MovieChat Forums > Woman in Gold (2015) Discussion > Good Movie BUT Lackluster Script AND Wea...

Good Movie BUT Lackluster Script AND Weak Lead Actor

posted 9 years ago by StrayCat1000
9 replies | jump to latest

Good Movie BUT Cheesy Script & Screenplay and Weak Lead Actor Degenerates Woman in Gold

Woman in Gold is a good movie which includes a compelling message, historical value, excellent cinematography, soundtrack, locations, appointments, decor, talented actors for the most part, etc, AND seemingly a pretty big budget -- pretty much all the ingredients encompassing a great piece of work.

There are however a couple of major items that are rather lackluster, one of which includes a weak script. IMO they certainly could have found better (screenplay) writers, or tweaked the script to make it more powerful, professional, sleek, and have greater impact.

A lot of dialog is extremely cheesy, and scenes very predictable, especially the interactions between Katie Holmes & Ryan Reynolds & Helen Mirren, the court scenes, blowups between actors, etc.

I sat there watching it and many times said to myself "yeesh ~ not again! ~ PREDICTABaaaLE ~ how 'bout a spin or twist or some CREATIVITY?!".

The Director should probably assume some of the responsibility for all of what's written here. Here's a snippet from WikiPedia & Rotten Tomatoes:

The site's critical consensus reads, "Woman in Gold benefits from its talented leads, but strong work from Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds isn't enough to overpower a disappointingly dull treatment of a fascinating true story."

I also read somewhere (can't find it now) that the entire story, including legal battles, took a course of over ten years ~ do you know if this is correct? If it is, I certainly did not get that from watching this movie.

Another vital question is this ~ "WHY Ryan Reynolds"??? He's way too small (metaphorically speaking) an actor, and skillfully too weak to make Woman in Gold the excellent film it could have been. This is a critical flaw, major oversight, downfall of the film, and almost disastrous. Reynolds is especially ill-suited for this movie which has some historical value, an important message, and an "epic-oriented" story spanning the globe. He IS NOT a World Class Actor. Production and movie makers should have had the foresight & insight to consider the choice of Reynolds a show stopper and halted filming until they found an appropriate lead actor.

Apart from the few items mentioned here, which could have been corrected from inception, Woman in Gold might be embraced as a critically acclaimed movie, but the bottom line ~ it's still a great story and good film.

Comments? Opinions? Thoughts?

-
"There's a lot of RAGE inside me about it". ~ Austin Matelson

[–] HarlowMGM 9 years ago

I wouldn't call this a great movie (or any movie with a lackluster script and bad lead actor for that matter) but it was pretty good despite the flaws that you point out. I really hated those lame little "comic" bits (like her holding his doughnut in the car and their little quips to each other which made this film seem completely a "Hollywood movie" and not realistic). Ryan Reynolds is one of the weakest "big" actors on the screen today. The best I can say for him is he's at least not Channing Tatum and Orlando Bloom level bad, just mediocre but he certainly lacks versatility or the chops to play a role like this one. He is extraordinarily bad in the scene where he blows his top at Helen when she wants to drop the case after he has gone into debt and quit his job to pursue it and even in this final cut it seems that this scene is pieced together from a couple of takes (his face is red as a beet as he launches his tirade and then after a quick reaction shot from Helen he's back to his normal skin tone.) As you note, this part really required an accomplished actor not particularly a "movie star".

[–] StrayCat1000 9 years ago

I wouldn't call this a great movie (or any movie with a lackluster script and bad lead actor for that matter) but it was pretty good despite the flaws that you point out. I really hated those lame little "comic" bits (like her holding his doughnut in the car and their little quips to each other which made this film seem completely a "Hollywood movie" and not realistic). Ryan Reynolds is one of the weakest "big" actors on the screen today. The best I can say for him is he's at least not Channing Tatum and Orlando Bloom level bad, just mediocre but he certainly lacks versatility or the chops to play a role like this one. He is extraordinarily bad in the scene where he blows his top at Helen when she wants to drop the case after he has gone into debt and quit his job to pursue it and even in this final cut it seems that this scene is pieced together from a couple of takes (his face is red as a beet as he launches his tirade and then after a quick reaction shot from Helen he's back to his normal skin tone.) As you note, this part really required an accomplished actor not particularly a "movie star".

Ya, you're correct, and also explained things better than the OP... I recognized right after posting that writing "Great" was a mistake, and now changed it to "Good". Thanks!

-
"There's a lot of RAGE inside me about it". ~ Austin Matelson

[–] ChuckWalker 9 years ago

StrayCat,
I felt the exact same way and came here to read other's comments. I felt the story, the idea compelling but the execution was terrible. from the tone (odd moments light heartedness and actors mugging) to extremely cliche winks and expressions. Several transitions were terribly amateurish and yes Reynolds was just wrong on many levels. He looked lost in the role if not the character.

Weak script and very average sitcom-like direction.

[–] StrayCat1000 9 years ago

THANKS!! Reynolds is simply too small for the role ~ figuratively speaking.

-
"There's a lot of RAGE inside me about it". ~ Austin Matelson

[–] djsnafu23 8 years ago

couldn't have said it better - especially all those "cutesy" lines/facial expressions from Mirren just before the scenes cut were infuriating. awful movie
...

http://soundcloud.com/dj-snafu-bankrupt-euros

Coz lifes too short to listen to Madlib

[–] bpoz 8 years ago

It just goes to show that personal taste varies. I thought Reynolds and Mirren were both perfect in their roles and had a great chemistry together. I enjoyed the humorous moments and was moved not just by Maria's journey through her past and present heartache but also by Randy's awakening understanding of and personal connection to the events that shaped the case he was working on. I thought it was well directed and well acted across the board.

[–] SceneIt22 8 years ago

I thought they were perfect for their roles, as well. Both of them did excellent jobs.

I wonder what the real Maria and Randy were like in real life. Was there footage of the two that the actors might have used to get into the roles?

[–] Lolly83 8 years ago

There is a documentary called "The Rape of Europa" about the vast theft of art by the Nazis during WW II. The real Maria and Randy appear in the film.

[–] CuriousCase007 8 years ago

I have to agree. A lot to love with this movie, but there is some seriously clunky dialogue (especially in the opening scenes - very expository), and almost any actor could have replaced Ryan Reynolds. Paul Giamatti is a stronger actor and bears closer resemblance to Randol Schoenberg and I would have believed he would be caught up in the sentimentality of family history - a lot more than Reynolds.

www.bondandbeyond.forummotion.com