Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: September 13, 2019
6.8
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 86 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
50
Mixed:
23
Negative:
13
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
LamontRaymondSep 18, 2019
It's certainly not a terrible movie, but it's just big and bloated. Tough to know what to take away from this film other than the eternal power of art and beauty. What I will say is this: the film's use of "Your Silent Face" by New OrderIt's certainly not a terrible movie, but it's just big and bloated. Tough to know what to take away from this film other than the eternal power of art and beauty. What I will say is this: the film's use of "Your Silent Face" by New Order was better than any other film or TV show in history. And that's one incredible song. Lastly, I don't think that they needed Nicole Kidman in that role - she's so austere - any number of actresses cold have done that. It dind't play to her strengths. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
4
MattBrady99Dec 28, 2019
'The Goldfinch', an all-star cast with a decent director...yet somehow turned out to be such a huge disappointment.

Ansel Elgort was right when he said there was a lot good in this movie, but none of it connected with me. I didn't read the
'The Goldfinch', an all-star cast with a decent director...yet somehow turned out to be such a huge disappointment.

Ansel Elgort was right when he said there was a lot good in this movie, but none of it connected with me. I didn't read the book so I only watched this as a movie, because there should be a difference when it comes to adaptation.

Other than that, the movie felt rushed in terms of character development and relationships, which is odd cause the run time is 2.5 hours long. Finn Wolfhard plays a Young Boris and Aneurin Barnard as the adult version. Both actors have Russian accents and will often slip in and out.

The cinematography by Roger Deakins is great, but it isn't his best work. Not bad, just not memorable.

This should have been a straight to Netflix movie.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
moviecritic68Sep 19, 2019
Sometimes you come upon a screenwriter who tries to throw too many twists & turns into a story. I felt this way as I tried to follow this film. I see some found this film worthy of a 10 rating but I hardly agree. It's watchable but I couldSometimes you come upon a screenwriter who tries to throw too many twists & turns into a story. I felt this way as I tried to follow this film. I see some found this film worthy of a 10 rating but I hardly agree. It's watchable but I could have easily waited for a DVD release Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
winchester7Mar 7, 2021
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The first act showed the promise of the premise. Ansel Elgort and the actor playing the thirteen-year-old version of him did a decent enough job with the characters. However, I do have to point out that this is not an active protagonist that we were dealing with. Theo Dekker just let stuff happen to him and there were no attempts made by the filmmaker to try and make him active. For instance, in the scene where Theo was being blackmailed by his client to get the painting that was supposedly destroyed in the explosion that killed his dear mother, there were no scenes to show what Theo was doing to either do everything he could to protect the painting he had on him or any attempts made by Theo to do anything that would fight for the girl he was interested in. He just stood by and watched it happen.

As for the inciting incident, that never really happened and even if there was one, one could not be identified. The film dragged along for 2 hrs and 19 minutes straight.

What might have been better and exciting if this was a true adaption of a book is that Theo shouldn't have been in possession of the painting this entire time. It should have been set up in a way that Theo would be chasing it.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
JLuis_001Dec 1, 2019
They had a good novel, a decent director, a notable cast (with the exception of Ansel Elgort) And yet everything went wrong.

When I first read The Goldfinch a few years ago at the beginning it was hard for me to get into the novel. It took
They had a good novel, a decent director, a notable cast (with the exception of Ansel Elgort) And yet everything went wrong.

When I first read The Goldfinch a few years ago at the beginning it was hard for me to get into the novel. It took me about 200 pages to get really involved but after that I really enjoyed the book although my favorite book by Donna Tartt is still The Secret History.
When I learned about the adaptation, I was excited, but at the same time it made me think a lot, after all, despite the passage of time in the story of the book, the narrative is very linear.
That's why an adaptation could be complicated and this film demonstrates it because despite being a faithful adaptation it cannot help feeling incredibly inert and boring.

Did it fail to capture the magic of the book? I would hardly say that it's magic but certainly it failed to capture the soul of the story.
The biggest mistake? The disconnection of the times and the narratives. The edition divides the story in a way that doesn't help at all and prevents you from having any connection to the material at all times.

And I must add that the movie fails to provide you with an interesting main character and that's a very serious problem because Theo in the book is all you have. He's your narrator, here he's nothing but a poor person's excuse.
Ansel Elgort is not up to the role at any time and it's not that Theo is a complicated character but it does have many other nuances that Elgort simply fails to channel. A real disappointment.

The Goldfinch is the kind of sober adaptation that made a respectable production full of quality but that completely lacks life and when that fails, then no matter how much it tries it will also fail to get what's necessary to create and leave an impression.

A shame.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
JumpCut_OnlineOct 20, 2019
The Goldfinch tries hard to juggle all aspects of its dense source material but ultimately lacks the ability to keep them all up in the air. Nevertheless, Roger Deakins’ superb cinematography and some noteworthy performances are just enoughThe Goldfinch tries hard to juggle all aspects of its dense source material but ultimately lacks the ability to keep them all up in the air. Nevertheless, Roger Deakins’ superb cinematography and some noteworthy performances are just enough to hold your attention throughout the film’s hefty 2-and-a-half-hour runtime. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
FilmreactiviewSep 25, 2019
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews