Excellent, Without a doubt!!

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

There's a genre I like to call "little English comedy" that really traces its roots back to the Ealing studios in the late 40s. The movies didn't have high budgets (they couldn't afford them), but frequently had clever scripts that made them eminently watchable (Alec Guiness got his start there in movies like The Man in the White Suite and The Horse's Mouth).The Object of Beauty fits this category nicely. It's a little puzzling that it didn't do better, actually, with two American leads and rave reviews from Siskel and Ebert. Their review, in fact, is the only reason I happened to be on the lookout for this one.It's an elegant, witty comedy of manners. It's carefully, quietly scripted, and rather subtle. Totally worth seeking out.

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.

It was a real trial sitting through the entire duration of this tiresome film. It doesn't come even close to being successful as a comedy, and as a drama it is pointless and absurd. Additionally, the story could have been easily told in an hour; many events and characters are irrelevant and only prolong the suffering.The film gets annoying as soon as the deaf-mute maid steals "the object of beauty"; we find out at the end that she stole it because it spoke to her - what a load of crap. In the meantime, she returns it, then re-steals it! (Why Malkovich simply didn't put it in a safe place as soon as he found it remains unexplained.) The flaws and inconsistencies in the characterization grow as the film "progresses", and the whole thing is a waste of time.

I watched this for the first time on DVD last night and early this morning. I totally fell in love with Jenny and wanted to take her into my world and live happily ever after. I am sorry that more wasn't concluded with her at the end. Jake and Tina other wise should have been swept out to sea by a tsunami at the end. Jenny portrayed the commonalty & frailty of most of humanity(her brother being the subversive side of the rest of the commoners). Jake of course was the corporation and greed aspect of humanity with Tina being the human lemmings that follow the Jake side of life. I am sure though that if Tina had realized the true reason why Jenny took the statue she would have probably given it to her.(NOT!!) Tina's self-obsession during the encounter with Jenny just shows how shallow she really is. Glad I watched this movie and goes again to prove that the the Yanks still don't know how to make a good movie. Well not since D.W. Griffith that is. DEVO the guy who will never see ET.