I had difficulty watching "The Object of Beauty" to the end. What kept me going was the little bit of intrigue about Jenny, the deaf-mute hotel maid who steals the statue. That little subplot, with the unknown outcome of theft, is all that kept this film together. And, it's what kept my interest in watching to the end. Otherwise, scenes of eating, drinking, and sex that repeat ad nauseam could hardly make for an interesting story.
A few viewers saw something of social commentary in the movie -- that it poked fun at materialism. I didn't see that. What I did see seemed to be almost a celebration of hedonism and self-centeredness. The producers may have intended criticism of that way of living (I can't call it a lifestyle - while they lived it up in style, there was no real "life" in them). But that didn't come across as obvious. Whatever intent there may have been, the film seemed to me to be mostly about two people who lead hedonistic, pointless lives without regard to or consideration for other people. Indeed, their attitude toward all others in the hotel is demeaning and dismissive.
Some reviewers commented on romance, comedy and the acting. The script clearly showed two people who didn't live for each other, but simply in companionship with one another. That's not love, but "using." Is that the romance some saw? I didn't laugh once in this film, or even smile once. I didn't hear any real clever or witty dialog. If it was a satire, it was so far over my head (very possible, I admit) that I didn't get it. But, I don't think this film was quite that sophisticated. It just doesn't have any comedy that I could see.
A couple called it an intelligent film. But I couldn't find any intelligence in two characters living high on the hog and constantly avoiding, skirting, maneuvering around, conniving and cajoling with people to keep from paying their bills or confronting reality. On the surface, they seemed calm, but they worried about their next move all the time. Surely, that's not an "intelligent" film, is it? As to the acting, I saw nothing special or exceptional. One other reviewer noted that Malkovich and MacDowell were their usual selves. They seemed to me - Malkovich as Jake, especially - to just blithely move from scene to scene.
This movie has no energy. Not in the script, the actors or the direction. There is no real drama, and certainly no comedy. The dialog between Jake and Tina was mostly meaningless and drivel. And watching a couple's continuous indulgence in food, drink and sex just isn't my idea of entertainment. I give it four stars for the subplot and the supporting cast in the hotel.
(Note: I originally posted this review on February 10, 2014, and it was still there on May 19, 2019, when I was looking up another reviewer. As of then, it had 1 of 2 people who found it useful. But on September 13, 2022, it saw that it had been removed. I had marked it with Spoilers Warning, and had no violations of IMDb editorial policy or rules, as any reader now can see. Perhaps some sort of glitch happened and it just got dropped. Even IMDb isn't spared computer glitches. I've had it happen twice before, that I know of, when I have resubmitted my reviews several years after my original submission, and had accrued some numbers of other reviewers who found them useful or not.)
A few viewers saw something of social commentary in the movie -- that it poked fun at materialism. I didn't see that. What I did see seemed to be almost a celebration of hedonism and self-centeredness. The producers may have intended criticism of that way of living (I can't call it a lifestyle - while they lived it up in style, there was no real "life" in them). But that didn't come across as obvious. Whatever intent there may have been, the film seemed to me to be mostly about two people who lead hedonistic, pointless lives without regard to or consideration for other people. Indeed, their attitude toward all others in the hotel is demeaning and dismissive.
Some reviewers commented on romance, comedy and the acting. The script clearly showed two people who didn't live for each other, but simply in companionship with one another. That's not love, but "using." Is that the romance some saw? I didn't laugh once in this film, or even smile once. I didn't hear any real clever or witty dialog. If it was a satire, it was so far over my head (very possible, I admit) that I didn't get it. But, I don't think this film was quite that sophisticated. It just doesn't have any comedy that I could see.
A couple called it an intelligent film. But I couldn't find any intelligence in two characters living high on the hog and constantly avoiding, skirting, maneuvering around, conniving and cajoling with people to keep from paying their bills or confronting reality. On the surface, they seemed calm, but they worried about their next move all the time. Surely, that's not an "intelligent" film, is it? As to the acting, I saw nothing special or exceptional. One other reviewer noted that Malkovich and MacDowell were their usual selves. They seemed to me - Malkovich as Jake, especially - to just blithely move from scene to scene.
This movie has no energy. Not in the script, the actors or the direction. There is no real drama, and certainly no comedy. The dialog between Jake and Tina was mostly meaningless and drivel. And watching a couple's continuous indulgence in food, drink and sex just isn't my idea of entertainment. I give it four stars for the subplot and the supporting cast in the hotel.
(Note: I originally posted this review on February 10, 2014, and it was still there on May 19, 2019, when I was looking up another reviewer. As of then, it had 1 of 2 people who found it useful. But on September 13, 2022, it saw that it had been removed. I had marked it with Spoilers Warning, and had no violations of IMDb editorial policy or rules, as any reader now can see. Perhaps some sort of glitch happened and it just got dropped. Even IMDb isn't spared computer glitches. I've had it happen twice before, that I know of, when I have resubmitted my reviews several years after my original submission, and had accrued some numbers of other reviewers who found them useful or not.)