50am

After watching the first episode of PBS’s new Asian Americans documentary series, the actual story of Anna May Wong was more compelling and affecting than whatever they came up with in Hollywood, where she was relegated to the background and not given a chance to shine (despite preposterously winning the Oscar for some prominent character we never really see). By the way, to this day, an Asian actress still hasn’t won Best Actress (or even nominated since 1936), and the only Asian actress to win Supporting Actress was in 1958 for playing a “lotus blossom” role Anna May Wong mentioned in her acceptance speech. Somehow, even this fantasy take wasn’t a satisfying ending.

[bear88]

Posted: 5/16/20 at 4:02am

I almost always finish shows I start. Three episodes in, this one is testing me. There are some good performances and decent scenes, but it mostly seems like a waste of a good cast. It’s surprisingly dull, which I wasn’t expecting.

[willep]

Posted: 5/16/20 at 7:09pm

There is literally no conflict in the entire show. No stakes, no drama, nothing. Its kind of amazing.