Hollywood Story

The Film Noir Odyssey

Writer: Frederick Brady and Frederick Kohner

Director: William Castle

Cast: Richard Conte, Julie Adams, Richard Egan, Henry Hull, Fred Clark, Jim Backus

Cinematography: Carl E. Guthrie

Studio: Universal

Release: June 1, 1951

“Hollywood Story” was released less than nine months after “Sunset Blvd,” a quickie cash-in on that masterpiece’s success in every sense of the word. That said, it’s still pretty fun.

The mystery at the film’s center is based on the true unsolved murder of a popular director named William Desmond Taylor, who worked on movies with silent stars like Mary Pickford. The film takes place in the present (well, 1951 “present”) with a popular producer named Larry (Richard Conte) moving to Los Angeles to found a new studio. When he and his agent Mitch (Jim Backus) get the studio tour (the film was shot on the Charlie Chaplin Studios lot pre-Muppets), the security guard (Houseley Stevenson) relates the story of the murder, and Larry decides that it shall be the storyline of his upcoming film. He hires the slain director’s favorite screenwriter Vincent (Henry Hull) to pen the new screenplay. No one seems to want the movie to be made – not Mitch, not Larry’s producing partner Sam (Fred Clark) and not Sally (Julie Adams), the daughter of one of the original actors… and soon another murder takes place. Who was the killer then? Who is the killer now?

All of this is fun enough and certainly engaging considering the murderer’s row of excellent character actors filling out all the roles, plus delightful cameos from Joel McCrea and a host of silent stars including Betty Blythe, William Farnum and film’s first stunt woman Helen Gibson. But it’s also incredibly… well… disposable. It just a silly murder mystery with no underlying themes or meaning. And there’s no way to solve the mystery – every single “clue” given to the viewer by co-writers Frederick Brady (a bunch of TV) and Frederick Kohner (the “Gidget” franchise) is a red herring. At the end, nothing actually adds up and the murderer himself seems as random as where a child pins the tail on the donkey.

Still, the film is worthwhile viewing for film buffs like myself (and, presumably, you) because of all the cool Old Hollywood stuff. Beyond the cameos, it’s very cool to see Chaplin studios and a myriad of other locations throughout the Los Angeles area, as well as a super cool Christmas parade. Drinking in the locations and history at play is sometimes more fun to pay attention to than the mystery itself. I have fundamental questions about the storyline itself, like why the hell Mitch is narrating the film… or even a character at all since he serves zero purpose. It’s also super annoying that the film is fine with showing a bunch of older men but apparently women over 40 don’t exist outside of a brief cameo – there was no reason to have the Sally character here instead of her mother aside from ageism. Her romance with Larry feels super forced anyway. But then as all this stuff gets frustrating… oooh! It’s the Pantages Theater!

That said, the final chase is kind of amazing, especially the pay-off of having the murderer shot dead in the exact place his victim died decades ago… even with the same gold pendant in his hand. Well, sort of the same place – he dies on a facsimile of the real bungalow built on a film set, which is just about as perfect of a film moment as you could imagine. I just wish what led up to it was better.

Conte’s casting is a masterstroke even though his character has zero depth or motivation beyond the surface mystery/movie scenario. But because Conte is an incredible actor, he makes you feel like you’re actually seeing a character of more depth than he actually has. He’s also, and I know this isn’t a hot take, very easy on the eyes. The rest of the cast is pretty awesome aside from Richard Egan, who plays a suspicious cop circling the case. I’ve seen Egan do good work elsewhere like in “Violent Saturday,” but here he is genuinely a block of wood. Like, would it kill the guy to show any emotion?

The film was directed by William Castle before he became the gimmicky William Castle we all know and love. At this point he was leaping from B-list film to C-list film and back again, including many noir movies. Luckily, he and cinematographer Carl E. Guthrie (“Caged”) excel in making the film memorable visually – both in their location shooting and their set work. Los Angeles looks heavenly, and Chaplin Studios looks like a haunted, forgotten place (in a good way).

Look, most of me knows that “Hollywood Story” is not exactly high quality. It has a great premise, but was obviously written in a hurry and therefore the screenplay is a big ‘ole mess. But Conte is charismatic as hell and seeing Los Angeles as it was is a dream – the geekier you are about silent films and noir, the more joy you’ll get from it. Just don’t expect it to be… you know… “good.”

Score: ***