Watch The Object of Beauty For Free

Purely Joyful Movie!

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

This film probably has the highest ratio of great lines/minute of any film other than "Withnail and I." If you liked "Withnail and I," you might like this one. For all their differences, the two films share many of the same characteristics: a great script, a couple of grifters as main characters, quotable lines, funny scenes, and one or two moments that will break your heart. The two main characters in this film are also scroungers -- but at a high-end London hotel. The film follows them as they try to climb out of a hole they've dug for themselves, but the plot is less important than the characters. It's a great cast, working with a clever script. Like "Withnail and I," it's funny and ironic, but about love and hopes and individual identity underneath all that. Some of the scenes -- the funny ones and the bittersweet ones -- have stayed with me for years. I think it is John Malkovich's best role (which is saying something); Andi McDowell's also (which is saying less, but she is well nigh perfect in this).

The object in question is a pint-sized Henry Moore statuette, owned by shallow sophisticate Andie McDowell and appraised at $35,000, an amount in many ways even more beautiful to its owner than the item itself. Especially when McDowell and her 'husband' (played to haughty perfection by John Malkovich) find themselves at a fiscal disadvantage while living beyond their means in a posh London hotel. In the vernacular of the upwardly mobile, they aren't 'fluid', and when the statuette disappears they immediately accuse each other of plotting to collect the insurance value. The film is an underhanded, cynical, satirical poke at American materialism, pointless in the end because nothing is resolved. But the plot itself is secondary to the characters (ugly though they are), and rarely have two actors been better suited to their roles: McDowell's poor little rich girl routine is by now second nature, and Malkovich captures all the self-absorbed boredom of the ersatz upper class with his languid voice and steady reptilian gaze.

This is by far one of my favorite little films, & just yesterday I bought it on DVD for a mere pittance ($6 & change)& settled in happily to enjoy it again. Only once in a blue moon does it turn up on artsy/independent film-type channels, so don't hold your breath looking for it on TV.Everyone in this film is perfectly cast, & what makes it come together so beautifully is that each character in this piece exhibits faults & foibles, as we all do. It's so refreshing to watch something entertaining where the characters are portrayed as "real" - albeit flawed - people. In addition, the jazz musical score throughout the film fits the mood like a glove.My favorite not-to-be-missed extremely funny scene? John Malkovich's "Jake", in a moment of depressed exasperation, talking aloud to himself composing his own obituary. I laugh every time I hear it - his delivery is perfect. Another favorite scene, very poignant, is when Mr. Malkovich's "Jake" phones his parents, after an apparently long absence, with the apparent intention of requesting monetary assistance. From the one-sided conversation you hear, you get an automatic insight into "Jake"'s upbringing, & perhaps why he's taken the path he has. Even though short, it's an extremely moving & insightful scene.This movie is definitely worth renting if you can find it - but for the money, it's also worth adding to one's permanent DVD collection.

I particularly have to disagree with a couple of reviews which see the deaf mute maid as unsympathetic, selfish and idiotic. She is the movie's emotional core, and the only character who has a true arc. Yes, she commits a selfish act, but she returns the statue when she realizes it was as wrong for her to take the statue from its owners as it was for her brother to take it from her. That is development of a kind the other characters don't have, and admittedly such a lack is a problem with this movie. Before one tosses aside her return of the statue as merely ethical on a childish level, consider what prompted her to take the statue in the first place: her first caress of the earless statue reveals a profound identification with it. In a world severely limited both by physical challenges and her economic situation, her opportunities to see herself as having any sort of beauty have obviously been rare to non-existent. Be certain that this statue is a full-strength totem object for her, rendered with the sensitivity of a master artist's hand. Out of a life so empty, the statue's return represents a genuine sacrifice of self. Then perhaps the "why anyone in this movie does what they do" problem becomes less vexing, at least with regard to one.The movie's major mistake is ending with Jake and Tina, whom one suspects will never really change their habits or lifestyle even if they are talking about it, instead of giving us any idea what's to become of the maid, even (or perhaps especially) on an internal level.