The Player's industry satire stings, now more than ever

In the wake of The Studio, the film that introduced Griffin Mill feels even more prescient.

The Player's industry satire stings, now more than ever

The Studio‘s Griffin Mill (Bryan Cranston) swaggers into the first episode of the Apple TV+ series like a New Hollywood mover and shaker, a Robert Evans caricature defined by his ’70s bravado and turtleneck-with-suit swinger style. The CEO passes the studio head torch to Seth Rogen’s Matt Remick, who embodies yet constantly fails to live up to the idealized “artists first” mentality that defines that mythologized era in filmmaking. This inevitable, repeated, farcical failure—as wrapped up in the hard truths of the business as it is in Remick’s insatiable need to be liked by the directors and movie stars he keeps screwing over—lends the hypermodern industry crisis of The Studio a simple, sweet, slapstick mania. But a primary source for the series, and the direct source for Hollywood asshole Griffin Mill, satirizes moviemaking with a more timeless bitterness: Robert Altman‘s 1992 comedy The Player.

The original Griffin Mill (Tim Robbins), The Player himself, is both studio executive and caricature. Like Matt Remick, he traipses around Los Angeles in expensive double-breasted suits, introducing himself over and over again to celebrities making cameos as themselves, all of whom seem to hate him. He orders endless varieties of fancy water, and never sticks around long enough to sip them. He hears vapid pitch after vapid pitch from screenwriters desperate to play the game, and treats them like flies buzzing in his ear. This is the biggest difference between these projects: The Studio follows an executive obsessed with a dying breed of filmmaker, while The Player follows a self-obsessed executive who only cares about filmmakers when one finally threatens to kill him.

These threats, sent in via anonymous postcards, are the only things adding a bit of movie magic to Mill’s studio—a glorified office park overrun by fax machines and wall-mounted toy basketball hoops. More concerned with backstabbing work politics, looking busy, and other signifiers of the increased corporatization of the industry, The Player only begins feeling “like a movie” when the folks that write them snap. This dramatic ploy, which writer Michael Tolkin adapts from his own (darker) novel, fits into all the other self-aware pieces of filmmaking Robert Altman deploys to make Griffin Mill’s sordid story resemble one of the feel-bad noirs whose posters ornament his walls. As Mill falls down the rabbit hole of his own personal crime flick—filled with murder, sex, cops, and schemes—the story of a changed Hollywood starts to look a lot like a story told by old Hollywood.

Altman had spent a decade out of favor with Hollywood after his Popeye adaptation flopped back in 1980. His return was angry, yet run through with the affection for film that The Studio mostly just namechecks. Some of that is simply a matter of tone. Rogen and team’s series uses long tracking shots to instill a panicky energy into its softer, sillier, quote-tweet dunk of the film world. Each episode becomes an extended walk-and-talk nightmare, more in line with workplace comedies than film genres (true even of the voiceover-heavy Chinatown riff “The Missing Reel”). The choice to lean on this showy technique—itself glaringly self-referential in the unbroken-take episode “The Oner”—is a direct reference to the opening eight-minute oner of The Player, which features a character meta-griping about the quick-cut style taking over the industry and lamenting the bygone days of elaborately planned shots like that in Orson Welles’ Touch Of Evil.

As much as The Studio digs at the state of the industry, it’s also hard to imagine any of its characters referencing Welles, or The Graduate (which Buck Henry pitches a legacyquel to), or Bicycle Thieves (which Mill half-heartedly floats remaking). Even The Player‘s main in-movie production gag (a legal weepy called Habeas Corpus), which is paid off with a delightfully cynical sell-out sequence to end the movie, would feel like an outlier in today’s cinematic landscape. A drama for adults not adapting other material, featuring big stars and something as grounded as the American legal system? Welcome to streaming, buddy. The Player is clear that the evil rich guys will always fail up, but it is poignant, at least, to look at a moment when even the greedy bastards at the top (and the mass markets they sought to exploit) actually knew a thing or two about movies.

But the most searing part of The Player‘s industry takedown, the one that’s become most insightful with age, comes from Mill’s work rival, fellow bloodsucking exec Larry Levy (Peter Gallagher). As Altman creatively plays with light, shadow, and scene constructions—with abstract love scenes, breakfast conversations that overlap as the frame shifts its focus from fore to background, and a bleakly cheery ending with a plasticky sheen—the characters he films argue that being a “creative type” is on its way out. All the studio stuffed shirts think they’re smarter, more cultured, and generally just better than those they employ to make the movies, but this mindset’s spokesperson is Levy. Mill literally gets away with murder, but Levy gives him a run for his money at the Douche Olympics.

Gallagher, even more handsome and smug and hateable than Robbins, shines throughout the film, but he sticks a hot poker into the business’ soft underbelly during his big scene, in which Levy spins random headlines into loglines like he’s refitting a printing press with plates for dollar bills. As he bullshits scripts into the ether with little more than a working knowledge of tropes and an improv student’s prompts, his condescending attitude—not to mention his success at making the examples all sound like movies—is an ill portent for the industry. With these templated layouts plausibly turning profits, it’s no wonder Levy wants to rid Hollywood of professional writers. Why would a business so often accused of being imaginatively bankrupt need or want people to come up with original ideas? With generative AI usage on the rise in all industries, there’s a new wave of pessimism around human artistry. Now, when Mill quips back at Levy, “If we could just get rid of these actors and directors, maybe we’ve got something here,” it’s too close to reality to be that funny.

If that aspect of The Player feels oddly prescient, the rest of it reflects (much like The Studio) the self-reflexive demands of its contemporary era. The Player contains all the things Mill says a studio needs to market a film successfully: “Suspense. Laughter. Violence. Hope. Heart. Nudity. Sex. Happy endings.” How do you market a film successfully now? Make it prestige TV instead. The industry has made great strides in avarice since The Player. Happy endings might test better than sad endings, “up” better than “down.” But now, companies have realized that ending at all is a liability. All movies need to conclude with stingers for potential sequels; The Studio has already been renewed for a second season. Its chaotic finale—in which its version of Mill has been reduced to a literal puppet, drugged and swinging down from rafters on strings—culminates with the trite, unquestioning chant of “Movies! Movies! Movies!” This is the one reference that actually might be more bleak than its inspiration in The Player: At least in the former film, the studio’s optimistic yet anodyne slogan was, “Movies, now more than ever!” Mustering even that kind of bland platitude now feels dishonest, even for a satire.

 
Join the discussion...