All the Money in the World (2017)

McCarthy gives the film an enthusiastic verdict, calling it a gripping and propulsive thriller. He especially praises Christopher Plummer’s authoritative performance and Michelle Williams’s resourceful portrayal of Gail.

Turan finds the film worth seeing, praising Ridley Scott’s ability to make the last-minute recasting feel seamless. He particularly singles out Christopher Plummer’s portrayal of J. Paul Getty, while also commending Michelle Williams’s performance.

Strong finds flashes of greatness in the film but says its hero complex dampens them. She praises Christopher Plummer and Michelle Williams while criticizing the framing of Mark Wahlberg’s character as heroic.

Macnab argues that replacing Spacey with Plummer was the right move and that the film benefits from Plummer’s performance. He especially praises Plummer’s portrayal of Getty as both a victim and a villain, with gravitas and pathos.

Harley praises the film as a lean, intelligent thriller, with Scott directing it briskly despite the challenges surrounding its production. He singles out Christopher Plummer’s nuanced performance and Michelle Williams’s convincing lead turn.

The critic finds the thriller consistently gripping and its study of money and greed terrific, despite some reliance on cliché. Christopher Plummer’s complex, icy performance as J. Paul Getty is singled out as the film’s best element.

Sragow presents the film as a sharply drawn thriller with clear-eyed treatment of the kidnapping. The standfirst singles out its depiction of the Getty oil scion’s abduction.

Dowd finds the film uneven, with a proficient but overly workmanlike approach. He singles out Christopher Plummer’s performance as the film’s best element, while criticizing the weak dramatic tension between Getty and Gail.

The page is blocked by a browser verification screen, so the critic’s verdict cannot be determined. No praise or complaint from the review is available to verify.

The review’s verdict is unavailable in the accessible text. The page identifies the real-life kidnapping and greed as the film’s central focus, but provides no specific praise or complaint.

The article text is inaccessible, so the critic’s verdict cannot be established. No specific praise or complaint can be verified from the available page.

Debruge finds the thriller technically accomplished but somewhat mechanical and lacking sustained suspense. He singles out Christopher Plummer’s performance as its strongest element, praising how it humanizes the miserly Getty.

Edelstein finds the film uneven but worthwhile, with Michelle Williams’s performance giving it emotional force. He also praises Christopher Plummer’s portrayal, while faulting the thin characterization and familiar, ridiculous climax.

The review describes the film as curiously detached, suggesting a mixed verdict. It singles out Christopher Plummer as the best thing about it.

Lodge finds the film stolid and sluggish, with little perspective on its characters or their emotional pain. He praises Christopher Plummer’s seamless integration and sharply material portrayal of Getty.

Hans finds the kidnapping drama plodding and lacking urgency, with the ransom plot taking too long to become thrilling. She singles out the final third’s severed-ear scene and car chase for bringing some momentum, while noting the distracting recasting of J Paul Getty.

The critic finds the film detached and lacking psychological insight, despite its capable cast. Charlie Plummer brings pathos to the role, while Christopher Plummer gives J. Paul Getty an unexpectedly avuncular quality.

Stewart finds the film a tasteless, manufactured thriller with little insight into its characters. He praises Michelle Williams’s convincing portrayal of Gail, while lamenting that she is sidelined and overshadowed.

Hammond calls the film a must-see thriller and a true winner. He especially praises Christopher Plummer’s authoritative, wry performance as J. Paul Getty.

The review is strongly positive, calling Christopher Plummer’s performance bone-chillingly perfect and praising Ridley Scott’s command of detail. It also singles out the film’s visual beauty and its incisive treatment of wealth, greed, and family.

The critic finds the film a compelling, morally weighted portrait of greed. Christopher Plummer’s portrayal of Getty is singled out as an indelible depiction of corrosive miserliness.

The review finds the film compelling and absorbing, with strong Oscar potential. It singles out Michelle Williams’s nuanced performance and praises Ridley Scott’s handling of the story’s pace and atmosphere.

The critic finds the film an unconventional, entrancing thriller that ultimately rewards its audience. He especially praises Christopher Plummer’s captivating performance, while noting that following the kidnapping victim’s story weakens the investigations’ suspense.

The review finds the film somewhat slow and stretched but ultimately vital, with Christopher Plummer stealing the show. It especially praises his nuanced, charismatic portrayal of Getty despite the rushed reshoots.

Goldberg finds the film professionally made but ultimately incoherent and unable to deliver lasting impact. He praises Michelle Williams’s forceful performance, while faulting the story for not making her character more central.

Kaye finds the film polished and well-performed but ultimately unable to generate much passion, with its labored second half weakening the story. He singles out the clash between Michelle Williams and Christopher Plummer as the film’s strongest aspect.

Leitch finds the film disjointed and frazzled despite its technical accomplishment and Scott’s storytelling skill. He praises the kidnapping scenes’ visceral intensity, but says Christopher Plummer’s rushed performance feels out of place.

Collins finds the film flat and stale, failing to turn its gripping true story into a taut thriller. He praises Christopher Plummer’s performance as Getty, though the character’s brief screen time leaves the movie’s seams and shortcomings in focus.