I very much enjoyed the beginning of this film. It reminded me of elements of A Single Man which was a singularly excellent film. Geoffrey Rush’s performance is a worthy reason to see this film, and I enjoyed Jim Sturgess too. And there are some lovely items and artwork on display as well.
Unfortunately the storyline and the dialogue are wholly implausible. This one generously ignores at the beginning whilst the visual intrigue of the lead character’s lifestyle unfolds. However once the lead female character is sighted, all is lost and the idiocy of the film’s premise, and unlikelihood of any of its relationships, is exposed to all but the scriptwriter who remains convinced that his constant references to ‘fakes’ are deeply hidden in the shallow dialogue. Did Dan Brown have a hand in this?
One feels some sympathy for Geoffrey Rush at the end, but we know that no one, especially Geoffrey, would actually have been taken in by a story as empty as the room in which he sits in the photo below.
Father M 
What a penetrating, keen, incisive review, Father M. Even after a second viewing I didn’t get the rabbiting on about the fakes, lost in Rush’s performance. Several implausible plot points. But despite the bashing I didn’t jump and scream once, did you? The writer/director treated us kindly. I’m glad the Australian actress was included as the savant.
I haven’t seen the film yet and will wait until I do to make one comment.