The Goldfinch is ROTTEN!

I really liked the book.

Hollywood needs to stop trying to make Anson Elgort happen. Its not going to and Spielbergs remake of Westside Story will be the final nail in the coffin for Elgort's 'acting' career.

You might try reading, OP. It clearly says "No consensus yet." It's not uncommon for a film to look "awful" before the all the reviews are in. This is never going to be an awards-getter, but it could still pull off a successful release.

The trailers didn't exactly make it look like anything beyond bad Oscarbait.

"Anson Elgort." Not a "star" moniker. Rather an ugly name, actually.

I recently finished the book. It was a slog for the last half. Will give this film a pass and another Tartt novel a hard pass.

I don’t see why it’s Ansels fault and I don’t even like him

It’s getting terrible reviews across the board, R3.

Agree, R6. The hullabaloo surrounding the book was a head scratcher. It was unreadable.

I thought Theo was meant to be gorgeous when he grew up? He certainly had lots of girls.

Of course it's rotten! It has Nicole 'Billboard Forehead' Kidman in the cast.

I saw it last night. Actually, Nicole is, in my pinion, the best thing about it, followed by Sarah Paulson. I'm kind of on the fence about the movie itself. I would say I liked it but I loved the book and I was invested in how a material so ornate would translate into a 2.5 hour movie. On the other hand, for the first 20-30 minutes I was sitting there thinking: "this probably doesn't make any sense to anyone who is not familiar with the book." It abandons the linear narrative and is told in the form of a series of flashbacks.

Does Ansel get naked in it?

No, he doesn't.

[quote] At the risk of putting too fine a point on it, Ansel Elgort cannot really act. In most of his work, that doesn’t matter much; he’s a perfectly adequate Unthreateningly Handsome Teen in something like “Divergent” or “The Fault in Our Stars,” and in “Baby Driver,” he’s basically a puppet in the hands of a stylish director who’s figured out how to manipulate him into something resembling a human being. Alas, that won’t do in “The Goldfinch,” the new adaption of Donna Tartt’s novel from director John Crowley (“Brooklyn”). Elgort is insufferably miscast as the story’s protagonist, Theodore Decker; we’re told he’s a dashing, knowledgeable antique furniture salesman with a dark past and secrets a-plenty, but he looks like a kid in a high school play who borrowed his dad’s glasses and suit in a failed attempt to look like a grown-up.

He gave it a C-.

I tried to read it because I loved “The Secret History” when it came out. I just couldn’t get through the first few pages of “The Goldfinch”.

“The Little Friend” started out well enough but the climax dragged ON and ON and ON. And then I re-read “The Secret History” and found it hadn’t aged well for me. It reminded me of “The Catcher In The Rye”, in that it seemed so profound when I was young.

R16-I wholeheartedly agree. I simply could not get through The Goldfinch. The prose was turgid, and the pacing abysmally slow. I was baffled at the critical acclaim. It was a case of the Emperor's New Clothes as far as I was concerned. No one dared point out the book was an enormous disappointment.

Is it based on the stupid tartt book?

Gee, what do YOU think, r18?

I actually liked The Little Friend.

Elgort gets a nice review in The Guardian in the UK:

I want to see Ansel nude. I liked the book up until the last part where they travel to Europe.

The book SUCKED! I kept waiting for ANYTHING to happen. It was more of a character study in book form.

My favorite part of the book was the only part with any suspense, and that was the Nevada part... (which most people felt was the weakest)

If anything, I can see the movie working better...

I'm with all of you on "the book needed an editor badly" and with you R23 that the Las Vegas section was the only really interesting piece.

And as I'd mentioned in another thread, the most frustrating part was she couldn't make up her mind as to whether the internet existed or not.

And the Indiewire reviewer is clearly a DLer as he notes "and inspired detractors to read it for filth."

Donna Tart is a mediocre writer favored by the press and public. Jonathan Franzen and Gillian Flynn are also terrible overrated writers. I remember when every major critic was regularly jacking off over Franzens shitty sub-par books. Blech. I hope this film fails and Donna Tart never writes another book.

You do realize that Donna Tartt is writing character studies and not Tom Clancy novels? I'm kind of curious what people who dismiss her so out of hand actually enjoy in terms of contemporary American authors?

Sorry, I just TRASHED this horrible Goldfinch book, but Gillian Flynn's Gone Girl was a PAGE TURNER. I read that book in 2 days. I fucking LOVED that book. The Goldfinch (other than Nevada) was SO BORING. And what was so bad is the book got progressively slower and slower and slower. I could barely get to the last page. And the biggest takeaway- By the last 1/3 I did not give a FUCK about any of the characters or what happened to them. AND NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENED ANYWAY!!!

One of the biggest hack jobs ever.

Anso Elgort! Rhymes with STAR!

R14 That's disappointing, especially since a lot of actors go nude in order to attract Oscar attention, and this film is supposed to be Oscar bait. I'll still go see it to see how they were able to adapt an unfilmmable book.

I saw it at TIFF. I thought it was just okay and not among the top 10 films. I agree with R-12’s assessment. I think that Nicole was one of the highlights in it.

I thought Secret History was fantastic. But I couldn't stomach Goldfinch.

Another good review for Elgort, this one in Vanity Fair. Sorry, haters, this isn’t the disaster you were hoping for him.

Baby Driver was so forgettable to me except for the fact I hated Ansel Elgort so much. What a snooze fest. I liked the fast cars but have an image of Angelina Jolie hot-wiring a car out of a parking garage with Nicholas Cage. Gone in 60 Seconds? I don't know I'm probably mixing up multiple movies and I'm not even motivated enough to Google.

[quote]It's not uncommon for a film to look "awful" before the all the reviews are in

Um, it is actually very common. There's no particular reason to expect negative reviews to come earlier than positive reviews. If we were talking about 5 reviews, then you would be right. But there are 25 now, and at 25 the number has some statistical stability. Maybe the film can get 40% positive reviews, but it will come nowhere near a fresh score (+60%).

Looks like a film that will be forgotten in a few months. He still has West Side Story and probably other stuff lined up.

At r35, I meant to say, " ...is actually very UNcommon"

The Goldfinch didn't pick up for me until the Las Vegas portion, which was a weird coincidence because I got to that part while I was in Las Vegas. I thought the rest was decent, but not amazing. I don't really enjoy stories where the characters settle for romantic partners they don't really love. That's the reality for a lot of people, but who wants reality in fiction?

Oh I just hate those Bloomingdale's people pictures.

“Ansel” and “Nicole?” Really? I sometimes imagine the worst thing about being an actor would be to endure the effrontery of overly-familiar posters on the internet.

This is what he gets for coming to L.A and trashing it on social media. Bitch, the city has nothing to do with your film failures. Thank the stars you're a semi-handsome young white man, otherwise no one would have given you the time of day.

Trash !

[quote] John Crowley's adaptation of what’s regarded by many as a modern classic is well-mounted, but tepid.

[quote] Which is certainly an accomplishment. Only, there’s just not enough texture and feeling in The Goldfinch.

[quote] All told, The Goldfinch is better than I expected it would be. And yet in clearing that bar, it bares open all the possibility that it could have been even more.

r33 And you posted one of the positive reviews.

R41 He didn't blame his film failures on the city. He just made an observation that most LA residents already know.

[quote] Thank the stars you're a semi-handsome young white man, otherwise no one would have given you the time of day.

Didn't he photograph himself with a sign saying "Fuck Trump". I guess no amount of white apology is enough for some people.

I just read the book's synopsis on wikipedia. I can't bellieve anyone thought a tedious story like that would make for a good film.

I loved the book. I just wanted a cute actor to play the lead but that didn't happen. I would still like to see it.

He's cute, just not a Knockout. The book was good but indeed too long, the last part needed a good trim.

Well, A.O. Scott just eviscerated it in the Times, in one of his more amusing reviews to read. And he's usually overcautious.

Washington Post: "Through the magic of Hollywood, the best novel of 2013 has been transformed into the worst movie of 2019."

Whenever Eggbbort came on it seemed the film died a little.....

why is this pasty sad amateur in this film?????

Can someone post the AO Scott review inline here?

Everyone FF R3 for being a dumbass.

Every review I've read about this movie (which I will be watching when it hits Netflix because I like the cast) says this should have been a limited series. Too much has been cut out to squeeze this into a two hour movie. Sarah Paulson is barely in it.

Paulson's character was very limited in the book too. To me, her primary purpose was to create a juxtaposition with Theo's late mother.

I agree though, given how drawn out the book was it would have worked better as a 2 part miniseries for TV. Where would we end ep 1 though? Return from Las Vegas I guess..

Does Anson Elgot show his golden globes off in the movie?

How much is Las Vegas in this film?

The book was the most overrated piece of hackdom ever, but Las Vegas had me turning the pages...

I slogged through to the end literally going, "NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!??!!!"

And NOTHING happened!!

I feel now that the book is a character study, HOWEVER, other than Kidman's character (somewhat), and Zandra (wasn't that her name) from Vegas, and the dad- there were no interesting characters. And even those characters were not particularly compelling or composed.

What a joke. I was beyond disappointed by this book.

I also liked the Vegas part. It was a fever dream. However, in retrospect the book was a bit of a slog. I still like the conceit of a big, sweeping epic so I wanted to like it more than I did.

Is this thing going on the list with Ishtar and Heaven'sGate?

No R57- It looks like a The Glass Castle type bomb/disappointment. Not a complete disaster.

Huge flop, $2 million opening.

Nicole Kidman = death at the box office.

Memo to Hollywood: Stop trying to make Anson Elgot a star. It ain't going to happen and once Spielberg's unecessary Westside Story opens to bad reviews and zip box office will be the offical end of Elgot.

This should end Egglbert's career once and fer all. UNREAL BAD GOOD GOD

no shit, why do they keep giving that old kunt Kidman roles??????

Can someone reveal the whole plot and ending? briefly.....

This is the boy flop actor that brilliantine miss Spielberg gave the prime male role in west side story......GOOD GRIEF

R62 Because Kidman like most Hollywood 'stars' get paid next to nothing to appear in feature films. Streaming is where the money is and producing your own stuff is even better if you can pick the 'right' material like Kidman herself did with Big Little Lies.

Kidman is way over exposed, she is box office poison.

^Ummm, I don't think anyone sees this as a Kidman film. It's clearly an ensemble.

Her mere presence taints anything she is in: false pride, hubris, contamination...

I saw The Current War with B Cumberbatch,, Nick Hoult, , and tom Holland, …. very good !!! Makes a boring tripe like Goldfinch look amateurish...

R60: They try because unlike other actors of his age (lucas hedges, Thimothee Chalamet) Elgort had some box office hits under his belt. He had some award nomination too, so they think he is the real deal. They are probably wrong and unfortunately for them it doesn't seem there's no young actor able to combine good acting with massive appeal on the box office.

I'm not surprised that the movie fails. What works on a book doesn't necessarily translate well on a film. Ang Lee was able to do a good film with a mediocre novel (Life of Pi) and a bad movie with a great novel (Billy Lynn's long halftime walk)

Stop hiring special flavours. The same names saturate the film industry, and we’re supposed to pretend their not who they are. Kidman is so bland and unconvincing as a actual human. Elgort Humperdinck, is......! Far too many talented people out there are struggling, and we’re stuck actresses who numb the very thing that displays emotion.

“The Player”, is a must see. It’s actually how the industry works.

R70 This is R60 here again. I think too that the 'star system' is basically dead. Certainly some names (DiCaprio, Pitt, Streep, Hanks, Lawrence, Roberts and a few others) can get bums on seats in the right film but a stars name alone is no longer enough.

I also think the last person who emerged as a 'star' is Jennifer Lawrence and she is fading fast.

Its now superheroes, sequels or concepts, etc. People carry on like Chris Hemsworth is a huge star but its only because of one role 'Thor' and he could easily be replaced. Put him in anything else and it fails at the box office.

Hollywood has changed forever......

R70 Timothée is the best bet. He just needs to get the roles from the nepotism boys.

Nothing wrong with Elgort but he’s kind of a potato face and his personality stinks. I hate his smugness.

This was doomed when they decided to cast based on perceived popularity and not talent. HW is doing a lot of that lately. It’s ok to cast the Beyoncés or the Gagas but if the material isn’t phenomenal people will still not bother wasting their money.

This film's stunt casting didn't help either. Strayed too far from the book.

R63- I BARELY REMEMBER IT- IT WAS THAT BORING!!!!

It about the dude's boring as fuck relationship with that boring as fuck girlfriend.

Then something about the bullshit painting. I barely remember where the older gentleman/antique store owner fits in anymore- or even Nicole Kidman's character.

The book is overrated dreadful pigswill and DOODY!!!!

The plot truly meandered. It was truly about a boy and his lonely journey through life and his experiences.

But it just wasn't compelling and the characters were duds. And the author teased you as if some thrilling plot was developing (the first part of the book up to Vegas FEELS like it is at least developing into something- and the painting thing works for about 200 of the 800 pages- but it is all a big nothing. Not only is there no plot development, but there really isn't any character development, when you think about it. I think this author should be ashamed of her accolades. I feel like I must be in a parallel universe. PIG DROPPINGS!!!

I think it’s time to start dealing with talent and not names. First off, stop indulging bored ‘music idols’. Second, stop indulging social media darlings, and third. Hire who is right for the part. No more prosthetics, fat suits and fucking such. Allow the right people to act, period.

P.S. I saw Gary Oldman in a fat suit...am I alone?

R76 No and his was hammy it up shamelessly in that wretched film. The Darkest Hour aptly named - the darkest hour for cinema goers sitting through that garbage.

Why do they keep casting that g damned Kidman?????? How many films must she fuk up before they stop the madness?????

SEND HER BACK TO CHANEL TV ADS.....

R73: I don't think Thimotée is more mainstream than Hedges at all, both seem born to play good character roles but not for classic stardom.

They only difference is Hedgest knows that an just doesn't care because he is perfectly happy with that roles while Chalamet wants to be a star. But you need something more than acting chops and a good presence to be a star (Chalamet is handsome but he is not everybody's cup of tea in the looks department either, and he has a very vocal internet fandom but there are tv young actors with way more fans than him).

He seems ready to fake relationships for promotion but he doesn't use his acting chops (even Rami Malek is better than him, and only Shawn Mendes is less convincing) but then he seems on the verge of collapse when he is questioned about his relationship. He is not particularly good on interviews either.

Of course people way less gifted than Chalamet became a star, but generally not the kind of star (with box office hits but awards too) that Chalamet wants to be.

Elgort seemed to have it all, but it's not working.

HW needs to cast good actors and not popular ones, And they need to make some movies an adult man or woman wants to watch, because right now everything they do are remakes and superhero movies. The teen market is important, but it's not the only one

Goldfinch would probably have worked better as a mini-series rather than trying to cram everything into a 2 plus hours movie.

I'm not going to see it unless the main character flashes his peen at Boris and says: "Want to finish what we started in Vegas, you slag?"

And the book needed a good editor who could tell the author to get to the point earlier and pare down her opus greatly.

I was ready to hate it based off the scathing reviews out of the Venice (or maybe Toronto) Film Festival but I didn't hate it. Some if the criticism is valid. The film attempted to be faithful to the novel as much as it could so there are some scenes that add nothing to the film. The third felt like a completely different film because we spend so much time with teenaged Theo that I couldn't get a real beard on adult Theo.

But for once I didn't hate Ansel Elgort in a film. Kidman is barely in the film.

Why do people keep saying that this needed a miniseries?

A mini series requires a plot and plot points. It requires character development. It really does require suspense on some level.

This horror of a novel had NONE of that.

I think what bothers me most is that this author, by way of her writing, seems incredibly full of herself. Page after page of sheer blandness and cliche.

Page after page after page. And apparently the publisher and editor were blowing smoke up her ass the entire way.

This book really astounded me. On all levels.

No shit, I remember reading a review of the loooong book when it came out. typical bullshit to sell a piece of shit.

Now theyr pushin a shitty movie of a shitty book on us.

NO

I loved the book and will probably see the movie in the theater.

Datalounge has its share of extremely intelligent folks from different arenas. If there is someone here from the literary world, and English major, I don't care- I would love to hear, from an educated eye/ear, what makes this book "good literature"...

I mean that. I truly hated this book, and I think it was because I felt like I must truly have lowbrow taste or something. (My favorite novel of all time is The House of Mirth by Wharton, but I also loved the HELL out of trash like Gone Girl -I LOVE that one)

What makes this book so universally lauded?

R87, my favorite novel is The House of Mirth too!

Okay I am tired of Kidman as well...but I recently saw her in Top of the Lake - China Girl, she was awesome in a very unglamorous role that gave her grey curly hair and freckles.

I would have called him Hansel.

Nicole probably seduced him.

After the reviews ive read, would not be surprised if Speilberg replaced his plain jane arse….

R91: That would be ridiculous. He is in the business for decades, he is not going to change his mind by a bunch of reviews of another movie

If you can't enjoy the book...I would guess you would not be a fun person to know. You sound as if you are angry with a stick up your ass for some reason.

R93: When we talk about books people tend to have strong reactions, specially if they don't like a book it was praised by critics. I go ballistic everytime The idiot or Exit West are mentioned, and i know it's not that well known in the USA but i rant about Joel Dicker's The truth about Harry Quebert's affair at least once a year since i read it

meaning what???? u liked them or not????

I’d read somewhere that The Secret History was edited extensively by the publisher. Tartt hasn’t benefited from an editorial nursemaid should since.

"I couldn't get a real beard on adult Theo"

Is that why they added Nicole to the cast?

It's starting to come back to me (I read Goldfinch when it came out in 2013)

The book was an attempt to reinvent Dickens' "Great Expectations" and as such used many of Dickens plot tricks along with the "cast of thousands" and all that.

People thought that Theo might have been gay because he never actually seemed to have sex or think of the woman he was obsessed with in a sexual way, and seemed to have a mad crush on Boris, his Russian friend from Las Vegas who did have sex with women and there was a strong Y Tu Mama, Tambien vibe to their friendship. (There was another school of thought that said Tartt was just clueless about many things, including the male sex drive.)

And the internet bit--without giving it away, the ending of the book seemed to hinge on someone not knowing the answer to something that could easily have been Googled on their computer or smartphone. And since the character was a young person, they would have known how to use Google.

^^Also, one of the main characters is called "PIppa" and Pip was Dickens hero in GE

He does have sex in the book, on several occasions.

Theo is an insatiable bottom.

The references fucking some older woman when he was a reen, having a few female duck buddies and of getting out of bed naked after making love to itsy bitsy Kitsey

Sorry, *the book references him fucking some older woman as a teen, having female fuck buddies and sleeping intimately with Kitsey.

R98: When people say something like she has no clue about the male desire i always thought that the clueless are them. Desire is different on everyone, there are thing that are way more common but that doesn't mean that there weren't lot of people who are not like the norm

R95: Obviously not, i praise books that i liked not rant them

I'll take it you're not a native English speaker R104?

R105: I'm not, and my english is getting worse and worse since i'm on DL. But thank you, you are the first one who said the obvious without insult me (in other forums people give me a pass but here, well, it's a site about bitchiness for something)

All good R106

So did you read the book in English or in your native language?

R107: I read it in spanish.

Most female writers are boring, so movies based on their work are also boring.

R109: That's not true, there are a lot of interesting female writers.

But not all good novels are made to be good films. I know some writers writer thinking on the film adaptation but most writers don't do that, and some things are difficult to translate, and if they are big parts of the novel the movie could end being meaningless.

The name of the rose is a good movie, but it's very far from the novel. But they did a good adaptation because they chose the parts of the novel that could work well on film and skip the rest

As was mentioned up thread, but stated a bit differently-

[quote] The Goldfinch Bombs Hard at U.S. Box Office

[quote] It’s safe to say the Oscar chatter for “The Goldfinch,” already muted, ends here.

[quote] Sorry, haters, this isn’t the disaster you were hoping for him (Elgort).

No one I know was hoping for this to be disaster for him or anyone else. But it actually is a disaster.

I've always loved the original painting, and bought a reproduction of it recently, because of this thread. I need to take it to be framed, but just sitting there, propped up on my dining room floor, it haunts me. I'm not sure I actually want it hanging in my house, now.

R113- Due to the book sucking a double hung paired of donkey balls, I would BURN THAT PICTURE!!!

BURNT IT HUNTY!!!!!!!!!!!

Why does everyone keep casting Ansel Elgort? He’s a very very very bad actor (and musician). It’s weird that he always gets work.

My friend claimed he’s related to someone in Hollywood but I don’t know who.

I suspect our Ansel is doing his time on the Hollywood Player Cock Carousel and so we are stuck with him for a few more terrible movies yet, r115.

R115: And there's some rumours he is not a nice person either, but of course HW rumours are just that, rumours

Son of Grethe Holby, an opera director. His siblings are photographer Sophie Elgort and filmmaker Warren Elgort.

People who wanted the West Side Story film starring Ansel Elgort to be good and successful are now a lil' bit nervous. Lil' bit.

He went to the same school as Timmy

For r50:

Imagine you’re at a party — a fancy, catered thing with hors d’oeuvres floating by on trays and golden light suffusing a vast, elegant room. You run into someone you sort of know, maybe someone from college or an old job or who used to date a former roommate. Hey! What’s up? Clutching what must be the evening’s third or fourth glass of Champagne, this person excitedly tells you about staying up all night to finish “The Goldfinch,” by Donna Tartt, which is the most amazing book. Have you read it? No? So, see, the bird is actually a painting of a bird, and there’s this kid named Theo. …

Hours pass. Other people you recognize drift toward the conversation then, wisely, retreat from it. The light grows dim. The bar shimmers like a mirage on the horizon. Well-mannered soul that you are, you have nodded and smiled and tried to pay attention through various tangents and emendations as your friend leads you through a thousand pages worth of plot. (Oh but before he went to Amsterdam with the guy he knew from Nevada. …)

To be honest, it sounds kind of interesting. There are fake antiques (not like totally fake, but not strictly authentic either), drugs and drug dealers, terrorism and romance. (Because see the other girl, the one he’s engaged to, is the sister of the kid he lived with after his mother got killed in the bombing, and then her mother. …) Finally you are released into the night air, drained and bewildered, wondering what that was all about.

The above represents my attempt to convey to you, without taking up too much of your time — because we barely know each other and I see your eyes darting over to the review of the Jennifer Lopez stripper movie — what it’s like to watch “The Goldfinch,” John Crowley’s earnest and utterly flummoxing adaptation of Tartt’s 2013 book. I should say that I admire the novel, a best seller and a Pulitzer Prize winner, though not as much as I like Tartt’s others, “The Secret History” and “The Little Friend.” And it’s clear that Crowley (director of the lovely “Brooklyn”) and the film’s screenwriter, Peter Straughan (of the risible “Snowman”), also admire it. They just can’t, given two and a half hours of the viewer’s time, quite manage to explain why.

Theo, a New Yorker whose mother is killed by a bomb at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, who goes to live with a patrician family on the Upper East Side and then with his no-account father in the Nevada desert, who befriends a furniture restorer and a Russian latchkey kid, who takes a lot of drugs and treasures the tiny 17th-century Dutch painting he snatched from the rubble at the Met, who attempts suicide in Amsterdam and occasionally resorts to voice-over, is played as a boy by Oakes Fegley and in early manhood by Ansel Elgort.

(cont'd.)

The younger version is said to look like Harry Potter — his Russian pal, Boris (Finn Wolfhard, then Aneurin Barnard), calls him Potter — but he put me more in mind of a miniature George Will. Grown-up Theo’s face is remarkably smooth. Does he never shave, I found myself wondering, or does he shave all the time?

There is much more to wonder about, beyond the basic what-why-and-how of the story. In many ways, “The Goldfinch” approximates what we normally think of as a movie. There are actors — some good ones, too, well known and less so. Nicole Kidman. Sarah Paulson. Jeffrey Wright. Denis O’Hare. Willa Fitzgerald. Ryan Foust. There is music. There is furniture. There are themes and feelings, like loss and grief and the love of beauty and the pleasures of taking drugs, smoking cigarettes and looking attractive. All at once and in succession.

But like those dodgy antiques — “changelings,” as their maker supposedly calls them — this film is inauthentic without being completely fake. It looks and sounds like a movie without quite being one. It’s more like a Pinterest page or a piece of fan art, the record of an enthusiasm that is, to the outside observer, indistinguishable from confusion.

R118 Plus his dad is a fashion photographer who's done a lot of work for Vogue, so those connections alone...

Apropos of nothing, here's Ansel's music video.

^^ I made it through about :45 seconds.

That you R121.

“Like a Pinterest page.” Brill.

[quote] He has more facial expressions than the English language - Rollingstoneboi

r123 God I hope that's a lyric from the song. Someone actually typing that out and meaning it about Elgort and 71 people liking it is just wrong.

Now that the film is complete and apparently botched up, I'm glad they cast Elgort, if only to save Alden Ehrenreich from another failure.

A big part of the problem Hollywood has with young actors now is the actors are untalented and boring. Yet they persist in casting untalented, boring (but very pretty) young actors.

I don't know. There are good actors but HW want someone to make people go to the cinema and that generally has nothing to do with acting skills.

I think it's quite a good time for young gay actors who want to be character actors (trying to be an A list is a different story).

The truth is most A list actors are established long time ago.

JLaw was probably the exception, but they pushed her too far too soon, she was nominated at oscars almost every year and suddenly a couple of failed films and she doesn't seem so eager to be on the spotlight and she dissapeared from the map.

I don't even remember the last young male actor who was promoted as a big star. On superhero films all of them are replaceable. And the few interesting ones doesn't seem interesting on becoming lead actors or they have not mainstream appeal (even if some have a devoted online following). And of course there are others just doing tv or theatre

[quote]Is this thing going on the list with Ishtar and Heaven'sGate?

Sounds more like Bonfire of the Vanities Bad.

I can't stand the guy, but I do give him props for his singing. His problem is that he should stick to standards instead of pop songs.

This is bombing harder than Ishtar

I saw it last night in a theater on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and it was packed.

R133 I guess that’s the only theater it was packed in.

No one goes out in the UWS. I remember this Australian couple that came to visit I met at a bar in Brooklyn and they were enjoying Brooklyn so much more because it felt “alive” compared to the UWS, where they were staying. They said it’s all white People (they were white) walking around being stuck up. No one interesting or fun.

I laughed because it’s so true.

Against popular opinion here, I LOVED the book. No, it wasn't about a boy pining over a girl, it's a story of a young man dealing with PTSD, after a bomb attack that killed his mother. The painting symbolized the last connection to his mother. I finished the book in 2 days. I loved the book so much that I purchased The Secret History but that book is subpar compared to The Goldfinch that I stopped reading it.

A 2 hour movie doesn't do the book justice. They should have turned it into a mini-series. The story is better told in chronological order, not flashbacks.

R131 what a douche.

so funny that Spielberg has hired a total dud to be a lead in his soon to be flop W S Story......HILARIOUS

Some of the worst reviews of the year, and that’s saying something.

It barely made $800000. There were no “packed” theaters.

It's just really satisfying when certain movies flop like this. Makes me happy.

It makes me very unhappy when original dramas produced for the big screen flop this way. It means even more super-hero movies tailored for overseas audiences and less risk taken for original movies with no built-in audience.

Joining Pay It Forward, J. Edgar, and The Lovely Bones in the failed Oscar Bait category

[quote]Also taking flight at the weekend box office was Warner's The Goldfinch, which bombed after getting skewered by critics. The coming-of-age tale, ranking in No. 8, earned a measly $2.6 million weekend from 2,542 theaters — the sixth worst starts of all time for a film launching in 2,500 locations to 3,000 locations. Among those who did show up, 61 percent of ticket buyers were female.

YIKES!

If Ansel had just flashed his big fat cock all of this could have been avoided!

I wonder if he gifts his costars with copies of the high school fundraising calendar that his sister shot for him.

[quote]If Ansel had just flashed his big fat cock all of this could have been avoided!

I think he needs to do an emergency full frontal on his next after "West Side Story".

This guy is NOT hawt.

The film was beautifully crafted, a bit tedious, but Nicole and Jeffrey Wright were very good. Ansel is actually quite funny and should do comedy which works with his goofy beauty. The kid who played young Theo was great. And Luke Kleintank, from The Man in High Castle was very appealing as Pratt, the older brother of the Aristocratic family young Theo moves in with after the death of his Mother. Sarah Paulson literally chewed the scenery as her first few scenes are overwhelmed by her gum chewing and Luke Wilson was believable as the n'er do well Father who tries to exploit his kid. It could build and do well, but it won't be a blockbuster by any means.

Forbes.com explains why this movie was always going to have it tough at the box office-

[quote]As much as we like to look at such a (bad box office) result and wonder what went wrong or what the studio could have done differently, the truth is that this kind of movie just can’t survive in today’s “event movie”-driven theatrical marketplace.

[quote] A 2.5-hour, R-rated, $45 million drama would have been a risk even 25 years ago. But today, absent rave reviews, Oscar buzz or a star on the level of Leonardo DiCaprio, I’m somewhat shocked that it existed at all.

[quote]A 2.5-hour, R-rated, $45 million drama would have been a risk even 25 years ago. But today, absent rave reviews, Oscar buzz or a star on the level of Leonardo DiCaprio, I’m somewhat shocked that it existed at all.

True. But I'm a big believer of mid-budgeted films or films that aren't comic book based/sequels/remakes. Yes, these films have a tougher road to hoe because there's no merchandising incentive or sequel incentives for those type of films but hopefully studios will realize there is an audience and they should keep aiming to reach that audience.

The novel is not plot driven, which makes way more difficult to adapt successfully.

Mid budget films are needed, not everybody is a teen. I like superhero movies but there's a complete saturation right now. Trends come and go, and i hope the mid budget dramas come back, specially because the oscars seem more and more desperate when they chose best film nominations. It's difficult to give a great performance in most films destined to be big box office hits

The problem is not mid-budget adult fare, the problem is unwieldy lit adaptations. Warner Brothers also had a massive flop a few years ago when Ben Affleck tried to condense Denis Lehane’s 400 page Live By Night into a movie.

[quote] But today, absent rave reviews, Oscar buzz or a star on the level of Leonardo DiCaprio, I’m somewhat shocked that it existed at all.

What the author gets wrong about that is that the absence of Rave Reviews and Oscar Buzz only happened AFTER the film was made and then released. I'm betting everyone thought this was going to be AN EVENT-MOVIE based on incredible performances, rave reviews, and Oscar buzz. It was going to be a critically-acclaimed must-see movie, until it wasn't. So you green-light a project way before all those dreams of glory are crushed at the premiere.

R152: And The art of racing in the rain was not remotely the succes that it was (and still is) the novel.

They are very different formats, something that works well on a novel maybe doesn't work on a film (and the art of racing in the rain was narrated by a dog).

Anyway this was not as much oscar bait as other films. Oscar bait films are always released in november/ december.

The problem with HW is the same with tv shows that are not on the new platforms, they want to release film to a very wide audience and that's not what it works for that kind of film.

Some gay novels were successful way before the gay themes were mainstream, and that was they were successful with their target audience.

Now a lot of people will go to this damn movie just to see how bad it is!

This novel was not made for the screen but for a tv mini-series. It's character-driven. It should have been an HBO series like that series with Frances McDormand, Olive Kitteridge.

I don't know why Donna Tartt approved it as she's known as the ultimate perfectionist. She releases a new novel every 10 years. I wonder if she's having a panic attack seeing her "baby" getting horrible reviews.

Now this is what Netflix is for.

[quote]It could build and do well, but it won't be a blockbuster by any means.

Nope, in three days it's already been deemed a FLOP, people will avoid it.

R156, Donna Tartt was given 3 million and told to take a hike. She had nothing to do with film, and fired her agent because of it.

Stephen King didn't like Kubrick's The Shining so he produced a tv series based on his book years later. Tartt should do the same.

[R6] She really has a way with words and that may be the problem. Too many words. Not enough cutting to get to a meaningful story. I lost my way in that museum and never went back. I guess that was the problem with the movie too.

With this novel, Ms. Tarrt has the annoying tendency of larding up her sentences with excess verbiage for no good reason, simply because she can.

A competent editor could have trimmed all this annoyance, and shortened her book considerably, but I reckon no one at her publishing house had the clout or cajones to reel her back in.

Sometimes movies based on film have something worthy. How many flop besides Baby Driver has that poor boy had ?

"Sometimes movies based on film have something worthy."

What does this even mean?

Ansel Elgort's Hudson Hawk

hated the movie almost as much as the verbose mess of a book....

Timothee Challamet would have been fab in the Elgort role....

R161 make love to me

Ha Ha, fuck you Edsel, and the shit you rolled in on

Films of novels are tricky. I thought the film of Garp succeeded really well because they lost alot of the story, or rearranged it, but really kept to the themes and tone of the book so felt like the book, if that makes sense. Would love a mini-series of it though, such a good story, and the trannys would love Roberta Muldoon.

The book by Irving I would love to see made as a series is 'The Hotel New Hampshire'.

Who wants too give Egelbor's asshole a good sucking? bout all he good for......eh steven?

R166 why ansel is bad? (i havent seen the movie yet)

R166: Ansel will have a collapse if he reads that. I get the vibe that he is not a fan of Timmy

donna Tartt is a TART!

I don't think the film's problems can be pinned on Elgort. Even though he is the main character, he has about an hour worth of screen time. I thought his work here was surprisingly subtle, especially the scene where the girl he loves breaks it off with him at the end. Beyond that, there isn't much to recommend here. The story is just too boring.

The director should have hired a good looking and sexy actor to play Theo.

Well that didn't happen and the book was tiresome .. so pretty much fucked up as I see it.

I saw Baby Driver and he was OK but who in the world decided he was a star? He has no star quality...so who is he fucking? I loved the book but knew Hollywood would fuck it up by casting.

Two words: Fuh. Lop.

Some key points from Indiewire.com's postmortem on The Goldfinch-

[quote] The mid-September opening suggests Warners had little expectation of “The Goldfinch” as an Oscar player. Even though this year’s awards calendar has moved several weeks earlier, no other likely contender moved this early (the original date was mid-October).

[quote] The studio was privy to research screening data, which was reinforced by the poor critical response.

[quote] With a $45-million budget, a global marketing campaign took the bottom line north of $100 million.

[quote] This debacle is bad news for any studio executives pushing for non-franchise content. In five weeks time, Warner Bros. released three original standalones: “The Kitchen,” “Blinded By the Light,” and “The Goldfinch.” Combined, they might not reach $30 million for their domestic gross.

[quote] Published novels remain a source for movies. But these days the likelihood is low that a critically acclaimed book (including winners of the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize for fiction) will wind up a theatrical movie. These projects, more and more, are heading for home viewing.

MOVIE FAILS CAUSE THE LAD CANT ACT HIS WAY OUT OF A WET PAPER CONDOM...

When will the stop casting boys cause they have merely pretty faces ???

Not a blockbuster, just a bust!

Im sick and tired of no talent cunts with a pretty face ????? getting prime parts, imagine all the good young actors turned down for this role.

sickening.

hope eglbort makes old speilbergs wesst side story flop big time ...

I am surprised everyone is blaming the actor, when the book SUCKED A DONKEY'S ASSHOLE, and the plot is pointless..

If anything, I suspect the film is BETTER than this book.

Never has a book disappointed me to the point of anger like that piece of shit did. The book was endless, yet you heard it was impeccable. So you slog, and slog, and slog through page after page- and there is nothing. There isn't even subtext or deeper meaning.

Anson Elgort has a face like if somebody tried to carve a marshmallow

Ansel Elgort is yet another one who got into the business because of well-connected parents.

^ I tried to ejaculate on that face!

why u think the book review sites/etc pushed the book so hard as a great read? I remember when it came out the ny times rave about it even tho it was thousands of pages loong. ugh. maybe they paid to praise it huh....

HORRID BOOK YES

EVEN WORSE MOVIE, WHICH IS HARD TO PULLL OFF

[quote]I saw Baby Driver and he was OK but who in the world decided he was a star? He has no star quality...so who is he fucking?

He has well-connected parents. And being Jewish sure does help, too.

no honey, takes more than that,,,takes ,ass tits and cock to get into the winners circle in h wood baby....

Like Lena Dunham, r189?

Ansel begs you to see The Goldfinch and to bring your mum.

Was he high and drunk?

HE GOTS THE KIND OF FACE U WANT TO PUNCH INTO MONDAY.....SCREAMS GOOFBALL OF THE SCHOOL WHO NOBODY LIKED...MUCH

so exciting, ive never seen a crumby actor stir up so much shit in long time , will be a hoot to shiv his w s story 'performnce' with that big soft mushy mary face.

Thank you Steven Sp for turning west side story into a campy queeny comedy!!! with ms edglbort in it....Yay

r191 Wow... he's taking the poor response to his film badly. Shame.

wow I feel sorry 4 him....he nice kid

R188 Not just well connected...his dad is the iconic photographer Arthur Elgort.

This thread may need to temporarily turn into an Arthur Elgort gallery, sorry.

maybe the other siblings got the talent gene......alas.

It was horrendously boring. Terribly edited. Anvil has a very punchable face. The stranger things kid’s attempt at a Russian accent was grotesque. Roger Deakins was the only shining aspect. Tho Jeffrey Wright was enjoyable in 5/6 of his scenes.

R185: That's the case of a lot of actors, from the hyped actors of his group of age Lucas Hedges is exactly in the same position. It's only a problem when the guy can't act

cant stand Jeffrey wright, he is so many things, and with such......earnest vibes. oy....go retire for a few decades dude.

Well the Hobie Character is very earnest.

R191 That angle with that face...oof

There one thing that HW seems to ignore, what works for a book, doesn't necesarily have to work for a film.

The goldfinch was a very successful book (even way before the Pulitzer) but it's not the kind of book that translate that well into a film.

First, it's very long, second it's not plot driven and that makes more difficult the adaptation.

It happened the same with the tv adpatation of The corrections. Even a novel that seems totally ready for tv or film like The art of fielding failed in the adaptation (i don't know if they even filmed the pilot).

Plot driven novels work better on scream, that's the reason why a mediocre novelist like John Grisham has a good bunch of decent films made of his novels

I'll use a legal metaphor: "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree,"I go back to the book as to why the movie is awful.

How could it not be since it was based on that over-long, turgid mess of a novel. No joke, I doubt I'll ever read Tartt again.

I recommend she start writing under a pseudonym to get over this fiasco.

I couldn't even finish the book. How did this win a Pulitzer?

R209: It was a very good literary year so it makes all more difficult to understand. It's not like The goldfinch is terrible or the worst Pulitzer (Tinkers is equally uneven but way shorter, of course Tinkers was almost unknown and from a small publisher so it receives way less backlash than more popular novels like The goldfinch or All the light you can not see), but there were way better novels that year.

Curiously, The son and Billy Lynn's long halftime walk (two other praised novels that year) had very bad adaptations too

Lol, you sound like a character from the novel, r113.

damn book could have been edited to half its length.....god

Took me a while before I realized Natasha McElhone was Sarah Paulson.

Ansel Elgort's music is as bad as his acting. His godawful "Supernova" song is always playing when I'm at the gym, and it's the kind of garbage song that gets stuck in your head on a loop.

head of his cock sings better than his.....head.

The book is great...some of you don't like it simply because it is not gay.

This movie -- "bless its heart."

Is Spielberg on suicide watch?

I want to see his arse

You want to see Spielberg's ass?

dint Spielberg have male gay stalkers in the past? jilted lovers?

well.....look at the wife.

I just watched this film, and I daresay it's better than 97% of what is typically on offer. Though it isn't the novel, (screenplays often disappoint passionate readers, and they ought to know the difference, and be prepared) the excerpt from the NY Times review is pathetic.

If anyone is interested, I encourage them to see the film.

I actually liked it. Was shocked it was so hated.

I saw this and Lucy in the sky in Toronto. I wanted to blow my brains out. Shitty movies that shouldn't have been made.

Oh I just hate those Bloomingdale's people pictures.

That was not Bloomingdales

Just caught this on streaming, and maybe it was lowered expectations, but this was not as bad as it was made out to be. All in all they did a good job of streamlining a long novel down to a manageably easy to understand plot, though a little to often it like it was hitting point to point to get somewhere. Kidman is one of the best things in it in that she plays a very distinguishable type, UES wealthy white woman, which is easily dismissed, but gives her nuance and warmth.

What was missing for me was a more interesting, charismatic adult Boris with sexual tension to Theo. People will freak, but Timmy would have been wonderful and looked more like an adult version of Finn Wolfhardt or whatever his name is. I did miss how he survived the final exchange, I thought he had been mortally shot. I would gladly of had another half hour added to adult Theo and expanding on the Boris relationship to make that fully realized and less rushed. I wonder if there is a longer director’s cut that does some of that which might see the light of day at some point.

I finally watched the movie last night and I basically agree with you, r227. And I, too, thought that Boris died in that gunfire exchange, or at least that he was seriously injured.

I spent a week in an Amsterdam hotel and Tartt was staying there at the same time. Posters of "The Goldfinch" were everywhere in town and so was she, everywhere there she was, a tiny figure in black with a red accent (always, as I recall) walking very briskly about. It stirred some curiosity but I couldn't bring myself to read the book; the premise is why I read so few books by modern writers and fewer still by modern women writers.