Gucci Family Issues Statement Over ‘Insulting’ Portrayal in ‘House of Gucci’

MGM Studios

According to Variety, the heirs of Aldo Gucci have a lot to say about Ridley Scott’s House of Gucci. And it’s not very flattering. The family issued a statement claiming that the film’s implications and portrayals are painfully inaccurate. Above all else, they say the buzzed-about movie flaunts “a tone and an attitude that never belonged to them.”

Here’s the full scoop.

Gucci Heirs Continuously Claim They Were Never Consulted

MGM/Scott Free Productions

As you’ve likely heard by now, the Gucci family claim that they were never given a chance to contribute any true tidbits or feedback for the film. And they’re looking to set the story straight.

The scathing statement was first published by Italian news agency ANSA. It states, “The production of the film did not bother to consult the heirs before describing Aldo Gucci — president of the company for 30 years — and the members of the Gucci family as thugs, ignorant, and insensitive to the world around them.”

They also say the film didn’t just damage the brand and family name, it has caused irreparable emotional harm to all involved. “This is extremely painful from a human point of view and an insult to the legacy on which the brand is built today.”

Lady Gaga’s Portrayal “Couldn’t Be Further From The Truth”

Lady Gaga

Allegedly, how Milanese socialite Patrizia Reggiani was portrayed (played by Lady Gaga) and her motives were warped in favor of the director’s agenda. According to the Gucci fam, how they depicted the company’s treatment of women who worked for them was inaccurate overall, and they’re not letting it slide.

Reggiani was first convicted of facilitating Maurizio Gucci’s (played by Adam Driver) murder back in 1998. The family feels some of the responsibility for her actions were inadvertently and wrongly placed on the House of Gucci. They call her portrayal one of the most “objectionable” aspects.

“[Reggiani] is portrayed not just in the film, but also in statements from cast members, as a victim trying to survive in a male and male chauvinist corporate culture. This couldn’t be further from the truth.” The statement goes on to say that Gucci was always “an inclusive company” and “there were several women who held top positions.” While not everything can be confirmed, that much is true.

They “Reserve The Right” to Protect Their Name

Gucci logo on store front

The statement concludes by saying, “Gucci is a family that lives honoring the work of its ancestors, whose memory does not deserve to be disturbed to stage a spectacle that is untrue and which does not do justice to its protagonists,” adding, “the members of the Gucci family reserve the right to take action to protect the name, image and dignity of themselves and their loved ones.”

At this time, no legal action has been taken. Or at least, not that we know of just yet. Thus far, Ridley Scott continues to dismiss any and all criticism regarding the film, including remarks made to the Associated Press by Patrizia Gucci. Speaking on behalf of the Gucci family, Patrizia called the director out for “stealing the identity of a family to make a profit.” Scott disagrees and says he “doesn’t engage with that.”

Speaking to BBC, Scott said, “You have to remember that one Gucci was murdered and another went to jail for tax evasion, so you can’t be talking to me about making a profit. As soon as you do that you become part of the public domain.”

In other words, Scott stands by that he didn’t “steal” the story because everyone already knows it. As for whether or not he fabricated some of it for the sake of bankability and theatrics, he’s yet to say.

Read the full statement here, compliments of Variety.