All the Plummer in the World
Friday, December 1, 2017 at 8:00AM 
Chris here. While we've been waiting for reactions on the big late year arrivals and potential Oscar players The Post and Phantom Thread, don't forget that we have another film yet to be seen: Ridley Scott's All the Money in the World. Though admittedly what we're anticipating here is if the film will arrive on time at all or not.
The film famously went back into reshoots last month to replace Kevin Spacey after several sexual assault revelations came to light regarding the actor. Scott had originally wanted Christopher Plummer for the role of J. Paul Getty, and now he's getting his wish - and sans the unfortunate looking makeup that shrowded Spacey. But by all reports, Scott will achieve the difficult casting overhaul and the film will open on schedule on December 22.
Which means all eyes will be mostly on Plummer as Getty and the potential for him to be a last-minute player in the Best Supporting Actor race. By the looks of the first footage, Plummer is a more chilling and formiddable presence than the glimpses we saw from Spacey. From the new trailer, what do you think of Plummer's chances?
Reader Comments (30)
I really want to see this after watching this trailer. Plummer looks formidable. The exciting BSA field just got more crowded.
As much as I'd like to be excited about this movie, Scott's comment explaining the whitewashing of Gods of Egypt soured me toward him indefinitely -- not to mention that he's done himself no favors with those semi-dreadful Alien prequels. I won't be surprised if this film goes on to be a hit for all of the wrong reason, but if I see it, it will be for free.
Oh, and to answer your question, Plummer's Oscar chances seem as good as those of any of the other major players in the race, even sight unseen. I could see his gaining traction simply on the strength of the attention brought to the film because of his recasting.
This is going to go one of 2 ways no one sees it and the critics/oscars ignore it or critics embrace it and people go see it for curiosity,Williams looks better in the 2nd trailer.
I always believed Plummer should have won 1999 S./Actor award.
christopher plummer and charlie plummer playing jp getty I and jp getty III - the way it was meant to be!
apparently the hollywood foreign press are going to be the first group to see it - i suspect they’ll reward it generously for that fact alone
The only problem with Plummer gaining traction in BSA is that there is no where for him to grasp. It might not be the best 1-15 group of contenders, but I don't see him breaking past the top 10. Best Supporting Actor is a really interesting group and I just don't see room for him
Ben, the field is indeed jam-packed with talent. But on one has seen this movie yet. And if Plummer comes out and kills it, which we all know he can, he definitely can knock someone out. He's 88, a beloved legend, Capt. von Trapp--and he saved a movie. There's no better narrative.
I'm fine with Chris becoming 2/3. He'll join Jason R, Sally F, and Dianne W.
This is what's all wrong about pundit's mentality. Just bc a beloved older actor replaced someone who's been accused of molester, the all of a sudden the forced narrative it's like he has chances?
Come on! You are better than that. Everyone I know is delighted by the Academy's changes. But you still try to anticipate what they will vote? This is like a malaise!
I'm sure many many voters rely and critic's thinkgroup to separate the "pile of stuff" they need to see in order to vote. Why not giving outlier options? Why not?
This is when pundit's shepherd mentality fall into a trap. You'r buying the cerulean sweater instead of making the color a trend. I will celebrate the day your political correctness stop and start thinking about the movies and performances you'd LOVE to see nominated instead of what you think it'll be.
It's not that hard. Just try it. I was already pissed off when Scott replaced Spacey with Plummer. It is a demagogue move. Your movie won't be less liked with him on it if it is any good!
Mark Harris has a wonderful thread on twitter about this "problem" with forcing narratives on awards season.
You have to stop with this. Period.
Considering people thought Spacey had a chance for the nomination sight unseen, I imagine the same consideration should be extended to Plummer, no, chofer?
What's grosser than seeing Spacey is seeing Wahlberg. Here's a man who literally blinded an old Asian grandpa with a bat for racist reasons, and he still has a career in Hollywood.
Robert G
He, he. I bet you iron(y) well.
chofer, winning an Oscar has never been nor will ever be simply about the acting. There are always other factors. That is a given since time in memoriam and it will never change.
I suspect Supporting Actor is too crowded a field for Plummer to make the cut, barring his performance being an epic one. (The film still looks like an underwhelmer to me.)
Who knew casting an elderly man as an elderly man would look better than casting a middle aged man as an elderly man?
I've just seen Plummer in "The Man Who Invented Christmas" and at one point I thought, oh that's right, actors exist with such superb technical skills and range and depth that they can make language come alive and wake the audience out of complacency.
It's not like a breath of fresh air, it's like a blast furnace that knocks you back, chars your clothes, and singes your eyebrows. Such power. It reminds you of what acting is all about.
If anything like that is on display in "All The Money In The World" (and why wouldn't it be?) the viewer would have a bundle of new thoughts and an immediate re-assessment.
Can we simply just anticipate the film without talking about best supporting actor? Come on Chris - you have better things to write about (don't you?)
I think there's more than enough room in Supporting Actor if Plummer does well. Dafoe seems like the only true lock at this point (though it's easy to see Stuhlbarg, Hammer, or Rockwell getting to that point if they double at the BFCA/Globes). The Shape of Water continues to underwhelm in precursors, and if the box office can't help that, Jenkins could definitely be vulnerable, and Mendelsohn, Rylance, Elba, and Harrelson are all intriguing fifth slot nominees, but none of them seem impenetrable (none of them are going to WIN, for example, or even come close to winning). So if Plummer lands, I think the curiosity factor & the thank you factor could get him the fifth slot.
But the film has to deliver-it can't bomb, and he needs to be noteworthy. For the Oscar that is, the advance screening plus the curiosity factor plus the celebrity might be enough for the Globe citation. :)
Looks good.
Looks great.
And Plummer suits the part better than Spacy for sure.
beyaccount - Wahlberg did that as a teenager before Hollywood, served time, has a permanent record, and apologized to his victim. You think that is worse than a pedophile who has not paid the price for his crimes in the court of law and came out of the closet to try to deter attention to his abusive behavior?
Much more interested in this project now.
Aahh Plummer was sublime in The Insider
I don't know why people bother to read an Oscar-centered website if they don't want to talk about the Oscars.
It's a major improvement. After all, Plummer should've been cast in the first place. Stupid Sony. If this film doesn't make money, it's their fault for suggesting Spacey in the first place.
@JJ - Malcontents.
Plummer can absolutely be nominated. He can win too!
Dafoe is not so entrenched as the lead. Plummer can absolutely take the wind from his sails.
However, I am very concerned with the beyond quick turnaround on this when it comes to the quality of the film. This is just insane and the first trailers had Spacey in what appeared to be more elaborate set pieces and locations; I can’t help but think the film will have lost something by the change. With that said, that does not mean Plummer does not have a juicy juicy performance here at all.
I would love to see both cuts of the movie.
is automatically shitting on big makeup or CGI heavy characters in vogue? Or do I just have poor taste, cuz I thought the makeup for Spacey looked fine, even just in the trailer. I think the interest factor for Plummer may give him a shot at a nom, but hes done "mean old man with varying levels of malovelence" so many times he can do it in his sleep, so I doubt it. I have no idea why anyone thinks this movie ever had a chance, Ridley Scott's track record hasnt been good of late, 'The Martian' notwithstanding.
A shockingly different re-edit of the trailer too. I have to say I preferred the the tone of the other one which made it look like a toxic family drama with a heist elements. This just looks like a thriller that thinks too highly of itself.