At the Movies – The Essential Truths

– By Noah Gittell –

Richard Gere is a good liar. He has in fact built his 30-year career on playing one, whether it be the two-faced lawyer he portrayed in “Chicago” and “Primal Fear,” or the impostor husband of Jodie Foster in “Sommersby,” a discourse on the nature of lies and identity. And even when not playing an overt liar, he gravitates towards characters hiding essential truths from themselves, as in “An Officer and a Gentleman” and “Pretty Woman.” Of course, playing a liar is the apotheosis of film acting. The actor must be able to share the truth of his character with the audience but make the lie he is telling in the scene seem convincing.

A fine actor, Gere has never been better than in “The Hoax,” a movie that seems tailor-made to his strengths and weaknesses. It is the mostly true story of Clifford Irving, a writer who, in a financial pinch, cooks up a great idea for a book to sell to McGraw-Hill. The book? An authorized biography of Howard Hughes. The problem? Irving has been given no such authority and has in fact never met Hughes.

Irving’s ingenious and daring plan is contingent on Hughes’ well-known seclusion. For the authority of the book to be challenged, Hughes would have to appear before the world and publicly dispute it, which Irving bets he will never do.

The movie frames Irving as a compulsive liar, but “The Hoax” lies firmly in the con-man movie genre. We root for Irving to fool the publishing executives for the same reason we root for any con man: because he is part of a larger fantasy that there is a shortcut around life’s personal miseries and our claimed injustices. Irving’s idea is hatched after his latest book deal falls through. Drawing on our own experiences of personal failure, it is easy to understand Irving’s motivation for creating this hoax. He is motivated only by success and disregards the moral implications. And for much of the running time, “The Hoax” qualifies as escapist cinema, letting us take a break from our own moral standards to join Irving on the ride.

While Gere has a knack for choosing roles and possesses more charisma per square inch than anyone around, he lacks emotional range. Director Lasse Hallstrom turns this to his advantage by surrouding Gere with some of the finest character actors in the business. Oscar-winner Marcia Gay Harden, as Irving’s wife, wisely underplays the character’s codependency, leading to a powerful emotional climax. Stanley Tucci appears, briefly but memorably, as Shelton Fisher, president of the publishing house. While Irving is blinded by his chances for success, it is through the work of these actors that we fully understand the effect his lies have on those around him.

But it's Alfred Molina who steals the show as Irving’s friend and partner in crime, Dick Susskind. Susskind sees the entire enterprise as a vacation of sorts from his wife and children, but quickly gets in over his head. The veteran character actor Molina (“Boogie Nights,” “Frida”) plays him as a man who shares Irving’s sense of adventure but lacks the cool and calm to get away with it. In lesser hands, it would have been a throwaway comic role. Molina makes him into the moral compass of the film. It is an Oscar-worthy performance.

While the issue of casting is paramount, Hallstrom deserves his share of praise. Never afraid of changes in tone, he makes certain that the film provides several different experiences for the viewer. When things are going well for Irving, the movie is funny, fast-paced, and sharp. As his lies (and his mind) begin to unravel, it is dark, mysterious, and confusing. Hallstrom’s work has varied from the subtle character stories, such as “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape” and “My Life as a Dog” to lighter, romantic fare, such as “Chocolat” and last year’s “Casanova.” “The Hoax” incorporates the best elements of both genres.

Hallstrom’s only real misstep is his attempt at instilling a political undercurrent. There are clumsy parallels drawn between Irving’s charade and our current political climate, coupled with a bold, though largely unfounded, theory that the break-in at the Watergate had something to do with Clifford Irving. These elements may simply have been an attempt to expand the scope of the story, or there may be a real connection. Either way, Hallstrom never fully commits to the idea, and it comes off as a mere distraction.

But there is a certain intangible consistency to the film that makes it work exceedingly well. There is a synergy in its elements, from casting to acting to the understated art direction (the story is set in the early '70s). It is a subjective and personal vision of true events, yes. But, to put it simply, it never lies.