All the Money in the World

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.

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

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.

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 true story this film recreates could and should have made a crackling movie, but instead Ridley Scott delivers a serviceable film that hits all of its marks but feels rather bloodless on screen.

As pretty much everyone knows, Christopher Plummer was pulled in at the last minute to play J. Paul Getty, reshooting all of the scenes previously featuring Kevin Spacey in a performance we will now never see thanks to the sexual harassment scandal that emerged about him. Getty refuses to pay the ransom when his grandson is kidnapped, much to the anger and frustration of his ex-daughter-in-law, played by Michelle Williams in a performance that struggles to rise above the middle-brow film making. Mark Wahlberg is Getty's chief security man who's tasked with handling the situation and who eventually sours on Getty as he realizes what a cold-blooded monster he is. All of the performances are fine, but nothing about this movie really ever comes fully to life. Everything we're supposed to feel is telegraphed every step of the way, including the rather obvious moral that a life driven by the acquisition of money and stuff is bound to be an empty one. And the finale, which should be a nail biter, instead is clunky and awkward. Scott's direction in the rest of the film is uninspired but competent; his direction of the film's climax is just bad.

Grade: B-