It's 1929 NYC. Editor Max Perkins (Colin Firth) reluctantly reads a manuscript from Thomas Wolfe (Jude Law). Max is bowled over. Thomas is overwhelmed by the acceptance after many rejections from other publishers. Max has 5 daughters with Louise (Laura Linney) and Thomas becomes a son he never had. The two work to publish many successful works. Thomas's wife Aline Bernstein (Nicole Kidman) grows jealous of the relationship. Eventually, the highly unstable Thomas leaves Aline and clashes with Max. Max's other writers include Ernest Hemingway (Dominic West) and F. Scott Fitzgerald (Guy Pearce) who struggles with his disturbed wife Zelda.This movie should be zeroing in on Thomas Wolfe rather than Max Perkins. That's where the drama exists. The first half struggles with a lot of Max reading, sitting, and smoking. A writer can be a static subject but a reader is infinitely more static. By following more with Max, the dissolution of Thomas' marriage doesn't get enough exposition and it comes apart off-screen. There is so much inherent drama that it does create some very compelling scenes. This should have been Thomas and Aline's collapsing marriage with a side of Max. It could have been so much better.

It's a reasonable, pleasant film. There isn't a big story, an astonishing scenario or even an amazing moment in the movie. But for those who love literature it is interesting to look at such famous writers, that quite frankly I always saw as some sort of gods, not even giving them a real image, and now seeing them as human beings, failing and being petty as they write tremendously. It is interesting to think of the process of writing that created The Great Gatsby and what follows next. It make us realize that we are just commons humans no matter what great achievements we make. There are some moments in the movie that are going to get our attention and some suspense in the middle that is well explored. Jude Law, specially, and Colin Firth are actors that know what they are doing and that helps painting the picture. Overall an average movie that can become interesting if you enjoy watching an image of great writers from the pass, but not much more than that.

The great Truman Capote once brilliantly said that "when God hands you a gift, he also hands you a whip; and the whip is intended for self-flagellation." I tend to think that the last part is the most definitive and most painful one, specially to a crafted artist whether being a writer, a filmmaker or anything related to the arts. The amount of trouble, pain and suffering that goes through the mind of a creative mind during the long process of making something meaningful, the roads taken to make that art relevant or at least palatable to someone is like moving mountains you're not completely sure they must be moved in the first place, or never knowing that they're heading to the right direction. I've never read Thomas Wolfe's works but what I could gather here in "Genius" seems like a true definition to Capote's words. Here's a talented yet tormented soul that knew how to expose his views with long descriptions about the world he knew, it seemed brilliant on paper but it dragged on endlessly each book came by...but that in the words of his editor who managed to make those works something that readers would like to read. It's more of question of Wolfe being born on the wrong era; in our times it's quite possible that he'd manage to publish his novels in the way he intended to be. Unfortunately, books are a true definitive so everything that is essential must stay on the page, and in the mind of a writer this is a constant and heavy torment to bear, specially when you're forced to leave something out or worst, when you think you left out something important. It's not like a big budget film where years later the author can make a director's cut version, changing and adding stuff to the audience to present how the original idea was better than the edited version the studio forced them to release. Intelligent readers and watchers of the world, this movie is for you despite its imperfections and it's lack of a higher engagement. "Genius" stars Colin Firth as Max Perkins, the famous editor who published best-sellers from the likes of F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway. One day a huge manuscript came to his desk from a certain unknown Thomas Wolfe (Jude Law). Intrigued by the story and the evident talent by the young man, Perkins decides to publish the book on the condition of extensive rewrites to make it shorter. Wolfe is appalled but since Perkins' publishing company was the first to accept his novel after being rejected by several others, he complies and gets instructions in how to reduce what's repetitive and unworthy and make it more concise (Perkins was also a writer). The result was "Look Homeward, Angel" and the rest is a successful history that evolved into a deep friendship between both men. Since films cannot translate with exact measure the weight of a literary work, we only get glimpses of what Wolfe writers with a minimum of context - but they worked at least for what I saw and the intended message of conveying Wolfe's world. Then inspiration came again to Wolfe. Boxes and boxes of manuscripts totaling 5000 pages and in what would become "Of Time end the River", drastically reduced and with years of development to reach its known version. But by that time Wolfe and Perkins relationship (friends at first, then more paternalistic to Wolfe) started to deteriorate not only because of constant fights over why it was important the book stay in that long way but also due to personal problems Wolfe had with his rich girlfriend (Nicole Kidman); and also some minor problems Perkins had in spending some quality time with his family because of his work obsession with that epic book.In the end, "Genius" fascinates us without that extra twinkle in the eye one would expect from a real-life story. It doesn't inspire neither cause amazement; but it reveals a reality hardly seen or presented on films. John Logan's script isn't one of his greatest, it's quite moderate but perhaps there's something about the acting or the direction that forced the film in going to a path that wasn't so brilliant or appreciative. The characters are somewhat distant that it's hardly to engage for any of them or to deeply understand their true motivations: is Perkins right with his guidance to Wolfe or it's just a matter of sabotage because he'd become a writer more referenced than Perkins was? Perkins is right in cutting everything because the other is pretentious or because there's a lack of talent in there but he knows how to shape it? It's all a mystery.Firth is always a true class act even though he makes of Perkins someone really cold; Law is over-the-top but Wolfe might have been that kind of guy, who shouts and flows with such energy that is hard to deal with it, some would say his performance is erratic, to me it was on/off. Kidman didn't impress me, showing off a lot; and Laura Linney steals the show as Perkins wife. The problem with "Genius" is having a first-time director carrying this material. Sure, Michael Grandage is a known theater name but he's no Orson Welles or Sam Mendes to make a spectacular transition with such high-class cast and material. Wolfe made his mark, now he's part of the American canon of writers of the 20th Century. But the readers of the world were deprived of something that now is lost and gone forever thanks to Perkins. We'll never know who got it right in this battle for the arts. And I think it's fair to say that the talent Perkins had also came with a whip, one that was more hard-hitting on him whether editing his friend's book but also in ways that their friendship almost ended. 8/10

A chronicle of Max Perkins's time as the book editor at Scribner, where he oversaw works by Thomas Wolfe, Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald and others. Although Genius has some pretty great performances by an all star cast it suffers from a very thin script i found myself bored most of the time and even when tragic things happened i really did not feel any kind of connection with any of the characters but for people who like this kind of movies i think that they won't be disappointed but for the rest of the worldwide audience this will be a beautiful looking movie with good performances that simply doesn't do much or say much and i'm gonna give it an 5.5/10