Watch it at Amazon
60 out of 82 people found the following review useful: Tired Tale In First Person Singular, 18 October 2008 Author: watbarr from United States
Art Linson's memoirs are a reminder of what a sad place Hollywood really is. We got closer and more original glimpses in films that go from Wilder's "Sunset Boulevard" to Altman's "The Player". Bernard Rose's "Ivansextc" also comes to mind not to mention Blake Edwards's SOB. Here the prototypes are well known even by people who have nothing to do with the film industry so one gets a bit impatient waiting for this fresh look from a prominent, still active, Hollywood producer. No such luck but there are other elements that make the film fun to watch if nothing else. To see Robert De Niro play "a character" that it's not in any way a semi parody of the films that made him famous is a welcome surprise in itself. Barry Levinson shows that he's as sharp as ever and the rhythms that he finds to tell the story keeps the tired tale not only alive but almost gripping.
59 out of 93 people found the following review useful: entertaining but missed the mark, 4 April 2008 Author: moviefan8169 from United States
I just got back from an AFI screening of Barry Levinson's satirical comedy, "What Just Happened?", an inside look into the movie business and big studio politics. Robert De Niro was in attendance along with director Barry Levinson and screenwriter Art Linson. Although I tried to get a photo of De Niro, sadly, I was never close enough to get a good shot.Based on producer Art Linson's book, "What Just Happened? Bitter Hollywood Tales from the Front Line", the film version tells the story of a successful Hollywood producer, Ben, played by Robert Deniro, as he juggles his personal and professional crises. This film has an impressive cast including Robin Wright Penn as Ben's second wife, Kelly; John Turturro as Dick, the stereotypical shifty agent; Stanley Tucci as Scott, the blocked screenplay writer; Michael Wincott as Jeremy, the temperamental director; Catherine Keener, as Lou, the hardcore studio exec; Bruce Willis as the demanding movie star; and Sean Penn as himself.This mildly funny expose of modern-day Hollywood, was entertaining, but a little disappointing. The message is supposed to shock and outrage the viewer about how the film industry ruins art by turning it into pure commerce. But there have been plenty of Hollywood satires like "The Player" that have done this genre better. Although the source of the material is authentic and despite an outstanding cast (who all give great performances), "What Just Happened?" ultimately has nothing new to say besides the fact that Hollywood is a devious place to work. As a gimmicky farce, it works, but as a satire it was a limp and familiar insider's movie that lacked sharp irony, humor and novel characters.This film won't appeal to everyone, but it does have some good one liners and funny moments. However, the combination of these actors working together in a comedy may be worth the cost of admission alone.
73 out of 122 people found the following review useful: on the contrary to the other commenter, this is very funny, and a slight comeback for Levinson, 14 March 2008 Author: MisterWhiplash from United States
Director Barry Levinson hasn't had much luck lately- after Bandits, which was a good though not anything very noteworthy comedy caper, he had two colossal duds in a row- Envy and Man of the Year- which, despite an otherwise impressive host of films (i.e. Diner, Rainman, Sleepers, even Toys) could have threatened to throw him off track ala Rob Reiner. But in a way What Just Happened was relatable for Levinson, despite it being the stories of Art Linson, semi-famous producer who's had hits and misses throughout his career, and at the same time gave him some ample material for some sardonic, spot-on satire of the industry. It's not the Player, don't get me wrong, but it gives its winks and nods to the egomania, the preciousness of directors and stars, and how personal lives get caught up in the mix without getting too smug with us common moviegoers.Probably the funniest, as sort of a near running gag, is the latest film that producer Ben (De Niro) is being test-screened for audiences; a rough cut of "Fiercly" starring Sean Penn (who, as with Bruce Willis, plays "Himself" in the film) disturbs the audience because, on top of a bleak end for its hero, a dog is killed on screen (this, for all the wrong reasons, is hysterical funny, if only for the deadpan reaction from DeNiro to the insanely negative response cards). The director, however, a British hipster (brilliantly played by Michael Wincott), doesn't take it lightly that he doesn't have final cut. This brings around what seems like a moment of levity midway... and then back to the start when it comes time for Cannes. On top of this is Willis's 'plot-line' involving a beard he won't shave off. It's almost like a slight reprisal of his part in Four Rooms, only put to a much bigger, aggrandizing maximum. Both of these, much like seeing certain characters in a Christopher Guest movie, elicit laughs anytime they're on screen.And the rest of the movie is... still very good. Aside from some scenes where Levinson decides to rush things along via the speedy transitions, he provides a style that suits the feel of the material, of Ben trying to balance his personal struggles (an ex-wife he can't totally let go of, and his rebellious teen daughter with a secret) with the eternal BS of getting work done in an industry concerned, a lot more often than not, with the final dollar over artistic integrity. It's not quite reality TV, but it has that unpredictable, on-the-fly hand-held feeling all the same, which is a method much more effective used here than in Man of the Year. And De Niro is also surprisingly good (maybe not a surprise to some, but considering some of his hit-or-miss turns in recent fare), as he doesn't lay too low-key in the part. One can probably see De Niro having studied producers- not just Linson himself but others- for long stretches to get the right steps for each deliberate step in ego-maniacal Hollywood.So sit back, relax, and enjoy some near classic self-conscious satire on an industry that deserves anything those in it can dish back out (if that makes sense).
34 out of 50 people found the following review useful: I saw what just happened there., 30 October 2008 Author: shnizzedy from United States
The film is certainly enjoyable, and has several laugh-out-loud moments. However, like the film within the film, What Just Happened? feels too long. As a filmmaker myself, I really enjoyed this film, but I am afraid that much of the appeal will be missing in a general audience. A producer trying to change Bruce Willis' mind is pretty funny, but how funny is it to a non-producer or a non-Bruce-Willis? The performances, are, of course, outstanding. The entire cast is composed of nearly uncriticizable actors who are superb in any role they attempt. If you have an interest in how films come to be, this is a fun little flick. If you don't care about the behind-the-scenes, you may want to sit this one out.
55 out of 92 people found the following review useful: Boring, 1 February 2009 Author: vampirbg from Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro
This film was very boring and a perfect example of the current state of things in Hollywood. They think that just by bringing big stars in the movie will have to be a hit. The actors are not the problem. They did their part. The problem is in the script or rather lack of it. The script is better suited for a 45 minute episode than for a whole movie. That's probably why the movie needed to be padded with long scenes of traveling. Also, the pace is too slow.My advice to everyone is to avoid this movie. Watching paint dry is equally amusing and you might even get it for free.
78 out of 140 people found the following review useful: Hollywood in Hollywood about Hollywood, 19 October 2008 Author: Danielle De Colombie from Paris, France
Strange feeling for a French person to sit at a Hollywood movie theater to watch a movie about Hollywood. People around me laughed more than me because, presumably, the joke touches a lot of local nerves. The story is introduced by a score resembling the Nino Rota of "La Dolce Vita" but the similarities with "La Dolce Vita" end there. There is nothing new here other than Robert De Niro's performance, the first in a long time in which there is a notable commitment. I found the characters tiresome and far too familiar. I couldn't care less about any of them. The predicament of De Niro's Ben (a thinly veiled producer, writer Art Linson) left me cold. Living the times we're living, to concern myself with this was too much to ask.
23 out of 32 people found the following review useful: what just happened? seriously., 10 December 2008 Author: alexdrew0 from United Kingdom
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
after just spending nearly 2 hours of my time in the cinema seeing this lousy excuse for a film, I could have made the decision to end my otherwise fun life right then and there. I had high expectations for the film due to the great cast and good reviews. As an avid fan of De Niro, Willis and Turturro, as well as Barry Levinson in the directors seat, it was like a movie made to be great. However, this dreary, badly scripted, badly filmed and even (suprisingly) badly acted film was possibly the most boring time at the cinema i've ever experienced. Any film where the climax is whether or not an overly-acted Bruce Willis (think funeral scene)will shave his beard off was going to be bad anyway, but this somewhat took the biscuit. In summation, The otherwise aptly named "what just happened?" should be extended to "what just happened to my afternoon?". DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE!!!
36 out of 60 people found the following review useful: I'll tell you what happened!, 28 November 2008 Author: stuart_a_mack from United Kingdom
I can applaud the effort here, it really wants to say something, I'm just not certain that the director had the balls or the producer the guts to give it both barrels! Which I suppose is ironic given the subject matter! (Though I don't think intentional) Robert De Nero plays an ailing producer on the decline in the business, he has two ex wives and stress from egotistical stars and their demands, whether it be high maintenance directors or attention seeking actors.The core of the problem I have with the film is that the main character is completely unsympathetic.You'll hate him, he's shallow, selfish, egotistical and devoid of any passion. Whilst this may be the point of the character, and I think it is, it doesn't make for a good film! I went away from the film thinking that they were trying to tell me that Hollywood is full of artists, but that the system breaks them down into nothing more that monkeys who turn out dross films that appeal to the mass market because focus groups tell them too.Well if the artists are going to produce films like this then maybe there should be some editorial control, away from the hands of the artists because this missed, in my opinion, on just about every level.The film that this will be compared to most is The Player by Robert Altman, a much better film and I highly recommend, the main difference between these two films however is in The Player everyone is in on the joke, Altman never speaks down to the audience and has fun with the story.Tim Robbins (in The Player) is just as much of a shallow and hollow character and you'll dislike him as much as De Nero in this but because you are included in the joke, because you can see how distanced from reality he has become, by being a part of the Hollywood system, you can feel sorry for him.Sadly for De Nero in this I couldn't.I can't recommend this title to anyone but the dedicated film fan who will see a lot of the in jokes about Hollywood, everyone else should give it a miss.
48 out of 86 people found the following review useful: Completely Predictable and Incomplete, 20 January 2009 Author: dpexecute from United States
I love DeNiro, and expect a lot from this film. The movie started out nicely, with great acting, but became incredibly predictable. I just flat out predicted the ending. The movie ended without any conclusion, to any of the plots. And each subplot was more incomplete than the other.Bruce Willis subplot was absurd, just a bunch of commotion about his beard and then the result and then what? Nothing. It was all about the beard.The wife and the main character are apparently divorced; we don't see any real chemistry between them. We don't get anywhere with that either except that the two are less intimate in the end. Wow, that was so important to know.The movie has no moral, no big surprise, no story. It's almost like a fragment of an episode of Entourage, without actually getting to know any of the characters.What was the point of this movie? Don't trust some Hollywood people? Or that Hollywood is tough? Or that people that get divorced don't get back together?
29 out of 49 people found the following review useful: Oh dear, 1 December 2008 Author: losriley-1 from United Kingdom
This film was really poor. I went with two friends and they both really hated the film. People started walking out of the cinema halfway through. Essentially the film is so condescending and self indulgent. I have no doubt that the movie luvvies who are parodied in the film love it. However for the general public it is a real bore. The over loud gun reports. Bruce Willis wants to keep his beard, big deal.Robert De Niro is late for meetings, that's drama.The moments in the film that appear that are meant to be subtle are laided on with a trowel. Big cast real letdown. Still I am sure everyone involved was well paid. And movie critics will over praise the film to feel like they are part of this oh so wacky world.
Add another review
