SnoopyStyle Jake (John Malkovich) and Tina (Andie MacDowell) are living beyond their means in a classy London hotel. Hotel manager Mr. Mercer (Joss Ackland) and his underling Victor Swayle keep trying to collect. Jake is down from a cocoa investment in Sierra Leone. Tina has a small highly priced Henry Moore sculpture from her husband Larry (Peter Riegert) which Jake would like to sell. Joan (Lolita Davidovich) is her friend. Deaf maid Jenny steals it for its beauty. The hotel investigates. The insurance company stalls on paying the claim. Distrust grows between the couple. Jenny's brother Steve tries to sell the ugly little sculpture.As a comedy, it's not that funny. It's intermittently quirky. Its pacing does not give it the needed tension. It's a bit of an odd duck. It has a darkness but isn't dark enough to be compelling. Nobody is worth rooting for. I worry more about the sculpture than any of the characters. This film needs an upgrade in intensity. I have questions about how Victor gets to ransack Jenny's home. I also have questions about who that lady is to Jenny. I would be more interested in following the odd little head than any of these characters.

Robert J. Maxwell John Malkovich and Andie McDowell, unmarried but happy, are high-living surfers on a wave of risky investments and the luxury that can come from them. They are in a fancy London hotel when Malkovich's ship not only doesn't come in; his pier collapses and they are out of money and credit. The only thing of value they own is a pint-sized bronze head of a woman by Henry Moore, which looks like something you might make in a high school art class out of papiere-maché if you happened to be drunk.The object of beauty disappears, stolen by a poor, mute, plain-looking made to whom "it spoke." It doesn't speak to the owners, except to say "Twenty-five thousand dollars." The object of beauty is not the same as objective beauty. Tension between the lovers. Arguments. Their relationship is questioned. Finally, after much difficulty, the object of beauty is restored.It's slow. The direction is competent and the art direction fine. A lot depends on the characters and the dialog. McDowell, Malkovich, and Lolita Davidovich meet the challenge.It would have been a good screwball comedy from the 1930s, with maybe William Powell and Carol Lombard. But then we'd have been deprived of a lingering look at the sleeping Andie McDowell's beckoning haunch.Diverting enough to keep you watching. And there is some wit distributed through the writing in little bits and pieces.

StephenTaylor One of the most underrated movies of all time. I am amazed at how many people can watch this film and not get the point. The Object of Beauty is an intelligent conversation about rich and poor, selfishness and giving, and basically how to be! How to behave as a human being. The language of the film is irony, specifically situational irony. It is ironic that Malkovic's character refers to himself as a pig being placed in a very sweaty position. Pig's don't sweat! It is ironic that the female deaf character claims that the inanimate sculpture spoke to her. It is ironic that while John's character is reporting the theft of the statue we learn that he has stolen an object of beauty from another man; MacDowell's character. Ironic even more that the insurance investigator is used to bring this info forward. You will enjoy this film much more if you pay attention to the irony of the value placed by different characters upon this Henry Moore sculpture. It is worth nothing to some, only money to others, an emotional commitment to another, and an object of aspiration to one other. All of these perspectives speak to each other, and it is a very interesting conversation.

cleo-24 This movie disappointed me. It's billed as a 'low key comedy', but ends up being so low key, you wonder (with the exception of a couple of scenes) where the comedy is. Most of my disappointment, however, stems from the script - aside from the chambermaid and her brother, I simply did not care what happened to the characters. The juxtaposition of the two ways of life was excellent - but it's too obvious where the scriptwriter's sympathies lie.