The Cat's Meow (2001) User Reviews

A version of a famous Hollywood scandal

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 9 July 2008]

No one will ever know what really happened aboard William Randolph Hearst's yacht on that fateful weekend in 1924. Director Peter Bogdanovich recreates it based on rumors in "The Cat's Meow," a 2001 film starring Kirsten Dunst, Edward Herrmann, Cary Elwes, Eddie Izzard, Joanna Lumley and Jennifer Tilly. The weekend in question is a celebration of producer Thomas Ince's birthday aboard Hearst's yacht with a guest roster that included Hearst, Marion Davies, Ince, his mistress, Margaret Livingston, Louella Parsons, writer Elinor Glyn, Charlie Chaplin and others. Thomas Ince was removed from the yacht, supposedly ill, and died in his home several days later, supposedly of heart failure. Rumor has it that Hearst, suspecting an affair between Davies and Charlie Chaplin, shot Ince by accident, either mistaking him for Chaplin or because Ince happened to be on the dock at the same time and got in the line of fire. Morning newspapers (not Hearst papers) claimed that Ince had been shot; the evening papers did not carry that story, nor did the Hearst papers. No one who was on board the yacht ever spoke of the incident except in the most ambiguous of ways. Louella Parsons' column became syndicated in over 600 papers, and she worked for Hearst until she retired; Ince's mistress Livingston received a whopping increase in salary. She finally retired to manage her husband Paul Whiteman's band.

That's the story Bogdanovich goes with, and it makes for a meandering but intriguing story. The "meandering" part is not so much a fault of the film but done on purpose - it's a weekend yacht party, after all, and Bogdanovich shows us the parties, the conversations and the intrigues of various guests. He captures the atmosphere of the '20s and the splendor of Hearst's yacht very well.

It's hard to say how accurate the actors were with their characterizations; for my part, I don't know what Charlie Chaplin, Hearst, Glyn or Parsons were really like. From seeing Marion Davies in films and in photographs, Dunst seems too young, though her acting is good. Herrmann I suspect captures Hearst beautifully - powerful, a good host, a sometimes brutal man and very much in love with Marion. (When he saw Citizen Kane, believing that Susan Alexander was based on Marion, he was most upset at the portrayal of Susan as a drunk.) Tilly plays Parsons as if she was an airhead - I believe externally in real life, Parsons did come off as a silly, ineffectual woman, all the better to gain your confidence; in fact, she was an ambitious person who wielded a lot of power. Tilly captures this; in her last scene, Parsons gets down to business and drops a lot of her act. Lumley's Elinor Glyn is elegant, intelligent and more of an observer (she narrates the film) - I suspect that is true as well. Cary Elwes doesn't register much as Ince, who is portrayed as a desperate man trying to get his career back on track with Hearst's help.

Eddie Izzard's Chaplin is problematic. Physically he seems all wrong - Chaplin was quite good-looking and much slighter than Izzard; Izzard hints at a British accent but doesn't really come off as very British or very graceful, which Chaplin definitely was. The writing of this character may be incorrect as well, as it's doubtful that Chaplin would have actually wanted Marion to leave Hearst.

All in all, though it's not an edge of your seat kind of film, "The Cat's Meow" is a good film about a fascinating piece of Hollwyood lore. It seems likely that Ince did not die of indigestion, heart failure, or suicide, but that something did happen and the guests were sworn to silence; it's also more than likely that the police and DA cooperated in covering it up. There is an interesting sidebar to this story - Davies' secretary Abigail Kinsolving, was considered a suspect in Ince's death (strange, since he supposedly died of heart failure). She claimed to have been raped by Ince, and it was noted by guests on the yacht that she had bruises on her body. She had a baby some months later and died in a car accident near San Simeon. Two suspicious things there: she was found by Hearst bodyguards, and there was a suicide note that wasn't in her handwriting. Her orphaned daughter was supported by Marion Davies. Did Kinsolving know too much? Whether she did or not, the rest of us know too little.

An interesting semi-fictional tale of Hollywood folklore

[FilmOtaku · 7/10 · 5 June 2003]

The Cat's Meow is a semi-true story of a murder that occurred on William Randolph Hearst's yacht one evening in 1924. While much of the screenplay is presumably speculation, it is interesting to see the effects the murder on some of his other guests, like Marion Davies, Hearst's mistress, Charlie Chaplin and Luella Parsons, among others.

This film couldn't fail for me – its subject matter involves William Randolph Hearst, a foe of my main obsession Orson Welles, and it contained one of my favorite entertainers in the cast, Eddie Izzard as Charlie Chaplin. However, while watching the film I had to consider whether the movie was a well-written drama or simply too slow in its development, making the climax more of a let-down than anything. If the film wasn't book-ended by compelling writing that made you both look deeply into the subject matter from the beginning, then reflect on the past events at the conclusion, I would have said the latter was true. And while Eddie Izzard was fantastic as Chaplin, and Kirsten Dunst wasn't her usual irritating self as Davies, it was Joanna Lumley who I thought was the breakout star of the film. Her role was small, but integral to the progression of the film – acting as narrator, analyst and the film's conscience.

While not a fast paced, action filled film, The Cat's Meow is pleasant to experience based on its dramatic merits. Bogdanovich is more of an actor as of late than a director, but this film's character-driven dramatic elements harkens back to his best known classic, The Last Picture Show. If you are a fan of film history as I am, you will find this film interesting and thought-provoking.

--Shelly

A little from column A, a little from column B

[Decko_koji_obecava · 5/10 · 21 June 2003]

First of all, this film is based on a fascinating real-life tale that's been a part of Hollywood folklore for decades and one that I, amazingly, am hearing of now for the first time.

In November of 1924. media tycoon, movie producer and one of the richest and most powerful men in America at the time William Randolph Hearst organized a lavish private cruise on his yacht with many important Hollywood players invited on board. Among them: movie producer Thomas Ince with his mistress actress Margaret Livingston in tow, Hearst's own mistress - actress Marion Davies, Charlie Chaplin, writer Elinor Glyn, gossip columnist Louella Parsons, etc..

Unfortunately, not all guests made it back on terra firma in the same condition they left it as Thomas Ince died two days later from the effects of whatever it is that happened to him on that boat. Because of wealth and social status of the people on board at the time of Ince's end, his death was hushed up without proper investigation leading in the years since to many wild rumours as to what exactly occurred. Fuelling these further was the fact that possible foul play witness Louella Parsons, up to that point a mere Hearst columnist in New York, soon after the events got a lucrative lifetime contract with his corporation.

In "The Cat's Meow" Peter Bogdanovich, himself not a stranger to Hollywood entanglements involving good looking young fame-seeking starlets, jealousy, murder, and desperation induced by lack of money, takes one version of the events ('whispers heard most often' as the movie tagline puts it) and runs with it. His movie will inevitably draw comparisons to Bob Altman's "Gosford Park" - a vastly superior experience, but "The Cat's Meow" is still worth seeing, though largely on the basis of what it covers rather than how it covers it. If these were completely fictitious events I don't think I'd recommend it. Altman's film is much more enthralling, its script is better and as a result actors end up looking more convincing. Joanne Lumley, whose portrayal of Elinor Glyn seems to be an impression of Jackie Collins, was particularly annoying here. Though it has its good moments, "The Cat's Meow" with its overall hokiness too many times feels like watching dramatization sequences on 'E! True Hollywood Story'.

It was Mr Hearst, in the yacht, with the gun!

[SilentType · 9 November 2002]

`The Cat's Meow' is a mildly enjoyable telling of a notorious tall story that has been told in Hollywood for nearly eighty years.

Super-magnate William Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) invites a diverse mix of Hollywood biggest names and its oddest fringe dwellers to celebrate the birthday of famed director Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes) aboard his luxury yacht. Things begin to fall apart when Hearst suspects a guest - none other than Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), the most famous man in the world - of having an affair with his actress girlfriend, Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst).

Although the film is entertaining, there is something underwhelming about it. Its stage origins are obvious - characters perambulate from plot point to plot point, spouting exposition, never appearing much more than caricatures, and thus failing to evoke much sympathy.

The casting of Eddie Izzard in the pivotal role of Charles Chaplin is a grave mistake, though the script saddles him with a most unsatisfactory characterisation of Chaplin to work with. Chaplin was not a serial romancer, as is implied in the film, but a serial seducer. He would have been the last person to urge a woman to run away with him on the basis of undying love. He spent his most famous years running from women who suggested exactly that, freely admitting to them that while sex was a pleasant diversion, his work came before any woman. It's a casting decision that is an obvious attempt to distance us from the Little Tramp as opposed to Chaplin the real man, but we never get a true sense of either. Ironically, Izzard actually resembles the real Thomas Ince far more than does Cary Elwes, and as a real-life cabaret performer could conceivably have brought the flamboyance and eccentricity of the real-life director to life better than Elwes does.

The film also takes an annoyingly facile view of women, perpetuating the dull cliche that all women spent the 1920s with a bad case of St Vitus' dance and addicted to laughing gas. The grating performances of Claudie Blakley and Chiara Schoras in particular throw the beautifully understated efforts of Kirsten Dunst into high relief. Dunst feels like the only real person in this cast of cartoon characters - beautiful, funny, and vital, she is the best thing in the film. Yet there is never any moment in the movie to suggest the true depth of her dedication and passion for Hearst (portrayed as a roly-poly father figure rather than the hard nosed businessman he was), nor any justification for leaving him for the roguish but uncharismatic Chaplin. Unfortunately, the more interesting conflicts in Marion's life, such as her growing alcoholism and her dissatisfaction with Hearst's insistence on casting her in leaden romances rather than the comedy to which she was so obviously suited, are only touched on lightly.

Though it could have been a thought-provoking and complex experience, as Joanna Lumley's poignant final statements imply (and like `Gosford Park' to which it has been compared), in the end `The Cat's Meow' doesn't feel much more substantial than your average game of Cluedo.

Star rating: 3 out of 5

[jennifer_litchfield · 6/10 · 13 January 2005]

The Cat's Meow offers an insight into what may (or may not) have occurred during a fateful pleasure cruise aboard media mogul William Randolph Hearst's yacht in 1924. One guest didn't survive the trip, and afterwards the other passengers only ever talked about what happened during those few days in riddles. The film is at pains to point out that it only depicts one possible version of events, which unfortunately does rather undermine the convincing storyline.

The story begins in Hollywood, "a land just off the coast of the planet earth", in that decadent decade dominated by the Charleston, flappers, and bootleg moonshine. The women's costumes are thus visually spectacular – all satin and feathers – but some of the actors seem to be overwhelmed by the splendour, and appear somewhat wooden as a result. The notable exception to this is Kirsten Dunst, who plays the effervescent Marion Davies, Hearst's mistress. However, the best lines in the film surely belong to the wonderfully cynical and sarcastic Joanna Lumley.

The thing the movie does capture to perfection is the double standards extant in Hollywood. One of the characters disdainfully dismisses the Prohibition, claiming that alcohol isn't illegal "for us". And that seems to pretty much sum up the attitude of the film fraternity at the time – that they are above rules and regulations. Even murder, it would seem, can be hushed up.

This isn't a murder mystery as such; anyone with a thorough knowledge of Hollywood history will know who died, and the whispers surrounding the event. But the average viewer may question if, after all this time, they really care what the truth is. Better instead to enjoy this film as a fiction.

Ship of fools

[jotix100 · 7/10 · 31 May 2005]

Peter Bogdanovich returns to some of his old ways with his direction of this movie. "The Cat's Meow" presents us with a group of personalities on a weekend voyage that gathers some of the most glamorous stars of the era. The yacht belongs to William Randolph Hearst who has invited some of the biggest movers and shakers for some fun as they cruise the Southern California waters. The screen play is by Steven Peros, who also has a small role in the movie.

The story is loosely based on an incident that happened in Mr. Hearst's yacht in which a famous producer, Thomas Ince is murdered. This was the object of gossip at the time. In the film, we are taken along for a view of the possible cause of the shooting and how it involved the lives and careers of some of the people aboard that fateful cruise.

Edward Hermann is an underestimated actor. Mr. Hermann transform himself into the magnate and gives the performance of his career. We get to see William Hearst as an insecure and jealous millionaire who is madly in love with Marion Davies, who he treats as a little girl. In turn Ms. Davies seems to have loved this man for himself, and not for the fame and fortune that accompanied their relationship. Kirsten Dunst makes a perfect Marion Davies.

The supporting members of the cast are perfectly cast, the most fun being Jennifer Tilly, as Louella Parsons, the famous gossip diva of the Hollywood of those years. She is totally loyal to Mr. Hearst and she proves to be a tough negotiator at the end, getting a plum deal for herself within Mr. Hearst's empire.

Eddie Izzard is appealing as Charley Chaplin, a man who wanted Ms. Davies for himself. Cary Elwes plays the doomed producer Thomas Ince. Joanne Lumley is seen as the mysterious writer Elinor Glyn.

The film is lovingly photographed with a detailed account to the art deco of the yacht by Bruno Delbonnel and a magnificent background hit parade of the songs of that epoch. Under the direction of Mr. Bogdanovich, everything comes together for a fun time at the movies.

More than a purr, not quite a meow

[tomsview · 7/10 · 24 June 2013]

"The Cat's Meow" is based on an incident that took place on William Randolph Hearst's luxury yacht one night in 1924. The story often crops up in books on Hollywood deaths and mysteries. I remember reading about it in Paul Donnelley's "Fade to Black", but I've read it in other places as well.

The film has a lot going for it, an interesting subject, good performances, and witty dialogue. I have only seen the Director's Cut, and whatever longueurs the film has are probably due to director Bogdanovich putting back in what was originally taken out. Some scenes seem a bit stretched, and there is possibly one Charleston too many, but with that said, it's a cruise worth taking.

Newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, played by Edward Herrmann, and Kirsten Dunst as his mistress Marion Davies, invite a number friends and associates for a cruise on his luxury yacht.

Included are Charlie Chaplin, played by Eddie Izzard, and movie director, Thomas Ince, played by Cary Elwes. Also on board is columnist Louella Parsons and novelist Elinor Glyn, played by Jennifer Tilly and Joanna Lumley. Hearst is jealous of the attention Chaplin is paying to Marion Davies, while fading film director, Thomas Ince, fuels the tycoon's suspicions to further his own ends. The result is unexpected and leads to the cover up of a crime that only Hearst's power, wealth and influence could accomplish.

There is an impressive performance by Edward Herrmann as Hearst and an engaging one from Kirsten Dunst. Herrmann captures Hearst pretty well if old newsreels are to be believed, he exudes bonhomie, cunning and ruthlessness in about equal measure. However Joanna Lumley steals the show. Her character, Elinor Glyn, is a female version of George Sander's Addison DeWitt from "All About Eve". Her dry, cynical observations bookend the film, She also has some of the best lines – when approached by the annoying Luella Parsons, gushing about how much she loves her books, Glyn escapes by saying, "Do forgive me dear, but I just have to go and write another one".

Although the 1920's jazz-age soundtrack featuring restored versions of popular songs and music is tinny, nasally and relentless, "The Cat's Meow" successfully captures the look and feel of the period.

An interesting movie, but I suspect the original theatrical release may actually be a sharper version than the Director's Cut.

Good for what it is

[oswaldspengler · 6/10 · 2 October 2002]

This movie is good, it's entertaining, but beyond that, this is not the movie that will reestablish Peter Bogdanovich (the man who gave us Saint Jack, Paper Moon, and the Last Picture Show) to his former position of greatness. I'd even watch Daisy Miller over this. But it's good if you have no idea how much better it could have been. I'm not even sure why it's only good. Eddie Izzard made a great Charlie Chaplin, and Kirsten Dunst was able to give this film a good amount of steam to the picture. Edward Herrmann was pitch perfect, and Joanna Lumley would have been worth the price of admission alone. But why was Jennifer Tilly in it? Meg Tilly, yes, but Jennifer? Her standout performance was as Savannah, the hooker with the heart of gold, co-starring with fisher stevens on West Palm Beach.

Peter Bogdanovich is a god among filmmakers, but Alan Rudolph has already demonstrated how you can make movies like these that actually resonate. Using actors like Linda Fiorentino and Jennifer Jason Lee as opposed to J.Tilly would be a good start.

A Triumph for Bogdanovich

[jhclues · 9/10 · 28 April 2002]

Obsession, combined with jealousy, was the impetus for an incident that occurred in November of 1924, aboard the yacht of media mogul William Randolph Hearst, and which in the years since has become the stuff of Hollywood legend and lore. The story has many versions, but the `whisper told most often,' is the one recounted in `The Cat's Meow,' directed by Peter Bogdanovich, a dramatization of what may or may not have happened during that extended weekend birthday-party cruise in honor of pioneer film director, Thomas Ince, which included an eclectic guest list of the rich, famous and powerful. What is known, is that the party ended with the death of one of the guests, and that foul play and an ensuing cover-up have long been suspected, but never proved. And one thing is certain: Not a single person aboard the yacht at the time has ever spoken of what happened, at least not publicly; but there are those who believe to this day, that someone just may have gotten away with murder.

Once a powerful force in a young Hollywood, Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes)-- who had formed Triangle Films with D.W. Griffith and Mack Sennett, and later founded Paramount Studios with Adolph Zukor-- has fallen on hard times. Once responsible for forty pictures a year, he now struggles to get a single film made. And, his birthday aside, he has decided to mix business with pleasure during this cruise, pitching an idea to Hearst (Edward Herrmann), to combine their resources and make movies together. Hearst, however, has other things on his mind; rumor has it that his mistress, Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst), is being courted by Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), and he has brought them together, here, to observe and decide for himself if anything untoward is going on between them. Hearst is not only in love with Davies, but is obsessed with her, as well as the course of her career, and he's not about to let this baggy-pants comic actor interfere. And Hearst, a powerful and controlling man, always gets what he wants-- and what he wants right now is for this business with Chaplin to disappear. So it is, that in the midst of celebration, paranoia overtakes the host of the party, and it's about to cast a pall over the proceedings and ultimately involve everyone aboard in one of the greatest unsolved mysteries ever to come out of Tinsel Town. It's a story that Hearst keeps out of the papers, making sure in his own way that dead men, indeed, tell no tales.

Bogdanovich successfully captures the era, as well as the mendacity of this rich assortment of characters, who are all the more intriguing for the fact that they are real people rather than the product of imagination; and it proves that fact is often more bizarre than fiction. The excesses and overindulgences of many within the Hollywood community during this period rivals anything happening today, and one of the most telling scenes in the film is when novelist Elinor Glyn (Joanna Lumley) offers her take on what Hollywood really is and what it does to those who dwell within. Glyn is also the narrator of the film; a wise choice, as it adds a balanced perspective to the events as they unfold, and are summarily grounded by her often wry and incisive observations. The final words of the film are hers, in fact; a final observation that encompasses so much in so few words, that it provides an impact that makes it the perfect ending. And it makes you realize what a terrific job Bogdanovich did with this film, and how well he brought this material (screenplay by Steven Paros, which he adapted from his own play) to life.

The film is highlighted by a number of excellent and memorable performances, beginning with Herrmann as Hearst. This is possibly the best work he's ever done in his career, perfectly capturing the many facets of this extremely complex man. There's a depth to his performance that conveys not only the bravura of a powerful individual-- and one who delights in using it-- but the vulnerability, as well. He also makes you cognizant of the fact that Hearst is a man capable of almost anything, including creating his own reality, and maintaining it with his limitless resources. It's one of the subtle, underlying nuances that Herrmann brings to his portrayal, which is altogether convincing and believable.

Kirsten Dunst also rises to the occasion, turning in a remarkable performance as Marion Davies. It's a concise reflection of a young actress caught up in a situation that is at once enviable and undesirable, who manages to tactfully negotiate the sensitive issues with which she is faced with a sensibility and maturity beyond her years. And through Dunst, we see the many layers of Davies' personality; the fun-loving girl, as well as the responsible woman, who finds herself in a perpetually tentative environment and selflessly refrains from playing the prima donna or attempting to act as if she is the center of the universe-- something to which too many others who have been swallowed up by the Hollywood lifestyle over the years are prone. It's a comprehensive and convincing performance that proves that Dunst has the stuff to fulfill the promise made by her work in previous films.

The performance that surpasses them all, however, is turned in by Eddie Izzard, as Chaplin. Izzard captures the very essence of Chaplin, physically and emotionally, with a detailed portrayal of the man, created through expression and astute introspection. This is not the on-screen persona, the `Little Tramp,' but Chaplin the complex individual and artist who is presented here. Izzard brings him to life with singular nuance and depth, and it's a performance that should, by all rights, earn him an Oscar nomination. Skillfully acted and presented, `The Cat's Meow' is a memorable film that offers some insights into a town and lifestyle that few have ever experienced. 9/10.

Nothing special

[shaid · 6/10 · 29 January 2002]

Based on the true murder story of Thomas Ince and adapted by Steven Peros from his own stage play, this film is nothing special. if you see it you might enjoy it. If not you can be sure that you have not missed a thing.

Director, Peter Bogdanovich is known for making films that deal directly or indirectly with films. And this film is no exception. He deals with Hollywood of the 20's. He shows that Hollywood has been run and still is by interests that are not all business only. It quite depends on who you are, how much money you have and if you know the right peoples and have the right connections. Talent sometime play a little part in your success but usually is an extra bonus. Bogdanovich describe all the above well but during watching the film I couldn't have noticed that Bogdanovich put himself a little bit in distance from the material. He did not seem to care about the characters enough to be fully involved in the project. Yes he has done a good job but it seems lifeless, so lifeless that even an above the average performance from all cast(especially Edward Herrman as W. R. Hearst and Eddie Izzard as Chaplin) could not help this film from becoming so unimportant that it doesn't matter if you watch this film or not. Sadly though, because the dialogue is sharp and the set design is exceptionally good. A sad miss.

Disappointing

[claudecat · 4/10 · 14 April 2007]

"The Cat's Meow" contains a few scenes that boast intelligent dialogue, and some fine performances, a few of which surprised me. Eddie Izzard is more effective than I expected as Chaplin (partly thanks to an excellent hair and makeup job by some talented designer); Joanna Lumley is compelling as novelist Elinor Glyn; and Kirsten Dunst is winning as Marion Davies (though why movies never use her real-life stutter is difficult to explain). But these elements don't add up to a successful whole. The screenwriter seems to have worked very hard on certain scenes--the meetings between Davies and Chaplin are particularly well crafted--but not so hard on the big picture. Several minor characters don't need to be there, and don't behave consistently. The basic plot is full of illogic (e.g., why does Thomas Ince think it's a good idea to tell Hearst something he really doesn't want to hear?), and the party scenes are repetitive and tiresome. I'd like to think a trip on Hearst's yacht was more fun than the movie indicates. Davies is characterized as a standard bubbly Flapper type, which isn't really accurate, and the screenwriter's ideas about Chaplin and love are implausible.

Strangely, Bogdanovich, who seemed so connected to the Thirties in "Paper Moon", lacks a similar affinity for the Twenties. He insisted the excellent costume designer use only black and cream, which gives the party guests a very artificial look, and plays only the most stereotypical songs of the period (e.g., "Yes, We Have No Bananas"). When Hearst insists everybody "Charleston, Charleston!" it looks as if the actors had a ten-minute dance lesson just before the scene was shot.

The lives of silent film stars can make fascinating movies, I'm sure, but not this time.

Peter Bogdanovich is back, folks

[deadclowncollege · 8/10 · 15 May 2005]

I have to say, I thought the Cat's Meow was the cat's pajamas. Peter Bogdanovich has made a story out of an event whose outcome is still unexplained. What's more, it feels like it actually could've happened. The interactions between the characters leading up to the act are given much more screen time than the actual act itself. So when it happens, it doesn't seem preposterous at all.

The story concerns newspaper honcho William Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) and company celebrating the birthday of Hollywood producer Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes) on Hearst's yacht. That company includes Hearst's lover/actress Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst), Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), author Elinor Glyn (Joanna Lumley), gossip columnist for Hearst's newspaper Louella Parsons (Jennifer Tilley), and Tom's lover. Tom hopes to negotiate a contract with W.R. Hearst for Marion to star in his next few films, but Hearst is more concerned about the attraction between Marion and Chaplin. Elinor is nearby to dispense advice, while Louella unsuccessfully attempts to mingle. There's also a pair of party girls on board attempting to have a raucous time as possible.

The Cat's Meow has an eclectic ensemble with a Robert Altman-esquire taste to it. Edward Herrmann's role may be the most challenging, because he has to juggle eccentric, warmth, and jealousy as W.R. Hearst. Joanna Lumley is wonderfully dry. And for those like me who only remember Eddie Izzard for his droll stand-up work, he's surprising in this film. He's quite good as Charlie Chaplin. Kirsten Dunst is the biggest name on the cast. She's very fetching in the Cat's Meow, and this represents a change of pace from her dearth of Hollywood-oriented films.

As good as the cast is, this is really just as much Peter Bogdanovich's film. After the excellent Last Picture Show, he sort of faded away and made smaller films (The Thing Called Love, for example). Although The Cat's Meow will not make him a household name, hopefully maybe his work will garner more attention again. His direction is very good here.

Oh, I should also mention the costume design and music here. The production values in general are excellent in imitating the feel of that era. I was reminded a little of Woody Allen's Bullets Over Broadway (and not just the Jennifer Tilly connection). Anyways, The Cat's Meow is a good movie with interesting characters and thoughtful direction.

not everyone will charleston

[aeriz · 7/10 · 15 June 2003]

First off, I was attracted to Cat's Meow since it was a Kirsten Dunst film and the poster design is one of the most attractive I've seen. Didn't know what to expect until I read the back of the box at the rental store. With that said, Cat's Meow is a good film in representing the feel of the twenties, especially in respects to the Hollywood film industry. The costume designs were top notch and I personally liked the outfits worn by the women. course, men typically wear suits and only so much can be done with those. Good choice by Bogdanovich in his use of b/w and color to create time. They really added to the whole 1920's feel the film went for.

But the film isn't perfect. To me, it's slow in some parts and some issues just seem to get drawn out to a point where you just don't care anymore if they're resolved. I personally won't be listening or doing the charleston anytime soon but it did function well in establishing the free spirited mood of the characters when it was necessary. see the Cat's Meow if you happen to be interested in dunst, Hollywood history, or the twenties. if not, you may walk away from it.

DISASTER

[CinemaEden · 1/10 · 18 August 2001]

What happened to Peter Bogdanovich? Once a brilliant director, a trail blazer... is now scraping the very bottom... Is this the same man who directed "The Last Picture Show"? Here, he takes a somewhat interesting (albeit farfetched) premise, and turns it into bubble gum that loses flavor the moment you take the first bite... Dunst is not bad, but Izzard is miscast as Chaplin, and all the other actors seem to have been cast for their "looks", and not because they were right for the part. Too bad. I'll go rent "Paper Moon" again.

Nice Gem

[Michael_Elliott · 6 June 2009]

Cat's Meow, The (2001)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

Extremely well acted and marvelously directed drama tells the story of the legendary producer Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes) who boarded a ship owned by Willam Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) and a couple days later was dead. While there are various reports as to what happened, this film follows the most talked about which is that Ince informed Hearst that his girlfriend Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst) was having an affair with Charles Chaplin (Eddie Izzard). Later that night, in a rage, Hearst went to kill Chaplin but instead shot Ince in the back of the head. I'm sure many people have heard this story but director Bogdanovich has done a marvelous job at putting the story into a film and deliver something that is quite intense but at the same time it will also get your blood boiling. The director was a personal friend of Orson Welles and considering Hearst pretty much ended his career, I'm sure Bogdanovich was happy to show Hearst as a evil S.O.B. and that's pretty much what happens here. The entire movie isn't a hate piece aimed at Hearst because most of the time the director is taking a look at the power of not only Hearst but the media in general as well as Hollywood. The opening sequence showing everyone arriving was great fun as we get to hear the Hollywood gossip, which a lot focuses on Chaplin and his recent film, THE WOMAN OF Paris, and people joking about it bombing due to him not playing a part in it. There's also a lot of goofing on him in regards to THE GOLD RUSH costing so much money and him getting the 16-year-old star pregnant. This type of stuff was great fun to hear. In the end we see Hearst using his power to keep everyone quiet and to pay off Louella Parsons (Jennifer Tilly) who would eventually get a lifetime contract by Hearst. These scenes will certainly get your blood boiling and you can't help but feel a strong hatred for Hearst and a certain sadness for his mistress. The performances are all quite remarkable with Herrmann really standing out as the media magnet. Dunst and Elwes are also quite good as is Izzard in the role of Chaplin even though he doesn't come close to Robert Downey, Jr.'s performance in CHAPLIN. The entire look of the film from the sets to the costume design are wonderful and everything is brought together perfectly by Bogdanovich. Seeing this wonderful gem just makes you rather sad that he hasn't been able to make more films over the past couple decades because he's clearly very talented.

Poorly written, slow, annoying

[elle_kittyca · 6/10 · 13 April 2016]

As always, my reviews are short and sweet and to the point, designed for people who, like me, know what they like. If you have a lot of patience for a slow set up, you might like this movie more than I did. I watched this movie because it was recommended to me and I had never heard of it, despite having worked in a video store and being a fan of both period pieces and true stories. While the actual true story involved is one that made me want to watch this movie, I am afraid the movie lost my interest fairly quickly. The set up of the characters and their relationships was slow and not very engaging. Secondly, the characters were written as goofy stereotypes rather than people who seemed real, and this did not work for me. One character was portrayed as so screechy and annoying, I hated every second she was on screen. I'm just not sure that was necessary to inflict upon the viewers. 50 minutes into this film, with no murder having happened, I decided to go to youtube instead to look for a documentary that would tell me what happened without making me suffer so much.

Typical characters for a film of this type, but it has it's moments

[Quinoa1984 · 7/10 · 11 May 2002]

Peter Bogdanovich is a director whom I haven't seen that many of his works. I saw some of the footage from Directed by John Ford and laughed at how Ford answered Bogdanovich's questions in a proffesional manner, er, like a prick. And I also saw him in his small role on the Sopranos. Here, he shows a story that obivously had a lot of care taken to the craft, but it doesn't amount to anything spectacular. The story has good qualities to it like the charicatures of Hearst as a slightly crazed rich man and Chaplin as a hardly laughable and loving man. Worth a peek, if only to see a turn back for Dunst into the more mature film world. B

Bogdanovich is back, and he's taking names!

[funkyfry · 7/10 · 7 October 2002]

Very well photographed, well-acted pseudo-historical film marks Bogdanovich's return from the Showtime desert. Here he tells the near legendary tale of Thomas Ince's fatal weekend on W.R. Hearst's luxury boat (in the company of other film luminaries including Charlie Chaplin and Marion Davies). Speculation has always run along the lines that Heart accidentally killed Ince (with whom he was apparently considering a defection for Cosmo pictures from MGM, probably an Ince pipedream or a diversionary tactic by Hearst to get more leverage on Mayer and Loew), mistaking him for Chaplin, who was also aboard and was rumored to be Marion Davies' lover. What makes the film good is not the fact that it makes these dubious speculations explicit, but rather its dry and somewhat corrosive portrayal of power relationships and the crushed dreams of lost power. I do agree with the previous comments that the direction was a little bit too even-toned, not accentuating certain scenes.

Semi-fictional but Interesting ! A 7 !

[cshep · 7/10 · 5 December 2004]

William Randolph Hearst, a controversial figure to say the least, has a problem, one of his passengers is critical ! The newspaper moguls personal life is being challenged by the intervening but charming and flirtatious Charlie Chaplin, over the favors of Heart's intimate leading lady , Marion Davies. In the 1920's , money and influence could buy anything , even Thomas Ince's well being. Accounts of what happened on Hearst's yacht, have never been confirmed, but this little tale gives us a nice spin on what could have happened. Decadence reigns supreme in the 1920's.This episode combines every element of the rich and super rich and tells about an interesting love triangle, power plays, paranoia and unfortunate events,they transpire to move the story along at an even pace. Edward Herrman gives a competent performance as the controlling W.R. Hearst. Kirsten Dunst is a lovely and vulnerable Marion Davies. Cary Elwes gives his usual stellar display of talent as the ill-fated Thomas Ince. Eddie Izzard is interesting as Charlie Chaplin.

Apparently, wealthy socialites moralities are governed by the size of their bankroll. A lot of people who are critical of this movie are entitled to their opinions, but I found this film an interesting character study, even though the characters talents are greater than their moral reputations.

Historic truth?,..or Orson Welles' posthumous revenge?

[theowinthrop · 8/10 · 1 March 2009]

When Pauline Kael did her celebrated combination of original research and character assassination, entitled "Raising Kane", she mentioned that in the course of the final version of CITIZEN KANE that we have Orson Welles pruned out some events put into the script by Herman Mankiewicz. Mankiewicz, for example, wanted to make the eventual collapse of the first Kane marriage to Emily Norton Monroe to be caused by Kane's accidental encouragement of the assassination of Emily's uncle, the President of the United States. This was based on an incident that Hearst's enemies seized on involving Ambrose Bierce (a Hearst columnist in 1900-1901) writing a quatrain about the killing (in 1900) of Governor-elect William Goebel of Kentucky, that suggested that the missing assassination bullet was headed for Washington "to stretch McKinley on his bier." When Leon Czolgosz shot and killed the President in September 1901 Hearst's foes recalled the lines and said Hearst encouraged political murder. The original script for Kane had Emily accusing Charles for her uncle's death, and never forgiving him.

That was cut, with Emily's growing dislike for Charles based, instead on his ego, his concentration on his newspaper empire and political ambitions, and his neglect of her (and probably their son). The business with Susan Alexander is the final straw.

It was not the only cut of a sensational nature. In the final film Susan tells the reporter that he should speak to Raymond the butler because "(h)e knows where all the bodies are." In the original script Raymond was (with Susan) a witness to Kane actually killing a man, but covering it up. This is why Raymond remains so important to Kane in his later years. It also helps explain Susan's growing dislike for her husband.

It too was cut. Welles was wise here - everyone in Hollywood would have known what that was about, and any denials about Kane not being based on Hearst would have been dismissed because the dead man would have been too much of a coincidence to ignore.

In 1941 it was generally suspected throughout Hollywood (and in much of the U.S.) that William Randolph Hearst was in some way responsible for the death (in 1924) of movie director/producer/pioneer Thomas Ince. Ince had been one of a set of guests invited on Hearst's luxury yacht, the "Onieda" for a cruise. Others on the cruise included novelist Elinior Glyn, Hearst's mistress Marion Davies, the great Charlie Chaplin, Tom Ince, and a newcomer to the Hearst empire, gossip writer Louella Parsons. At some point on the trip (which was supposed to be a two week cruise) Ince was rushed ashore in serious condition and taken to a hospital. He died two days later. The cause was varied according to the bulletins, usually being either a heart attack or a stomach ailment. However, rumors soon emerged that an incident happened on board the Oneida that led to the shooting of Ince, probably at the hands of Hearst.

The story has never completely died, and even today there is a small body of evidence that Ince did not die a natural death. The basic scenario was that Ince was on deck when Hearst was chasing Chaplin (who had been fooling around with Davies) and in shooting at Chaplin Hearst accidentally wounded Ince. Hearst was powerful enough to clamp down on the tragedy, but at the same time there was a cost: Louella Parsons was just a new employee at the time. Now, she blackmailed her boss into making her a national columnist and a real power in Hollywood.

Peter Bogdanovitch (who directed THE CAT'S MEOW) was a close friend of Orson Welles. One can't quite get it out of one's head that this film, a twisted "prequill" to KANE, was meant as Bogdanovitch's homage to the classic film and his attempt to smear Hearst, who after 1941 did everything he could to hurt Welles.

The period detail is very good, and Edward Herrmann makes a dandy Hearst (sort of a return to the mad playboy husband of Goldie Hawn in OVERBOARD, which also takes place on a yacht). Certainly he is supremely confident as the millionaire, but he is also smart. A running story line is that Tom Ince (Cary Elwys) is trying to get Hearst's backing for a rejuvenation of Ince's film career (supposedly on the verge of collapse in 1924) but that Hearst is not stupid enough to waste his money that way. However, Herrmann does also demonstrate that he is more than a little possessive about Ms Davies (Kirsten Dunst), and that he is worried about that little cockney Chaplin (Eddie Izzard) going after his woman. Certainly Chaplin's reputation with the ladies was enough to give any man pause. Jennifer Tilly (Louella Parsons) certainly is keeping her eyes open (she is, after all, a gossip writer), and it pays dividends at the end. As for Joanne Lumley as Elinor Glyn, she gives the film a kind of narrative and framework (Glyn, by the way, if you can't recall her was the woman who termed the euphemism for sex appeal as "it", and was to make a screenplay called "It" that starred Clara Bow, who became the "It girl" - otherwise she has become pretty forgotten).

The film is worth watching - not perhaps another PAPER MOON or LAST PICTURE SHOW, but better than AT LONG LAST LOVE. Do I think Hearst killed Ince? If he did it was a sheer accident, because who would kill a well known figure under such circumstances as part of a comprehensive murder plan!

A interesting movie with much witty dialogue

[lingmeister · 7/10 · 11 December 2002]

This movie tells of one of the unresolved scandal that happened to one of hollywood's inner circle. There is a lot of witty lines and comeback lines, and some interesting characters, but many seem to be only cardboard cutouts of what a person of that stature and time should be like.

Edward Herrmann was great as William Randolph Hearst, the overconfident man who turns to a insecure child whenever it comes to his relationship with his girl, played by Kirsten Dunst, who is good as the nurturing figure that was the light to Hearst. His perception of his love that might fly away at any moment gives a view of the other side of this ever powerful magnate.

There was a lot of dialogue that I missed at first because they were fired off back and forth so fast, but with the advent of DVD, it was not hard to re-hear what was said, and utilize of subtitles if it was still not understood.

All in all, a good movie how one of the great hollywood scandal might have played out, along with good insight on one of the most powerful man at that time.

Awful. Bad acting, no emotional connections to characters... what is the movie supposed to be anyway?

[WahooKristen · 4/10 · 27 October 2001]

Kirsten Dunst is terribly overrated as an actress. You can tell always she's just "acting". I like Izzard though. Plot is awfully boring. The viewer has no real connections to the characters, never knowing who to really sympathize with, or even care about. Slow, dull movie, with some laughs, but few and not very funny anyway. Plot is not engaging or suspenseful in the least. You can see each plot turn coming a mile away. What is this movie supposed to be? Comedy? Drama? Who cares? You won't by the end of this film.

An overlooked Gem that was snubbed by the Oscars

[Norway1 · 8/10 · 9 February 2004]

I am abhorred that the Oscars could ignore this film for all the categories it so well deserved:

Best Actress (Kirsten Dunst) Best Actor (Edward Herrmann) Best Costume Design Best Cinematography

And those are just the obvious ones!

Peter Bogdanovich is one of my favorite Directors. He has an amazingly vast Encyclopedia of knowledge about Hollywood during this time. He was good friends with the master Orsen Wells and even did the Commentary for Citizen Cane in Wells' place. He was unquestionably the perfect Director for putting this story to screen.

Kirsten Dunst is remarkable playing 24 year-old Marion Davies at only 18. She does a superb job in the role and deserved a lot more attention than she was awarded.

I strongly disagree with comments that the supporting cast was bad. Everybody was perfect for their role! The sax player WAS a sax player (not an actor) from Berlin (where most of the movie was filmed) and he did fantastic! (He only had one line for goodness sake!)

Though I would concur that Jennifer Tilly played Louella Parsons a bit unlike we would expect, I support her decision to treat her this way for the sake of this film. She lightened up the film with her bumbling silliness. So what if Lolly wasn't like that in real life? It worked well for the movie.

My only (slight) complaint was the decision to have one of the flappers briefly flash us (show her chest) during a party scene with her, the other flapper, the sax player and Chaplin. It was unnecessary and felt out of place with an otherwise clean movie. My guess is this was the reason for the PG-13 rating.

There is hardly any language - in fact Bogdanovich changed the film's only F-word to "screw" to clean it up even more than the original script. This works much better for the period than filling it with 21st century language.

Anybody interested in the 20's, William Randolph Hearst or 'The Golden Age of Hollywood' MUST see this movie!

8½ out of 10. (I can't decide between 8 and 9!)

"Reputations are...so fragile."

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 17 July 2017]

"A wild birthday party, illegal alcohol, orgies..." what will the press make of this? Tailor-made vehicle for director Peter Bogdanovich, adapted by Steven Peros from his play, concerns a legendary (if not mythical) 1924 birthday cruise aboard the yacht Oneida owned by publishing czar William Randolph Hearst that ended with a shooting. Hearst and his mistress, silent starlet Marion Davies, host the desperately-gay gathering of the wealthy and hungry: movie mogul and birthday boy Thomas Ince, his mistress Margaret Livingston, film star Charlie Chaplin, writer Elinor Glyn and Louella Parsons, a professional gossip who works for Hearst's New York American. Ince is the unfortunate victim of the hushed-up tragedy, however he was not the intended target. As Glyn's narration states, "no two accounts of the weekend were the same," so much of the drama presented here is speculation handed down through the decades. Still, the film, which takes a while to get cooking, taps into that now-ghostly period of the '20s where wealth and power took the place of morals, and the hedonistic rich danced and drank the night away because--if they stopped for one moment and looked at themselves--they'd be lost. Provocative and well-acted, particularly by Edward Herrmann as Hearst, portrayed here as a jealous clod. **1/2 from ****

A BORING MESS...

[Callsheet · 1/10 · 6 September 2001]

...is the only way to describe this movie about subjects that should be surefire: scandal, sex, celebrity, power. Kirsten Dunst grins her way through her role as silent movie star Marion Davies like she thinks she's in "Legally Blonde." The guy who plays William Randolph Hearst overacts to the point where you want to reach into the screen and slap him. Eddie Izzard is pretty good, except that he's playing Charlie Chaplin, and is about, oh, 125 lbs too heavy for the part? Hard to believe this hamfisted, uneven wreck was directed by Peter Bogdanovich, but then again, he hasn't made a watchable movie in, what? 30 years? Sometimes, there's just no coming back.