Why "The Offer" (About The Godfather) is Better than "Hitchcock"(About Psycho) SPOILERS
(aka ecarle)
I finally got around to watching the "Paramount Plus" streaming series "The Offer," which is about the events leading up to, and away from the making of The Godfather in 1971 and its stunning success upon release in 1972 and its nail-biting Oscar night in 1973.
Watching "The Offer," I almost immediately thought of the 2012 movie about the making of Psycho(from Stephen Rebello's seminal book "Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho") called "Hitchcock."
In many ways, "The Offer" and "Hitchcock" are a matched pair and not in a good way. We feel some falseness as we watch the famous movie people(whether well-known actors or famously written-about moguls) stage rather overly dramatic showdowns .
We are also left to wonder "what really happened?" versus what we see on the screen. For instance, "Hitchcock" suggested that Hitchcock and his wife Alma mortgaged their home and faced financial ruin if Psycho failed -- nah, it wasn't THAT risky. And there's a scene in Hitchocck where Hitchcock shows off photos of Ed Gein's crimes to showbiz reporters. THAT didn't happen, either.
Moreover, "Hitchcock" wastes a lot of time on Alma's near affair with screenwriter Whitfield Cook which -- if it happened, actually happened 10 years earlier during the making of "Stage Fright." That's what McGilligan's Hitchocck bio said..they just moved the affair into the Psycho period.
"The Offer" has similar "made up" scenes and evidently one "near made up character" with Juno Temple(quite pretty and sassy) playing a real Paramount assistant who is here "expanded" into an "important woman" in a story which otherwise has no woman behind the scenes.
"The Offer" also works overtime to play as a " life and death REAL Mafia tale" about how producer Al Ruddy(the lead of the piece) gets too close with one Mafia guy(Giovanni' Ribisi's Joe Columbo) while making enemies of another(Joe Gallo, played by -- I don't know.) Interestingly, the shootings of Columbo and Gallo were also in Scorsese's The Irishman and staged differently here.
Still, once the story gets going, we are given some marvelous characterizations of some real-life "movie men of the 70's" and to see them on screen so nicely acted is a true...yeah, I'll say it...delight.
Especially Robert Evans, the handsome ex-actor and Paramount boss whose manner was somewhere between Hugh Hefner and the Smartest Man in Movies. Matthew Goode has the hair down, the body down, the manner down and the VOICE down(Goode chooses to speak almost all the time as if his nose is stuffed up and its the KEY to the Evans voice.)
But also the scary-faced Burn Gorman as Charles(Charlie) Bluhdorn -- the always-angry, always-firing-people boss of Gulf and Western -- the corporate company who owned Paramount when Evans ran it. Charlie Bluhdorn has been the scary villainous rouge of countless books on the stories of 70's Hollywood(Easy Riders, Raging Bulls; Evans own infamous autobio)...he is here brought to life in all his menacing glory. (As I recall, Bluhdorn's business was not movies at all; but he bought the studio so he could chase women. MeToo without justice -- but not always involuntary on the women's part.)
Bluhdorn and Evans as friends who becomes foes and then back again is the "entertaining meat" of "The Offer," but the chosen lead of the story is Miles Teller as Al Ruddy -- who went from creating Hogan's Heroes to producing The Godfather. This is HIS story. Teller plays him as a macho but kind tough guy troubleshooter, under fire from all sides (Bluhdorn, Evans -- and a smarmy Colin Hanks as the REAL villain of the piece.) , who somehow brings the movie to fruition while backing its overweight Tweedledee and Tweedledum: Writer-director Francis Coppola and The Godfather novelist co-screenwriter Mario Puzo.
The movie focusses on Ruddy, Evans, Bludorn, exec Barry Lapidis, and a rather underused Peter Bart(who was Ruddy's bookish second in command at Paramount) while reducing the actors playing Brando, Pacino, Caan, and Keaton to smallish bits(because its so hard to match a unique star -- the guy doing young Pacino has his voice perfect, but not his look.)
OK: the problem, we all learned later with "Hitchocck" is that it was a Fox indie film that couldn't get any cooperation from the Hitchcock estate or Universal, which owned the rights and the film and the script.
"Hitchcock" famously seemed to scrupulously avoid showing almost ANY of the film's production, we barely got a glimpse of the Psycho house on the backlot, and saw little of the actors acting. It turns out that "Hitchcock" had a lawyer on set who job was to make sure that no scenes SHOWED TOO MUCH of the making of Psycho. So we got a movie about the making of Psycho that hardly showed the making of Psycho.
CONT