All the Money in the World | 25th of December, 2017 | Wahlberg's gotta get paid

[Firepower]

Kevin Spacey looked better in this role. Don't care about make-up, but his line delivery was definitely better. Plummer looks really boring and lazy, like he didn't put any effort in his performance.

Edited November 29, 2017 by Firepower

[WrathOfHan]

The trailer is good!

[antovolk]

better trailer than the IW one

[Ozymandias]

http://variety.com/2017/film/in-contention/golden-globes-ridley-scott-all-the-money-in-the-world-christopher-plummer-1202625962/

 

rough plummer cut screening for HFPA on December 4th in order to qualify for GGs lol

[Ethan Hunt]

1 hour ago, antovolk said:

better trailer than the IW one

much. yes 

[That One Girl]

This looks really good.  Y'all crazy

[Cmasterclay]

Kevin Spacey seemed to be playing J. Paul Getty, a real person with thousands of hours of documented interviews, as some sort of alien/James Bond bad guy. I mean his one line delivery was cool in the same way Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan was "cool", but like, this guy really was alive 40 years ago! It was weird. Anyway, movie looks okay but weirdly cut and Ridley is hit or miss.

[Ozymandias]

https://www.thewrap.com/all-money-in-world-kevin-spacey-less-ridley-scott-golden-globes-voters-screens/

 

"The buzz out of the film’s HFPA screening was strong, with Plummer getting particular attention for his supporting role as oil tycoon J. Paul Getty."

Edited December 6, 2017 by Ozymandias

[Eric Prime]

http://deadline.com/2017/12/ridley-scott-getty-kidnap-all-the-money-in-the-world-move-christmas-day-1202221676/

 

Moves up three days to X-Mas Day.

[filmlover]

2 hours ago, CoolEric258 said:

http://deadline.com/2017/12/ridley-scott-getty-kidnap-all-the-money-in-the-world-move-christmas-day-1202221676/

 

Moves up three days to X-Mas Day.

Good move, it would've been silly for nothing to take advantage of the empty Christmas spot (even though I still don't think this is gonna do that well).

[WrathOfHan]

Review embargo lifts on Tuesday.

[Jonwo]

Has the runtime been confirmed, Ridley isn't known for directing 90-100 minute films so I imagine it's 120 minutes minimum

[WrathOfHan]

1 hour ago, Jonwo said:

Has the runtime been confirmed, Ridley isn't known for directing 90-100 minute films so I imagine it's 120 minutes minimum

2:07 minus credits, 2:13 total

[Jonwo]

8 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

2:07 minus credits, 2:13 total

Decent length with and without credits.

[Cmasterclay]

This is getting good reviews. Not amazing (apparently overlong and overplotted) but pretty damn good, and fucking AMAZING considering it was just reshot by two dudes in their 80s in like a week last month. Apparently Plummer is all the way up in it too, certainly no small feat. Plummer might actually get an Oscar nom.

[WrathOfHan]

2 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

This is getting good reviews. Not amazing (apparently overlong and overplotted) but pretty damn good, and fucking AMAZING considering it was just reshot by two dudes in their 80s in like a week last month. Apparently Plummer is all the way up in it too, certainly no small feat. Plummer might actually get an Oscar nom.

The last two spots after Rockwell/Dafoe/Jenkins are going to be TIGHT between Plummer, Harrelson, Odenkirk, Carell, and maybe a CMBYN guy (the SAG snub for both is pretty damning, though).

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

This is getting good reviews. Not amazing (apparently overlong and overplotted) but pretty damn good, and fucking AMAZING considering it was just reshot by two dudes in their 80s in like a week last month. Apparently Plummer is all the way up in it too, certainly no small feat. Plummer might actually get an Oscar nom.

Yeah, reviews are looking to be really positive. Still not sure how this will do at the box office, but at least it appears the movie was worth saving.

[Cmasterclay]

Just now, WrathOfHan said:

The last two spots after Rockwell/Dafoe/Jenkins are going to be TIGHT between Plummer, Harrelson, Odenkirk, Carell, and maybe a CMBYN guy (the SAG snub for both is pretty damning, though).

I think it goes Dafoe/Rockwell/Hammer/Jenkins/Plummer, personally. Stuhlbarg first one out. Odenkirk and Harrelson have shots depending on how much they go for it. I think Carell is a total fluke like Blunt was last year, personally. 

[Jonwo]

Just now, filmlover said:

Yeah, reviews are looking to be really positive. Still not sure how this will do at the box office, but at least it appears the movie was worth saving.

I think that replacing Spacey may have been worth it, it's an interesting story and I can't wait to see it even if Ridley's track record is very hit and miss, this looks like it's going to a decent thriller. 

[WrathOfHan]

2 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

I think it goes Dafoe/Rockwell/Hammer/Jenkins/Plummer, personally. Stuhlbarg first one out. Odenkirk and Harrelson have shots depending on how much they go for it. I think Carell is a total fluke like Blunt was last year, personally. 

Right now I'm predicting Rockwell/Dafoe/Jenkins/Harrelson/Odenkirk with Plummer in sixth. Carell isn't like Blunt because he has the Globe+SAG combo. I don't think anyone in the Academy cares about BOTS enough for him to get in, but it could be a random nomination.

Edited December 19, 2017 by WrathOfHan