All Good Things -- you know, the other Ryan Gosling movie, not the NC-17 one -- opens this weekend with a limited release.
Inspired by the bizarre case of Robert Durst, a cross-dressing real estate tycoon wanted for multiple murders, the film tries to fill in the gaps of what we don't know. The problem is that there isn't much we actually know, so director Andrew Jarecki takes some liberties to tell the story he wants to tell.
This seems to be the main reason reviews for All Good Things are so mixed.
Ian Buckwalter, NPR:
Jarecki [...] decides to fill in the blanks. This requires a great deal of speculation (and the changing of most characters' names), and it turns the film into a CSI-like ripped-from-the-headlines crime thriller. [...] But it all feels incomplete.
Lou Lumenick, New York Post:
Though it's a far-from-perfect movie with some especially awkward transitions, I think "All Good Things" is [better than Blue Valentine], with Kirsten Dunst's best performance ever as the doomed wife.
Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel:
It’s not the smoothest thriller. But “All Good Things” is thoroughly engrossing, a roman a clef that chillingly ponders a puzzle and suggests solutions outlandish enough to be stranger than anything Hollywood, on its own, could make up.
Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News:
The film ends up wrestling itself into a corner, though it's saved by a corrosive central performance from Ryan Gosling and a disconcertingly hypnotic feel.
According to the reviews, Kirsten Dunst and Ryan Gosling deliver stand-out performances, which may be reason enough to watch it. But many critics were left wondering why this strange story was being made into a film, and why it would try so hard to speculate on background but then not dig deeper.
Are you familiar with the Robert Durst case? Are you interested in watching All Good Things?
Image via All Good Things