The Hoax Reviews

• The 70's off to a rollicking start.

  
  By A2640U1KK4SPGK on 2007-10-12
  A struggling writer discovers that Hughes cannot appear in court to dispute a hoax because the reclusive billionaire is in a nasty dispute with TWA shareholders. So the hoax is born. Soon though, events turn raucous when the billionaire fails to appear to allegedly vouch for the autobiography, and then another hoaxed autobiography appears in print ahead of Irving's release. The mystery of who is hoaxing who surfaces when a box of scandalous files anonymously appears at the writer's home. The frenzied sensation draws the attention of darker forces in America. Apparently, someone has to know what would be included about Hughes and Nixon's brother, Donald, who had received unrepaid loans from Hughes in the 1960 campaign, and may have received more loans in 1972. Then suddenly the hoax unravels. Within within months, Nixon is re-elected, the Hughes-TWA dispute resolves, and Americans begin to learn of a third-rate burglarly called Watergate. The Hoax is an interesting chapter in American history.
  
  
  

• A Hoax-man For A New Generation

  
  By A3J5UO5QMTFSWB on 2007-04-09
  Despite the fact that I'm not exactly a Richard Gere fan, I went into "The Hoax" with high expectations. After all, I consider director Lasse Hallstrom - feelgood/schmaltzy though he may sometimes be ("Once Around", "The Cider House Rules") - to be one of the more consistently reliable filmmakers of the last twenty years (he's directed several of my all-time favorite films, including "My Life As A Dog", "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" and "Chocolat"). And from what little I knew of the intriguing real-life story upon which this movie is based, I figured it would be a good to very good film as long as the filmmakers didn't mess it up (and Richard Gere didn't ham it up).
  
  Thankfully, I was wrong. It actually turned out to be a great film, and not only did the filmmakers not mess it up, they elevated the material beyond what my already-high expectations were going in. From the taut and smart script (which in my opinion is worthy of an Adapted Screenplay Oscar Nomination) to the inventive cinematography, from the (as always) imaginative direction to a surprisingly non-showboaty performance from Richard Gere (not to mention scene-stealing performances by actors in supporting roles), "The Hoax" is right up there with the best films I've seen all year.
  
  For those of you not in the know, the story centers around (and is based on a book by) Clifford Irving, who - as we meet him in the movie - had already (quite aptly, it turns out) written the book Fake, with forgery as its subject (and you can see the real Clifford Irving in Orson Welles' classic 1974 film "F for Fake"). Now he's received verbal agreement that his publishing house, McGraw Hill, will be putting out his second book, the unfortunately named Rudnick's Problem. So he spends his advance in advance (of actually having one), even as people are repossessing his couch from previous debts owed. Then, in an ill-timed turn of events, Life Magazine - who was set to serialize the book - reads the manuscript and calls it a "third-rate Phillip Roth knock-off." Oops! Deal's off, Cliffy!
  
  Desperate to not be ignored by his publisher, and desperate for cash and other non-perishables with which to feed his ego, Irving tells the people at McGraw-Hill that he's been commissioned to write the autobiography of infamous billionaire recluse, Howard Hughes (even though he hasn't - hoax alert!). He starts by forging letters whose handwriting is copied from a Howard Hughes profile in Life Magazine (which, if still around, would have had to pay a hell of a product placement fee for this movie).
  
  Irving figures it's a perfect plan: "he'll never come out of hiding to denounce me because he's a lunatic hermit, and I'm the spokesman for the lunatic hermit!" This sets into motion a series of cat and mouse games as various factions try to smoke out Irving as a con artist and Irving (actually more of a rat than a mouse) ratchets up the stakes at every turn, figuring the bolder the lie, the more likely it is to be believed.
  
  As played by Gere, Irving is a pompous, adulterous liar who's also a bit of a drama king. His wife (played with quirky delight by Marcia Gay Harden) seems to be aware of all this, dismissively telling him early in the film, "My gallery show is in 3 weeks - I don't have time for the drama now, darling." And later, she warns him to not spend time with any "special friends" as he's planning to go on a trip. That Gere plays this jerky gasbag in such a way that we not only care about him but root for him is no mean feat.
  
  A scene-stealing Alfred Molina plays Dick Susskind, Irving's nervous nebbish reluctant co-conspirator, whom we meet as a 38 years old, unpublished author (whose wife has left him for a lesbian), trying to write a children's book featuring the dual kid-friendly themes of war and sodomy. (yes, this film has a sense of humor - there are many lines that are patently absurd and laugh out loud funny)
  
  The picture keeps Nixon and 'Nam hovering in the background as an effective backdrop, with paranoia being the paradigm of the time and Irving himself getting so caught up in his web of deceit that he himself can barely distinguish fact from fantasy, reality from paranoid delusion. There is also a very interesting subplot involving a mysterious box that shows up on Irving's doorstep that may or may not tie Nixon and Watergate into the whole biography mess.
  
  Not knowing too much about what really happened, to me this is the only part of the film that felt like its grasping for a bit more than it can truly hold. Intriguing, yes. Plausible? Not really. But I fully concede in advance that things might have actually played out that way in real life and that truth is indeed stranger than fiction (and that I'm an ignorant buffoon). And regardless of whether it's the way events actually happened or not, the screenplay is pure genius, with lots of quotable lines and crisp dialog.
  
  In some early reviews, I've seen a lot of comparisons made to the journalistic con artist Stephen Glass played by Hayden Christensen in the film "Shattered Glass". But I feel this movie owes more in its tone of well-layered psychological suspense and intrigue to the great "Quiz Show" - with Ralph Fiennes' Charles Van Doren being caught up in a scam while the truth squad closes in. Both "Quiz Show" and "The Hoax" are so artfully told, so skillfully and stylishly shot, that each film transcends its subject matter without detracting from or diluting its substantial suspense.
  
  As "The Hoax" has some (very) minor flaws, I'd like to give it 4.5 stars. But of course, the 'Zon won't let me... so five stars it is!
  
  

• Amusing recreation of the 1970's deception

  
  By A39AWL2FKWDFK6 on 2007-04-15
  Director Lasse Hallstrom's dedicated re-enactment of Clifford Irving's memoirs of his fraudulent autobiography of mysterious, antisocial millionaire Howard Hughes, "The Hoax", is his most impressive work since the 2000 film "Chocolat". Using film footage of the Hughes and also President Nixon and the tumultuous times of the 70's, he creates a sometimes comedic look back at this memorable scandal.
  
  Richard Gere does well in his portrayal of struggling author Irving, a man obviously devoid of a conscience, who conjures up the idea of faking a Hughes autobiography. He figures that the reclusive Hughes would never surface to dispute the veracity of Irving's well researched but fictitious novel. Alfred Molina playing Gere's neurotic sidekick and co-conspirator Dick Susskind is magnificent in his role, giving the movie a comic flair. Marcia Gay Harden with dyed blonde tresses and a disturbing foreign accent was annoying as Irving's wife Edith.
  
  Hallstrom did well in demostrating the extent of Irving's delusions, actually believing himself to be in contact with Hughes and his minions. 91 year old Eli Wallach, always a treat to see on the screen, was delightful playing old codger Noah Dietrich, once a right hand man of Hughes. The movie was insightful in tying in the effect of Irving's hoax, the machinations of Hughes himself who actually communicated disavowing Irving's chicanery and important current events and the day.
  
  

• Ramifications of a Hoax

  
  By A328S9RN3U5M68 on 2007-10-18
  Clifford Irving (Fake, Trial, Final Argument, The Spring) became a sort of national hero when he contrived to publish 'The Autobiography of Howard Hughes', a 400 page phony but well researched book that, while it was never published, did cause enough of a stir among the New York publishing cognoscenti and those surrounding the then President Richard Nixon that it now is recognized as a HOAX of writing that triggered the final discovery of the Watergate Scandal and the subsequent dethroning of Nixon. Those facts alone make this sometimes rather tepid film interesting enough to sit through. Screenwriter William Wheeler has adapted Irving's book into a study of the 1970s and Lasse Hallström gives it just the right balance between soft crime and strange comedy to keep it afloat.
  
  Clifford Irving (Richard Gere) is down on his literary luck, searching for the right kind of story that will set is publisher Andrea Tate (Hope Davis) on fire. Irving wife Edith (Marcia Gay Harden) is an active painter and doesn't give Irving the support he gets from his pal Dick Suskind (Alfred Molina), but on the messy floor of Edith's studio is a rag magazine with a cover picture of the mysterious Howard Hughes and bingo! up comes the idea for an 'autobiography' of the wizard as confided to Irving and researched by Suskind. That is really the plot then, how these two men squirm around lies and good luck to forge papers and gain the favor of the publishers. Of course it all caves in, but in the publicity about the book Nixon's secrets are revealed and the rest is history.
  
  Gere, Molina, Harden, Davis, Stanley Tucci, Julie Delphy and Eli Wallach add immeasurably to the success of the film. No, it is not a heavy story, but the scandalous years of the 1970s are treated realistically and provide a lot of memories, both good and bad, about how we all changed in that post Vietnam time. Worth watching for that! Grady Harp, October 07
  
  
  

• The Missing Link Between The Aviator and All The President's Men

  
  By A3I7OX03X6KDMN on 2007-04-28
  There is a core belief system in people like me that is greatly offended by industries that are supposed to noble and artistic, such as publishing, that turn into soulless money making machines. These are industries, we believe, where quality and passion should trump schlock such as "The Secret." So when I sat down to watch "The Hoax", a film in which an aspiring author takes the capitalistic publishing world for a ride, I was firmly in the corner of the deceitful one. For it is a beautiful thing to watch as Clifford Irving (Richard Gere, fugitive from the law) recognizes these people for what they really are (stuffed suits whose sole purpose is to sniff around manuscripts looking for commercialism), and then use their lust for cash against them. Obviously he is not out there making a point or taking a stand, he is there to cash in and get famous, but no matter. Greed begets greed, so if McGraw/Hill needs somebody to blame for the creation of Irving then they need look no further than the mirror.
  
  Director Lasse Hallstrom finally turns out a winner here after leaving two sloppy messes all over the 2005 Oscar season ("Unfinished Life" and "Casanova"). Far breezier than his usual stiff exercises, "The Hoax" tells one of those amazing stories that we only believe because we know that it actually happened. Feeling mad with anger after having his fictional work rejected Irving comes up with the perfect concept for a best seller, a wholly different kind of fiction. He will make up interviews between himself and famous recluse Howard Hughes, and then sell it as a sort of autobiography. McGraw/Hill, eye on the box office, bites and the game is on. Irving pulled off some truly amazing stunts that led me to believe that him pulling this ruse off for so long was nothing short of a miracle. He is dishonest to the core, but the ways in which he fools the world are simply artful. But as time ticks by Irving learns that cheating on his wife is one thing, faking his way into a fortune another, and impeaching the President a whole different Solar System. Since the Hollywood Code says so Irving is brought down in the end, and yes I know that is how it really happened, just to say that films about real life renegades who get away with murder are few and far between. Money got the best of him and no matter how you cut it depositing Hughes' checks into a Swiss bank account was not a smooth move.
  
  The acting is also quite impressive here, especially from the two main stars. Gere plays Irving as Gere only minus Father Time, and still manages to navigate his way through this challenging role. Alfred Molina is also very believable as his sidekick who loyally helps him through his stickiest moments despite remaining a doormat throughout. In the end I had no ill will towards Irving. If he wants to make his fame and fortune on the back of Howard Hughes why would I care? Hughes had more than enough of both and didn't seem too enamored with either. Furthermore, late in the film when another character decides to launch her career off of Irving's back, and subsequently sink his ship, I didn't feel bad for him either. [..]
  
  
• Hmm...
  By A3W13VVBRY5GL7 on 2007-08-18
  I didn't enjoy "The Hoax".
  
  It's odd that I didn't enjoy it - it's got an excellent pedigree (a great director, a mostly tried-and-trusted cast roster and a really fascinating true story as its raison d'etre), but for me, it just doesn't come together at any time to make a whole and likeable movie.
  
  Down-on-his-luck writer Clifford Irving (Gere), sick of his work not being published, decides to invent a biography of reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes, and, in the wave of publicity and anticipation surrounding the book's publication, involves his friends and loved ones in a web of lies that could ultimately destroy them all.
  
  Alfred Molina and Marcia Gay Harden are, in this reviewer's opinion, hopelessly underused in films, so it's great to see these two highly talented actors turn in very sensitive and watchable performances - in particular, Gay Harden's turn as Irving's long-suffering partner is outstanding - but in the central role, Richard Gere's performance cannot match his support. He comes across as sort-of desperate, kinda hopeless, maybe-a-little-bit unfaithful, somewhat untrustworthy - Gere seems to be torn between playing Irving as a basicaly decent guy backed into a corner by debt and temptation, or as a Machiavellian no-talent hack with an eye for manipulation. Neither chord is really struck, however, and it's in this confusion of personality that Gere's Irving fails to work as the central column around which this otherwise fine drama is built. There's a lack of resolution about the character of Clifford Irving that leaves the viewer feeling, at best, confused, and at worst, irritated. By the movie's end, we wonder if Irving really is hallucinating, has he finally succumbed to his own deceptions, or whether we care enough about him to really want to know.
  
  Hallström's direction is assured and confident, and there are several scenes (Irving's fire escape shenanigans or his "abduction" towards the movie's end) where Hallström's talent behind a camera shines - the visuals, at least, keep us satisfied for these sections - and overall, this is, from a technical point of view, a good movie. The screenplay is above average, too - it's a tight, polished script that doesn't feel like it's rushing us through a complex and tense storyline. Sadly, neither of these elements can overcome the overall sense of banality that hangs about "The Hoax".
  
  It's a shame - William Wheeler's fine script, a terribly interesting story, some great direction by Lasse Hallström and two excellent supporting performances (Molina's Sancho Panza to Gere's Don Quixote is excellent, believable and sympathetic) - spoiled by a very flat central performance from Gere. And in a movie of this length, where 90% of the action features Gere's character front-and-centre, these 115 minutes very quickly start to feel like two hours too many. Given a different choice of actor for the role of Irving, with every other element of the movie kept the same, "The Hoax" could have been a fantastic bit of cinema. As is, it's not even particularly memorable.
  
  Not recommended.
  
  
• Of prose and cons
  By A2FEJIORC1MBG3 on 2007-09-27
  A character in the film "The Princess Bride" utters one of my favorite quotes: "Life is pain, highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something." Alas-if we would only remember that sage advice before writing our phone number on a napkin, signing on a dotted line, dropping coins into a collection plate or punching out a voting chad.
  
  Hollywood loves con artists, probably because movie audiences never appear to tire of watching yet one more poor sucker being bamboozled and swindled. It makes us feel superior-"I'd never fall for THAT!" (Er-right.)
  
  Director Lasse Hallstrom has delivered a smashing entry in the genre with his new movie, "The Hoax". The film is based on the story of Clifford Irving, a struggling writer who toiled in relative obscurity until he stumbled onto an idea for "the most important book of the 20th century"-the "Autobiography of Howard Hughes". The book was the most hyped literary event of 1972, and would assure Irving the notoriety he craved. Heck, he even made the cover of Time. Unfortunately, his Time portrait was slugged with "Con Man of the Year", because as it turned out, the "autobiography" was a bit of a surprise to Mr. Hughes, because, you see, Mr. Irving made the whole thing up (oops). The books were unceremoniously yanked from the shelves soon after their debut.
  
  Richard Gere tears through the lead role with an intensity we haven't
  seen from him in quite a while. His Clifford Irving is a charlatan and a compulsive liar, to be sure, but Gere makes him sympathetic in a carefully measured portrayal and never stoops to audience pandering. Even as he digs himself into an ever deepening hole, and you cover your eyes because you know the other shoe is going to drop at any time, you've just gotta love this guy's pure chutzpah. In retrospect, when compared to some other mass public deceptions that were brewing at the time (the Irving scandal was soon to be eclipsed in the headlines by Watergate), Irving's fraud trial almost seems like malicious prosecution.
  
  Hallstrom does an excellent job at capturing the 70's milieu; especially the insidious paranoia of the Nixon era.
  
  The cast includes Alfred Molina (in a great turn as Irving's researcher), Marcia Gay Harden (sporting a Streep-worthy accent as Irving's Eurotrash wife), and true chameleon Hope Davis (looking very Mary Richards as Irving's agent). Also with Stanley Tucci, Julie Delpy and a memorable cameo from Eli Wallach.
  
  
  
• Surprisingly Good
  By A2CJYE66ZVJO4W on 2007-10-07
  Since anyone of A Certain Age remembers how this story turns out, I was expecting more of a documentary than a thriller. But the film does a great job of pacing, and literally races towards the unraveling of Clifford Irving's web of deception.
  
  Richard Gere is excellent, with a smarmy self-confidence that almost explains how so many supposedly intelligent people could have fallen for what would seem to be a patently obvious hoax.
  
  
• Fool me once...
  By A1YS3I3BIO5M7B on 2007-11-05
  This is an interesting film and an even more interesting set of special features. Most DVDs dealing with actual events don't include any relevant historical footage. I always suspected the DVD producers didn't want to pay royalties to a third party. The Hoax, on the other hand, does not disappoint, and it includes a Mike Wallace interview and the real Clifford Irving.
  
  The movie sometimes moves a bit slow, but the script is well crafted and the acting good, especially by Alfred Molina. This is one of those rare films where it is probably better to watch the Special Features first. You'll appreciate Gere's calm, low-key performance after getting a glimpse of the real Clifford Irving.
  
  The movie promotes itself as being based on a true story. The major events are true enough, but the script is based off a book written by Irving. After Irving fools the corner-office crew at the nations most prestigious media companies, we're suppose to believe Irving's claim that Hughes knew all about the book and manipulated Irving to bring Nixon to heel. Yeah, right. Fool me once...
  The Shut Mouth Society
  The Shopkeeper
  
  
  
• Gere is Great!
  By A146H6A41B26QT on 2007-08-14
  Richard Gere turns in an amazing performance as Clifford Irving in "The Hoax." Irving wrote a notorious "authorized" biography of the reclusive Howard Hughes in the 1970's which was a complete fabrication. He fooled McGraw-Hill, Life magazine, handwriting experts and journalists who had known Hughes before he cut himself off from the world totally. As the story unfolds, Irving turns into Hughes himself, adopting the looks and voice of Hughes as he had been in public many years before. The house of cards collapses in the end, of course, and the movie suggests a twist to the story that may or not be factual, but I'll say no more.
  
  At Gere's first appearance on the screen, I almost didn't recognize him. He's a little old and down on his luck, and it's amazing how the reddish brown curly hair he's been given changes his look entirely. None of the "Pretty Woman" star here. It seems as if he only comes alive when he's lying--to his wife, his best friend, the publishers and lawyers, himself. It's sad, and a great performance.
  
  
  
• This Movie is NO Hoax
  By A2MNMZMM6BGLTA on 2007-10-22
  Just watched this movie and I must say that I enjoyed every minute of it. I had heard about it but couldn't get a real idea by the trailer if I would like it or not. I thought it was a great story and very funny. The acting and casting was also superb. I have heard some critics say that there was a lot of 'playing with the facts' but since I didn't know the facts I took it for what it was to me... entertainment.
  
  I recommend it to everyone.
  
  
• Meh. Read the book instead
  By A2Y9U0BLP7Q9UM on 2007-05-26
  Another lazy, middlebrow Miramax movie for the elderly liberal demographic, complete with an obligatory gratuitous mention of George (H.W.) Bush. Only Miramax could succeed in making the story of the Hughes autobiography scam seem less interesting than it actually was. The book by Clifford Irving is vastly more entertaining.
  
  
• Interesting True Story, but More Interesting if It Were Truer.
  By A3UPYGJKZ0XTU4 on 2007-10-24
  "The Hoax" was inspired by Clifford Irving's book of the same name in which he recounted his nearly-successful attempt to publish the infamously fraudulent "Autobiography of Howard Hughes" in 1971. As the movie tells it, Clifford Irving (Richard Gere) is a struggling novelist, down to his last dollars, when he conceives the idea to misrepresent himself to publisher McGraw-Hill as being chosen by the reclusive, mysterious billionaire Howard Hughes to write his autobiography. With the help of friend and fellow writer Dick Suskind (Alfred Molina), Clifford passes himself off as Hughes' confidant and tracks down information never before published, producing an "autobiography" that puts the Nixon White House on edge and induces Howard Hughes to make his first, and last, public statement in 15 years.
  
  "The Hoax" is an entertaining and intriguing movie. But it's mostly fiction. Characters and events have been re-written. Clifford Irving had money and a 4-book contract. The film portrays him as a penniless failed novelist in order to establish motive. In reality, Irving seems to have conned the press, public, and publishing industry just for fun. Making Irving out to be desperate and deluded is not a bad story, but it begs the question: Why write fiction when the reality is more interesting and has far more commercial potential? Why make a preachy movie when you could make an energetic, irreverent one? The only explanation I have is that this is a conformist, authoritarian time in American history, and the real story of Irving's hoax isn't a lesson in how to be a good citizen. But that doesn't mean that audiences wouldn't prefer the unapologetic, iconoclastic version of the story. Of course we would.
  
  The DVD (Miramax 2007): There are 2 featurettes, 6 deleted scenes with optional commentary, an extended "Business as Pleasure" restaurant scene (6 min), and 2 audio commentaries. "Stranger Than Fiction" (8 min) interviews director Lasse Hallstrom, cast, and others about Irving's motivations, the scam, and Hallstrom's directing style. "Mike Wallace: Reflections on a Con" (4 min) interviews Wallace, who interviewed Irving for "60 Minutes" in 1971, about his impressions of the man. The audio commentary by director Lasse Hallstrom and screenwriter William Wheeler is interesting and constant. They discuss what is true, embellished, or fiction, Irving's motivations, the script, the autobiography. An audio commentary by producers Leslie Holleran and Joshua D. Maurer talks about themes, the political angle, performances, what was fictionalized, and more. There is some overlap but also different historical information in the 2 commentaries. Subtitles are available for the film in English SDH, French, Spanish. Dubbing in Spanish.
  
  
• Not Quite There
  By A4JP4T1F95D0A on 2008-01-31
  Set during the Watergate era of Nixon's presidency. This is the story of the man who faked Howard Hughes autobiography. Gere is decent but unlikeable in his role in a picture that was okay until the end when I couldn't figure out if he was going crazy, or was crazy the whole picture. Also the whole conspiracy thing involving Hughes and Nixon was treated like fact rather than speculation and gossip. An interesting movie, but you are better served by reading the book.
  
  
• When you start believing your own lies!
  By A3RWR50VUII07D on 2008-04-29
  Lasse Hallstrom has put together a slick and tension producing romp in "The Hoax", fueled by a great Carter Burwell soundtrack that catches the pulse pounding of the film. Based on the actual events of Clifford Irving's attempt at fooling the publishing world into thinking that HE has the exclusive interview with the world's most eccentric recluse, billionaire Howard Hughes, Hallstrom spirals Richard Gere as Irving and an extremely comic and refreshingly fattened Alfred Molina as co-auther Dick Susskind, into a second to second, make-it-up-as-you-go, belly-tightener. Watching Gere actually "becoming" Hughes and then believing his own lies is classic fodder for any psychiatrist. The film never has a moment of down time, and leaves you pretty exhausted by the end. The editing keeps the pace of the screenplay, and is smart and tight in telling this story. Hallstrom ties in the world events (Nixon, Viet Nam, TWA scandal etc which sometimes confuses the main objective). "The Hoax" is a great look at con men at their best when they actually start to believe their own con! Now that's commitment AND delusional grandeur!
  
  
• It's All Been a Pack of Lies
  By A18G7GG53G2X8A on 2007-04-09
  Lying is an art form, a commitment requiring every subtle nuance to be perfectly executed. Not only does everyone have to believe the lie, the liar has to, as well; it won't work otherwise. In the early 1970s, author Clifford Irving demonstrated just how good of a liar he was by writing and publishing a fake autobiography of eccentric, reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes. His lie was eventually discovered, prompting him to write the memoir "The Hoax," a nonfiction work documenting his elaborate scheme. Richard Gere plays Irving in the film adaptation; since I know nothing about the real Clifford Irving, I can't say whether or not Gere's portrayal is accurate. However, I can say that he gives a fine performance, giving Irving an untrustworthy edge that becomes all consuming as the film progresses. And the film in general is fascinating--especially in the way that certain characters are so easily manipulated.
  
  In reality, Irving concocted this hoax in 1970 while in Spain, visiting his friend, Richard Suskind. The film alters the events by having the scheme created in America, specifically in New York. Irving is down on his luck; his first book (ironically entitled "Fake!") sold poorly, and his publishers turn down his newest project. In hoping to make money quickly, Irving claims to be working on "the most important book of the century"--an "authorized autobiography" of Howard Hughes. While the folks at McGraw-Hill publishing jump at this, it means that Irving and Suskind (Alfred Molina) will be busy at work, creatively researching the topic. They travel the country, meeting with key figures, copying and/or stealing important documents. Irving forges handwritten notes, perfectly copying Hughes' unique penmanship. He even goes so far as to create recordings of phony interviews, all of which are based on the stolen information.
  
  Thus begins a whirlwind descent into deception, the acquisition of money, and the fear of discovery. The film plays like a three act play, the first act marked by frenetic and, at times, comical attempts at gathering information. The second act is marked by legal squabbling, with "Life" magazine offering McGraw-Hill money for the right to publish a serialized version of the book. The third act is marked by the impending discovery of the hoax and the subsequent collapses. It was interesting how the events played themselves out, with each character deeply embedded in a web of lies. It's hard to imagine how anyone could still determine what was real and what wasn't; at a certain point, it's suggested--but never actually proven--that Irving was kidnapped and threatened by Hughes' personal security team. Anyone who could actually imagine being in that situation has a serious reality distortion problem.
  
  Things come to a head when it's discovered that Hughes had paid Richard Nixon's brother, Donald, as a kind of personal favor. This information is eventually added into the Hughes biography. By the time it gets published, speculations arise that it contributed to Nixon's paranoia over the Democratic National Committee's stay at the Watergate Hotel (I personally think this is a bit of a stretch, but it sure made for good conflict within the context of the story). Such uproar only made for more legal disputes over the Hughes biography, so much so that Hughes made one final "public" appearance (via a live telephone conversation). It's made public that he had never met or even heard of an author named Clifford Irving.
  
  Interweaving throughout is a subplot involving Irving and his wife, Edith (Marcia Gay Harden), whose relationship has barely healed after Irving's affair with a sultry aspiring actress (Julie Delpy). While traveling around the country, Irving reunites with his mistress, knowing full well that Edith doesn't have it in her to forgive him one more time. I got the sense that Irving wanted to get caught, despite being so enveloped by deception (not helped by the fact that Edith is very much involved with the hoax; she travels to Switzerland to cash Hughes' check). While he gets a psychological thrill from lying, he doesn't cover his tracks well enough for the lie to remain undiscovered. He doesn't count on his mistress to send him a note. He doesn't count on Hughes actually making a public statement, denouncing the biography. Yet both things happen, leaving Irving in a situation of his own doing. I never once felt sorry for him.
  
  For that matter, I don't feel sorry for the real Clifford Irving. He's recently said that this film adaptation of "The Hoax" is a hoax of a hoax. That may be the case, but considering his track record, I don't feel he deserves to be taken seriously. And that's the truth.
  
  
• a boring movie for the old time sake and the old timers only
  By A32AK8FOAZEPE2 on 2007-04-26
  i sat in the darkness watching this movie going on the screen, but i didn't feel any connection with it. yes, this hoax is indeed a hoax, but it had happened long long time ago, i seriously doubt people would still be interested. it's like the roman empire, once it's gone, it's gone. you think there would be more people who really care about howard hughes? he's only for the old timers who once lived through that era. did you see signs, logos, names or brands nowadays still carry howard hughes name? except for the old timers in hollywood or those who might be interested in finding how clifford irving, a literary con-artist, conned those moronic publishing media guys, made and ended up themselves like big jokes in the last century.
  to me, this movie is literally a failure just like a bad mystery. why? because we already knew almost everything about it. the interesting part of a mystery is that we couldn't guess 'whodunit' until the last page or the last moment. but this so-called 'hoax', except shot it very seriously and performed quite good by all the actors, is nothing but a mystery we already knew the answer. it's a mystery novel we start reading from the last page backward.
  the only feeling i got when i watched it was: how it possible this clifford irving guy could have fooled so many main stream media guys? unless they were really and actually fools? it just seems highly impossible or, well, the general public common people have become wiser today? because all of those people involved in this hoax and conned by clifford irving just look too comically stupid. you must admit that once the mystic 'whodunit' effect lost from page one, the whole on-going of 'what's going on?' would become totally pointless except time waste, and the whole movie just turned into a bad and boring comedy. why? because it seems only clifford irving was the smart con who outsmarted every one half century ago.
  this 'hoax' is by far the most uninteresting 'hoax' i've ever seen and could have you cared less, lesser or even the least.
  
  
  
• It Must Have Been Something In The Water
  By A3RNP5X8ZGZIEI on 2008-01-30
  "The Hoax," a 2006 comedy drama starring Richard Gere, is set in the Watergate era - think corruption, underhanded dealings and dirty tricks, if you weren't there, during what eventually proved to be American President Richard Milhous Nixon's final days. It tells one of the more interesting tales of the era: the efforts of Clifford Irving, a sinking mid-list novelist, to convince his publishers McGraw-Hill, a major firm, that he had established a relationship with legendary billionaire recluse Howard Hughes, and that the eccentric Hughes was cooperating with the author to write the famous moviemaker/aviation pioneer's biography. It must have been something in the water, because mighty, corporate McGraw-Hill wilfully believed Irving for quite some time.
  
  The movie is based on Irving's own remembrance of his attempted sting, as rewritten for the screen by William Wheeler. It was cleanly directed by Lasse Hallstrom. The 1970s setting is pretty good - clothes, cars and soundtrack. Gere, in a prosthetic nose, can be said to carry the movie: he's in almost every scene. Nobody, not even Gere, can play romantic leads forever, but that offhand, arrogant charm he had as a handsome playboy seems to work here too. He receives able support from Alfred Molina, playing his fellow author/best friend Dick Suskind, who also gets caught up, much to his regret, in the scheme. And, by the by, what a career Molina has had, first coming to public attention as Kenneth Halliwell, murderous gay lover of noted British playwright Joe Orton (Gary Oldman) in 1989's "Prick Up Your Ears." Hope Davis plays Andrea Tate, Irving's agent. Marcia Gay Harden plays Irving's Swiss wife, Edith, and gets to trot out her inner housewife. Stanley Tucci plays Shelton Fish, publisher who signed off on a real bad deal. Eli Wallach plays Hughes' henchman, Noah Dietrich. Julie Delpy plays Swedish folk singer Nina Van Pallandt; of the minor nobility, she was Irving's mistress at the time, and apparently, she got to hang out at the swankier New York hotels. Zelko Ivanek and Ralph Graves have smaller parts; Larry David puts in a cameo.
  
  The film labors to explicitly tie itself to the larger picture, and to suggest some kind of secret dealings between Hughes and Nixon, but it isn't very convincing. Guess you had to be there.
  
  
  
• Cliffords side of the story
  By A3IKLTT9JQACCI on 2008-03-15
  This isn't a documentary about the man who wrote a fake autobiography about the legendary Howard Hughes. It is the tale of the author, from the author's point of view.
  
  The Hoax centers on Clifford Irving, a down on his luck writer, who brilliantly tricks McGraw Hill into publishing his autobiography. Like most delusional writers, Irving finds himself more fascinating than Howard Hughes, the President (Nixon) and the time period itself. He finds himself to be very clever and sees himself as a master puppeteer. Richard Gere does a fine job portraying Irving's smooth arrogance and Alfred Molina is superb as his best friend and co-author.
  
  It's impossible to root for anything other than justice in this film. You won't secretly wish that Irving is successful and retires on a tropical island, but it is interesting to watch his perspective of these historical events. It's fascinating to learn about the connection between Howard Hughes, The President and Watergate for those of us that aren't up on our history books. And the DVD special features are full of facts and interesting information.
  
  There are enough twists in the movie to keep it from falling flat in the third act, however those that are familiar with the true life story seem insulted that Irving is given a voice at all. The movie does end with Clifford all but patting himself on his own back, but again, like it or not, it's his story and he was the slimy crook that lived it.
  
  
  
• What's the REAL story?
  By A3AVJCB1ZD6ZY5 on 2008-05-08
  I'd say only Clifford Irving knows for sure, but as you will be able to see from this film, Irving began to believe his own lies after awhile.
  
  Fed up with the publishing business and fearing his career is over after his successful story of a Picasso forger in "Fake", Clifford Irving (Gere) concocts a grandiose scheme to scam McGraw Hill. He'll write Howard Hughes' biography. The bazillionaire is one of the most famous men in the world, he's a noted recluse, and there's no way Hughes can sue him. If he appears in any US Court, he'll be caught up in another lawsuit that will cost him 137M.
  
  So, Irving his researcher buddy, Richard Suskind (Molina) off his current project. The problem with lying is, when you get a credulous bunch of editors hanging on your every word, you start telling lies. That's when Suskind tells the tale of Howard Hughes giving him an organic prune.
  
  "The Hoax" is based on a true event. Irving actually served 17 months' time in jail for fraud.
  
  The film's interesting and well-acted. What amazes me is how possible the story was with a little research and how well Irving (Gere) seemed to integrate Hughes personna into his own to perpetrate the fraud.
  
  The soundtrack is especially good, featuring songs of the timeframe. Really takes you back to the day.
  
  According to the Clifford Irving website (which I cannot link here due to Amazon restrictions) the hoax book entitled "Howard Hughes: My Story," by Clifford
  Irving is available in a quality paperback
  edition by John Blake Publishers.
  
  
  
  
  
• The biggest hoax of the 1970's.WHAT A STORY!!! 4 1/2******
  By ATXL536YX71TR on 2007-04-06
  When one thinks of "Period Pieces" in the cinema ,pictures of boddice ripping,high-waited Empire dresses and powdered wigs may come to mind.Well, here we have a "Period Piece",but of a different period of flair-bottomed pants,short skirts and a country caught in the throws of an unpopular War.The 1970's were the turbulent Richard Nixon years with the Vietnam War dragging on, the Watergate break in and the numerous White House scandals.If you were there at the time,it was a mess,as America seemed to be coming apart at the seams.The most luminescent"star" figure of the day was the mysterious and most eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes (see Leonardo DiCaprio in AVIATOR for more on Hughes) who,to get an exclusive interview with,was a writer's dream and a publishers "coup de grace".Enter Clifford Irving,a novelist (Richard Gere) whose latest novel with Mc Graw-Hill Publishers has been rejected.Irving,with the help of his partner,Richard Susskind ( the most amazing scene stealing performance EVER by Alfred Molina!),hatches an elaborated hoax that persuades McGraw-Hill,and their representative,Andrea Tate (absolutely another show -stopping performance by the underappreciated Hope Davis!)that HE alone has the ear of Howard Hughes and that a subsequent "authorized memoir" is forthcoming.If this story was not absolutely true,it may not be as frightening as it actually is!Irving lies,manuevers,and connives his way into the publishers confidences and convinces the most skeptical of critics that his book is positively the authorized autobiography of Hughes.If you are not familiar with the actual events that transpire then this movie will grip you with the audacity and incredulity of the entire affair.This book not only contains the memoirs of the eccentric billionaire,but more importantly it contains information that,though absolutely accurate and substantiated, can destroy the President and Hughes himself!The problem is that the book IS a hoax.This is the real dilemma that plays out the rest of this film .Devotees of the work of director Lasse Halstrom (CHOCOLAT,CIDER HOUSE RULES,SHIPPING NEWS,CASANOVA,WHAT'S EATING GIBERT GRAPE) will greet his newest creation with much applause.The story is gripping,swiftly and taughtly paced,with two great Oscar- worthy performances by Alfred Molina and Hope Davis.Marcia Gay Harden plays Edith Irving in a much less supportive role and Richard Gere is more than adequate in his portrayal of the conniving,almost manic Irving.The film ,though, truly belongs to Molina and Davis.
  THE HOAX evokes an earlier hoax film SHATTERED GLASS and the undoing of one lying writer for The New Republic Periodical.
  What the Halstrom film brings to light is that once a person lies,everything they do and say afterwards is met with a jaundiced eye.The fact that Irving later wrote a book entitled THE HOAX concerning the entire Hughes affair shows that the public must always be aware of what they see and hear and are told.That was the 1970's,a period of time, that now filmmakers choose to bring to the screen.These are the "new period pieces" of this Millenium!Along with the recent BOBBY and THE ASSASSINATION OF RICHARD NIXON here is hoping that more films will enlighten audiences in years to come.
  
  
• The Humor Behind The Hoax
  By AUEHG0DB54B7K on 2007-04-16
  
  When I saw the trailers for The Hoax I was not all that interested in seeing the film. I recalled when Clifford Irving's book was announced and the subsequent scandal occurred and I was a little dubious about making a film about it. I was convinced to see the movie after reading about Richard Gere's performance and the talk lives up to reality. The film is beautifully acted by Mr. Gere, Alfred Molina and Marcia Gay Harden. At first, for a few seconds, I did not even recognize Ms. Harden because of the blond wig and the thick German accent that she uses for her character - Edith Irving.
  
  The film is also far more entertaining and thought provoking that I would have thought. Instead of a gritty portrayal of one of the biggest frauds in the literary world it comes off with much more humor and elegance as Clifford Irving tries to keep one step ahead of his publisher's doubts and manages to parry serious questions about the authenticity of his manuscript. The film becomes a game for the audience to see how well Irving can pull off his scam. It was interesting how the film visually showed Irving's thought process as he is making up his lies, associating bits and pieces of scenes that occurred earlier in the film. For me the ironic bit is that the book would have been a good biography of Howard Hughes since Irving had to research Hughes' life so thoroughly and had access to the book Noah Dietrich had written about Hughes.
  
  It was good to see Eli Wallach in the small role of Noah Dietrich and Stanley Tucci was good as Sheldon Fischer. Julie Delpy was good as Nina Van Pallandt, who was the only person who truly benefited from the scandal by subsequently launching a film career. It is interesting that Richard Gere appeared with her in American Gigolo. How ironic that he is now having a fictional affair with an actress playing her. The film is an interesting story about literary fraud but there also is a side plot that Howard Hughes used Clifford Irving's book to get what he wanted from the Nixon administration. I found this part of the story quite fascinating that Mr. Hughes could have realized that Irving's book could be used to get him over a difficult government law suite over TWA and then, once his goal was accomplished, disown the book. Unfortunately, The Hoax has not been showing on many screens so if one wants to see the film it may be a bit of a search for a theater.
  
  
  
• "Howard and Me and Clifford"
  By A3M2WW0PO34B94 on 2007-05-04
  Clifford Irving (Richard Gere), a writer whose first book didn't sell well, is desperate to get his next book going. His connection at McGraw Hill, Andrea Tate (Hope Davis), assures him the company loves the new book, will publish it, they are just waiting for Time magazine to look at it for possible serialization. A couple of days later, the editor of Time hates the book and McGraw Hill is no longer publishing. Clifford is desperate for something to happen; his furniture is being repossessed, so he turns to his wife, Edith (Marcia Gay Harden), a painter, and his best friend, Dick Susskind (Alfred Molina) for help and suggestions. Clifford and Dick decide to escape for a few days to the Bahamas. In the middle of the night, the entire hotel is evacuated because the owner, Howard Hughes, wants to spend a few nights there and he is notoriously germ phobic. Back home in upstate New York, Clifford gets an idea. He will write the "autobiography" of Howard Hughes. It is the perfect plan; the subject never appears in public, he won't fight the book because of pending litigation against his airline, TWA, and Clifford can make a mint. He manages to convince McGraw Hill he has a connection to the reclusive billionaire and events start to spiral out of control. At one point, Clifford even suspects Hughes may be secretly feeding him information.
  
  "The Hoax", directed by Lasse Hallstrom ("The Cider House Rules", "Chocolat"), and based on the book by Clifford Irving, is an interesting look at how far one man is able to take his tall tales. It isn't a perfect film, but it is enjoyable. I can't help but think if the film had been released last fall, it might be doing better box office. It seems like a fall type of offering; a little low key, a period piece, some funny bits, some dramatic bits, a difficult to categorize film.
  
  Set in 1971, Hallstrom seems to have gone to great pains to capture the look and feel of the era. The main characters in the story are either the rich or the middle class, so everyone seems to have well thought out outfits with period authentic hairstyles that help transport us to this time and place. This isn't a world filled with protesters, or hippies, so everyone acts very `civilized' and this could also be considered a fault of the film. Given the story takes place in the early 70s, there are few mentions of protestors, the war, etc., and there is surprisingly little of this type of discussion or impact on the story. Late in the film, Irving realizes he has something that may affect Nixon, and there is some discussion of this, and the story then connects to Watergate. But until this point, there are only brief glimpses of newsreel footage, to remind us of the events surrounding these people. Events that seem to have little impact on this group of characters.
  
  "Hoax" works best when Gere uses events from Irving's life to fabricate the character's tall tales. In an effort to convince the publishers at McGraw Hill that he is legitimate, Irving begins to create a story, using a phrase his nervous friend, Dick, uttered, making it into a believable encounter with the eccentric millionaire. As Gere tells these stories, Hallstrom provides a stream of consciousness parade of images that we have already seen, to illustrate the tale, showing us the type of huckster Irving is. Clifford really lucked onto a sort of "perfect storm" of hoaxes; he reads some magazine articles about Hughes and then learns more information before deciding to try to emulate the eccentric, little seen man's speech patterns and voice. The publisher brings in a man who actually met and worked with Hughes, an expert, and he is convinced Irving is telling the truth. As Irving says, "the more outrageous I sound, the more everyone believes me."
  
  Gere does a nice job of portraying Irving's manic aura; he is a desperate man and the lies he creates make him even more desperate. Initially, he is trying to get another book published, to pay some of the bills he and Edith have accumulated. Later, he is desperate to keep the fiction going because he is able to secure a huge advance for the story. Now, he has to keep everyone believing the autobiography is true. Every time he appears on screen, Gere displays his character's confidence in his scheme, but his eyes shift around and he isn't completely able to hide Irving's restless nature. Towards the end, and only then, does Gere seem to let Irving calm down a bit, when he realizes there is no escape.
  
  Alfred Molina is good as Dick Susskind, Irving's researcher, friend and co-hort. He seems to go along with the idea, at least initially, because creating this famous man's life intrigues him, trying to make it as real as possible is a challenge. Then, they stumble upon an old associate of Hughes (played by Eli Wallach, a nice, slightly eccentric performance), who has written a sort of secret autobiography of his own, which he doesn't intend to publish. But Susskind realizes it has valuable, secret information - transcripts of phone conversations, meetings, and deal memos - in it that would only help to enhance their fiction. As they get deeper and deeper into the lies, Susskind becomes more and more nervous.
  
  Marcia Gay Harden plays Edith, Clifford's Swiss wife, who is trying to complete the paintings she needs for an art gallery opening. Their relationship is interesting. She occasionally reminds Clifford of his extramarital affairs and has forgiven him, but dreads a relapse. She is very anxious about his trips into the city because she doesn't want him to continue to meet Her (Julie Delpy). Edith and Clifford are clearly in love, but there is also a hint of desperation in her dealings with her husband.
  
  Stanley Tucci and Zeljko Ivanek ("The Manchurian Candidate", TV's "Homicide", "Law and Order") pop up as publishers (the head of McGraw Hill and the publisher of Life magazine respectively) and lend an air of gravitas to the story.
  
  As Irving continues to weave his lies, he receives a box in the mail. Postmarked from Las Vegas, with no return address, the box contains paperwork that could only have come from Hughes files. Were they stolen? Who sent them? As Clifford looks through them, he realizes there is evidence linking bribes from Hughes to Nixon. This is powerful stuff and Clifford shows it to his publisher, insists it be published in the book. Hughes may be insisting on it as well. Throughout the film, there are small exchanges and conversations Irving uses to inform his `tall tales'. "Hoax" smartly weaves this idea into the story, using it again in another way.
  
  "The Hoax" is a better film than I expected or anticipated; the story moves fast and the characters are interesting. But the film almost seems to be painting broad strokes. We don't get a full sense of many of the supporting characters. Hope Davis' role is weak. If Irving is such a hack writer, why is she so interested in helping him out? Tucci and Ivanek add the requisite bluster, but it is difficult to see beyond these single notes. When Tucci's character confronts Irving, he is incredulous when the writer calls of the deal, creating a showdown. Later, when the book starts to fall apart, he announces that they have too much invested in it; they are going to go ahead and publish it. But you also get the sense that he realizes, even in the early 70s, that no publicity is bad publicity.
  
  If you see "The Hoax", and your attention will be held, you might also consider renting Orson Welles' "F for Fake", a film he made in the mid-70s, in which he tries to determine if certain things are true or false. One of the subjects is Clifford Irving and Welles interviews him for the film. It is a strange film, but it would give you the opportunity to see the subject of "The Hoax" in person.
  
  
  
• A Good Job of Faking It
  By A387BD735MI50R on 2007-10-29
  This movie takes us into the heady realm of reality twice (or is it three times?) removed. Richard Gere does a wonderful job of projecting himself into the head of author Clifford Irving, just as Irving in turn projected himself into the head of Howard Hughes in the 1970s. The result is an absorbing dramatization of the resulting scandal.
  
  Irving claimed to have gained exclusive access to Hughes and to have produced a book revealing the mind of that reclusive mystery-man. When Hughes came out of seclusion to deny ever having met, much less having given intimate biographical detail to Irving - the whole house of cards fell. Because of Hughes' far-reaching influence, the scandal reverberated through the halls of power. "Hoax" does a find job tracing that downfall.
  
  However, like me, you might be bothered by a few false notes here. There is generally good buddy chemistry between Richard Gere and Fred Molina who plays Irving's collaborator in the hoax. But the script makes Molina too much the goofy sidekick at times, too much the fidgety foul-up. It's endearing, like Pat Butram and Gene Autry - but it isn't very believable.
  
  Also, Marcia Gay Hardin's accent and overall performance as Irving's European wife, overwrought at his infidelities, sometimes comes across as being a little forced. Maybe not though. Some of these wrinkles seem to hang out with the weight of a second, more informed viewing.
  
  Actually, there's a lot on this DVD, both in the movie itself, and in the bonus materials - so you might want to give yourself time to go through it all. There are two commentaries. One is given by the Director and Writer - the other by the Producers. If you have time for only one, I suggest you make it the Producers' remarks. Once it gets going, it's livelier and packed with more inside information about which parts of the film were invented or exaggerated for dramatic effect, and which parts are strictly factual.
  
  There's a common thread running through film and commentary alike though. The whole DVD is suffused with a tone of awe, almost of reverence. Gere captures how in awe Irving was of Hughes, channeling him, trying to become him. The commentaries in turn show how in awe the filmmakers generally are of Irving, how much they admire the sheer nerve he exhibited in pulling off such a deception for as long as he did. All this admiration seems a little misplaced.
  
  If this movie should pique your interest in Howard Hughes, I recommend you try to get a copy of the TV miniseries "The Amazing Howard Hughes" that aired a few decades ago and starred Tommy Lee Jones. There have been prize-winning movies on the subject, including the recent "Aviator." But for me, that earlier production with Jones is the definitive visual version of Hughes' life. Talk about channeling - Tommy Lee Jones truly became Hughes. "The amazing Howard Hughes" also provides a more realistic view in that it shows how often Hughes persisted in making bad business decisions and consequently in letting money geyser out of his accounts - hardly a universal "genius," hardly someone any enterprising person would want to hold in reverence.
  
  
• Fairly entertaining but also fairly innacurate.
  By A5KMMY627T3W on 2007-11-10
  This makes for an entertaining afternoon at the movies (or evening at home on DVD) but it's too bad that like most Hollywood fare it had to be so polished up that it lost a lot of the realness.
  
  Richard Gere, while doing a great job acting here, plays Clifford in a way completely removed from reality. It's not Gere's fault; it's the script's/director's fault. The real life Clifford is a sleaze ball. He is not fun and whimsical as Gere has portrayed him to be.
  
  
  This whole movie is just way too slick. Everything is presented in a slick, seamless Hollywood style of acting and storytelling. The cold realities of the story are not presented to us. Similar movies that got the gritty reality right are "Shattered Glass" and "The Insider." This movie almost plays like a musical without the music. Also it plays almost satirical at times like "Wag the Dog." All of that would be fine if that is what they are going for, but I was under the impression they were going for a "true story" feel like "The Insider." It just doesn't hit the right note that the real life story dictates in my opinion.
  
  Again the real life guy is a low down sleaze ball and social parasite; nowhere near as likable and charismatic as Gere has played him here.
  
  
• Huckster
  By A2LUJINJYU5G9E on 2007-12-05
  I bought this film because it was directed by Lasse Halstrom. I can't put my finger on it, but there was something missing in this film. I admit I may be biased because I'm not a Richard Gere fan, but this film seemed a bit lazy in places and not well developed in others. As far as the real story of Clifford Irving's shenanigans, it's hard to believe someone would go to such lengths to become famous and it's even harder to believe that he duped an entire industry. In the end though, while the subject matter made for some interesting history, the movie failed to fully flush out the characters and the reason for their indiscretions both publicly and privately.
  
  
• Richard Gere...
  By A33PNAQ33DGBJG on 2007-10-26
  always seems to find the strangest movies to participate in. He does a great job in this one. The movie is about a man that is a down on his luck author that wants to get published so bad he goes to extreme of making up an authorized biography of Howard Hughes. Things go awry and prison time is served for him and his co-horts. I wouldn't say this is a family movie but isn't too bad. I watched it on airplane flight so I think it may have been edited.
  
  It is an interesting movie that makes you want to find out more about the character the movie is about.
  
  
• What a tangled web we weave.....
  By A1IOJE0W1NXOSE on 2007-11-10
  Clifford Irving fools some of the biggest names in the publishing world, when he convinces them that the reclusive Howard Hughes has authorized him to write Hughes' biography. Determined to make a name for himself, Irving (played by Richard Gere) stays just one step ahead of discovery by a creating a tangled web of lies and deceit. Irving states that since Hughes is so eccentric, the more bizarre his lies, the more likely that others will believe him. His sidekick and "researcher" is ably played by Alfred Molina who himself becomes a victim of Irving's charade. As the movie progresses, Irving becomes obsessed with his deception and almost appears to believe it himself. This is a very interesting rendering of a pivotal point in history which implicates a president, as well as an author.
  
  
• Good Job
  By A29I9VL8PQ2G0J on 2007-12-14
  This film features great acting, an engaging story line, and is well directed. Richard Gere is perfect for the role of Clifford Irving, which begs the question: is Mr. Gere really a friend of the Dalai Lama or has he been pulling our collective leg.
  
  
• H for Hoax
  By A220FJEQNGMSRN on 2008-02-13
  Would you buy the autobiography of Howard Hughes from a man who wrote a book about art fraud and whose novel you'd just rejected as a pale imitation of another author's work? You would if you were McGraw-Hill and you were almost as afraid of looking stupid if it turns out to be real and you rejected it than if it turns out to be a fake you handed out a million dollar advance for. It's a pitch so ridiculous it could only be a true story, though quite how true the sadly overlooked The Hoax is is open to question since it's based on the how-I-nearly-got-away-with-it book by the fraud in question, Clifford Irving, who in turns claims he was defrauded by the filmmakers who turned his book into pure fiction...
  
  The real Irving can be seen in Orson Welles F For Fake, where he goes from expert on art frauds to a literary fraud himself in the course of the film, but while Welles doesn't figure in Lasse Hallström's film it does share some of the devious sense of fun the semi-documentary displayed. The mechanics of the fraud - looking up Hughes' Senate testimony for syntax and speech patterns, photocopying a Hughes' aide's manuscript for insider gossip - are detailed as an exhilarating adrenaline rush, the film perfectly capturing the intoxicating thrill that comes with thinking you're getting away with an outrageous scam and the crash into paranoia as you defend the indefensible so much that the only person you end up fooling is yourself. It also delights in the constant Alice in Wonderland logic of it all: as Richard Gere's Irving explains to Alfred Molina as his researcher and `co-author' Richard Susskind, "(Hughes will) never come out of hiding long enough to denounce me because he's a lunatic hermit and I am the spokesman for the lunatic hermit, so the more outrageous I sound, the more convincing I am!" Too convincing, because Irving gradually starts becoming Hughes as he dictates the millionaire's `memoirs' in the millionaires clothes and pencil moustache until he starts believing his own lies and manages to convince himself that maybe Hughes really is collaborating on the book in his own way to further his own political ends. Just to add to the absurdity, when Hughes does indeed break cover to denounce the book, the experts think the recluse is so contradictory that no-one initially believes his denials!
  
  There are occasional missteps - it's hard to believe that Irving's lover would describe herself to him as shallow and the film does threaten to overreach itself as it outlines a possible conspiracy with Hughes using the controversy to gain leverage with Nixon, inadvertently precipitating Watergate, but by this point it's possible that everything we see is just a fantasy fuelled by Irving's hubris and overactive imagination. Even a couple of truly terrible bits of back projection, one intentional, one not, seem entirely acceptable in context. Boasting a boxer's nose and an air of self-righteous hunger, Gere gives his best performance since Internal Affairs, while Molina and Stanley Tucci offer very different but complimentary comic performances (the one driven by sweaty desperation, the other by callous arrogance) and Hallström's direction is better than anything he's done in years (there's a particularly great shot late in the film at the moment of Irving's triumph of Hughes' suddenly malignant photo over his shoulder practically willing him on to his self-destruction).
  
  So, is the last third a hoax? Is the whole film? With a delightful lack of irony, Irving has publicly criticized the film, claiming it completely distorts events by making him look dumb and is a complex hoax that trivializes his achievement. And who are we to doubt him?
  
  
  

• A Mighty Heart
• Mr. Brooks
• Michael Clayton (Widescreen Edition)
• Gone Baby Gone
• 3:10 to Yuma (Widescreen Edition)