All the Money in the World

It's nearly impossible to separate what happened off screen with the final product of All the Money in the World. With that said, Ridley Scott pretty much couldn't have done a better job at making a seamless transition from Kevin Spacey to Christopher Plummer in the role of J. Paul Getty. Inevitably that will be the one thing people always remember about this film, but in the end, the film succeeds elsewhere as a thriller based around the kidnapping of Getty's grandson in Rome in 1973.

Perhaps the most impressive aspect of the film is its non-stop pacing. Whether or not all of the bells and whistles of this story were true, Scott is determined to keep you on the edge of your seat with suspense, even if you ultimately know where the story ends up. And luckily, this story is perfect for a cinematic experience. The true events are unfortunately tragic for many involved, but in the end it's the character of J. Paul Getty that makes for a truly riveting character to watch. Not willing to budge to pay a single dime for his grandson's ransom is beyond frugal, and the fact that the events didn't play out in an even worse manor is a miracle.

Getty's pushback (or lack thereof) makes for a great back and forth with his daughter in law, Gail Harris (played by Michelle Williams). Williams is brilliant in everything, and she once again kills it as the desperate but under control mother of a kidnapped son. She will likely be overshadowed by Plummer come award shows, but Williams' talent will never go unnoticed from me.

Ultimately, All the Money in the World is a fascinating tale of greed, frugality, power, and the differences in people's approach in high stress situations. From great performances to an impressive and important feat from Scott's last minute direction, I quite appreciated All the Money in the World.

7.9/10

J. Paul Getty (Christopher Plummer) was the richest man in the world when his grandson (Charlie Plummer) was kidnapped in 1973. He refused to pay a dime of the $17 million dollar, saying he couldn't afford it and it would set a bad precedent. The boy's mother (Michelle Williams) is left with only the aid of the Italian police and a former CIA operative who works for Getty (Mark Wahlberg) to help recover her son.

The film unfolds in a tense drama that keeps the audience on the edge of their seats. Michelle Williams is fantastic as a desperate mother willing to do anything to save her child, but having to fight Getty just as much as the kidnappers. Wahlberg is also surprisingly good as the former CIA man that is really a negotiator, not a super spy. The real star is Christopher Plummer's Getty. He is outstanding as an old frail man who built an empire through ruthless negotiations and frugality and refuses to deviate from that even to save his own grandson. His misguided priorities are perfectly displayed by him claiming to not be able to afford the ransom and then spending millions on a new painting. Plummer's performance is all the more impressive considering he stepped in at the last minute and shot all of his scenes in just 8 days.

Ridley Scott blends the experiences of the hostage Paul Getty with the worry of his mother and the indifference of his grandfather beautifully. There is very little wasted movement and my biggest complaints are just the occasionally confusing decisions by some characters, but those decisions are all the ones made by real people at the time, so I can hardly fault Scott.

A wealthy oil man's grandson is kidnapped. His son is a broke and gave nothing to his wife in the divorce. Years later the divorced couples son is kidnapped in Rome but evidence points that the boy n may have staged his own kidnapping.

The acting in this is great. The film however seems to go on 2way to long and most viewers who see this at home will be able to hit the "Fast Forward Button"

Worth watching but if you have a limited attention span then skip it

By now, almost everyone knows about the last minute switch of Christopher Plummer in place of current-pariah Kevin Spacey as pivotal Billionaire J. Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD, so when I checked out Plummer's Oscar nominated turn, I couldn't but help see if I could tell when Scott put in a new scene and where he just "augmented" his scenes with Plummer. And then, a funny thing happened...

I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.

A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.

Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.

I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.

I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.

All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.

Letter Grade: B

7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)

The film tells the story of the 1973 kidnapping of J. Paul Getty III (Charlie Plummer). He's held for an exorbitant ransom, but the kidnappers figure that since the young man's grandfather is J. Paul Getty (Christopher Plummer), the richest man in the world, he shouldn't have a problem paying it. They don't know Getty, a notorious cheapskate and skinflint who first refuses to pay any ransom, and then tries to negotiate it down to only an amount that is tax deductible. This naturally infuriates the boy's mother Gail Harris (Michelle Williams), who works with Getty family security chief Fletcher Chase (Mark Wahlberg) on getting the boy home safely.

Director Scott keeps things moving swiftly along, offering various snapshot flashbacks to moments in the Getty family past to help illustrate the unique familial ties at play. Michelle Williams continues to show an amazing amount of range in her characterizations and accent work. Wahlberg has little to do, and is at times a distraction, although he gets a good "telling 'em off" scene near the end. Charlie Plummer (no relation to Christopher) is good as the unfortunate kidnap victim, and I was impressed with Romain Duris as a sympathetic kidnapper. But all eyes were on Christopher Plummer when this was released, thanks to all of the controversy.

As most will recall, original co-star Kevin Spacey became the focus of much public outrage after accusations against him were made, and director Scott and the film's other producers made the unusual decision to completely reshoot his scenes with Plummer in the role, all mere weeks before the movie's scheduled release. Not only did they succeed, but I can't imagine Spacey being nearly as good as Plummer is as the soulless Getty patriarch. Plummer's Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor was viewed by many as acknowledging the logistical accomplishment, , as much as for the actual performance. But while I could argue that Plummer's is actually a co-leading role, I will say that his nomination was warranted for the acting job.