Joe Gould's Secret

Based on a true story, "Joe Gould's Secret" could well remain a secret, despite its stellar cast and story. Ian Holm plays Joe Gould, a Harvard graduate turned street-person eccentric whom the film portrays living in 1940s New York. Stanley Tucci delivers a brilliant perforance as the real-life Joe Mitchell, a writer for The New Yorker magazine, who stumbles into Gould and his vision of the magnum opus "oral history" he has been writing through his life. Susan Sarandon plays a magnificent role as one of Gould's contemporaries, an avant-garde painter in that fabulous nascent period between The Bohemians and The Beatniks. And Patricia Clarkson, in a role consisting of a little more than a couple of cameos, acts the role of one of Gould's most generous patrons.It starts out easy enough -- with Mitchell, the New Yorker writer, finding Gould at a lunch counter. Gradually a friendship is started between the two men. Mitchell eventually writes an article called "Professor Sea Gull" and fan letters containing a few dollars for the "Joe Gould Fund" start to arrive at Mitchell's office. Meanwhile, Mitchell is trying to get his hands on what he thinks might be a Holy Grail of sorts -- Gould's opus "Oral History" in notebooks stashed a half-dozen at a time at various patrons' and friends' houses through New York. The actual treasure trove of the 9-million word History, consisting of 20,000 interviews, remains elusive and out of Mitchell's reach. Even after Gould's death, Mitchell keeps trying to find the farmhouse, where, wrapped in oilcloth, lie the rest of Gould's notebooks and the Great Oral History. Many years later, Mitchell writes his last New Yorker piece on what he has learned about the story.

The action takes place in New York City in the 1940s, Joe Gould died in 1957, and Joe Mitchell wrote the book “Joe Gould’s Secret” in 1964 to reveal the secret. I lived in New York in the 1940s and redd the book when it first came out. I found the book better than the movie, for the following reason: The climax of the story comes when the secret is reveal. After that the book comes to an end fairly quickly with a brief summing up. But the movie continues on for about 30 minutes, diminishing the dramatic impact. Thus it becomes a biography of Joe Gould, rather than a good dramatic story of the revealing of his secret. It could have profited from some extensive editing. There are many excellent features of the movie (which other reviewers have mentioned) but I only gave it 3 stars instead of 4 because of what it might have been.

I really enjoyed this movie. It had a lot going for it. Holm turns in a simply fantastic performance, Tucci is equally as good, if not much more subdued. They are ably supported by an excellent cast. The movie does an excellent job evoking the bohemian world of New York in the 1940's and, less so, of the New Yorker magazine.Now that I think about it, the title of the movie is misleading. It is not about Joe Gould's secret, it is really about Joe Mitchell and his secret. Actually, it takes its title from a great article Mitchell wrote and is more about him and his writing. Joe Gould is not the enigma, for Holm's bravura performance is right in your face all movie long, it is Mitchell that is the puzzle.I found the story to be engrossing, but it is an odd movie about a very odd person whom not all may be interested in (sort of like Jeff Bridges' alcoholic country singer in Crazy Heart.) The movie is not long, but it does feel that it takes its time. That said, there are few wasted screen moments, and even those that seem to dwell on Gould are, through the lens, always telling the viewer something.What ended up really intriguing me is "the secret" and how it impacted on Joe Mitchell, being Tucci's character. I am not giving the movie full marks because there are a few fairly important scenes that just weren't clear to me until I had given the movie some thought and did a bit of reading. Normally I have faith that a good movie will give me all the info I need, presented in a comprehensibly way, to understand what it means and how the parts fit. And I like to think I'm a quick enough study to fill in any blanks.So, being intrigued, I did some reading and only afterwards did I appreciate the rich and complex screenplay. It is so because Gould and Mitchell are so complex, as is their fascinating relationship.This is all the more thought provoking in light of the recent biography of Joe Mitchell. I am not giving anything away here, as it does not impact on the movie plot, but ... Mitchell was a famed New Yorker writer, part of cadre that really gave the magazine a "New York" voice in the 1940s and 1950s. But it has be proven that some of his most memorable articles included characters that were composites, essentially fictionalized people. Now, while this would not stand present day journalistic scrutiny, it may have been acceptable 60+ years ago. That said, it makes you wonder about the relationship between Mitchell and Gould and their similarities. Tucci could not have known these facts, but I think this is what he was getting at in his nuanced direction and performance.I loved Tucci and Holm in The Big Night and it was a pleasure to see them again in Joe Gould's Secret.