The movie is actually fairly dull, not that funny, with kooky characters that are just kooky and not that interesting. That said, it makes an important statement about Hollywood and Hollywood screen writing.The consensus is that this film accurately explains the hellish environment a Hollywood screenwriter goes through in trying to chase their dreams. I've read a couple of biographies of famous writers and the issues they mention are shown in this film. While most people presume that everything we see in a movie is based on the many concrete choices made by its screenwriter or director, the reality is different. For a screenwriter either you never get the film made the way you want it, or you chase the paycheck and compromise with the money men.In this movie the money men are only willing to put up money for a film as long as their girlfriend is handed a juicy part. This of course means the main character, a screenwriter played by Bob Wuhl, has to decide to compromise or not to compromise. A complication exists in that his wife is in New York, trying to get their dreams of a restaurant up and running. Unfortunately this isn't a real fallback option, since she isn't his muse; the Hollywood dream is. Thus the concept "mistress" is multifaceted. Is it a reference to the girlfriends of the producers? Is it his wife? Is it Hollywood? Is it his dream of being a famous respected artist? The movie could have gone deeper and been a powerful satire, a wonderfully entertaining critique and an important cautionary tale. Regrettably its not as deep as all that and only succeeds at the latter. Perhaps this is in itself a statement. A very formulaic film done on purpose to explain why most Hollywood films are indeed formulaic? It feels like a precursor to Adaptation. Or am I trying to see things that aren't there?In any case while the whole experience is a little watered down, if you know someone that wants to be a screenwriter you should show them this film as it does lift the lid on the Hollywood dream and reveals how it really is, at least most of the time. For a better quality satire on the same topic watch The Player (1992).

This film has a few good moments. The story line about the director as an artist unable to overcome the devastating end of his first try to film his masterpiece is convincing and moving. The rest of the plot about the producers and all their girlfriends is silly. But, as you work through this dichotomy, you realize what is happening - somewhat in the manner of "Adaptation," the journey of the script in question is echoed by the journey of the characters to produce the script. However, this film has none of the wit and pace of Adaptation. The characters are fairly one dimensional. Al Pacino does a shrill and annoying job of playing a shrill and annoying character.

The info button described MISTRESS as thus " An earnest screenwriter sees his dream mangled in the Hollywood movie machine . Robert DeNiro is a crass moneyman demanding a role for his talentless mistress " Great I thought , this is going to be like THE KING OF COMEDY except it`s set in Hollyloot . Twenty minutes later DeNiro`s still not appeared and I`m aware of one thing - info buttons are never right The info button wasn`t so much wrong but it was rather misleading . DeNiro does indeed play a crass moneyman who is after a role for his mistress but she`s not exactly talentless . The plot mainly revolves around a failed director/screenwriter called Marvin who finds himself having to severly alter his script if he wants it produced , it`s a sort of satire/black comedy on the Hollyloot system of film making and once you get over the initial disappointment of it not being a Scorsese / DeNiro masterpiece it`s an enjoyable film , and one with a lot of scathing truth like a pitch is all down to presentation , casting is down to who the actress is sleeping with and a producer`s vulgarity is only matched by his ignorance . Also watch out for the line " This isn`t BATMAN 3 " which at that time hadn`t been produced yet . I guess someone made BATMAN 3 as a homage to MISTRESS ?

A sadly underrated movie. Hollywood could not have loved it because of the cruelly true things it says about how movies are made, about how a writer's creative vision becomes corrupted and debauched on its way to the screen. That doesn't sound like a setup for a comedy, but a wonderfully dark comedy it is, with some richly witty dialogue. Landau's performance is superb (he is one of the best actors around), and the descent of Wuhl's character from idealistic writer to desperate self-promoter - a sad journey - is made humorous. Wonderful bits by Eli Wallach, Danny Aiello, and all three mistresses.