Best Offer

I thoroughly enjoyed it; such masterful storytelling.This movie serves as a lesson that dishonesty and greed can cause our own demise, and that emotions can be contrived, particularly love, because it is the greatest tool used for entrapment.In as much as the auctioneer (Virgil) was conning buyers in his auction scheme to acquire these valuable paintings, he failed to realize that he could also be the recipient of a scheme.The watch repair chap (Robert) was a brilliant con man, because he used Virgil’s greatest desire against him, which was his curiosity and intrigue for complex objects. Once Virgil was drawn to the complexity of Claire, he became carelessly intrigued and unwittingly foolish.I am not sure which is worse, a young woman using her femininity to scam an elderly man or an elderly man who shamelessly lusts for a young woman old enough to be his daughter.Poor man, he lost all these women (the paintings) he possessed for many years because of his foolish attraction to one he could not possess.

I might have thought this was slow at times but I would have been wrong. I had great expectations when I saw the writer also was the director and they were exceeded by far! It is best not to try to describe this story but just to know that it has a great cast and it is very successful in telling its highly unusual tale!

The plot is fairly predictable, but the acting and direction make this movie worth the wait and investment. Excellent acting all around. There are a few holes in the plot but if you can look past those, you are surely to enjoy the well thought out scam. I'd watch it again, just to enjoy the investment of the actors in making this come to life.

Wonderful acting. Intriguing plot.DVD arrived new as advertised.

I could have sworn that Roman Polanski himself directed this film. The film has very Polanski and almost Lynch-like feel to it.A bit predictable, yet the film manages to keep you guessing till the vary last minute. A keen observant can foresee the ending because the director keeps on dropping clues throughout the movie as what is "really" going on. Geoffrey Rush is a remarkable actor, his face characteristic look very peculiar, I can only think of another actor with similar facial features and that is Gerard Depardieu.About the film:Virgil Oldman (Rush) is an eccentric introvert, who is a well known and praised English art collector and auctioneer.His distrust of people and arrogant nature lead him to have only two friends. One of them is an old artist (Sutherland) who frequents auction house where our hero works, and another one is a young artificer/fixer-upper (Strugess) to whom Virgil goes for all kinds of help. Virgil's life changes drastically when one day he is asked to appraise art collection of a young woman whose parents recently passed away and left her an old mansion with bunch of old art and furniture. The young woman suffers from a strange human-phobia. She locks herself in a room and refuses to be seen by anyone. This intrigues our hero to the point of obsession...

Purchased dvd, arrived swiftly and played without an issue.

The Best Offer is a film at once unique in its ingredients but familiar in its recipe. I don't know... like a "hamburger" made with the rarest and best meats. (That's a terrible analogy, but there it is.) The film is both a satisfying bit of entertainment and a spotty attempt to reach a bit deeper. I enjoyed it while it lasted, but I don't have much extended praise to share.As an art collector, artist, art historian, and somewhat of a shut-in myself the film speaks to me on several superficial levels. I utterly adore the subject matter, I still find it deeply interesting, but that isn't quite enough. The parts seem to be greater than the sum.The world of buying, selling, and forging antiques has always been ripe for cinematic and literary imagination. It's a great juxtaposition: beauty and malice. This film fits into that lineage as a relatively cerebral and mysterious fiction; that is not to say it's particularly intelligent or especially imaginative, despite its efforts to be both. Being cerebral -- that is, existing largely around the emotions and behaviors of the central characters, as opposed to blunt action -- can be just as dumb as an explosion or a car chase at every turn... minus the thrill and with the added peril of pretentiousness.Done well, cerebral narratives are the best sort. They move us, but what's more, they offer explanations as to why we are moved in the first place. Unfortunately this film comes up short. At its core it's a basic heist drama and it winds up latching itself too faithfully to that metric. It's dressed in a promising and dizzying array of stops, starts, and meandering explorations of human nature but those are all just dressing for the same story repeated a million times. It's never particularly pretentious, although some aspects of the film grate the sensibilities: e.g. the bizarrely intelligent little person in the bar who serves as overbearing metaphor and narrative parallel; or the wealthy onlookers ogling at Virgil Oldman's gloves which he wears to protect himself from germs (gloves aren't odd, people wear them... why pretend otherwise?); or the fact that Robert appears to have a really great location for his tinkering shop but never seems to do anything... etc. But rather than embrace the stilted qualities of the main character, become mired in the melodrama of its risky plot devices, or succumb to the oft-vapid setting of the art and antiques world, the film is self-deprecating and critical enough of such things to be both party and convincing critic at the same time. At moments the film is about much more than art or selling it/obtaining it; it digs to the core of the human qualities that make great art so lasting and so financially valuable. But then it doesn't endeavor to illuminate its own findings. The film stops short, or it holds back, or it doesn't understand what to do with its big, human ideas. Perhaps this is why the disappointment is greater, for despite all of the careful construction the carry-through is so inevitable and anticlimactic that one begins to question what it was all for.The acting and technical filmic aspects of the movie are strong. Geoffrey Rush is a superb actor and he brings life to every role I've found him in -- this one proving no exception. His character is unsavory, but vulnerable; he's unsympathetic, but we manage still to dig up empathy for his circumstances.It's a movie about idiosyncrasies while managing itself to be disappointingly conventional. It's clear that the creators were aiming for more and they very well might have succeeded if they'd sacrificed a bit of style and convention. Like so many before it, The Best Offer is lost somewhere between style and substance... but the style is fun to indulge for the duration. It's a fine bit of entertainment, but sadly not much more.

This movie will draw you in and keep you wondering where this is heading. Beautiful paintings.

Great film and actor lm very happy with the seller and product

j'avais vu ce film à sa sortie .. très proche de Geoffrey Rush lors de ses études théâtrales à Paris, fan absolue, j'ai tous ses films !celui çi éreinté par la critique est un film étrange, doté d'un scénario fabuleux, de décors magiques et poétiques ....Un film comme on en fait plus ... j'adore !

他人から「屈辱」を味わわされた者、「踏みつけられた」者は、その事を決して忘れない。人間とは、そういう「生きもの」なのである。この作品は、「やられた」者が、その相手に「報復」をする・・・そういう話である。「やられた方」の人間というのは、主人公の相棒の老人と、（美術品）修復をする青年ロバート。二人共、主人公のヴァージルから「屈辱」を味わわされていた（が、ヴァージルはそれに気付いていない）。世界的な鑑定士であるヴァージルは、芸術品に囲まれて暮らすという、実に「贅沢」な人生を謳歌していた。そんな彼が、最後は全てを失う・・・。友（だと思っていた者）も、芸術品も、生まれて初めて得た「愛」すらも・・・。全てはヴァージルの「自業自得」なのだが、その描写には「容赦」というものが一切見られない。凄まじいまでの「えぐり」っぷりである。監督のジュゼッぺ・トルナトーレは、間違いなく「ネオ・リアリスモ」の継承者である。（↑　ロベルト・べニーニやナンニ・モレッティも同様である）イタリアの「ネオ・リアリスモ」には、フランス映画でさえ太刀打ち出来ない「深み」がある。全てを失ったヴァージルは、精神病院に入らざるを得なくなる。この「転落」ぶりが凄い。天国から地獄へと、まっしぐらに堕ちてゆく。しかし。「想像」の余地を残すラストが素晴らしい。プラハのレストラン「ナイト・アンド・デイ」でも光景は、一体何を意味するのか。あの、時計だらけのレストランが「示し」ているのは一体何か・・・！？私は、あの多くの時計は「（一つの）人生」を示している様に感じられた。一つ一つの「時計」は、過去の人生（前世）・現在の人生（現世）・未来の人生（来世）なのではないか・・・！？ヴァージルは「ナイト・アンド・デイ」で、「“連れ”を待っている」と言っている。「連れ」とは何を指すのか・・・！？依頼人のクレアの事か。　彼女への「愛」そのものか・・・。私は、プラハのレストラン「ナイト・アンド・デイ」は「永遠」の象徴だと感じた。そしてヴァージルはその「永遠」の中で、「連れ」を待っている。その「連れ」とは・・・「神」だと想った。全てを失ったヴァージルだが、クレアを始めとする「依頼人」たちを心から「憎んだ」様には見えなかった。彼は全てを失ったかも知れない、だが、「愛」だけは彼の中に残った。だから「復讐」はしなかった・・・私はそう解釈している。地位も名誉も財産も全て失ったヴァージルだが、唯一「愛」だけは彼に残された。ヴァージル自身が、その「愛」を手放そうとはしないのだ。そんな彼が「永遠」の中で待っているのは・・・「神」以外に考えられるだろうか。ジュゼッぺ・トルナトーレ作品はこれが初めてだが、この作品で良かったと想っている。ちなみに「映像特典」の、トルナトーレのインタビューはまだ観てはいない。・・・と言うのは、「自分の感性」を何よりも大切にしたかったからだ。イタリアという国、とりわけ「ローマ」という街は「永遠」を感じさせる。（↑　実際にローマに行った時にそう強く感じた）「永遠」を間近で感じていると、「見える“もの”」が違ってくるのはごく自然な事。加えて「ネオ・リアリスモ」が根付いている国・・・。その起源は「ルネッサンス」、そして「古代ローマ」まで遡る事が出来る。「永遠（の都）」と「神」・・・。この二つは同じ処（ところ）にいるのではないだろうか。この作品には、わずかながらも「救い」が描かれている様に（私には）思われた。が・・・この映画、（人生観が）とても「深」く、「難し」く、そして「厳しい」作品となっている。そもそも。「ネオ・リアリスモ」の作品というのは、「“魂”の感覚」が（主に）描かれているものだ。それこそが、「ネオ・リアリスモ」作品の「真骨頂」とも言える。監督自身が「作品の“本質”」を理解し切れていない可能性すら、あり得る事なのだ。だからこそ、「ネオ・リアリスモ」の（継承者の）作品は「分かりづらい」側面が多々ある様に思う。ところで。この作品は、他人を「踏みつけた」経験がある人には、おそらく理解しがたい。（↑　承知で「踏みつけた」場合は話が別だが・・・）ただし、「踏みつけられた」者は、その事を決して忘れない、忘れられない・・・。自分のこれまでの「人生経験」と向き合うには、実に良い作品だろう。

The dvd quality is excellent

An amazing film!!!