हाउस ऑफ़ गुची

There were quite a number of reasons for wanting to see 'House of Gucci'. The advertising did intrigue and did suggest a film that would be over the top but entertaining in its own way. Ridley Scott's filmography is hit and miss, brilliant at his best like with 'Alien' and 'Blade Runner' though some of his films, such as 'GI Jane' and 'Robin Hood' ('Legend' is underrated in my view), are not too great. The main draw though was the cast, with Lady Gaga (an immensely gifted performer and inspirational person) being a big selling point for many.

For me though, bigger selling points were seeing two of my favourite actors Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons again (and reunited after 'A Merchant in Venice'). Jared Leto has always been very take and leave. 'House of Gucci' turned out to be one of those difficult to rate and review sort of films for me, it is going to be one of those films that some are going to love and others are going to hate (with some in between). It is a hugely flawed film, but there was also a lot to enjoy at the same time. As far as Scott's films go, it's a middling effort. Neither one of his best or worst.

'House of Gucci' has a lot that is good in my view. Have very little to complain about when it comes to how it looks, apart from some editing being in need of a tightening in the final act. The Italian scenery and the costumes are truly stunning though and the camerawork is similarly sumptuous. Scott's direction is uneven dramatically but is very impressive on a technical level, especially in his use of multiple cameras (which must make it easy for actors to know where to look). The soundtrack is also wonderful and beautifully operatic in scope, though not always well placed, but from a standalone point of view there are no complaints here.

Despite the very all over the place accents, with a mix of exaggerated (Leto, to almost cartoonish effect in his case) or barely there (Irons, am a huge fan of Irons but will never deny about accents not being a forte of his), most of the acting is fine. Lady Gaga kills it as Patrizia, who is a very interesting and well fleshed out character here, bringing charm, effortless charisma and menace to her. It has been said that her accent isn't great, as far as the cast goes it's actually the most convincing one along with Salma Hayek's. Adam Driver is a good deal more understated, one of the few in the cast to play it very straight, but he is also compelling and his character growth/decent is believable. They have great chemistry together.

The supporting cast on the whole support them well, Pacino coming off best having a whale of a time as Aldo. Irons brings vulnerability and authority to patriarch Rodolfo and Salma Hayek gives some of her best acting in years. Really liked the chemistry on the whole, Lady Gaga and Driver are great together as are Lady Gaga and Hayek, while that between Irons and Pacino is a joy. 'House of Gucci' does have a few great individual scenes, and one of the best is the magnificent encounter between Irons and Pacino. Personally thought the first half was fine and that it set up the intrigue and characters extremely well. As well as a few funny moments, Rodolfo's verbal brutalising of Paolo was gold and sums up the viewer's opinion of him and his work perfectly.

On the other hand, 'House of Gucci' has a number of shortcomings. One performance didn't work for me and that was Leto. Unrecognisable in much talked about(the talk of social media when advertising was first revealed) makeup that deserves its own film, he overplays his role, especially when the comic relief becomes more dominant, and belongs in a completely different film. Yes the film is very over the top in tone, but Leto's performance veered on excess and too much of a Super Mario Brothers caricature. There are pacing issues, the rather underdeveloped family business stuff drags, sometimes to the point of stalling, due to the lack of tension and gravitas that was not there enough. And other parts come over as very choppy and incomplete feeling, like the final act. The second half needed a tightening up, which would have made the film less overlong (and it is a film that could have been 25 minutes shorter easily).

Also found the ending very rushed and anti-climactic, handled with too much of an indifferent shrug. After spending so long on the family stuff (and not developing that enough) and the increasingly uneasy spurts of comedy, the event that caused such a sensation is just too throwaway in treatment. Tonally, 'House of Gucci' is messy, the comedy going for the campy approach that goes too far into pantomime in the second half and some of the serious moments being too melodramatic. Tonal shifts can be uneasily abrupt.

The script has some funny and intriguing moments, but is on the whole too overwritten in tone (Leto's comedy increasingly gets too much), bland emotionally (the descent into revenge is not examined enough) and also too much of a trying to include as many iconic lines as possible. Some of the line delivery has to be heard to be believed, can imagine right now the amount of reaction gifs online in regard to some of the more comedic lines and Leto's body language.

Concluding, hugely flawed but also quite fun when taking it for what it is. 5.5/10 (was struggling which score of 5 or 6 to give it but decided to go in between and round it up)

Greetings again from the darkness. I've never purchased or owned anything Gucci, but that didn't prevent me from enjoying the heck out of Ridley Scott's film that brings the longest, most expensive and dangerous real life episode of 'Family Feud' to the big screen. It's co-written by Becky Johnston and Roberto Bentivegna, and is based on the 2001 book, "House of Gucci: A Sensational Story of Murder, Madness, Glamour, and Greed" by Sara Gay Forden. Brace yourself for a (mostly) true wild ride, and for what is likely to be one of the year's most divisive films - plenty of love and hate (just like the actual story).

What happens when a brand is so closely associated with a family name? The arguments begin on who 'deserves' to be a Gucci, who is a 'real' Gucci, and who should make the decisions that impact the Gucci family and business wealth and reputation. During the extended run time (2 hours, 37 minutes), we see many of the iconic Gucci items: the Flora scarf, the moccasins, the bamboo bag, and the watches. And though high fashion is always present, director Scott has delivered a spectacle of romance, family riffs, extravagance, greed, power, betrayal, revenge, and crime.

Lady Gaga (Oscar winner, A STAR IS BORN, 2018) stars as Patrizia, the newest Gucci. Hers is not blind ambition, but rather calculated and laser-focused. That she implodes a dysfunctional family is only a portion of the story. After marrying Maurizio Gucci (Adam Driver), Patrizia immediately begins manipulating her husband into reconciling with his family and taking on an active role in a business for which he previously had little interest. This is simply step two (the first was marriage) in her grand scheme to control the business and the money. Maurizio's father Rodolfo (Oscar winner Jeremy Irons, REVERSAL OF FORTUNE, 1990) is ailing, so it's Uncle Aldo (Oscar winner Al Pacino, SCENT OF A WOMAN, 1992) to whom Patrizia directs her attention. She plays it like a chess match - only this is more entertaining to watch unfold.

Also in the picture is Paolo Gucci (a truly unrecognizable Jared Leto, Oscar winner, DALLAS BUYERS CLUB), Aldo's son, and a family outcast. Paolo is a wildly creative individual who tends to his pet pigeons and tries desperately to find his place in the family. Jack Huston plays Dominico De Sole, Rodolfo's consigliere and the family attorney. Each of the characters is given their time in the spotlight, including a terrific breakfast scene with Pacino and Irons. Of course this is mostly Patrizia's story, so it's Lady Gaga's performance that will attract much of the attention and commentary. I found her mesmerizing and twisted fun to watch as she proceeded with backstabbing and trickery. Driver's quietly intense approach makes the perfect contrast to hers.

If you are familiar with the story, you know that Maurizio does eventually run the company, and he also tires of Patrizia's family-crushing antics ... which send him back into the arms of Paola Franchi (Camile Cottin, STILLWATER, 2021). This turns the campy and juicy melodrama factor up to 11 (on the Spinal Tap scale). Patrizia's frequent trips to fortune teller and TV psychic Pina Auriemma (Salma Hayek) cause a massive tonal shift in the film, leading to the well-documented conclusion. If all this isn't strange enough, Ms. Hayek is the real-life spouse of the CEO of Gucci's present-day parent company, Kering. Reeve Carney ("Penny Dreadful") has a small, yet vital role as up-and-coming fashion designer Tom Ford.

In this movie, it's easy to describe some performances as hammy or over-the-top, but that's likely to only hold as a first reaction. Leto's characterization of Paolo sticks out so much from the others ... but he was known as eccentric, and at best, was patronized by the family. It seems highly likely that his personality and approach stood in stark contrast to the old-school style of his father Aldo, or the more staid personalities of his Uncle Rodolfo and cousin Maurizio. Lady Gaga as Patrizia is cunning and shrewd in her calculated approach to re-structure the family and the business. She plays whatever games she must to get where she wants to be. I found her first half performance to be truly outstanding. Pacino is the actor who has trademarked hammy performances over the years, yet here, he fully grasps his role and character, and is a delight to watch.

Much of this is documented by history, though the Gucci family claims not all is or was how it seems. Whether the boost in counterfeiting/knock-offs went down in the 70's and 80's as it's portrayed here, might be an area worth researching, but this is much less a case study in business principles as it is one in family dynamics. I'll certainly understand those who argue against the story structure here, but the entertainment value proved to be enough for me. As the Gucci tagline goes, "Quality is remembered long after price is forgotten", but the backstabbing and disloyalty is never forgotten - despite providing great theater (and fashion).

Opens in theaters on November 24, 2021.

As I'm on holiday at the moment in Portugal, this was seen as "Casa de Gucci". But the soundtrack was English with Portuguese subtitles. At least, I *think* it was English!

Positives:

• Other than the bare outlines, it's a story I knew nothing about, so it made for interesting viewing. And who doesn't want to see some escapist high-fashion, flashy cars and Italian high-living on the big screen?

• Adam Driver delivers another stonking performance. He delivers the best of the accents on show and is a delight to watch whenever he's on screen. His performance is deliciously subtle and under-played. A model for acting lessons.

• Al Pacino, in full-on Pacino mode, is also great as Maurizio's uncle: owner of the other half of the empire.

Negatives:

• The accents! Where do I begin? I felt a desperate need mid-film to order a Cornetto and go compare my car insurance online. While Driver and Pacino tend to rein it in, most of the rest of the cast assume accents approaching a bad parody of Italians. Jared Leto and Gaga are particularly guilty.

• I appreciate that the part of the "idiot" Paolo Gucci was meant to be comedic, but Jared Leto seems to almost be in a different film entirely. There's 'over-the-top' and 'waaaaay over-the-top'.

• I've seen some other reviews praising Lady Gaga... saying that it proves her performance in "A Star is Born" wasn't just a "flash in the pan". Personally, I didn't feel it. I appreciate that the character of Patrizia is a larger-than-life one. But, although she did have some impressive scenes, for most of her performance I felt like she was obviously acting, and sometimes over-acting. The accent didn't help.

• The film has a banging set of tunes, no argument. But for a sprawling drama told over a few decades (the film is nearly 160 minutes long!), music should be used to anchor the movie as to which year you are currently in. Donna Summer "I Feel Love": so it must be 1977. But the movie doesn't consistently follow that rule. It's the early 70's, but suddenly George Michael's "Faith" blares out. #Unsettling.

• This may be my lack of concentration, but there seems to be an assertion in the film (presumably completely false) that Aldo Gucci was supporting/producing knockoff Gucci products for the mass-market: a "lucrative product line" that was later canned by Maurizio. I was personally confused by this bit of the story.

Summary Thoughts on "House of Gucci": This was not the <2* bust that I thought it might be from early word I saw from other reviews. The fact that it turns out to be a 158 minute film surprised me, since it felt long... but not that long. So that's a good thing. And it has its moments for sure. But this is not a movie that I will be in a hurry to revisit, since the accents and some of the performances (Jared Leto - take one step forwards) are not ones that I thought worthy of the potential that the movie had. For me, Ridley, I'll take "The Last Duel" any day.

(For the full graphical review, check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks.)

House of Gucci is a new crime drama directed by Ridley Scott, the director of Gladiator and Alien.

The film is inspired by true events surrounding the family behind the Italian fashion house Gucci. When Maurizio Gucci (Adam Driver) begins a relationship with the outsider Patrizia Reggiani (Lady Gaga), he is disinherited by his father Rodolfo Gucci (Jeremy Irons). He suspects that Patrizia is behind Maurizio's family money. That's how the two have to make it without the support of the Gucci family. Years later, the two are married and have a child together. Maurizio's uncle Aldo Gucci (Al Pacino) thus contacts him again and brings him back into the family business. The Gucci fashion house is once again going under multiple names, leading to creative differences, exposing betrayal, revenge and even murder cases.

There have been many changes in the making of this film. Martin Scorsese, for example, could have directed the film at first, but Ridley Scott was eventually given a directing position. Together with the casting directors, he also had many ideas for the casting of the roles before they finally came to the chosen actors and actresses.

After the many changes in casting and direction, they probably should have looked back at the writing crew of the film, because the final script was written by more novice writers, which can sometimes be seen in the film. The story can sometimes seem a bit messy and so long-winded, because the story makes many jumps in time. Some relationships come across as rushed, which can cause some loss of credibility.

What comes out best in the film about a well-known fashion brand is therefore the costumes and make-up of the characters. Janty Yates can expect film award nominations for this. Still, the film has received complaints from actual members of the Gucci family that the relatives were better dressed in real life compared to the actors in the film. They also credibly convey the places where the story takes place.

Al Pacino comes out the best of the film cast and knows how to provide the best and most believable accent compared to the entire cast. Lady Gaga and Adam Driver have good chemistry together in the film, but their relationship sometimes comes across as weak. Patrizia is clearly showing signs that she is more behind the Gucci family's money than she really loves Maurizio. Their accents can also come across as a bit unusual. Lady Gaga has more of an Eastern European accent than real Italian. Her characters seem to come more from Russia in some scenes. Of the entire cast, Salma Hayek is the only one who has received help with speaking in the correct accent. This is probably because she is married to the man who now owns the Gucci brand. If they had helped the entire cast a little more with their accents in the film, they would have come across a bit more like people from the same country. Who even seems to play in a completely different film is Jared Leto, because in the film he wears a fattening costume and also has a strange shaved hair style. In the film, he comes across as too exaggerated compared to the rest and speaks excessively in a high-pitched voice. He sometimes sounds just like the video game character Mario.

A film so out of its mind that it is operating entirely on impulses, House of Gucci makes for a wild, inconsistent & unabashedly over-the-top biographical crime drama that chronicles the downfall of the Gucci family dynasty without any intent or interest and is surprisingly fuelled by absolutely unhinged performances, each functioning on a separate wavelength and pointed in a different direction.

Directed by Ridley Scott, this tonal nightmare plays out like an (un)intentional parody of the Oscar-bait biopics and is far from the quality of work we expect from the filmmaker at helm. All its elements are at odds with each other, thus resulting in a film so bonkers & unpredictable in its approach & execution that it actually piques the curiosity in a way that's not just unusual or unexpected but also nonsensical.

However, a story treatment this uneven & erratic can only carry on for a while before the appeal goes away and this one goes on for 157 long minutes, all of which is tediously paced. The characters themselves are mere caricatures and the ensemble cast is given the license to render them as such. But none of the actors are ever on the same level or looking for any kind of harmony even when sharing screen together.

Overall, House of Gucci is inarguably the "so bad it's good" film of the year. Laced with irony, drowning in decadence and incongruous in each n every aspect, this overlong & overbearing train-wreck suffers from issues of its own makings and despite boasting an A-list ensemble, it doesn't utilise a shred of their talents. Inadvertently hilarious & downright mediocre, Ridley Scott's latest is what happens when the entire cast n crew is left unsupervised & goes amok.