The Deal of the Art
Reviews and Comments by Ken Burke
I invite you to join me on a regular basis to see how my responses to current cinematic offerings compare to the critical establishment, which I’ll refer to as either the CCAL (Collective Critics at Large) if they’re supportive or the OCCU (Often Cranky Critics Universe) when they go negative. However, due to COVID concerns I’m mostly addressing streaming options with limited visits to theaters, where I don’t think I’ve missed much anyway, but better options are on the horizon. (Note: Anything in bold blue below [or near purple] is a link to something in the above title or the review.)
My reviews’ premise: “You can’t please everyone, so you got to please yourself.(from "Garden Party" by Rick Nelson and the Stone Canyon Band, 1972 album of the song’s name)
However, if you’d like to know more about rationale of my ratings visit this explanatory site.
Here’s the trailer:
(Use the full screen button in the image’s lower right to enlarge its size;
activate the same button or use “esc” keyboard key to return to normal.)
If you can abide plot spoilers read on, but this blog’s intended for those who’ve seen the film or want to save some $ (as well as recognizing those readers like me who just aren’t that tech-savvy). To help any of you who want to learn more details yet avoid these all-important plot-reveals I’ll identify any give-away sentences/sentence-clusters with colors plus arrows:
⇒The first and last words will be noted with arrows and red.⇐ OK, now continue on if you prefer.
WHAT HAPPENS: Julian Sklar (Ian McKellen) is a once-famous London painter, but in his old age (death seemingly not far away) he’s rejected fame, turned cynical about most everything (which he presents in a compelling monologue when we first meet him), hasn’t touched a paint brush in years, but has put out a call for an assistant to help him catalogue his belongings. His adult kids, Sallie (Jessica Gunning) and Barnaby (James Corden), recruit art restorer Lori Butler (Michaela Coel)—Sallie knew her when they were in art school, knew she faked a couple of paintings attributed to someone else for a tidy profit—to take the job in order to finish Julian’s long-abandoned third series of portraits of his long-ago ex-lover Christian (the first 2 series of the man were lauded, sold for millions) so they can rake in the profits after Julian dies. Lori agrees, goes to meet Julian at his cluttered residence, finds he now gets a small income from making short computer videos for his remaining cluster of followers, has to lie she’s no artist nor a fan. His assignment is to rip up the third Christopher canvases, but instead she make copies, tears up the copies, keeps the originals hidden. Julian somehow figures out her scheme so she comes clean about it with him which surprisingly brings them closer (yet farther from his kids), even as Sallie and Barnaby see the ripped fragments, assume their plan is finished even though a rich tech bro has purchased the series in advance, given them a 1,000,000 pound retainer (already spent most of it, putting them in big debt).
Julian still wants to destroy the original canvases, so Lori brings them to his outdoor fire pit but she can’t start the flames; they end up back in his home where he decides to finish them in an ugly manner so they’ll be worthless. Then we get backstory on how Lori and Julian met years ago when he hosted a TV show, Art Fight, intended to humiliate aspiring artists (like Donald Trump’s show, The Apprentice, [which I never had any intention to watch; sadly, now I see him constantly on TV news] where he and the audience delighted in hearing him say “You’re fired!”); Julian lambasted Lori’s painting leading to her never exhibiting her work again. ⇒Julian suddenly dies, yet Lori gets the last laugh on Sallie and Barnaby by forging a document giving the third “Christopher” series (we never learn if they were painted by Julian or Lori) to the actual guy who contributes them to a large exhibition of Julian’s work where Lori also has a video installation of dozens of tiny images of the videos Julian made for his fans taken from his computer. The film ends with Lori receiving a small self-portrait of Julian with “for Lori” written on the back.⇐ There's a bit more on the plot at this site.
(Not a great shot; limited options available.)
SO WHAT? I’m happy to say that after my 6-postings-in-a-row streak of subjects that netted my 4-stars ratings was broken last week with only 3½ stars to Office Romance (which I still liked more than did the OCCU—those snobs!) I’m now back in the 4-stars range with The Christophers, bragging that 7 of 8 at that level (with rare opportunities for me to go above 4 stars, although I have high hopes for whenever I get to see Disclosure Day [Steven Spielberg] and Toy Story 5 [Andrew Stanton]) leaves me quite satisfied with my recent choices to see/review, even when what I find to engage with puts me in distance from the collective “wisdom” of the OCCU. It’s quite possible one aspect of The Christophers that captured my attention, though, is the reality that I studied art in college and during those extensive years ago I made many paintings so I could relate to how both Julian and Lori have passions for putting paint on canvas in meaningful manners even though various circumstances prevent them from always being able to fully invest themselves in what they clearly have talents for (she seems to be capable of producing images that actively evoke the styles of others; he’s had a great career—at least years ago when he was still active—to the point where he can distinguish his work from the “shit” he finds in the output of many others [although I can’t agree with his rejection of Andy Warhol]). Plus, seeing all of those canvases in his studio makes me wonder what became of all those paintings of mine that have disappeared over the years, leaving me with only 9 nowin our condo (the final one a little depiction of Glenda the Good Witch as a wedding present for Nina way back in 1990). But, my personal interests aside, I find this movie to be a great pleasure to watch with excellent acting in service of some serious moral issues, lightened up at times with doses of effective humor. I always expect something worthwhile from Soderbergh (even if the actual quality’s not consistently on the same level), with this study of human motivations to be among his best work; obviously, I highly recommend it, think you would easily enjoy it as well.
BOTTOM LINE FINAL COMMENTS: The Christophers opened in domestic (U.S.-Canada) theaters on April 10, 2026 (gross so far of $1.8 million [worldwide $4.2 million]), has mostly moved on to streaming; rents for $9.99 from Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV, or Fandango at Home; the CCAL heartily encourages you to see it with the Rotten Tomatoes positive reviews at an astounding 95% while the usually-lower Metacritic average score is (for once [see my recent reviews for verification]) at a healthy 79%. In that this film’s set in London with British actors in the lead I’ll offer some commentary from U.K. critics, starting with Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian (MC 100): “[… Soderbergh’s] latest London-set movie is terrifically exhilarating and funny, as bracing as a large vodka and tonic before lunch: fast, literate and funny with a key plot progression elliptically and unsentimentally managed. […] McKellen is voluble, needling, vulnerable and pathetic; Coel is calm and withholding. She jiujitsus his arrogant insults against him through her refusal to be baited, intuiting and articulating his decline more clearly than Julian himself dares – but also suggests ways back that he hadn’t guessed at. The double act of McKellen and Coel has the onscreen chemistry of the year.” Of course, you can’t please everyone so here’s a dismissal from Tim Robey of The Telegraph (MC 40): “[… This] feels more like half a film; the details just don’t add up. The Oscar-winning director of Erin Brockovich and Ocean’s Eleven is here expending his talents – and those of a potentially knock-out cast […]– on a disappointingly feeble script (by Ed Solomon) that never gets to the bottom of anything much. […] While this duo bicker and scheme, they hardly grow closer, get wittier at combat, or reveal anything to each other that isn’t a cliché. Their common ground is a brutal exactitude about good art, while ripping into the phoney kind: they’d have taken a red pen to The Christophers, surely, before it got anywhere near the shooting stage.” For Tim, it's just a big waste!
I’m light-years away from Robey’s response, but before you decide to pay anything to watch this film you might want to explore such responses in depth (for The Telegraph, though, you’ll have to sign up for a limited free subscription; keep an eye on your calendar if you want to cancel later). While pondering a viewing of this (marvelous [I never said I was neutral]) offering, have a listen to my posting wrap-up from more Brits, Paul McCartney and Wings' "Picasso's Last Words (Drink to Me)" (1973 album Band on the Run [with excerpts from other songs on the album woven in]) supposedly based on the Spanish master’s final request “Drink to me, drink to my health / You know I can’t drink anymore,” which sounds like something Julian Sklar would also say (and maybe he did).
SHORT TAKES
Related Links Which You Might Find Interesting:
We encourage you to visit the Summary of Two Guys Reviews for our past posts* (scroll to the bottom of this Summary page to see additional info about your wacky critic, Ken Burke, along with contact info and a great retrospective song list). Overall notations for this blog—including Internet formatting craziness beyond our control—may be found at our Two Guys in the Dark homepage. If you’d like to Like us on Facebook (yes?) please visit our Facebook page. We appreciate your support whenever and however you can offer it unto us! Please also note that to Post a Comment below about our reviews you need to have either a Google account (which you can easily get at https://accounts.google.com/NewAccount if you need to sign up) or other sign-in identification from the pull-down menu below before you preview or post. You can also leave comments at our Facebook page, although you may have to somehow register with us there in order to comment (FB procedures: frequently perplexing mysteries for us aged farts).
*Please ignore previous warnings about a “dead link” to our Summary page because the problem’s been manually fixed so that all postings since July 11, 2013 now have the proper functioning link.
If you’d rather contact Ken directly rather than leaving a comment here at the blog please
use my email address of kenburke409@gmail.com—type it directly if the link doesn’t work.
OUR POSTINGS PROBABLY LOOK BEST ON THE MOST CURRENT VERSIONS OF MAC OS AND THE SAFARI WEB BROWSER (although Google Chrome usually is decent also); OTHERWISE, BE FOREWARNED THE LAYOUT MAY SEEM MESSY AT TIMES.
Finally, for the data-oriented among you, Google stats say over the past month the total unique hits at this site were 63,086. (As always, we thank all of you for your ongoing support with hopes you’ll continue to be regular readers.) Below is a snapshot of where those responses have come from within the previous week (appreciation for the unspecified “Others” also visiting Two Guys’ site):
