This was the tag line of the review of The Goldfinch in the NYTimes. Put where they normally explain why a movie has an R rating (e.g. for drug use depicted. )
I had loved the book but the movie sounds terrible. Pity. Though the review is pretty funny.
Here’s the summary “But like those dodgy antiques — “changelings,” as their maker supposedly calls them — this film is inauthentic without being completely fake. It looks and sounds like a movie without quite being one. It’s more like a Pinterest page or a piece of fan art, the record of an enthusiasm that is, to the outside observer, indistinguishable from confusion.”
I wasn’t a big fan of the book but I slogged through it. It needed major editing, IMO. I found the length self-indulgent on the author’s part. A good third should have been jettisoned and it would have made it a much tighter, more compelling read.
The critics on Rotten Tomatoes have given the movie a 28% - SPLAT! I’m not going to waste my $$ or time at the theater.
I am glad others felt this way about the book. I have started it no less than 3 times - each time when traveling and it was my only book - and haven’t been able to get through it!
Not going to watch the movie either…I also made myself slog thru the book and except for Hobie, didn’t find the characters appealing or likable. The good news is that persevering thru this particular book made me (finally!) realize it is OK to abandon a book.
I really enjoyed the book, but have no ability to see how it would make a movie (there was a LOT going on). Add in Nicole kidman even in a tiny role, and that is the kiss of death.
Both of my kids read and liked the book. I wanted to be able to see the movie and have the experience in 2 hours. After the reviews, I’ll wait until it is streaming for free to watch, if at all. Every review I’ve seen is negative.